Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:02]

>> THIS IS THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 8,

[1. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL / DETERMINATION OF QUORUM]

2025. IT'S 5:01 PM.

>> SYLVIA, ARE YOU CALLING THE ROLL TONIGHT?

>> YES, I CAN.

>> MEMBER ROBES.

>> HERE.

>> MEMBER GILLETTE.

>> HERE.

>> MEMBER GINGER.

>> HERE.

>> MEMBER BENNETT.

>> HERE.

>> MEMBER STEVENSON.

>> HERE.

>> VICE CHAIR FORHIM.

>> HERE.

>> CHAIR DOSTER.

>> HERE.

>> NICK, WOULD YOU LEAD US?

>> MR. CHAIRMAN, I THINK WE HAVE AN ECHO WHEN THE TVS ARE ON OR SOMETHING WITH THE VOLUME.

>> YEAH. SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE MUTED.

>> YEAH.

>> I STILL LEAVE THIS.

>> DO WE NEED TO TURN OUR THINGS OFF? [INAUDIBLE]

>>

>> 15TH.

>> WE ARE NOW IN OCTOBER.

WHEN YOU APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM OUR LAST MEETING,

[3.1 Approval of Minutes for the Regular Meeting of August 13, 2025.]

DOES ANYONE HAVE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES TO MAKE?

>> YES.

>> PLEASE GO AHEAD.

>> ALL RIGHT.

LET'S START HERE.

WE'RE GETTING FEEDBACK OVER. IS ME?

>> WE NORMALLY HAVE OUR TEXT.

>> LET'S JUST GO OVER TO THE FIRST PAGE OF THE MINUTES FROM WHAT WAS THAT AUGUST TO WHAT?

>> AUGUST 13 TO 25.

>> YEAH. THE FIRST PAGE IS THE SECOND PARAGRAPH, WHICH STARTS. MR. ARGAMOV SUMMARIZED.

I GET DOWN TO THE THIRD LINE OVER THE RIGHT HALF.

THAT WORD PLAN JUST NEEDS TO BE CHANGED TO PLANS, A SIMPLE CORRECTION, JUST ADMINISTRATIVE.

JUST ABOVE THE WORD PLAN, WE NEED TO TAKE OUT ONE OF THE MORES.

IAMO. WE DON'T NEED.

>> ARE YOU STILL UNDER 6.1OF THE MINUTES?

>> YEAH.

>> REVIEW.

>> YEAH. FIRST PAGE.

THAT'D BE ABOUT PAGE FOUR, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT OFF THE COMPUTER.

IT STARTS INTRODUCES SAYS, MISSES PEARSON, INTRODUCES GLENN, THE NEW CITY PROJECT MANAGER, THEN YOU GET A PARAGRAPH.

THEN THE NEXT PARAGRAPH DOWN IS THE ONE I'M SPEAKING OF.

IN THAT PARAGRAPH, YOU GO DOWN, GO TO THE SECOND LINE, RIGHT THIRD OF THE PAGE, AND THERE'S AN EXTRA MORE, AND THAT JUST NEEDS TO BE [INAUDIBLE].

>> I'LL GET IT.

>> [INAUDIBLE] THEN JUST BELOW THAT, THE WORD PLAN NEEDS TO BE PLANS.

THAT TAKES CARE OF THAT PAGE.

FURTHER DOWN THE SAME PAGE, THERE'S A PARAGRAPH THAT STARTS WITH MISS PEARSON MENTIONED.

GO TO THE SECOND LINE.

SHE CAN ADD HER ATTENTION TO THE CURRENT I'M SORRY.

YEAH. I'M SORRY.

SAME LINEUP ABOVE THE FIRST LINE, EXCUSE THAT SHE WAS EXCITED TO HELP.

JUST ANOTHER ADMIN ERROR.

GET ON TO THE THIRD LINE BECAUSE THESE AMENDMENTS HAVE NOT BEEN COMMUNICATED OR HAVE NOT COMMUNICATED ANY NEGATIVE FEEDBACK.

ADD THE WORD IN BETWEEN AND NOT.

NEXT PAGE. THIS ONE IS MORE OR LESS JUST A CLARIFICATION.

WHEN YOU GO TO THE SECOND PAGE, IT MENTIONS MISS PEARSON BROUGHT FORWARD OR BROUGHT UP THE SADDLE ROAD OVERLAY.

LET ME GET BACK DOWN TO IT.

SHE EXPLAINED THAT IN THE CURRENT TIME OF TRANSITION, THE NEXT STEP, AS DIRECTED BY MANAGEMENT, IS TO PUT THE SADDLE ROAD ANALYSIS ON HOLD.

THAT THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH IT, IT'S JUST A MATTER OF CLARIFICATION.

THERE WAS A QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS IN THE MINUTES.

IT'S CLEAR. IT'S THERE, AND IT'S STATED THAT WE WERE TO STOP.

THEN LET'S SEE. THAT'S GOOD.

GO DOWN TO, I THINK, ALMOST THE BOTTOM OF THAT SAME PAGE, AND IT STARTS.

MEMBER GILLETTE MENTIONED THAT PUDS REMAIN QUASI-JUDICIAL, AS EXCUSE ME, QUASI-JUDICIAL AS REZONING,

[00:05:03]

YOU TAKE OUT WOOD, AND BECAUSE IT WOULD REQUIRE REZONING.

YOU GOT ANOTHER WORD AND ANOTHER, AND DELETE THE TWO WORDS.

THAT'S IT. NEXT ONE.

THIS IS MORE OR LESS JUST A CLARIFICATION.

STARTS. MISS PRINCE ACKNOWLEDGED WHAT MEMBER ROBES PRESENTED AND VOICED CONCERNS THAT I WOULD PUT AFTER THAT SENATE BILL 180, OR SB 180, COULD JUST CLARIFY WHAT THE CONVERSATION WAS.

ALL RIGHT. FURTHER DOWN THAT PAGE, THIS IS UNDER PUBLIC COMMENT, ONE, TWO, THREE, FOURTH PARAGRAPH DOWN.

MISS PEARSON SAID THAT THE OWNER HAD REACHED OUT VERBALLY.

THIS WAS JUST ME THINKING ABOUT DISCUSSING THE TREN GALLI REVOTE.

ANYWAY, IT SAID THE OWNER HAD REACHED A VERBAL AGREE VERBALLY TO WITHDRAW THEIR APPLICATION, BUT NOT YET IN WRITING, AND THAT BUT NOT IN WRITING THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

THAT HALF OF THAT SENTENCE JUST NEEDS TO BE CLARIFIED.

IT SAYS, BUT NOT YET IN WRITING, AND ALSO HAS A VOICE IF THEY WISH TO WITHDRAW.

LOOKS LIKE IT'S MISSING TWO OR THREE WORDS.

>> IS THAT A VERBATIM THOUGH?

>> IN HERE, IT'S A VERBATIM.

>> BUT SO WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT?

>> VERBATIM, WHAT THEY SAY, WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE LANGUAGE?

>> I DON'T KNOW THAT IT WAS VERBATIM.

BECAUSE I'LL TELL YOU THE NEXT PARAGRAPH IS TOTALLY NOT VERBATIM. ALL RIGHT.

LET'S GO DOWN TO THE LAST LARGE PARAGRAPH IS PAUL LORE SOUTH 17TH STREET. GOT THAT.

ANYWAY, GO DOWN TO THE FOURTH LINE.

I SAID, MEMBER STEVENSON RESPONDED, MR. LORE SAID THAT THEY WERE DIRECTING IT FROM A PERSPECTIVE OF, WELL, IT IS TOTALLY WRONG.

IT'S NOT WHAT I SAID. I'M GOING TO READ STARTING, MEMBER STEVENSON RESPONDED TO MR. LORE'S COMMENTS AND EXPLAINED THAT THE PAID PARKING WAS BEING DISCUSSED AS AN APPROACH TO PROVIDING A FINANCIAL SOLUTION TO THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL CITY REVENUE TO ADDRESS SIGNIFICANT FUTURE CAPITAL DEMANDS. THE END.

>> IS THAT VERBATIM?

>> IS THAT?

>> THAT'S VERBATIM NOW. [LAUGHTER].

>> I THOUGHT WE WERE SUPPOSED TO BE IN THE CITY BEFORE.

>> YEAH, THE SMALL CHANGES, THE GRAMMATICAL CHANGES, SPELLING CHANGES, WE SHOULD TRY TO GET THOSE TO SYLVIA.

>> I TRIED.

>> REMEMBER.

>> I CALLED [OVERLAPPING] TO MAKE CHANGES LIKE THE ONE YOU JUST MADE.

IF WE CAN GET THE SMALLER ONES.

>> SOME OF THEM WERE SOMEBODY ELSE'S COMMENTS, SO IT'S ONE REASON I DIDN'T WANT TO.

>> ALL RIGHT. OTHER CHANGES FROM? ALL RIGHT. MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> SUBMITTED.

>> THANK YOU.

>> I'LL SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR.

>> AYE. [OVERLAPPING]

>> ANY OPPOSITION? ALL RIGHT.

NO ONE WANTS TO SPEAK TONIGHT. IN GOOD SHAPE.

THERE'S NO OLD BUSINESS LISTED ANYWHERE? NO NEW BUSINESS, SO WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO BOARD BUSINESS THEN,

[6.1 Guest Speaker - Updates on recent and ongoing utility improvements within the City limits.]

AND MARGARET, ARE YOU GOING TO?

>> YES, CHAIRMAN.

6.1 IS WE WERE WORKING ON TRYING TO GET A GUEST SPEAKER.

THERE HAD BEEN AN INQUIRY FROM A BOARD MEMBER ABOUT UPDATES, AND THEY WANT TO KNOW AN UPDATE ON THE RECENT ONGOING UTILITY WORK THAT'S BEEN THROUGHOUT THE CITY.

I THINK FLETCHER AND 14TH, AND THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF UTILITY WORK.

>> I'D LIKE TO SAY PERSONALLY, BAILEY.

>> YEAH [LAUGHTER]. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON TRYING TO GET A GUEST SPEAKER, UNFORTUNATELY.

WE WEREN'T ABLE TO GET ONE FOR THIS MONTH, BUT WE HAVE ONE SCHEDULED TO COME IN NOVEMBER.

BUT IN THE INTERIM, GLENN IS GOING TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON SOME OF THE INFORMATION THAT HE HAS.

>> LYNN, I CONSIDER YOU A DISTINGUISHED GUEST, BY THE WAY.

>> THANK YOU. LENNA ROMA, PROJECT MANAGER.

SO, AS MARGARET SAID, WE DO HAVE THEM ACTUALLY CONFIRM TO COME.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE OF IS THAT AS THEY'RE PREPARING THEIR PRESENTATION, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY PROVIDE THE INFORMATION THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR.

IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS THAT YOU WANT TO ASK FPU, THEN SEND THEM TO ME OR SEND THEM TO DEPUTY CITY MANAGER GLEASON OR BOTH OF US, AND WE'LL MAKE SURE THEY GET THEM SO THEY CAN PREP.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN YOU'RE LIMITED TO ASKING THEM OTHER QUESTIONS.

THAT'LL HELP THEM DO A GOOD, A GOOD UPDATE FOR YOU.

I THINK THEY'RE ON EVERY MAJOR STREET THAT WE HAVE, BASED ON DRIVING AROUND TODAY, CHECKING OUT SOME OTHER THINGS.

[00:10:02]

A COUPLE OF QUICK PROJECT UPDATES, AND THEN I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF PROCESS UPDATES.

PROJECT UPDATES: IF YOU'VE BEEN DOWN TO NORTH SECOND, YOU CAN SEE WE'RE GETTING REALLY CLOSE.

THE POLES ARE DOWN, EXCEPT FOR ONE, SO IT LOOKS A LOT DIFFERENT THAN IT DID, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE GOING FOR.

THEY WILL FINISH UP POURING THE CURBING TOMORROW, AND THEN THEY'LL START DOING ALL THE SIDEWALKS, FORMING THE SIDEWALK.

IT LOOKS LIKE WE ARE TAKING IRRIGATION AND LANDSCAPING TO THE COMMISSION FOR APPROVAL ON THE 21ST.

SHOULD THAT GET APPROVED, WE HAVE ALREADY PLANNED THAT IF IT DOES GET APPROVED, THEY WILL START ON THE 22ND.

THE PAVING WAS APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION LAST NIGHT, WHICH WOULD BE THE LAST PART.

IT'S JUST A MATTER OF GETTING THEM SCHEDULED, SO WE'RE GOING TO TRY AND DO IT IF THEY'RE AVAILABLE THE WEEK OF HALLOWEEN.

IF EVERYTHING GOES CORRECTLY, THE PROJECT WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLETE BY HALLOWEEN, SO THAT'S THE GOAL THERE.

THE OTHER MAJOR ONE, WELL, TWO OTHER MAJOR ONES.

WE TAKE THE MARTIN LUTHER KING BALL FIELDS.

THAT'S IN DESIGN ELEMENTS, PREDESIGN, I WOULD CALL IT.

WE'RE JUST PUTTING ALL THE ELEMENTS INTO THE PARK.

THAT GOES TO THE PARKS ADVISORY BOARD NEXT WEEK AND THEN TO THE COMMISSION FOR AN UPDATE.

THEN EVERYONE IS VERY INTERESTED, I KNOW, IN THE WATERFRONT PARK, AND THAT IS, WE HAVE AN UPDATED SCHEDULE THAT I'LL GET TODAY, AND WE'RE LOOKING AT SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION OF THAT BY THE END OF JANUARY, WHICH IS ACTUALLY TWO MONTHS EARLIER.

IT'S BEEN A LONG SCHEDULE, BUT YOU SHOULD SEE MANY THINGS START TO HAPPEN OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS.

WE'VE CLEARED A LOT OF ENGINEERING HURDLES, SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.

WE HAVE A LOT OF MASTER PLANS ABOUT STARTING HERE PRETTY SOON.

WE HAVE THE PARKS, RECREATION, AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN, WHICH WE'RE WORKING ON GETTING A CONSULTANT FOR THAT.

WE ARE DOING THE HARBOR MASTER PLAN, WHICH WE'RE GOING TO BE WORKING ON DOING A CONSULTANT FOR THAT.

THE PARKS ONE WILL PROBABLY START FIRST WITH A CONSULTANT, AND THEN THE HARBOR MASTER PLAN WILL FOLLOW.

I WOULD ANTICIPATE THAT WE WOULD BE BACK IN FRONT OF THIS BODY WITH THE HARBOR MASTER PLAN BECAUSE MY GUESS IS THERE ARE GOING TO BE SOME REQUESTS FOR UPDATED REGULATIONS AND THAT THING.

AS SOON AS WE HAVE THAT PRELIMINARY, WE'LL BRING IT BACK SO WE CAN PREP YOU FOR WHATEVER THAT LOOKS LIKE AND GET YOUR INPUT ON THAT.

WE ALSO HAVE THE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN GOING, AND THE STORM WATER MASTER PLAN IS BEING DONE INTERNALLY.

THE LAST PIECE THAT I WANTED TO UPDATE IS THE STAFF FOR PLANNING.

WE NOW HAVE A NEW STRUCTURE PLAN THAT WE'RE PUTTING IN PLACE.

WE DID INTERVIEWS TODAY FOR A PLANNING TECH FOR THE FRONT, WHICH WILL HELP ALL OF OUR STAFF WHO ARE SITTING OVER THERE, BECAUSE THEY'RE TAKING UP THAT SLACK, SO WE'RE DEFINITELY LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT.

WE'RE HOPING TO HAVE SOMEONE IN PLACE IN THE NEXT 30 DAYS, MINIMUM.

THEN WE WILL HAVE A PLAN OR TWO OUT ON THE STREET FOR SOLICITATION HERE AND HOPEFULLY TOMORROW, BUT BY THE END OF THIS WEEK.

IF YOU KNOW ANY PLANNERS, REALLY GOOD PLANNERS, PASS THE WORD BECAUSE PLANNERS ARE HARD TO FIND.

THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE ON THE UPDATE.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER.

>> LYNN, RELATIVE TO ALACHUA, ARE WE GOING TO TRY AND CLEAN THAT UP A LITTLE BIT MORE, DOWN RIGHT AT FRONT STREET?

>> YES.

>> IT'S PRETTY RAGGED RIGHT NOW.

>> YEAH.

>> THE SECOND THING IS MONDAY NIGHT, WE HAD WATER LAPPING UP ON FRONT STREET, AND THAT WAS NOT A BAD KING TIDE.

IS THERE ANY WAY WE COULD, I DON'T KNOW, PUT A BERM OR SOMETHING UP, MAYBE AT LEAST A FOOT OR SOMETHING, JUST TO KEEP THE WATER OFF THE ROAD?

>> YEAH, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF THINGS WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING THAT WILL HELP WITH THAT.

WE HAVE A PLAN FOR DECORATING AND IMPROVING 101 FRONT STREET.

THERE'LL BE BOLLARDS UP, THERE'LL BE A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS.

WE ALSO KNOW, YES, THE TIDE COMES IN, BUT WE ALSO HAVE A DRAINAGE PIPE THERE THAT'S BROKEN.

WE HAVE A DOUBLE-EDGED SWORD THERE.

WE'RE WORKING ON BEING ABLE TO DO THAT.

IT WON'T TAKE UP ALL OF THE TIDE, BUT IT WILL TAKE A LOT OF IT BECAUSE UNDERNEATH THE GROUND,

[00:15:01]

IT TAKES A LOT OF THAT WATER IN AND OUT OF THE SYSTEM, AND IT'S NOT FUNCTIONING.

WE KNOW WE HAVE THAT, AND WE HAVE A PLAN FOR THAT AS WELL.

>> NOW, IS THAT GOING TO HAVE A FLAPPER VALVE BONDED ON IT?

>> YES. WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT HOW WE REDO THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE OTHER IMPACTS IN THAT AREA.

THERE'LL BE SOME OF THAT THAT GOES IN.

THAT'S ALSO PART OF THE PLAN OF THE RESILIENCY WALL.

>> AS WE DECIDE WHERE ALL THAT GOES, THAT'LL BE PART OF THAT.

>> THIS WILL BE A PRECURSOR.

>> IT WILL BE. ABSOLUTELY.

>> THANK YOU.

>> QUESTION, MR. CHAIR. YOU MENTIONED GLENN THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HIRE A CONSULTANT FOR THE PARKS AND RECREATION OPEN SPACE PLAN? WHAT'S THAT CONSULTANT GOING TO DO? I'M JUST CURIOUS AS TO SEEMS LIKE WE WERE FAIRLY BUILT OUT ON ALL OF OUR PARKS.

>> ACTUALLY, I WOULD SAY, AND THE PARKS DIRECTOR WILL LEAD THAT EFFORT.

BUT WHAT I WOULD SAY IS WE ARE BUILT OUT, BUT LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE HERE, WE'RE AGING OUT.

ALMOST ALL OF OUR PARK SITES, ALL OF THE PARK BUILDINGS NEED TO BE REDONE.

IT'S REALLY A GOOD TIME TO TALK TO THE COMMUNITY ABOUT HOW THEY WANT TO SEE THOSE REDONE.

OF COURSE, ARE WE GOING TO ADD MORE? HOW ARE WE GOING TO GO ABOUT REHABILITATING THE TWO REC CENTERS? THOSE ARE MAJOR QUESTIONS THAT THE COMMUNITY NEEDS TO ANSWER.

ONE OF THE CHALLENGES THAT I UNDERSTAND BECAUSE I WASN'T HERE ABOUT THE LAST PLAN WAS THAT THE CONSULTANT LED THAT EFFORT.

IN THIS CASE, THE STAFF, SCOTT AND I WILL BE LEADING THAT EFFORT.

THE CONSULTANTS GOING TO SUPPORT US AND GATHER FACTS AND HELP US WRITE THE PLAN OF WHAT WE HEAR FROM THE COMMUNITY.

THAT'S WHAT WE'LL BE DOING, AND THEN THAT WILL BE OUR GUIDING DOCUMENT FOR THE NEXT DECADE.

>> MY ONLY RECOMMENDATION BEING A CONSULTANT WOULD BE MAYBE TO GET THE PLAN FIRST BEFORE YOU GET THE CONSULTANT, BECAUSE CONSULTANTS TEND TO DRIVE WHAT THEIR IDEAS ARE, WHICH WIND UP COSTING A LOT MORE MONEY THAN WHAT MAYBE WE ENVISION.

THE COUNTY'S EXPERIENCING THAT A LITTLE BIT NOW.

>> HAVING BEEN A CONSULTANT AS WELL.

I THINK THE KEY IS FOR THAT IS THAT THAT WE AS STAFF HOLD THE VISION FOR THE COMMUNITY THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS.

THAT'S WHY WE NEED TO BE IN FRONT OF IT, NOT THE CONSULTANT. WE NEED TO CHECK THEM.

THERE'S TIMES WHEN THEY'RE GOING TO SAY, HEY, WE'D LOVE TO SEE YOU DO THIS, BUT DOES THAT'S NOT WHAT FERNANDINA BEACH NEEDS OR IS ASKING FOR.

IT'S CLEAR TO ME AFTER READING MULTIPLE TIMES THE CURRENT PLAN THAT DID NOT GET ADOPTED THAT THAT WAS THE PROBLEM LAST.

>> THANK YOU.

>> GLENN, ONE LAST QUESTION.

IT APPEARS THAT WE'RE STARTING TO THINK A LITTLE BIT MORE STRATEGICALLY, WHICH WE HAD DISCUSSED BEFORE WAS A GOOD MOVE.

SOMEHOW, I JUST SEE AS WE'RE MAYBE PUSHING THE PROJECTED STRATEGIES AND SO FORTH, LOOKING A LITTLE BIT FURTHER OVER THE HORIZON, IS THAT CORRECT?

>> THAT'S 100% ACCURATE.

I THINK THE CITY MANAGER CAMPBELL IS LEADING THAT EFFORT.

BUT THAT'S REALLY WHERE WE'RE FOCUSED.

I BELIEVE THAT I'VE WITNESSED AS COMING IN AS A NEW COMMUNITY MEMBER AND A NEW STAFF MEMBER IS THAT WHEN THE COMMUNITY HERE UNDERSTANDS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO AND HAS THEIR SAY SO, AND WE HAVE A STRATEGY AND A PLAN AND A VISION THAT WE CAN ALL GET BEHIND, THIS COMMUNITY DOES THAT.

WHEN THEY DON'T, THEN IT'S THE OPPOSITE.

THEY DON'T SIT ON THE SIDELINES EITHER WAY.

WE NEED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF HAVE A CLEAR STRATEGY THAT WE'RE ALL LIKE, YES, THIS IS THE WAY WE WANT TO BE.

THAT INCLUDES ALL THE BOARDS.

WE'RE AN EVOLVING COMMUNITY AND WE'RE JUST IN THAT PLACE.

OUR STRATEGIC PLANS WILL SET THE TONE.

WE'RE ALSO GOING TO UPDATE THE COM PLAN, WHICH YOU'RE GOING TO TALK A LOT ABOUT TONIGHT, WHICH WILL ALL COME TOGETHER BASICALLY AT THE END OF THE NEXT TWO YEARS AND DICTATE WHERE THIS COMMUNITY WILL GO.

IT'S PERFECT TIME, I THINK.

>> WE HAVE THESE DEPARTMENTS, WE HAVE A PARKS DEPARTMENT.

IT SEEMS TO ME THERE ARE TIMES AND PLACES WHERE THESE THINGS

[00:20:01]

OVERLAP WHERE WE MIGHT REDEVELOP, WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT THE SADDLE ROAD OVERLAY, AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN THERE SPECIFICALLY, BUT IS GREEN SPACE A PARK OR DOES THE PARKS DEPARTMENT TALK TO US ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT OF GREEN SPACE, OR IS THERE A CROSSOVER AND INTERDEPARTMENTAL COLLABORATION WHERE NEEDED?

>> YES. I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THOSE SECRETS WITH ANY COMMUNITY IS EVERYTHING'S CONNECTED.

YOU CAN'T SEPARATE THEM.

>> THAT'S WHERE I'M GOING.

>> ABSOLUTELY. WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE CODE AND THE COMP PLAN, IT IMPACTS EVERYTHING THE REST OF THE STAFF IS GOING TO DO.

THAT'S OUR JOB, IS TO IMPLEMENT THE POLICY THAT'S CREATED BY THE COMMUNITY WHICH STARTS HERE AND ENDS WITH THE COMMISSION.

YES, IT IMPACTS ALL OF US.

THAT'S PART OF THAT STRATEGIC THOUGHT PROCESS, IS TO BE ABLE TO INTERCONNECT THEM.

WE'RE ALSO WORKING ON THAT INTERNALLY.

THERE'S ALWAYS THIS IS A GOOD SIZE ORGANIZATION, AND THERE ARE THINGS THAT NEED TO BE CLEANED UP, AND WE'RE WORKING ON ALL OF THAT, BUILDING RELATIONSHIPS INTERNALLY TO MAKE OURSELVES MORE EFFECTIVE IN DELIVERING THE POLICY THAT YOU ALL [OVERLAPPING].

>> OTHER QUESTIONS FOR GLENN.

>> THAT WAS GOOD. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. THE ONLY THING I WOULD ADD IS THAT THE GUEST SPEAKER ON THE UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE COMING TO THE COMMISSION ON THE 21ST OF OCTOBER AS WELL.

IN CASE YOU WANT TO [INAUDIBLE] THAT MEETING YOU CAN HEAR THEIR DISCUSSION AS WELL. I JUST WANTED TO ADD ON THAT.

>> MARGARET, IF I COULD JUST REMIND THE BOARD THOUGH, IT'S IMPORTANT THAT IF ANY OF US HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, AS GLENN JUST MENTIONED, THAT WE PASSED THOSE QUESTIONS ON.

JEREMIAH ASKED ME BECAUSE I THINK I WAS JUST THE PERSON HE RAN INTO FIRST TO GIVE HIM SOME OF MY QUESTIONS, AND JUST TO GET THE THINKING GOING, IS I WAS ASKING ABOUT THE RIGHT OF WAYS HOLDING STORMWATER.

THESE WOULD BE QUESTIONS FOR THE FPU REPRESENTATIVE.

STORM RESILIENCE, WHICH A LOT OF THIS, I THINK IS BEING DONE UNDER STORM RESILIENCE.

I'D LIKE TO HEAR WHAT THE CURRENT AND FUTURE UTILITY WORK IN THE CITY OF FERNANDINA, WHAT IS GOING ON.

THEN ISSUES WITH PUTTING UTILITIES UNDERGROUND AS REQUIRED IN OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IN SEVERAL SECTIONS.

IF THAT MAYBE KICKS OFF A FEW THOUGHTS FOR OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD.

I KNOW THAT JEREMIAH OR GLENN, YOU WOULD APPRECIATE ANY OF OUR THOUGHTS, BECAUSE WE CERTAINLY WANT TO HAVE SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS THAT RELATE DIRECTLY TO OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, ANSWERED WHILE WE HAVE SOMEONE WHO CAN ANSWER THEM FOR US.

>> MR. CHAIRMAN, I'D LIKE TO ADD SOMETHING ONTO THAT BECAUSE VICTORIA BROUGHT UP A GOOD POINT.

WE HAVE TO, AS DEVELOPERS, PUT EVERYTHING UNDERGROUND, AND FPU SEEMS TO BE BUILDING ALL THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE AGAIN ABOVE GROUND OR REBUILDING IT.

>> I AGREE.

>> THERE'S A LOT OF IT, ESPECIALLY ON LIKE SOUTH FLETCHER, WHERE EVERYONE ARGUES ABOUT THE WATER TABLE AND IT'S TOO HIGH BUT WE DON'T HAVE THAT CONFLICT THERE.

THAT'S ONE OF THE AREAS THAT I FEEL LIKE WE COULD HAVE DONE SOME UNDERGROUND WORK INSTEAD OF BEING OVERHEAD.

I'M NOT SURE ANYBODY TELLS PEOPLE THAT OR TELLS THE CONSULTANT, BECAUSE FPU IS NOT DOING THE WORK THEMSELVES, OR SUBBING IT OUT.

THEY OUGHT TO FOLLOW THE RULES THAT WE HAVE TO FOLLOW.

WE PAY A LOT OF MONEY TO PUT IT UNDERGROUND.

IT IS HARD WHENEVER THERE'S WATER TABLE ISSUES, SOUTH FLETCHER IN PARTICULAR, THEY MANAGED TO GET IT UNDER THE ROUNDABOUT AT SADDLER.

I'M NOT SURE WHY THEY COULDN'T MANAGE IT IN OTHER PLACES.

>> WELL, AND I CERTAINLY SEE THE IQ FIBER AND MAYBE NOT NECESSARILY COMCAST BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN THERE ON FOR SO LONG.

BUT SOME UTILITIES DO GET UNDERGROUND SO IT CAN BE DONE.

>> POWER GOES DEEPER THAN MOST.

USUALLY BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO BE HIT BY A SHOVEL.

>> TRUE.

>> PEOPLE GET HURT. BUT ON FLETCHER IS ONE OF THE FEW PLACES THAT THEY COULD HAVE DONE IT THE WHOLE WAY AND NOT HAD THAT ISSUE.

>> WHEN YOU GO DOWN SOUTH FLETCHER, IT'S NOTHING BUT SPAGHETTI ALL ACROSS EAST SIDE, WEST SIDE.

IF ANY OF THOSE LINES CAME DOWN IN A STORM, ALL OF THE WHOLE SOUTH END OF THE ISLAND WOULD BE AFFECTED.

[00:25:02]

>> I GOT ANOTHER QUESTION THAT GOES ALONG IN LINE WITH PLANNING.

HOW DOES FPU MODEL OUT WHAT THEIR PROJECTED ELECTRICAL DEMANDS ARE IN THE FUTURE? WE HAVE NUMBERS FOR WHAT WE THINK THE POPULATION SAY IN THE CITY.

BUT THEY'VE GOT TO INTEGRATE THAT BECAUSE THEY GOT TO WORRY ABOUT THE WHOLE ISLAND.

YOU CAN'T JUST DESIGN IT AROUND 14,000 PEOPLE HERE IN THE CITY.

I'D JUST LIKE TO KNOW WHAT MODELING THEY USE.

IS IT THE SAME ONE WE'RE TRYING TO USE FOR PROJECTED DEVELOPMENTAL GROWTH IN GENERAL, OR ARE WE WORKING TO A DIFFERENT SET OF NUMBERS?

>> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. LET'S PUT IT ON OUR LIST.

GOOD QUESTION.

>> IF I MAY, MR. CHAIRMAN, THE CITY MANAGER AND MYSELF ALSO MET WITH SOMEONE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT UNDERGROUNDING AND AN ATTORNEY WHO WORKS PRIMARILY IN THE ELECTRICAL FIELD WITH THE ELECTRICAL UTILITIES AND HAS GREAT RELATIONSHIPS WITH PSC, PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION.

IN THOSE DISCUSSIONS WITH HIM, I LEARNED SOME THINGS, TO ANSWER BOARD MEMBER GILLETTE'S QUESTION, WHICH HE MAY HAVE ALREADY KNOWN, FPU IS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT AN SPP, A STORM PROTECTION PLAN.

IT'S A 10 YEAR PLAN THAT HAS TO BE SUBMITTED.

TO THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AND APPROVED BY THEM.

THAT IS WHERE PLANS FOR FERNANDINA BEACH ARE AND WHERE THEIR PROJECTIONS OF UNDERGROUNDING.

WE WERE ALSO EDUCATED ON WHEN YOU WANT TO ASK FPU.

WELL, FIRST OF ALL, THEY DON'T ASK YOU WHEN THEY COME, THEY JUST DO WHAT THEY DO.

BUT IF YOU WANTED TO START A DIALOGUE WITH THEM, THEN THAT MEANS AN EXPENSE, AND THAT EXPENSE CAN EITHER BE WITH A SPECIAL DISTRICT THAT'S CREATED TO TAX OR IT CAN BE PUT ON THE BILL OF THE SERVICE PAYERS, US, THOSE OF US THAT USE FPU.

THERE WAS A COST TO IT.

YOU NEGOTIATE THAT COST WITH THEM.

AS BOARD MEMBER GILLETTE IS SAYING, IT'S GOOD TO GET AHEAD OF IT BECAUSE THERE IS A CALCULATION THAT IS PART OF THESE NEGOTIATIONS THAT IS, WHAT IT WOULD COST THEM TO PUT IN THE CONCRETE VERSUS GOING UNDERGROUND, AND SO GETTING AHEAD OF IT BEFORE THAT CONCRETE IS IN.

THEN WHAT YOU END UP IN DISPUTE OVER IS THAT CALCULATION.

THERE'S A FORMULA AND BEING AHEAD OF THE GAME HELPS YOU WITH THAT FORMULA AS A LOCAL GOVERNMENT.

THOSE ARE ALL THINGS THAT I KNOW THE CITY MANAGER IS LOOKING INTO AND THAT CITIZENS ARE BRINGING TO OUR ATTENTION AS WELL BECAUSE THEY'RE SEEING THIS HAPPENING ALL OVER THE CITY AND WONDERING WHY WE'RE NOT GETTING AHEAD OF IT.

BUT THE BIG ANSWER IS THEY HAVE A STORM PROTECTION PLAN THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE PSC, AND THAT DICTATES THEIR PROGRAM OF UNDERGROUNDING AND WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT.

WE'VE GOT TO GET OUR HANDS ON THAT DOCUMENT, WHICH I THINK WE'RE WORKING ON.

I JUST HAD THIS MEETING I THINK LAST THURSDAY.

THERE IS A PLAN OUT THERE.

AS OFTEN HAPPENS, BIGGER ENTITIES OR GOVERNMENTS GET EXEMPTED FROM THINGS THAT LOCALLY WE'RE REQUIRED TO DO [LAUGHTER].

THAT'S JUST A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION ON THAT.

THERE IS A STORM PROTECTION PLAN, AND WE CAN GET OUR HANDS ON THAT, AND IT DOES IDENTIFY THEIR PLANS.

>> WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD PASS ON TO US?

>> CERTAINLY. I COULD PROBABLY FIND IT WILE I'M SITTING HERE.

I JUST HADN'T PUT MY HANDS ON IT YET, BUT YES.

WE'RE WORKING ON GETTING THAT AND LOOKING AT TALKING TO FPU WHEN THEY COME BECAUSE I BELIEVE YOUR COMMISSION HAS A LOT OF THESE SAME CONCERNS THAT YOU ALL ARE RAISING.

>> IN MY RECOLLECTION OF HOW IT GOES WHEN YOU'RE PUTTING IN UTILITIES, SOME STATES HAVE WHAT THEY CALL MUD DISTRICT, MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICTS, WHERE THEY ACCRUE ALL THOSE COSTS IN EFFECT AHEAD OF TIME, YOU PAY IT DOWN OVER A 20 YEAR BOND.

>> WE CAN DO THAT.

>> WE'RE DOING SOUTH FLETCHER.

IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, NICK, YOU GOT TO KNOW BETTER THAN I DO.

IT'S ABOUT $45,000 PER POLE, ALL INCLUSIVE.

BY THE TIME YOU PUT THE POLE AND DO THE WORK, [OVERLAPPING] RIGHT NOW THEY'RE ON SOUTH FLETCHER, THEY'RE ACTUALLY TRANSFERRING OVER, POLES ARE HIGHER, AND TWO THEY'RE MOVING ALL THE HIGH VOLTAGE LINES, I THINK.

NOW WHAT HAPPENS WHEN 50% OF THOSE PEOPLE IN SOUTH FLETCHER HAVE ELECTRIC CAR, AND I'VE DOUBLED THE DEMAND, ARE THEY GOING TO BE ABLE? THAT'S WHERE IT ALL GETS INTO THIS EQUATION.

I THINK WE AS A CITY NEED TO HAVE SOME WAY OF UNDERSTANDING HOW THAT'S GOING, AT LEAST HAVE A VOICE IN IT.

>> WELL, INTO THE QUESTION OF UNDERGROUNDING AWAY FROM THE SERVICE, BUT THE UNDERGROUNDING, A LOT OF THEIR PLAN TALKS ABOUT HARDENING, WHICH JUST MEANS THE CONCRETE POLE.

THAT IS PART OF THEIR STORM PROTECTION PLAN, IS THAT RATHER THAN GOING UNDERGROUND, THEY HARDEN, WHICH IS THAT HIGHER CONCRETE

[00:30:03]

THAT WE'RE SEEING GO UP NEXT TO THE WOODEN POLE.

THAT IS CONSIDERED ACCEPTABLE FOR A STORM PROTECTION PLAN, WHICH WE ALL KNOW.

AS SOON AS THE WIND COMES, IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IT'S ON A CONCRETE POLE OR NOT.

THAT WIRE COULD COME DOWN [OVERLAPPING] WELL, THERE'S THAT.

BUT YES, SO THAT IS THE OTHER THING, GETTING BACK TO THE UNDERGROUNDING IS THAT PART OF THEIR PLAN CAN BE HARDENING RATHER THAN UNDERGROUNDING, WHICH I'M GUESSING.

THIS IS BACK IN YOUR AREA, IS LESS EXPENSIVE.

>> WELL, AND I'LL JUST SAID THAT THEY MANAGED TO HARDEN IT UNDER THE SADDLE ROW ROUNDABOUT UNDERGROUND.

IT WOULD SEEM THAT THEY HAVE THAT NUMBER OF WHAT TO DO TO GET IT UNDERGROUND.

>> THEY DO.

>> YOU COULD PIECEMEAL THAT INCREMENTALLY.

>> IF THEY CAN DO IT ONE PLACE, THEY CAN DO IT IN A LOT OF PLACES.

>> I AGREE, AND THEY DID SAY THAT THEY DO HAVE.

>> BUILD INTO YOUR BASIC ELECTRICAL NUMBER, THERE IS [OVERLAPPING].

>> THE LOG NUMBER. WE SHOULD BE ON THE NOTE.

>> RIGHT.

>> THERE'S A REPLACEMENT COST THAT'S BUILT INTO, AND THAT'S PART OF THEIR OVERHEAD STRUCTURE FOR THE BUSINESS SO THEY'RE DOING IT.

IF YOU GO UNDERGROUND, YOU SHOULD ONLY BE PAYING THE DELTA DIFFERENCE BETWEEN POOL VERSUS UNDERGROUND.

>> I'LL CLOSE UP WITH THIS.

THEY ARGUE, AND I SAY THEY, AS IF THEY'RE ADVERSARIAL, THEY'RE NOT, BUT THE ARGUMENT IS WATER TABLE ISSUES MAKE A LOT OF PROBLEMS. FLETCHER IS ONE OF THE UNIQUE PLACES THAT THAT YOU DON'T HAVE THAT ISSUE.

>> YEAH.

>> IF IT WAS DOWN DOWNTOWN OR ANYWHERE ELSE, THEN THERE COULD BE OTHER [OVERLAPPING].

>> EVEN LIKE GOING DOWN [OVERLAPPING].

>> THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER STREETS.

>> FLETCHER IS JUST ONE OF THE FEW UNIQUE PLACES THAT YOU DON'T TRULY HAVE THAT ISSUE WITH WATER?

>> BECAUSE IT'S A SAND DUNE.

>> YEAH. YOU HAVE WATER GETTING PULLED IN FROM EGAN CREEK ONE WAY IN THE OCEAN THE OTHER WAY, AND IT JUST MAKES IT NATURALLY DEEP WATER, SO THE WATER TABLE IS REALLY DEEP, AND THAT'S RARE.

>> YEAH.

>> THAT WOULD BE THE ONE PLACE I THINK WE WOULD HAVE AN ARGUMENT ON.

>> I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S PRECISELY OUR ISSUE, BUT WHAT TERESA WOULD BE THE NEXT STEP ON THAT.

>> WELL, AS MARGARET WAS SAYING, ON OCTOBER 21, THE COMMISSION IS PREPARING TO HEAR FROM FPU AND RAISE SOME OF THESE ISSUES.

THEN MS. CAMPBELL AND I ATTENDED THAT ONE MEETING, AND WE'RE GOING TO JUST START LOOKING AT IT.

THEY'RE ALREADY UNDER CONTRACT, THEY'RE ALREADY MOVING.

APPARENTLY THE NEXT STEPS ARE GETTING IN TOUCH WITH FPU, SLOWING DOWN THE PROCESS AND GETTING IN FRONT OF IT.

FOR THIS BOARD, BECAUSE THEY WON'T BE HERE UNTIL YOUR NOVEMBER MEETING, I THINK YOUR NEXT STEPS FOR YOUR QUESTIONS WOULD BE, AS YOU'VE ALREADY SAID, GET THEM IN TO MARGARET, COME TO THE MEETING, GET THEM IN SO THAT YOUR COMMISSION KNOWS TO ASK THEM AS WELL.

>> GOOD POINT.

>> IS THIS A GOOD ENOUGH FORM TO GET THEM IN OR DO WE NEED TO EMAIL THEM.

>> WERE YOU GUYS TAKING NOTES OR? [LAUGHTER] THAT'S UP TO THE.

>> IF YOU THINK OF ANYTHING ELSE YOU CAN EMAIL.

[LAUGHTER].

>> ANYTHING ELSE ON THIS? REECE, WHY DON'T YOU KEEP THE FLOOR?

[6.2 Discussion Items]

GREAT. THANK YOU.

CHAIRMAN. I AM GOING TO GET TO THE LEGISLATION BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THE LEGISLATIVE UPDATE IS IMPORTANT AS WELL.

ONE THING I ALSO WANTED TO TALK ABOUT TONIGHT, WHILE WE DON'T HAVE ANY ITEMS ON THE AGENDA AS FAR AS PUBLIC APPLICATIONS IS THE NEW PROCESSES THAT I RECOMMEND WE FOLLOW.

FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND IN THE PAST, WE'VE GOTTEN INTO A PROGRAM OF IF IT WAS AN ANNEXATION OF FUTURE LAND USE, MAP AMENDMENT AND A REZONING STAFF WOULD PRESENT IT TO THIS BOARD AS ONE APPLICATION, ONE STAFF REPORT, WITH ALL THREE IN THE STAFF REPORT.

ALSO, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD, AND I THINK I MENTIONED THIS AT MY FIRST MEETING, HAD GOTTEN AWAY FROM ACTUALLY HANDLING QUASI JUDICIAL MATTERS.

I'VE SPOKEN WITH GLENN AND MARGARET, AND I WOULD RECOMMEND, AND I WOULD SAY WE HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE OLD WAY OF DOING IT, WHICH IS, EACH ITEM HAS ITS OWN APPLICATION BECAUSE THE REZONING IS QUASI JUDICIAL, AND YOU NEED TO HANDLE IT AS SUCH.

WE'LL HAVE TO GET BACK TO READING OUR QUASI JUDICIAL PROCEDURES, HAVING YOU DISCLOSE IF YOU'VE SPOKEN WITH ANYONE ABOUT IT.

I THOUGHT TONIGHT WOULD BE A GOOD TIME TO BRING THAT UP AGAIN BECAUSE I BELIEVE POTENTIALLY ON OUR NEXT MEETING, IF NOT DECEMBER, BUT CERTAINLY NOVEMBER, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE AN ANNEXATION OF FLUME AND A REZONING COMING FORWARD.

I DON'T MEAN TO SPEAK OUT OF TERM, BUT GLENN AND I HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT IT, AND I THINK THAT STAFF'S PLAN IS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THREE, NOT JUST ONE COMBINED STAFF REPORT, CORRECT? THEN WE WILL DESIGNATE THE ONES QUASI JUDICIAL ON YOUR AGENDA THAT ARE QUASI JUDICIAL,

[00:35:04]

WE'LL READ THOSE LOVELY RULES.

YOU'LL DISCLOSE YOUR EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS, AND WE'LL PUT THOSE PROCEDURES BACK IN PLACE.

I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY HAS THE HISTORY OF HOW THEY WENT AWAY, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT IT MATTERS.

I JUST THINK IT'S THE LAW, AND IT'S THE WAY WE'RE SUPPOSED TO PROCEED AND CONDUCT OURSELVES.

THAT'S WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND WE DO.

[LAUGHTER].

>> SINCE THE CLERK IS NOT NORMALLY HERE FOR THAT, WOULD YOU SWEAR THEM IN FOR THE CLAUSE YOU JUST READ?

>> YES. EITHER MYSELF OR SYLVIA, WHOEVER IS SITTING THAT THAT DESK.

>> OKAY.

>> OFTEN TAKES THAT RESPONSIBILITY OF SWEARING THEM IN, OR ME, IF YOU DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE DOING IT.

BUT YOU'RE PROBABLY USED TO HAVING [OVERLAPPING].

>> YEAH.

>> THERE WAS A FORMER CITY ATTORNEY WHO SAID WE NO LONGER HAD TO DO THAT.

>> BASICALLY [OVERLAPPING].

>> WE'RE GOING TO ACT MORE LIKE THE CITY COMMISSION DOES WHEN THEY'RE VOTING?

>> WELL, YOU'RE GOING TO ACT LIKE THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD IS SUPPOSED TO ACT.

YOU ARE CONSIDERED COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO YOUR COMMISSION.

THAT'S WHY IT'S QUASI JUDICIAL.

YOUR PLANNING STAFF AND THIS BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION ON THE QUASI JUDICIAL ITEMS ARE CONSIDERED COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT YOUR COMMISSION CAN CONSIDER WHEN APPROVING OR DENYING.

THEREFORE, I WOULD LIKE YOU TO CONDUCT YOURSELVES IN THAT WAY.

IT IS REQUIRED BY LAW THAT YOU DO IT.

THEN THE ONES THAT ARE LEGISLATED, JUST LIKE THEY ARE AT THE COMMISSION LEVEL.

ANYTHING THAT YOU CONSIDER THAT YOU RECOMMEND TO THE COMMISSION THAT'S QUASI JUDICIAL ON THEIR LEVEL IS THE SAME ON YOUR LEVEL AS WELL.

IT'S TREATED WITH THAT SAME MANNER OF IMPORTANCE AND GOES UP WITH THE SAME RULES AND RESTRICTIONS AND DISCLOSURES, SO THAT YOUR RECOMMENDATION CAN BE SHOWN TO NOT BE TAINTED.

YOU SHOULD BE DISCLOSING YOUR EX PARTE JUST LIKE THEM.

BECAUSE YOUR RECOMMENDATION IS SOMETHING THEY CAN RELY ON WHEN THEY APPROVE OR DENIAL.

THAT'S ONE THING THAT I WANTED TO LEAD WITH, AND IF THAT'S OKAY WITH THIS BOARD.

>> IT'S THAT WE HAVE TO VOTE ON.

>> NO, AND I'M ACTING LIKE YOU ACTUALLY GET A CHOICE BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO BE NICE [LAUGHTER].

I WOULD STRONGLY ADVICE YOU MOVE IN THAT DIRECTION.

MR. CHAIRMAN, ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT? IS THIS BOARD COMFORTABLE WITH MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION.

>> IS THAT VOLUNTOLD? NOT QUITE THE SAME.

BUT I THINK WE NEED TO FOLLOW THOSE PROCEDURES.

IT'S MY LEGAL ADVICE THAT WE FOLLOW THOSE PROCEDURES, AND ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH THAT, MR. CHAIRMAN, THAT I IMPLEMENT THOSE PROCEDURE [LAUGHTER].

ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE REST OF THE BOARD BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO LEGISLATION?

>> IF YOU THINK THAT'S THE ROAD WE NEED TO GO, THEN WE NEED TO GO THAT WAY.

>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU ALL.

THEN THE LEGISLATIVE UPDATE, I KNOW WE'VE HAD A LOT OF TIME SINCE THEY'VE ACTUALLY BEEN IMPLEMENTED IN JULY, SO A LOT IS UNFOLDED.

OUR FIRST CONCERN THAT EVERYONE HAS SB180.

SENATE BILL 180.

SENATE BILL 180, AS YOU PROBABLY ALL KNOW AT THIS POINT, WHAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR AGENDA IS THE FLORIDA LEAGUE OF CITY'S LEGISLATIVE UPDATE, RATHER THAN REINVENTING THE WHEEL, WE HAVE BORROWED THEIR ANALYSIS.

THAT ONE IN YOUR PACKET ACTUALLY BEGINS WITH LIVE LOCAL, SO IF YOU WANT TO STICK WITH THE ORDER OF YOUR PACKET, I CAN BACK MYSELF UP [NOISE].

WE CAN START WITH LIVE LOCAL.

>> FLIP OVER. THAT'S THE THIRD ONE

>> YES. THE SB 180 IS FURTHER DOWN.

IT'S JUST FIRST ON MY BRAIN.

>> YOU GUYS WILLING TO JUST FLIP OVER 180?

>> YEAH.

>> OKAY.

>> SB 180 IS THE SENATE BILL THAT WAS PUT IN PLACE TO PROTECT PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO REBUILD IN EMERGENCY SITUATION, AND CERTAINLY AFTER EVENTS THAT HAVE HAPPENED, AND AS WE'VE ALL SEEN AND HEARD AND READ, IT HAS WHETHER ON PURPOSE OR NOT INADVERTENTLY BLANKETED THE STATE OF FLORIDA WITH NO ABILITY TO ADOPT LEGISLATION THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED MORE BURDENSOME.

AND THAT IS BECAUSE OF IT RELATING BACK TO STORMS AND WITHIN A CERTAIN TIME FRAME OF A STORM, YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO ADOPT ANY LEGISLATION THAT WOULD BE MORE BURDENSOME.

WE HAVE SEEN SINCE OUR LAST MEETING THAT THE STATE IS ALREADY ISSUING LETTERS TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS THAT SAY, THEIR AMENDMENTS ARE VOID AB INITIO, THEIR EAR AMENDMENTS ARE VOID AB INITIO, MEANING THEY'RE JUST VOID BY OPERATION OF LAW BECAUSE THEY VIOLATE THE SENATE BILL.

YOU'LL BE DISCUSSING YOUR EAR AMENDMENTS LATER THIS EVENING THAT ARE REQUIRED BY LAW, AND WE WERE ALL HOPING PRIOR TO THAT STATE ACTION BEING TAKEN THAT THE EAR AMENDMENTS WOULD BE EXEMPTED BECAUSE IT IS SOMETHING THAT'S REQUIRED BY THE STATUTE.

[00:40:02]

BUT THAT IS PROVEN TO BE UNTRUE.

THE STATE IS ISSUING THE LETTERS, SAYING THAT EVEN THOSE EAR [NOISE] AMENDMENTS WOULD VOID AB INITIO.

YOU'LL BE DISCUSSING TONIGHT HOW TO MOVE FORWARD WITH SB 180 FACING YOU AND YOUR TIME FOR YOUR EAR AMENDMENTS.

I DON'T WANT TO STEAL ANY THUNDER, BUT MY ADVICE IS GOING TO BE THAT WITH ALL THE LEGAL CHALLENGES THAT ARE OUT THERE, AND WITH THE FACT THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A SESSION BEGINNING IN JANUARY, AND WE WOULD HOPE OUR LEGISLATORS ARE GOING TO FIX THIS, THAT WE PROCEED AS IF WE'RE GOING TO ADOPT THEM.

WE JUST GO RIGHT UP. IT FEELS LIKE A WASTE OF TIME AND ENERGY AND MONEY, POTENTIALLY, AND AT ONE POINT, THE PLANNING AGENCY WAS NOT EVEN GOING TO ASSIST US WITH THIS.

BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT'S CHANGED, IS THAT CORRECT? AT ONE POINT, THEY WEREN'T EVEN GOING TO ASSIST WITH TRYING TO HELP LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WITH THEIR EAR AMENDMENTS BECAUSE THEY FELT LIKE IT WAS A WASTE OF TIME.

BUT NOW I'M GOING TO RECOMMEND THAT WE MOVE FORWARD, AND WE JUST WON'T BE ABLE TO ADOPT UNTIL THE LEGISLATURE SORTS THIS OUT OR UNTIL ONE OF THESE LAWSUITS MAYBE PUTS AN INJUNCTION IN PLACE THAT DOESN'T ALLOW THE BILL TO BE ENFORCED UNTIL MATTERS ARE HANDLED IN COURT.

HOW LIKELY THAT IS TO HAPPEN, I DON'T KNOW, BUT LOTS OF JURISDICTIONS ARE IN FAVOR OF CORRECTING THIS BILL, TO MAKE IT APPLY TO WHAT IT WAS MEANT TO APPLY TO AND TO CLEAN UP THE OVER BROAD NATURE AND IMPACT THAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU DRAFT LEGISLATION QUICKLY.

THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT. I SAW ON THE AGENDA LATER TONIGHT, WE HAVE DISCUSSION [NOISE] 10304 AND 10304.

I'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH STAFF ABOUT SEVERAL SECTIONS IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE CLEANED UP.

BECAUSE OF SB 180, WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT.

BUT IF IT'S MORE RESTRICTED, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO IT.

EVEN IF IT'S THE WAY WE'RE INTERPRETING OUR CODE NOW, AND WE SIMPLY WANT TO EXPLAIN IT BECAUSE IT'S THE WAY WE'RE DOING IT, BUT IT DOESN'T SEEM CLEAR.

IT'S GOING TO BE EASILY CHALLENGED.

WE'LL CONTINUE WITH CLEAN UP, AND I AM JUST GOING TO CONTINUE TO HAVE FAITH THAT WITH THE AMOUNT OF PUBLIC OUTCRY AND FROM ALL LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ABOUT THIS THAT IT IS GOING TO GET CLEANED UP.

I HAVEN'T SPOKEN WITH ANY OF OUR LEGISLATORS TO SEE WHERE IT'S GOING.

I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF YOU HAVE OR ANYBODY'S HEARD ANYTHING.

I KNOW THAT YOU WENT TO THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION OUT OF THE COUNTY.

BUT THERE IS THE LAWSUIT OUT THERE.

I THINK YOU'VE ALL SEEN THE THOUSAND FRIENDS OF FLORIDA HAS FILED A LAWSUIT.

THEN [NOISE] WI SEROTA HAS A LAWSUIT WITH 25 LOCAL GOVERNMENTS THAT HAVE COME TOGETHER, CITIES AND COUNTIES AND HAVE FILED SUIT.

A DECLARATORY JUDGMENT AND AN INJUNCTION TO ENJOIN THE APPLICATION OF THIS AND FINDING IT UNCONSTITUTIONAL BECAUSE IT USURPS SEVERAL OF YOUR POWERS AND AUTHORITIES THAT YOU'RE CHARGED WITH UNDER THE STATUTE.

THAT'S SB 180.

IT'S GOING TO PUT US IN A PAUSE MODE, BUT I DON'T RECOMMEND THAT WE COME TO A COMPLETE HALT.

WE JUST HAVE TO GET TO THE POINT WHERE WE'RE READY, AND THEN WHEN THE LEGISLATURE MAKES UP ITS MIND OR THE COURT DOES, WE WILL MOVE FORWARD.

BUT I DON'T THINK THE BUSINESS CAN STOP.

>> COULD I ASK YOUR QUESTION? ARE THE RULES OF THE ROAD PER 180 ONLY GOOD FOR ONE YEAR AFTER THE STORM, THEN THEY REVERT BACK TO NORMAL.

I READ SOMETHING THAT WOULD INDICATE THAT IT'S [OVERLAPPING].

>> YEAH.

>> 360 DAYS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT OR A YEAR.

>> YEAH. NO, I THINK IT'S THREE YEARS.

GLENN'S PUT [INAUDIBLE] THREE YEARS.

IT'S MUCH BROADER THAN THAT.

IT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

BUT THAT'S WHAT I MEAN.

THE IMPACTS OF THIS.

IT'S WITHIN ONE YEAR, IF YOU HAD IT IN PLACE PRIOR TO THE STORM HITTING, WHICH NOW THE STORMS THAT THEY NAMED ARE ALL WITHIN THE TIME FRAME THAT JUST BLANKETS THE WHOLE STATE.

EVEN SOME OF THE LIMITING LANGUAGE THEY THEY TRIED TO PROVIDE.

THEY COMPLETELY CIRCUMVENTED WITH THE OTHER LANGUAGE THAT MADE IT, NAMING THE STORMS AND PUTTING IT ACROSS THE STATE.

I'M TRYING TO FIND THAT THREE YEARS, BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS THREE YEARS AS WELL.

>> LET ME SEE. IN THE MEANTIME, MARTIN, WE HAVE TO BRING THE EAR IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSION, THAT'S THE CLOSURE ON IT BEFORE IT GOES FORWARD, CORRECT?

>> WHAT WILL HAPPEN AND WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT, BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO START THE ACTUAL PROCESS UNTIL JANUARY.

[00:45:03]

>> RIGHT.

>> THE HEAR WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

BUT WE'RE IN THE PLOMINARY STAGES.

THE DISCUSSION TONIGHT WAS SIMPLY JUST TO PUT IT ON YOUR RADAR THAT WE'RE MOVING TOWARDS THAT.

BUT WITH 180, LIKE REVENTION, WE'RE NOT GOING TO REALLY HIT IT HARD UNTIL JANUARY.

THEN BY THE END OF SEPTEMBER, THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE THAT LETTER AS TO WHAT CHANGES WE'RE PROPOSING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH.

THEN WE HAVE THE NEXT YEAR TO ACTUALLY IMPLEMENT THEM.

IT'S KIND OF FAR DOWN THE ROAD.

>> YEAH.

>> IT'S CLOSE.

>> OKAY.

>> OUR PART IS JUST TO UPDATE YOU ON WHAT WHERE WE'RE AT, BUT NOT REALLY A FULL BLOWN DISCUSSION AS TO INPUT AND ALL THAT AT THIS POINT.

>> THERE'S NO REASON FOR US NOT TO START.

>> ABSOLUTELY NOT, YEAH.

>> THE WAY THEY'VE WORDED IT IS THAT [OVERLAPPING].

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>> RIGHT. BUT THEN YOU GO DOWN FURTHER IN THE STATUTE, AND IT SAYS, IF YOU'RE WITHIN HURRICANES DEBBIE HELENE MILTON, AS WELL AS MUNICIPALITIES WITHIN THOSE COUNTIES, THE AFFECTED JURISDICTIONS MAY NOT IMPOSE.

CONSTRUCTION MORATORIUMS OR ADOPT RESTRICTIVE LAND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES BEFORE OCTOBER 1, 2027.

>> THAT'S WHERE WE'RE GETTING THAT TIME PERIOD.

IT'S REALLY A DATE CERTAIN.

BUT BECAUSE OF WHEN IT WAS ADOPTED, AND ALSO THE INTERESTING THING IS IF A PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNER BRINGS IT FORWARD, THEN YOU CAN HEAR IT.

IF THEY WANT TO COMP PLAN CHANGE THAT WOULD DOWN, WE JUST TOOK THREE PARCELS FROM MR. SUGAR ROOD TUESDAY NIGHT, 0.39 ACRES ADJACENT TO THE GREENWAY, AND THE CITY WILL BE THE APPLICANT TO CHANGE THAT ZONING FROM RESIDENTIAL DOWN TO CONSERVATION.

THAT WOULD BE MORE RESTRICTIVE AND MORE BURDENSOME, BUT SINCE THE APPLICANT OWNER OF THE LAND IS PROPOSING IT, YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD ON THOSE.

AGAIN, IF COMING IN FROM THE COUNTY.

THE ANNEXATIONS THAT YOU GET, YOU COULD TECHNICALLY SAY THAT THE ZONING WE PUT ON IT IS DOWN BECAUSE SOME OF THE ZONING OUT THERE HAS MUCH BETTER WELL, MORE USES, I WON'T SAY BETTER.

THAT'S MY PRIVATE PHASE, BUT MORE USE IS AVAILABLE TO THEM IN CERTAIN DISTRICTS IN THE COUNTY AND WHEN THEY COME IN TO THE COMPARABLE HERE IN THE CITY.

BUT AGAIN, IF THE APPLICANT BRINGS IT FORWARD, THEN YOU'RE ALLOWED TO HEAR IT AND ALLOWED TO DO IT AND GIVE THEM WHAT THEY ASK FOR.

SB 180 IS JUST WE'RE RESTRICTED.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO FIX A LOT OF THINGS IF THEY ARE SEEN TO BE MORE BURDENSOME.

WE CAN CERTAINLY BE LESS BURDENSOME.

IF OUR CLARIFICATIONS ARE GOING TO ALLOW MORE USES, AND WE WILL SEE ON THE LEGISLATION THAT'S THE LAWSUITS THAT HAVE RECENTLY BEEN FILED.

THAT'S SB 180.

I KNOW THAT IN THE LAST MEETING, THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT IT.

IS THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS OTHER THAN WE JUST WAIT AND SEE?

>> THERE IS A FOLLOW UP WEBINAR 3,000 FRIENDS OF FLORIDA SCHEDULED FOR OCTOBER THE 15TH, WHICH IS PLANNING UNDER PRESSURE, UNDERSTANDING THE IMPACTS OF SENATE BILL 180.

IF ANYBODY IS INTERESTED IN GETTING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, YOU CAN GO TO THEIR WEBSITE.

>> I JUST WOULD CAUTION, YOU NEED TO SIGN UP AHEAD OF TIME AND GET A TICKET NUMBER.

THE APPARENTLY ARE LIMITING THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE, SO YOU HAVE TO HAVE A TICKET NUMBER AHEAD OF TIME IN ORDER TO SEE THE WEBINAR.

>> GOOD. I HAD FORGOTTEN TO MENTION THAT.

THAT'S EXCELLENT INFORMATION.

>> ARE WE PART OF MANY OF THE LAWSUITS WITH OTHER CITIES? I KNOW YOU SAID YOU HADN'T TALKED TO OUR LEGISLATURES AND I HAVEN'T EITHER.

DO WE KNOW WHAT THEY THINK ABOUT IT OR HOW THEY VOTED ON IT?

>> IT WAS OVERWHELMINGLY PASSED.

I DON'T HAVE THE NUMBERS IN FRONT OF ME.

I HAVE IT IN MY PHONE SOMEWHERE.

IT MAKES YOU WONDER IF THEY JUST DIDN'T REALIZE WHAT THEY WERE DOING BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT WAS UNANIMOUS, BUT IT WAS PRETTY DARN CLOSE.

AS FAR AS OUR LEGISLATORS, WELL, I THINK THAT THE PROCESS THAT THIS CITY IS TAKING, PARTICULARLY IN THIS COUNTY IS THAT WE ARE GOING TO TAKE THE POSITION THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT FIXED WHERE THE CITY COMMISSION IS PUT IT ON ITS PRIORITY LIST TO HAVE TO SUPPORT THE LEAGUE OF CITIES, BUT THAT IT IS.

WE ARE GOING TO LOBBY ON THE BASIS THAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE IT FIXED AND OVERTURNED AND CORRECTED, NOT COMPLETELY REPEALED, AND THAT I THINK WE'RE ALL LOOKING AT IT AS AN INADVERTENT ACT THAT WAS OVERLY BROAD, UNINTENDED,

[00:50:04]

AND WE JUST WANT TO SUPPORT AMENDING THE LEGISLATION TO MAKE IT COVER WHAT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO.

THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING FROM SITTING IN MEETINGS, AND I THINK THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE THE CLOSEST TO THE COUNTY'S POSITION, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY STATED THEIR POSITION OUT THERE.

BUT THAT CERTAINLY THE CITY COMMISSION'S POSITION WHEN THEY HAD THEIR PRIORITIES SET THAT NIGHT WAS TO DEFINITELY IT'S ON THEIR LIST OF PRIORITIES TO CLARIFY SENATE BILL 180.

>> AND 103 AND 104 JUST BEING INTERPRETED AS WRITTEN UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE.

>> WELL, THAT FOR SO MANY REASONS.

YES. EVEN IF WE DIDN'T HAVE SB 180, WE'VE GOT THE TRONGALI APPEAL NEXT WEEK.

THERE'S JUST ENOUGH GOING ON THAT WE'RE NOT TOUCHING THAT [LAUGHTER] I SAW IT ON THE I DID NOT LOOK.

IT SHOWS YOU MY READING COMPREHENSION.

I THINK THAT, AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT WHAT WE MIGHT WANT TO DO.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, BECAUSE WE COULD HAVE PENDING LITIGATION IMMINENTLY COMING OUT OF 15 OCTOBER, I'D RATHER WE NOT GO ON RECORD WITH TOO MUCH INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT WE THINK, HOW WE INTERPRET IT, I MEAN.

>> AGREE.

>> AGREE.

>> THE QUESTION BEING, YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE ARE SOME AREAS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT JUST OVER TIME, WE'VE DETERMINED THEY NEED FIXING UP.

MY VIEW, WE OUGHT TO PROCEED WITH THAT BECAUSE I THINK AT SOME POINT IN TIME THIS ISSUE WILL GET HEALED OVER OR DO WE JUST WAIT?

>> WELL, LIKE I SAID, I THINK YOU COULD STILL TALK ABOUT ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE CORRECTED, BUT THE COMMISSION'S NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO ADOPT THEM.

IF THEY ARE MORE BURDENSOME.

TO CLARIFY EVEN 305, COULD BE INTERPRETED AS BEING MORE BURDENSOME, IF YOU WERE GOING TO CLARIFY IT TO MEAN WHAT YOU THINK YOU THOUGHT IT MEANT.

BUT LET'S GO TO ANOTHER ONE THAT I LOOK AT ALL THE TIME, WHICH IS THAT TOWN HOME 1, 40705.

WHERE IT DOESN'T EXACTLY SAY WHAT WE THOUGHT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO SAY.

BUT THEN IF WE WERE TO CLARIFY IT, IT COULD LOOK MORE BURDENSOME.

YOU CAN TALK ABOUT IT, BUT IF IT'S DETERMINED TO BE A CLARIFICATION THAT IS MORE BURDENSOME, THEN YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO ADOPT IT UNTIL THIS IS RESOLVED.

>> BUT WE COULD GO THROUGH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT COOL IF WE'RE GOING TO DO NOTHING EXCEPT STREAMLINE THE MECHANICS OF FLOAT ADDING FLOW CHARTS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

>> THE TRC, WE'RE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT THE TRC HAS SOME HAS THE WRONG PEOPLE LISTED ON THE LIST, AND DOESN'T HAVE CLEAR GUIDANCE IN CHAPTER 9.

THINK, YES, FIXING FLOW CHARTS THAT ILLUSTRATE WHAT IS ALREADY THERE. CERTAINLY.

>> THAT'S JUST TREATED AS ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES WHERE YOU'RE NOT CHANGING THE VERBIAGE OF THAT.

>> YOU CAN BE LESS RESTRICTIVE.

YOU JUST CAN'T BE MORE BURDENSOME.

>> HOW IS THAT DEFINED?

>> IS THAT ON THE EYES OF THE BEHOLDER?

>> I ANTICIPATED THAT THIS WILL BE RESOLVED. ANY IDEA?

>> I THINK IT'LL BE THE FIRST OF THE YEAR BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH THE LAWSUITS WERE JUST FILED WERE IN OCTOBER, AND YOU COULD BE HEARING SOMETHING ON THE LAWSUITS IN NOVEMBER.

>> BY YOUR NEXT MEETING, WE MIGHT HAVE SOME IDEA OF WHEN THEY'LL HAVE A HEARING, WE MIGHT HAVE SOME IDEA NOW WITH THESE CASES, THEY HAVE TO HAVE A CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER WITH THE NEW CIVIL RULES OF PROCEDURE.

WE CAN RETRIEVE THAT ORDER FROM THE DOCKET, AND IT'LL PUT ALL THE DATES THAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE THEIR HEARINGS AND GET SOME IDEA OF HOW THE LITIGATION IS GOING TO PROCEED, AND THEN THE LEGISLATURE'S NOT IN SESSION UNTIL JANUARY.

THERE'S YOUR ANSWER ON THAT ONE.

>> IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE, WHATEVER THAT MEANS.

>> I THINK YOU'RE IN NEUTRAL UNTIL PROBABLY JANUARY, FEBRUARY, BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH SESSION STARTS IN JANUARY, I DON'T THINK ANYTHING WILL BE RESOLVED IMMEDIATELY.

>> BUT THEY DON'T HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL JULY 1 TO IMPLEMENT 2026 IF THEY MAKE A CHANGE TO THIS.

THEY COULD IMPLEMENT EARLIER THAN THAT.

>> AS SOON AS THE LEGISLATION IS SB 180 IS CLARIFIED SOMEHOW SOME WAY BY A COURT OR THE LEGISLATURE, THAT'S WHEN IT CAN BE EFFECTIVE.

>> YOU MEAN IF THE STATE DID SOMETHING, THEY CAN MAKE IT EFFECTIVE SOONER.

>> IT'S GOT TO BE DONE BY THE BASED I GUESS.

>> THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO.

>> THEY DON'T HAVE TO WAIT THAT.

>> YES. I THINK THAT YOUR WORK IS JUST GOING TO LOOK A LITTLE DIFFERENT FOR NOW WITH SB 180 IN PLACE, AND YOU'LL MOVE FORWARD AND WE'LL JUST HAVE AN EYE TOWARDS, ARE WE BEING OVERLY BURDENSOME OR MORE BURDENSOME? ARE WE SIMPLY CLARIFYING?

[00:55:03]

WE'LL JUST HAVE TO LOOK AT IT.

I KNOW WHEN THEY GET TO THIS PART OF THE AGENDA LATER, WE'RE PUTTING TOGETHER THE CITY ATTORNEY'S CONCERNS WITH YOUR CODE, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S CONCERNS, WE'RE GOING TO PRIORITIZE GETTING THEM TO YOU TO REVIEW, AND CERTAINLY THERE'S SEVERAL WE HAVE TO HAVE DONE BY THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR, SO THOSE WILL BE COMING MORE QUICKLY, AND WE'RE GOING TO PRIORITIZE THOSE.

WE HAVE TO DO AND I CANNOT REMEMBER THE RIGHT NAME.

NICK GILLETTE MIGHT REMEMBER THIS NAME.

I CALL THEM RECOVERY HOMES, RECOVERY RESIDENCES HALFWAY HOUSES.

WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO CALL IT THAT ANYMORE, APPARENTLY.

WE HAVE TO HAVE SOME NEW LEGISLATION ON THAT.

THERE'S SOME CONDOMINIUM LEGISLATION THAT NEEDS TO BE ADOPTED BY JANUARY 1, AND OUR BUILDING OFFICIAL IS WORKING WITH THE COUNTY TO SEE WHAT THE COUNTY'S DOING ON THAT.

WE ARE NOT BEING SHAMEFUL.

WE'RE WATCHING WHAT THE COUNTY'S DOING.

IF DENISE MAY AND HER THREE ATTORNEY STAFFED OFFICE COMES UP WITH IT, AND WE CAN STEAL IT, WE ARE [LAUGHTER] THAT'S THE PLAN WITH TRYING TO MEET SOME OF OUR DEADLINES THAT OTHER THAN SB 180, WE HAVE LEGISLATION THAT WE ARE TOLD WE NEED TO ADOPT.

WE'LL BE PRIORITIZING THAT, GETTING IT TO YOU AND PUTTING THAT BEFORE YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, AND THAT WILL BE, AGAIN, JUST SOMETHING FOR YOU TO CONSIDER BECAUSE WE BASICALLY HAVE BEEN TOLD WE HAVE TO DO IT.

THE OTHER IS LIVE LOCAL.

THAT IS SB 1730, AND THAT WAS THE FIRST ONE IN YOUR PACKET.

ON THAT PARTICULAR LEGISLATION, THERE'S LOTS OF CHANGES, BUT ONE WAS THAT IT DOES IMPACT PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENTS, AND THAT IS AN INTERESTING TURN BECAUSE YOU HAVE SOME OLDER PUDS THAT MAYBE WERE NEVER BUILT OUT, AND MOSTLY IN THE COUNTY.

I'M NOT SURE THAT WE WOULD HAVE HUGE IMPACTS HERE IN THE CITY.

IN THE COUNTY, YOU HAVE SOME PUDS, WHERE THEY DID THE RESIDENTIAL, THEY NEVER DID THE COMMERCIAL.

NOW, AND IT WAS SEEN IN 2023 WHEN LIVE LOCAL WAS FIRST ADOPTED, THAT PUDS WERE EXCLUDED.

BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH YOU CAN'T CONTRACT ZONE TO ME, PUDS ARE CONTRACT ZONING.

IT'S A LEGAL WAY TO HAVE A CONTRACT ZONING, AND THE BENEFIT TO THE CITY OR THE COUNTY IS YOU GET SOME GIVE AND TAKE ON THE REGULATIONS, LIKE SIDE YARD SETBACKS OR WHATEVER, AND THEN BUT YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE A COMMERCIAL ELEMENT.

PUDS WERE INITIALLY PROTECTED FROM LIVE LOCAL BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T WANT THAT COMMERCIAL ELEMENT TO BE LOST.

THE DEVELOPERS ALREADY ARE THE OWNER.

THE PROPERTY OWNERS HAD ALREADY HAD THE BENEFIT OF THEIR BARGAIN WITH THE RESIDENTIAL PIECE.

BUT NOW LIVE LOCAL WILL ALLOW THE PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENTS TO HAVE THE LIVE LOCAL PROJECTS ON THEM, PROPOSED ON THEM.

BUT AGAIN, IN THE CITY, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THAT ISSUE.

THE OTHER, THERE WAS JUST MORE LIMITATIONS AS TO IF YOU CHANGED YOUR DENSITY BY A CERTAIN DATE, THEN IT HAS TO GO BACK TO WHAT IT WAS.

IF A LOCAL GOVERNMENT ADOPTED LEGISLATION TO REDUCE ITS DENSITY SO THAT THAT PROVISION THAT SAYS THE HIGHEST DENSITY ALLOWED IN THE CITY, THEN THE LEGISLATION NOW SAYS, WELL, NO, IT NEEDS TO GO BACK TO WHAT IT WAS PRIOR TO YOU ADOPTING THAT, DEPENDING ON WHEN YOU GOT YOUR ORDINANCE IN.

THE OTHER THING IT ADDS IS ITEMS IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, AND WHAT YOU'RE ALLOWED TO AUTHORIZE, AND IF YOU ARE GOING TO ALLOW A DEVELOPMENT, THE HEIGHT AND THAT IT'S REALLY THREE QUARTERS OF A MILE IS THE PROPOSED HEIGHT OR THREE STORIES, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER RATHER THAN THAT 1 MILE.

IT ADDED THE ABILITY TO PUT DEVELOPMENTS ON PARCELS WITH CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES WITHIN A HISTORIC.

IT'S NOT A MANDATE LIKE THE OTHER AREAS, SO I DON'T FORESEE THAT BEING BROUGHT UP IN THIS JURISDICTION.

THEN I THINK MOST IMPORTANTLY, WHAT HAS HAPPENED IS THERE IS A PROVISION NOW FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES TO A PREVAILING PARTY THAT BRINGS LAWSUITS.

YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO IMPOSE THEY PUT LIMITS ON A MORATORIUM BECAUSE A LOT OF JURISDICTIONS WERE TRYING TO IMPOSE A MORATORIUM ON DEVELOPMENT TO GET AROUND IT.

NOW YOU HAVE TO MEET CERTAIN CRITERIA TO IMPOSE A MORATORIUM, AND THEN THERE ARE ATTORNEY'S FEES THAT CAN BE AWARDED NOT TO EXCEED 250,000 IF AN ACTION IS BROUGHT FOR VIOLATION OF THE MORATORIUM REQUIREMENTS.

[01:00:06]

MOSTLY IT'S A CLEANUP AND MAKE IT VERY CLEAR.

ADDING THE PUDS, ADDING SOME DEFINITIONS OF COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USE, ADDING A PROVISION THAT RELIGIOUS PROPERTY COULD BE USED FOR LIVE LOCAL.

BUT AGAIN, THAT'S AN ALLOWANCE, NOT A MANDATE.

I'M TRYING TO THINK WITH LOCAL, WHAT ELSE MIGHT IMPACT US.

I REALLY DON'T THINK IN OUR JURISDICTION, WE'RE GOING TO SEE MUCH CHANGE IN THE WAY WE'RE TREATING THE LOCAL.

WE WILL BE, I THINK, BRINGING SOMETHING FORWARD FOR YOU TO MAKE IT CLEAR WHEN IT GOES TO PLANNING.

IF IT'S IN THESE ZONING DISTRICTS, THIS IS THE HEIGHT, THIS IS THE DENSITY.

IT'S AN EASIER TASK FOR CITY OF LAKE FERNANDINA BEACH AND THEN WHEN IT GOES TO THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, THEY'RE ONLY ALLOWED TO LOOK AT THE ENGINEERING PLANS, LOOK AT THE STREETS, LOOK AT THE BUFFERS, LOOK AT THE PARKING.

BUT THOSE THREE ITEMS THAT ARE MANDATED BY LIVE LOCAL WILL BE CLEARLY DETERMINED BEFORE IT EVEN GETS TO TRC.

THERE ISN'T THAT TEMPTATION TO TRY AND INTERPRET IT DIFFERENTLY.

IT'S ALMOST GOING TO BE LIKE A ZONING CERTIFICATION LETTER.

THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE ALLOWED TO DO UNDER LIVE LOCAL.

THEN WHEN IT GOES TO TRC, THOSE THREE ASPECTS ARE TAKEN OFF THE TABLE, AND EVERYTHING ELSE IS CONSIDERED AS IT MOVES FORWARD.

I KNOW THE ONE 14TH STREET IS STILL AN ISSUE AND THEY'VE BEEN BRINGING IT UP TO YOUR COMMISSION AS WELL.

LET ME SEE IF THERE'S ANY OTHER LEGISLATION THAT YOU HAD QUESTIONS ABOUT OR HEARD ABOUT?

>> THE QUESTION I WOULD HAVE IS WE CHANGED THE DENSITY MAXIMUM FROM 35 WHEN WE WENT TO 18.

HOW DOES THAT LIE WITHIN THE LATEST LIVE LOCAL CRITERIA? WAS THAT DONE BEFORE THE FACT?

>> I KNEW THAT ANSWER LET ME LOOK.

>> I REMEMBER THAT IT WAS, TRACY I LOOK AT THE RIGHT, BUT I THINK WE DID IT ON A DATE.

>> I THINK YOU DID IT ON A DATE THAT THAT YOU'RE OKAY.

THAT IS THE WAY WE'RE INTERPRETING IT.

YES. BECAUSE I KNOW WE'VE HAD THAT ISSUE COME UP, AND WE'RE INTERPRETING IT AS WE GOT IT IN BEFORE THAT DATE. THANK GOODNESS FOR US.

WE DID HAVE ONE THERE IS LITIGATION OUT THERE FOR ONE PROPERTY THAT WANTED TO CHALLENGE THAT UNDER THE BERT HARRIS, AND THAT'S BEING RESOLVED.

WE'LL GIVE YOU THE OUTCOME OF THAT ONCE IT'S FINALLY SETTLE.

BUT THAT'S THE LEGISLATIVE UPDATE THAT I HAD FOR TONIGHT.

AGAIN, I WAS REALLY WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE AWARE OF HOW WE WERE GOING TO CONDUCT OURSELVES IN NOVEMBER, AND SO I'M GLAD WE TOOK A FEW MINUTES FOR THAT.

I'LL KEEP YOU POSTED ON THE LITIGATION.

WHEN WE MEET AGAIN IN NOVEMBER, WE SHOULD KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT THESE LAWSUITS.

>> THANK YOU, TRACY.

>> MARGARET, I THINK WE'RE RECORDING.

>> YEAH. AGAIN, I MENTIONED THAT WHEN TRISA IS TALKING ABOUT THE LEGISLATIVE UPDATES.

THIS IS JUST A PRECURSOR TO LET YOU KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO BE COMING.

WHAT THE CITY STAFF IS THINKING AND JUST TRYING TO GET READY WITH TIMELINES AND BUDGETS FOR THE UPDATES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE LDC.

WE HAVE SEVERAL THINGS LIKE TRISA MENTIONED THAT WE WANT TO MENTION, BUT JUST GETTING READY FOR THAT.

WE'RE STARTING TO THINK ABOUT THE VISION OF THE CHANGES THAT WE WANT TO MAKE TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

WE WERE CONSIDERING GOING BACK AND LOOKING AT THE VISION PLAN THAT WE HAVE, THE 2045, AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT IT WAS NOT ADOPTED BY THE COMMISSION, BUT IT HAD A LOT OF GOOD INFORMATION IN THERE AND STAFF USES IT AS A KEY COMPONENT AS TO WHAT WE DO.

WE HAVE MET A LOT OF THOSE THINGS THAT WE'VE LISTED IN THE VISION PLAN.

TO CONTINUE ON WITH THAT PLAN, WE'RE THINKING ABOUT UPDATING IT AND JUST REVISITING TO MAKE SURE THE VISION IS STILL THERE AND ALSO PROCEEDING WITH SOME ADOPTION OF IT OR SOME FORM OF ADOPTION OF A VISION PLAN.

I KNOW THE MANAGER IS TALKING TO THE COMMISSION AND TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT HAPPENED LAST TIME AS TO WHY IT WASN'T ADOPTED, WHERE WE CAN AVOID THOSE PITFALLS IN THE FUTURE.

BUT THAT'S THE FIRST COMPONENT IS GETTING A VISION IN PLACE AND VALIDATING THE ONE WE ALREADY USE.

THEN WITH THAT, WE WOULD MOVE WITH CREATING THE EAR LETTER.

THAT WOULD LET THE STATE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE THINK WE NEED TO CHANGE, WE HAVE SOME LEGISLATIVE STUFF WE NEED TO CHANGE IF WE DON'T CHANGE EVEN BEFORE THAT DEADLINE.

BUT THOSE ARE SOME CHANGES AND THEN SOME VISION CHANGES THAT TO LET THEM KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING.

THEN THAT FALLS INTO THE NEXT PHASE OF IT ONCE WE GET THE LETTER OUT, THEN WOULD BE TO MOVE INTO ACTUALLY CHANGING THE COMP PLAN AND THEN THE LDC.

[01:05:04]

THAT'S JUST OVERVIEW TO LET YOU KNOW LAST TIME THE PREVIOUS TIMELINE STARTED IN SEPTEMBER OF 2019 AND THEY WERE ADOPTED IN 2020.

THE NEXT ONE STARTS IN SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2026, AND THEN THE WHOLE ADOPTION OF IT AT THE END, IT'S GOT TO BE DONE BY AUGUST THE 31ST, 2027.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS STILL FLUID BASED ON THE SENATE BILL 180.

WE'RE JUST DOING THE PRELIMINARY STUFF IN THE NEXT TWO MONTHS AND THEN IN JANUARY WOULD BE WHEN WE REALLY HIT IT HARD, AND WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS WE WILL BE MAKING PRESENTATIONS TO THIS BOARD AS WELL AS TO THE COMMISSION AS TO WHAT THE SCOPE IS, A TIMELINE BETWEEN NOW AND 2016 IN SEPTEMBER LAY OUT THAT TIMELINE, WHICH WILL BE ACCELERATED BECAUSE WE ARE SLOWING IT DOWN A LITTLE BIT, AND THEN MAYBE A PRE TIMELINE FOR THE 2027 CHANGES.

THAT'S WHAT THE MEMO LAYS OUT A LITTLE BIT.

IT'S NOTHING IN CONCRETE YET.

IT'S JUST SOMETHING WE'RE MOVING RIGHT NOW.

WE DID GET A DRAFT SCOPE FROM THE NORTHEAST REGIONAL PLANNING TO SOME IDEAS OF WHAT WE'RE THINKING.

WE ADDED SOME ADDITIONAL THINGS TO WE WANTED SOME MORE ONLINE STUFF, MORE PRESENTATIONS, AND SO WE'RE WORKING THROUGH THAT PROCESS WITH THE CONTRACT RIGHT NOW.

BUT PRIOR TO ALL THAT, WE WILL ACTUALLY BE MAKING PRESENTATIONS.

THE OTHER ITEMS THAT TRISA MENTIONED THOUGH, THE DISCUSSION OF THE SADDLE ROAD OVERLAY AND ALSO THE 103, 104, THOSE WERE JUST CONVERSATIONS THAT CAME OUT OF TALKING TO THE CHAIR IS THAT THOSE PROJECTS WERE LIKE THERE WERE THINGS YOU WERE WORKING ON THAT NOW BASED ON 180 AND ALSO THE SENATE BILL 180.

ALSO WITH NOW, WE'RE SO CLOSE INTO THE TIME TO UPDATE, TO GET READY TO SEND THE EAR.

THAT MAYBE THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY AND IT'S JUST FOR DISCUSSION AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT AGAIN NEXT MONTH IS THAT WE COULD ROLL SOME OF THOSE CONCEPTS OR VISIONS INTO THE VISION PLAN JUST TO SEE IF WE WANT TO EMPHASIZE THE SADDLE ROAD OR REALLY REDEVELOPMENT AS A WHOLE.

SADDLE ROAD, EIGHTH STREET, 14TH STREET.

WE COULD JUST DO A VISION OF IT AND SEE WHAT THE COMMUNITY THINKS.

THEN ALSO THE VISION OF WHAT THE THE INTENT OF 103, 104 JUST TO HEAR WHAT THE COMMUNITY THINKS ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE IT'S ALL BASED ON OPEN SPACE, VISUAL CORRIDORS AND THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO GET SOME VISION OF WHAT THE COMMUNITY THINKS THAT LOOK LIKE.

THEN WE CAN DISSECT THOSE TWO SECTIONS TO SEE IF IT DOES SPIT THAT VISION. WHAT IS THE VISION? BUT LIKE TRISA SAID, WE MAY WE'RE NOT GOING TO CHANGE ANYTHING ANYTIME SOON BASED ON ALL THE THINGS WE HAVE GONE ON, BUT AT LEAST WE WOULD KNOW WHAT THE VISION OF THE COMMUNITY IS ON THOSE PARTICULAR ITEMS. THAT WAS JUST OUT OF A CONVERSATION WITH THE CHAIR TO SEE HOW WE CAN KEEP THOSE TWO PROJECTS MOVING FORWARD.

BUT THAT'S WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW.

>> I'M GOING TO GO FIRST. I'M CALLING ON ME.

ASSUMING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS ADOPTED, TO WHAT EXTENT DOES IT BECOME A GOVERNING DOCUMENT? IN OTHER WORDS, IT CAN BE ADOPTED AND PUT ON A SHELF AND NEVER LOOKED AT AGAIN, OR IT'S ADOPTED, AND SO THEN WE ACTUALLY HAVE TO ABIDE BY WHAT IT SAID.

>> ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE VISION PLAN OR ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE COMPREHENSIVE I'M TALKING ABOUT THE TOP?

>> VISION PLAN.

>> VISION PLAN.

>> ONCE THE VISION PLAN IS ADOPTED WHICH I KNOW IT HASN'T BEEN ADOPTED, BUT WE STILL USE IT AS A KEY RESOURCE FOR STRATEGIC PLANNING.

I MEAN, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, AND GLENN CAN TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT, BUT WE USE IT IN A LOT OF WAYS.

WE WOULD USE IT FOR RECOMMENDED CHANGES IN THE COMP PLAN, BUT IT JUST GIVES IT MORE TEETH IF IT'S ADOPTED.

THAT IS NORMALLY THE PROCESS IS THAT THE CITIES ADOPT THE VISION PLAN.

THE VISION PLAN IS THE FOUNDATION FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGES, AND THEN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGES ARE THE LDC CHANGES.

THAT'S TYPICALLY HOW IT WORKS.

BUT WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST, UNTIL WE GOT TO THE POINT TO WHERE WE STARTED TO TRY TO DO A VISION PLAN, THE COMP PLAN WAS ALMOST LIKE A PSEUDO VISION PLAN WITH A PRE ZONING ELEMENT WITH GOALS AND POLICIES.

THAT'S WHERE IT WAS, IT REALLY IS NOT A BIG VISION PLAN.

I THINK THERE WAS AN ATTEMPT TO DO THAT WITH A 2045, WHICH IS A GREAT PLAN AND I THINK IT DID GO TO THE COMMISSION.

THERE WERE CERTAIN ELEMENTS THAT APPEAR TO BE ADOPTED, BUT THE DOCUMENT AS A WHOLE.

WE JUST DIDN'T WANT TO THROW THAT DOCUMENT OUT AND SAY, OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO START TOTALLY OVER.

WE HAVE A FOUNDATION TO TRY TO BUILD ON THAT, TO CREATE A VISION THAT LEADS US INTO THE COMP PLAN, WHICH LEADS US INTO THE LDC, BUT ALSO AT THE SAME TIME, REVISIT IT AND SEE STILL WHAT THE COMMUNITY THINKS.

BUT WE CAN RENAME THAT, WE CAN REBRAND IT.

[01:10:01]

I MEAN, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THE 2045 PLAN.

BUT IT'S JUST A VISION AND THAT'S OUR PLAN.

THAT STUFF'S GOING TO BE HASHED OUT OVER THE NEXT FEW MONTHS AS TO WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.

I KNOW SARAH IS VERY INVOLVED IN IT.

GLENN'S VERY INVOLVED IN THAT PROCESS.

BUT WE NEED A VISION BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT A COMP PLAN IS BASED ON AND AT THIS POINT, WE JUST HAVE ONE THAT HASN'T BEEN ADOPTED.

THAT'S WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW, BUT WE'LL HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT.

>> I THINK I SAW NICK'S HANDS AND VICTORIA'S HAND.

>> JUST TWO QUICK THINGS.

MARGARET, I KNOW WE TALKED TO YOU ABOUT THIS, BUT IF WE CAN GET A DRAFT OF THE SCOPE OF REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL FOR THE EAR AMENDMENTS, AND WHAT THEY'RE DOING, THAT GIVES US GUIDANCE ON WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

>> THAT WAY WE KNOW WHAT TO THINK ABOUT MOVING FORWARD.

ON THE VISION THING, I'M GOING TO TAKE THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THAT ONE.

I THINK ALL IT IS IS A REALLY BEAUTIFUL DOCUMENT THAT LOOKS GREAT, NO ONE EVER LISTENS TO IT.

I MEAN, IT LOOKS GOOD, MAKES YOU FEEL GOOD ABOUT IT.

>> LYNN MAY WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT ONE FOR THE ART PART.

>> YEAH, NO, I THINK YOU GUYS PUT A TON OF EFFORT INTO IT.

I THINK EVERYBODY DOES, BUT EVENTUALLY, 90% OF IT DOESN'T SEEM TO MAKE IT INTO THE COMP PLAN, WHICH IS OUR BIBLE.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO FOLLOW.

AT LEAST FROM MY EXPERIENCE AT THE COUNTY LEVEL, IT DIDN'T SEEM TO.

YOU READ THROUGH A LOT OF THIS AND IT'S BEAUTIFUL PICTURES AND THINGS, BUT IT DOESN'T SEEM TO HAVE A LOT OF TEETH TO IT, BUT THAT'S JUST MY OPINION OF IT. GO AHEAD, GLENN.

>> WHEN I LOOKED AT IT, THAT WAS ONE OF THE FIRST DOCUMENTS THAT I LOOKED AT AS I JOINED THE TEAM.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE TABLES OF THE SHORT TERM, LONG TERM, MID TERM GOALS OF THE PLAN, MOST OF THE SHORT TERM ONES ARE EITHER IN PROCESS OR COMPLETED.

WE ARE USING IT AND I THINK THE VISION PLAN REALLY IS YOUR ASPIRATION.

WHAT ARE WE REALLY MOTIVATED TO BE? THAT'S SETS OUR TONE FOR US.

WE NOW KNOW OUR INTENTION.

WHAT IS OUR INTENTION? NOW YOU TAKE THE COMP PLAN AND THE COMP PLAN IS THE POLICY DOCUMENT THAT DOES THAT.

YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. IT NEEDS TO REFLECT IN IT.

THAT'S WHY IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE GET BY IN AND WE ADOPT IT.

NOW WHEN WE MAKE OUR COMP PLAN CHANGES BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO MAKE COMP PLAN CHANGES EVERY; WHAT ARE WE ON A SEVEN YEAR CYCLE, I THINK? WE'RE ON A SEVEN YEAR CYCLE AND WE DO THAT, BUT WE ALSO MAKE EDITS AS WE MOVE ALONG.

NOW WE'VE INFORMED OURSELVES WHEN WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THOSE.

WHAT IT REALLY HELPS IS, AND THIS IS ONE OF THE CHALLENGES WITH A LOCAL GOVERNMENT BECAUSE WE CHANGE PLACES.

TEN YEARS FROM NOW, WE MIGHT HAVE VERY FEW, IF ANY OF US IN THIS ROOM, HAVING THESE SAME DISCUSSIONS.

WHAT IT DOES IS IT CREATES CONTINUITY AS WE'RE MOVING THROUGH AS A COMMUNITY WHICH AS WE KNOW, THAT HAS BEEN A BIG CHALLENGE FOR FERNANDINA BEACH.

THAT'S WHY IT BECOMES SO IMPORTANT BECAUSE NOW WE'RE AN ASPIRATION.

PEOPLE KNOW, WHAT WERE WE THINKING WHEN WE MADE THESE DECISIONS AS CLEAR.

THAT'S WHY I BELIEVE WHATEVER WE NAME IT, HOWEVER WE BRAND IT, THAT IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT DOCUMENT THAT WILL GUIDE US THE NEXT 20.

>> I'LL JUST FOLLOW UP ON THAT REAL QUICK.

I THINK THE ZERO TO ONE YEAR AND MAYBE THE ONE TO FIVE YEAR ARE LOW HANGING FRUIT THAT WE ALL KNOW IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

I THINK THE 15 OR 16 TO 25 OR WHATEVER IT IS, WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO BE A VISION, EVEN 10-25.

TO YOUR POINT, MOST OF US AREN'T HERE AND EVERYBODY'S VISION IS DIFFERENT AND HINDSIGHT IS GREAT, BUT I THINK ZERO TO ONE IS THE VERY EASY PART, AND I THINK THIS 6-25 IS THE PART THAT CHANGES DEPENDING ON WHO'S IN THE ROOM.

I'M NOT A BIG FAN OF THESE BECAUSE I THINK YOU CAN ONLY LIVE FIVE YEARS IN THE FUTURE AND I THINK IT'S HARD TO PREDICT ANYTHING AFTER THAT.

>> I'M WITH YOU.

>> BUT THAT'S JUST MY OPINION.

>> VICTORIA AND THEN PARM.

>> BUT FOR PURPOSES OF THE PROCESS, WHICH I GUESS THE EAR ADOPTION IN AUGUST OF 2027, WOULD BE JUST THE CHANGES THAT AFFECT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

IT'S NOT THE VISION PLAN IS NOT GOING TO THE STATE TO GET APPROVAL.

THE VISION PLAN IS OUR PLAN.

IT'S NOT GOING ANY FURTHER.

IT'S JUST OUR PLAN.

BUT THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO GET THE STATE TO APPROVE ARE THE CHANGES THAT WE ARE PROPOSING FOR OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, BUT JUST OR JUST THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THAT'S THE COMP. IT'S JUST A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS OUT THERE THEN.

[01:15:03]

I THINK THAT THAT GIVES US A LOT MORE LATITUDE TO BE IMAGINATIVE AND TO BE CREATIVE AND WHAT WE WANT TO SEE IN A VISION.

BECAUSE IT DOESN'T HAVE TO GET APPROVED BY ANYBODY, BUT US.

>> IT CAN BE A VISION.

>> WELL, I THINK IT'S REALLY GOOD TO KNOW WHEN IF THEY'RE VEERING OFF OF EACH OTHER.

BECAUSE I THINK I HATE THE THOUGHT OF PUTTING IT ON THE SHELF AND YOU NEVER LOOK AT IT AGAIN BECAUSE IN 10 YEARS SOMEBODY'S GOING TO BE SAYING, WHAT WERE THEY THINKING? WELL, THEY DIDN'T LOOK AT IT AGAIN.

I THINK IT'S VERY GOOD FOR US TO KEEP ON TOP OF THAT.

>> I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY OUT OF THAT VISION, WE WILL HAVE A LIST PROBABLY OF WANTS AND THEN NEEDS, THINGS THAT WE REALLY WANT TO OR THAT WE CAN DO. THAT'S WHAT I'M GOING TO SAY.

THERE'S THINGS THAT WE WANT TO DO TO THE COMP PLAN TO CHANGE IT, AND THERE'S GOING TO BE THINGS THAT WE CAN DO, BECAUSE OF SENATE 180, THAT LIST THAT MOVES TO THE COMP PLAN MAY LOOK DIFFERENT THAN THE OVERALL VISION.

IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT EVERYTHING IN THE VISION IS GOING TO BE PUT IN THE COMP PLAN.

IT JUST MEANS WE'RE GOING TO KNOW WHAT PEOPLE WANT, AND THEN WE'LL DECIPHER WHAT WE CAN DO THROUGH THAT NEXT PHASE.

THAT'S WHAT TO WRITE THE LETTER.

>> WELL, I WAS JUST GOING TO COMMENT THAT THE WHEN VISION 2045 WAS PUT TOGETHER.

THAT WAS TWO MAYORS AGO, TWO ORGANIZATIONS AGO.

I TEND TO BELIEVE THERE'S A LITTLE BIT MORE DESIRE TO DO THIS LOOKING OVER THE HORIZON A LITTLE BIT MORE THE WAY GLENN IS GOING.

BUT THEY NEVER ACCEPTED IT AS A PRODUCT THAT THEY WANTED TO FALL IN LOVE WITH.

IF WE CAN'T MARKET IT TO THE CITY COMMISSION, IT'S GOING TO SIT ON THE SHELF.

I THINK WHAT WE'RE FINE IS, YES, IT'S A TOOL THAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT CAN USE AND SO ON.

BUT SOMEHOW WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO GET THEM TO BUY IN.

NOW MAYBE THEY DON'T HAVE TO BUY IN ON 10 YEARS.

MAYBE YOU DO SOME OTHER WAYS OF DOING IT.

I PULLED UP THE ORDINANCE AS IT WAS APPROVED.

THEY BOUGHT THE FIRST MISSION, THE BASIC GLOBAL CONCEPT OF THE PLAN, BUT THEY WERE LOOKING AT IT AS EXECUTIVES AT 50,000 FEET.

WE GOT TO GET DOWN TO THE GROUND LEVEL WHERE YOU GOT A STAFFING OR I MEAN, A PLANNING ORGANIZATION.

THIS GOT TO STAFF THAT THROUGH AND GET IT DONE.

WE GOT TO SOMEHOW BUILD THE ACCEPTANCE LEVEL WITH THE COMMISSIONERS.

THIS IS WHAT IT WAS. I WENT BACK TO SOME OF THE COMMENTS THEY HAD FROM THE NIGHT THEY REVIEWED IT.

IT WAS TOO MUCH OF A WISH LIST, NOT FINANCIALLY A DOABLE BASED ON WHAT WE HAD FOR CAPITAL AND SO FORTH AND A PLAN WE HAD.

THERE WERE A LOT OF THINGS THAT WERE NEGATIVES.

WELL, THAT JUST TURNED EVERYTHING OFF. I THINK WHAT THEY DID.

>> I THINK GOES TO NICK'S POINT OF WHAT DID WE GO TO DO IN A YEAR OR TWO YEARS AS OPPOSED TO 10 OR 25.

BECAUSE YOU PUT TOGETHER A 25 YEAR PLAN, WELL, THAT'S ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD.

>> BUT I THINK A VISION PLAN IS WHAT YOU SEE IN THE FUTURE.

>> TRUE.

>> IT'S PRETTY EASY FOR MOST OF US TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO NEXT YEAR.

MAYBE TWO YEARS.

THAT'S PRETTY EASY TO FIGURE OUT.

BUT IF YOU ASK PEOPLE TO SAY, WELL, WHAT DO YOU THINK IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE IN FIVE YEARS? THEN YOU HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THAT AND RUN NUMBERS, AND THEN YOU SAY, WELL, MAYBE 10 YEARS, YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO GET SOME IDEA. I AGREE WITH NICK.

25 YEARS IS WAY OUT THERE.

BUT I THINK THE BASICS OF THE VISION PLAN OF WHAT THIS COMMUNITY RIGHT NOW THINKS ABOUT I BET YOU IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE PRETTY CONSISTENT BECAUSE BACK IN 2008 WHEN THIS COMMUNITY WAS REALLY BOOMING, THERE WAS A LOT OF GROWTH GOING ON, AND THIS BOARD AND THE COMMISSION AT THAT TIME SAW THAT AND RECOGNIZED A LOT OF GROWTH IS HAPPENING.

THAT'S WHY YOU SEE SOME OF THE THINGS YOU SEE IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

I BET YOU THAT IN ANOTHER 20 YEARS THEY'RE GOING TO LOOK BACK AND SEE OUR VISION PLAN, AND THEY'RE GOING TO SEE OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODES AND SAY, WOW, THERE WAS A LOT OF THINGS GOING ON IN 2025.

>> I THINK THERE IS A PURPOSE OF THAT VISION PLAN.

I THINK EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET IT RIGHT LOOKING DOWN THE ROAD 25 YEARS.

YOU MIGHT GET IT FOR FIVE YEARS, BUT EVERYTHING AFTER THAT IS JUST A GUESS.

>> WELL, MY OPINION OF IT IS WE OUGHT TO BE

[01:20:01]

INTERVIEWING PEOPLE THAT ARE 20-YEARS-OLD FOR WHAT THEY WANT IN 2045.

2045, MOST OF ARE GOING TO BE ALIVE.

WE OUGHT TO BE GOING TO HIGH SCHOOLS AND YOUNG PEOPLE, AND LET THEM DICTATE THE FUTURE OF WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN FOR THEM.

WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE WISER AND WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING THESE THINGS, BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE HERE.

WE OUGHT TO LET THEM DICTATE WHAT IT IS THEY MAY WANT TO SEE LATER ON.

>> I AGREE WITH YOU, NICK, THAT [LAUGHTER] THE OPPORTUNITY IS WITH THE EAR PROCESS.

>> TRUE.

>> THAT'S WHERE IT IS, AND THAT'S WHERE TALKING TO STAFF AND ASKING THEM TO ENGAGE DIFFERENT GROUPS THAN MAYBE WE'VE ENGAGED IN THE PAST.

IS THAT OPPORTUNITY? I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU.

I HOPE THAT SENA STREET DOESN'T CHANGE A LOT, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO BE LIVING HERE.

WE HEAR FROM THEM.

>> THERE TO BE LIVING HERE.

>> THERE ARE SOME CORE VALUES.

INCORPORATE IN THESE RULES.

SOME OF THOSE HAVEN'T CHANGED AS LONG AS I'VE BEEN HERE.

WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT DENSITY, LOW DENSITY, SHOULD BE LOW GROWTH.

THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT DRIVE THE CITIZENS OF THE TOWN.

THAT DOESN'T CHANGE AND THAT'S WHAT WE CAN INCORPORATE INTO THIS VISION.

>> I WILL SAY THAT GLENN AND I BOTH HAVE TALKED ABOUT THAT ABOUT, MAKING SURE THAT WE DO GET A BROAD SPECTRUM OF INPUT BECAUSE IT IS A VISION PLAN, AND WE'VE EVEN TWEAKED THE SCOPE TO TRY TO ADD THAT ELEMENT TO HAVING MORE WAYS TO OUTREACH.

WE REALLY ARE TRYING TO CAPTURE ALL OF THE DIFFERENT PEOPLE THAT WILL BE INVOLVED IN A VISION, SO THAT IS A FOCUS.

>> I'LL CLARIFY ONE COMMENT. THE REASON I'M AN ANTI CONSULTANT, A LOT OF THESE, A LOT OF CONSULTANTS LOOK AT IT DOWN THEIR TUNNEL, AND THEY DON'T LOOK AT IT AS A 20-YEAR-OLD OR 25-YEAR-OLD WOULD LOOK AT.

WE LOOK AT IN OUR LENS.

I THINK WE FORGET WHAT IT WAS LIKE 25 YEARS AGO, COMPARED TO WHAT IT IS NOW.

WE WOULD HAVE WE MAY HAVE MADE DIFFERENT DECISIONS, AND SO I THINK THEY OUGHT TO HAVE A VOICE, AND WE OUGHT TO LISTEN TO THEM AS THE PIZON GETS FURTHER AWAY.

>> WELL, TO EVEN EXPAND UPON THAT, AS YOU GO THROUGH, WE DON'T LIVE IN A REVOLUTION, BUT IT'S MORE OF AN EVOLUTION OVER TIME.

BUT I THINK THE ONE THING YOU CAN DO, IF YOU GET BEYOND THAT, SAY THAT THREE TO FIVE YEAR WINDOW, WHAT ARE THE IMPORTANT THINGS TO THIS CITY 25 YEARS NOW? I THINK WE CAN TAKE A CRACK AT IDENTIFYING WHAT WE BELIEVE THAT WILL BE.

IT CAN BE FROM A TECHNOLOGY STANDPOINT, FROM A TRAFFIC STANDPOINT.

MOBILITY STANDPOINT.

WE CAN LOOK AT SOME OF THOSE CONCEPTS.

WE'RE JUST GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT GENERAL.

I DON'T THINK YOU SIT DOWN AND SAY, WELL, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE 26 STREETS PAVED EVERY YEAR.

IT DOESN'T EVEN ENTER IN THE EQUATION, BUT WE CAN TALK ABOUT, DO WE STILL HAVE STREETS? DO WE NEED STREETS ANYMORE? BECAUSE ARE WE IN THOSE GLOBAL THINGS, I THINK YOU CAN TAKE FORWARD AND SAY, OKAY, MR. AND MRS. COMMISSIONER, THIS IS WHAT WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT THESE KIND OF THINGS, AND HOW WE DO IT IS GOING TO E BOBBLE OVER TIME.

THE STATE CAN CHANGE A RULE THAT WOULD AFFECT US OVERNIGHT.

IT'S JUST GOING TO BE HOW WE APPROACH IT.

BUT IF WE DON'T SELL IT TO THOSE FIVE COMMISSIONERS, THAT'S, WE'RE NOT GONNA GET ANYTHING.

>> WE MAY HAVE HOVER CRAFTS, INSTEAD OF AUTOMOBILES.

WE HAVE HOVER CRAFTS.

IN 25 YEARS, WHO KNOWS?

>> NO, SCOTTY MAYBE THEY'RE BEAT ME UP.

>> BEATING UP.

>> IN 25 YEARS, WE'LL ALL BE REPLACED WITH AI.

>> I WAS GONNA SAY THE AI THAT I WAS ABLE, IF WE TRUST IT, IF I MAY, MR. CHAIR.

>> THEY DON'T WANT ME TO DO THAT.

>> SB 180 WAS A VOTE OF ONE OH SIX TO ZERO IN THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE PASSED IT THE SAME DAY WITH A VOTE OF 34 TO ONE.

>> WOW.

>> I THOUGHT MY MEMORY WAS A SOUND, AND THAT WAS THE AMENDED VERSION THAT GOT PUT OUT AT THE LAST MINUTE. BUT THIS IS AI.

THAT'S WHAT MADE ME THINK OF IT IS IF WE TRUST AI.

BUT THAT'S WHAT MY MEMORY FROM LOOKING AT THE LEGISLATIVE PAGE. BACK TO AI.

>> WHO KNOWS THE STUFF THAT HAPPENS ON THE LAST.

>> THAT WAS IN THE JUST WELL, ANYWAY,.

>> I WAS JUST GOING TO MAKE A COMMENT JUST TALKING ABOUT LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

IF WE'VE GOT A SET OF INSTRUCTIONS AND STUFF.

I THINK ONE THING, WELL, THERE'S SEVERAL THINGS I THINK WE CAN DO, FOCUS ON IMPROVED USABILITY.

THAT'S FURTHER IMPLEMENTED THROUGH MUNI CODE.

WE OUGHT TO SET A GOAL WHEN MUNI CODE WILL BE UP AND OPERATIONAL.

NOW, THAT'S GIVEN, YOU GOT TO HAVE STAFF TO DO THAT.

[01:25:03]

THAT'S GOT TO BE THE FIRST CONSTRAINT.

IF YOU HAVE THE STAFF, I THINK WE NEED TO DO THAT.

THAT DOESN'T CHANGE ONE WORD IN THE LDC, BUT I LOOKED UP SOMETHING BASED ON A CLIENT OR A CUSTOMER THAT HAD A QUESTION.

TOOK ME 2.5 HOURS TO GO THROUGH THE LDC TO FIND ALL THE PIECES.

>> YOU'D BE SURPRISED I'M TELLING.

>> WAIT.

>> WHAT IS THE UPDATE WITH THAT? BECAUSE IT WAS IN PROCESS TO BE CODIFIED ON MUNI CODE.

>> YOU KNOW MUNI CODE.

>> I'VE HAD THREE LAWYERS ASK ME SINCE I STARTED WHY I WASN'T ON MUNI CODE.

I'VE JUST ALWAYS GONE TO THE WEBSITE, SO I DID. I DIDN'T REALIZE.

>> WHAT I'M SAYING IS IT WAS IN PROCESS.

WE WERE BUDGETED TO GET EVERY AND IT WAS GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS WITH THEM.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE WAS SOMEONE AT MUNI CODE WHO LEFT AND THE BALL GOT DROPPED, BUT IT WAS STILL BUDGETED FOR AND MOVING FORWARD.

HAS THERE BEEN ANY UPDATES WITH THAT?

>> I THINK WE'RE STILL MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT AND WORKING WITH THEM.

IT'S BEEN A SLOW GOING PROCESS.

>> CAN WE GET LIKE AN ESTIMATED TIME FRAME OF WHEN THAT'S EXPECTED TO BE FULLY CODIFIED MINER HAS BEEN TWO YEARS.

>> IT'S BEEN A WHILE. I CAN CIRCLE BACK WITH GLENN AND MARGARET LATER AND GET YOU GUYS AN UPDATE ON WHEN UNIT CODE IS SEEING THAT WILL BE IMPLEMENTED.

>> GREAT.

>> BUT IT'S A BIG PRIORITY FOR US, TOO.

I KNOW IT'S A VERY USEFUL PLATFORM AND HELPS CITIZENS AND MYSELF.

WHEN I CAME HERE, I WAS ALSO SURPRISED THAT THE CODE WASN'T IN MUNI CODE.

BUT WE'RE WORKING ON THAT AS WELL AS CITY VIEW, WHICH IS OUR NEW ENERGOV PROGRAMMING.

WE'VE HAD SOME DELAYS WITH THAT, BUT GLENN IS MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE GETTING BACK ON THE BALL WITH OUR CONSULTANTS AND HOLDING THEM ACCOUNTABLE.

>> MARGARET IN THE LAST MEETING, IF YOU GO TO THE MINUTES, SHE DID MENTION, WE HOPE WE GET BACK ON TRACK WITH MUNI CODE.

IT'S NOT OFF HER RADAR SCREEN, BUT WITH THINGS GOING ON, THERE MAY BE OTHER.

>> I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S AN INPUT.

>> IT'S CLEARLY COPY BASE.

>> I DON'T YOU WOULD JUST DUMP IT INTO A SOFTWARE THAT WOULD READ IT AND PUT IT IN THERE AND ORGANIZE IT.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S TWO YEARS AND WE HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING.

>> I'LL SEE THERE. I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THOSE PROJECT MANAGEMENT THINGS THAT I'VE JUMPED INTO BOTH OF THE SYSTEMS. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO AS A STAFF PERSON TO BE THE KEY FOCUS OF THAT.

IT'LL REALLY HELP WHEN WE GET FULLY STAFFED HERE OVER THE NEXT MONTH OR TWO.

BUT I'VE DUG INTO CITY VIEW, AND NOW WE'VE GOT THEM MOVING AND HOLDING THEM ACCOUNTABLE AND MUNI CODE IS THE NEXT ONE, AND I'LL START PUSHING THAT NEXT WEEK.

I'LL HAVE AN UPDATE FOR YOU IN NOVEMBER ABOUT EXACT TIME.

>> GOOD USE AS A RESOURCE.

WE CAN CHECK IT TOO.

WE'VE ALL DEALT WITH THE CODE.

I'M HAPPY TO HAVE YOU LET US BE THE QC PART OF IT.

ABSOLUTELY. I WILL TAKE YOU UP ON THAT.

>> THANK YOU.

>> RIGHT NOW, I THINK IT'S ALL HANDS ON DECK ON DOING THAT.

BUT THAT WOULD BE ONE AT LEAST WE CAN KEEP DOING THAT.

WE'RE NOT CHANGING ANYTHING, BUT WHAT WE CAN DO, THE CUSTOMER INTERFACE GETS A LOT SMOOTHER.

I THINK GENERALLY, HOPEFULLY WE CUT DOWN A LITTLE BIT OF THE WORKLOAD ON THE STAFF ALONG WITH IT.

>> JUST TO GIVE A LITTLE UPDATES THAT I KNOW THAT WE WERE WAITING UNTIL THE JULY UPDATE OF THE LDC THAT WE DID.

ONCE THAT WAS DONE, WE HAD A FINALIZED LDC AND A FINALIZED COM PLAN.

THEN THIS WAS SENT TO MUNI CODE PROBABLY BEGINNING OF AUGUST.

THEY HAVE ALL THE DOCUMENTS RIGHT NOW AND THEY'RE WORKING ON THEM, AS FAR AS STARTING THE INTEGRATION.

>> THANKS.

>> GOOD NEWS.

>> NOW, THE OTHER THING I THINK WE COULD GO AHEAD AND START WITH, WE'VE GOT CORRECT OR CLARIFY CONTENT PROBLEMS THAT ARE IDENTIFIED BY CITY STAFF.

OR THROUGH THE LEGAL, SO WHAT ARE THEY? AT LEAST YOU GET THAT BASKET BECAUSE I DON'T SEE ANY REASON WE CAN'T WORK ON IT.

SOME OF THEM WE MAY HAVE TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE, BUT IT MIGHT BE NO ADDITIONAL IMPACT OR NO DETRIMENTAL IMPACT TO THE CITIZENS.

>> WE HAD A RUNNING LIST OF AMENDMENTS.

>> I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED TO IT.

>> IT'S OUT THERE SOMEWHERE. IT'S FREE SUBSTANTIAL.

>> BEING YOUR AGENDA POCK IT'S OUT.

>> WELL, I THINK THERE'S ONE EVEN MORE COMPREHENSIVE.

>> WE HAVE PUT TOGETHER A LIST THAT WE GONNA BE MOVING ON.

YOU'LL START TO BE ABLE TO TAKE SOME ACTION IN NOVEMBER.

>> IT'S GOOD. BECAUSE I THINK THE OTHER THING IS JUST GOING THROUGH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, YOU USE IT EVERY DAY.

IT'S SOMETHING YOU GO BACK AND LOOK AT.

WELL, AS YOU GO THROUGH, YOU SAY,

[01:30:02]

HERE'S 10 AREAS WHERE IF YOU JUST HAD A FLOW CHART, YOU COULD SIT DOWN AND EXPLAIN THAT TO SOMEBODY.

I DON'T KNOW A REASON WE CAN'T START DEVELOPING THAT PRODUCT AS AN ADENOM TO GO INTO IT BECAUSE AGAIN, YOU'RE NOT MODIFYING THE LANGUAGE, YOU'RE JUST MODIFYING THE USABILITY AND IMPROVING IT.

WE WERE TALKING ABOUT IF YOU LET ME JUST USE 103 OR 405 AS EXAMPLES, THAT'S AN EXAMPLE WHERE SOMEHOW THE GENERAL CONSENSUS, WE NEED TO BULLETPROOF IT, WHATEVER THAT BULLET PROOFING IS TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NO UTILIZATION, I GUESS I'M SORRY A MISINTERPRETATION OF IT.

WE PROBABLY CAN'T CHANGE THAT RIGHT NOW, BUT I THINK WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THOSE KIND OF THINGS.

WHERE ELSE DO WE HAVE ONE? IS THERE ANOTHER O103 OR 405 DOWN THERE IN THE WEEDS SUMMER THAT WE JUST HAVEN'T TRIPPED OVER.

I THINK WE NEED TO AT LEAST PUT SOME ATTENTION ON IT BECAUSE AT SOME POINT IT'S GOING TO GET FIXED OR HAVE TO GET FIXED THROUGH SOME ELEMENT.

THOSE THINGS TO THINK ABOUT.

BUT I THINK RIGHT NOW, THE THING IS, LET'S JUST DO THE STUFF THAT WE CAN GO OUT AND DO, AND AS LONG AS WE DON'T CHANGE THAT LDC, THERE'S NO REASON WE CAN'T IMPROVE THE USABILITY OF IT.

>> GOOD.

>> A SERMON.

>> MORE PICTURES, I THINK WOULD BE HELPFUL.

WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT BEFORE.

>> MOVE ON.

>> MARGARET AND GLENN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT VISION PLAN UPDATES. WE'VE DONE THAT.

>> AT ALL, HAVEN'T WE?

>> I THINK WE'RE DONE.

>> KEEP LOOKING, BUT I THINK WE'VE DONE.

>> JUST CHECK IT OFF THE LIST.

>> THE LAST ITEM ON THERE IS TO REASSESS THE ESTABLISHMENT OF PRIORITIES FOR LDC ITEMS, BUT I THINK THE DISCUSSION COVERED A LOT TODAY.

BUT MARGARET AND I DID UPDATE THE ORGANIZATIONAL CHART THAT WE HAVE TITLED KB LDC ELEMENTS FOR VISION UNDER CONSIDERATION.

AND WE JUST HIGHLIGHTED THOSE TWO THAT WERE ADOPTED BY THE COMMISSION IN JULY AND THEN PUT UNDER 103 OR, 1035, CLARITY, AND THEN THE COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT TO BE INCORPORATED INTO THE 2045 VISION PLAN.

THEN THE PUD AMENDMENT THAT YOU GUYS SUGGESTED TO THE CITY COMMISSION, NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, BUT SADDLER SUGGESTS THAT THIS COULD BE DISCUSSED AT THE POTENTIAL JOINT MEETING IN THE FUTURE WITH THE COMMISSION.

>> THE ONLY THING THAT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL CLEAR ON IS WE ARE GLENN, I'M LOOKING AT YOU TO CLARIFY THIS.

WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THE WORK WE'VE DONE ON THE SADDLER OVERLAY AND PUT THAT INTO OUR PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE.

GLENN AND MARGARET EXPLAIN THAT TO ME AND HOW IT WOULD ACTUALLY GO FASTER.

I BELIEVE THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE HONEST PEOPLE, BUT WE HAD, A LOT OF ENERGY GOING ON THAT, AND I THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT PROJECT, AND I JUST SHOULD GET IT DONE.

>> THAT WAS FIRST OF SEVERAL.

>> THAT'S CORRECT. I WANT US TO KNOW THAT FOR A LOT OF REASONS, IT MAKES SENSE FOR US TO PUSH THAT BACK, THOUGH, I HATE PUSHING THAT BACK.

BUT WE NEED TO KNOW THAT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING.

WE HAVE GOOD ADVICE THAT IT IS THE EFFICIENT WAY TO DO IT.

>> MY VIEW ON THE THING WAS, IT WAS AN EXPERIMENT THAT NEEDED TO BE DONE.

WE NEEDED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS THE EFFORT, HOW MUCH ENERGY YOU HAVE TO PUT AND HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE AND SO FORTH? IT'S CALL IT A DRY RUN BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE YOU WON'T HAVE TWO MORE OF THEM 10 YEARS FROM NOW.

>> PETER IS A DRY RUN. THAT'S RIGHT, AND WE DO WANT TO UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS, BUT I HATE THAT PROPERTY LOOKING LIKE THAT FOR TWO YEARS.

IT'S ALSO MAKING THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY THERE REFLECT MUCH MUCH BETTER ON THE CITY.

IF THIS IS GOING TO BE A 2027 THING THAT GETS DONE.

>> I THINK WE HAVE HAD MANAGEMENT TELL US TO UNCOUPLE THE HORSES, LEAVE THE WAGON.

>> YES, LEAN. I'M JUST MAKING SURE WE KNOW THAT.

>> THANK YOU.

>> ANYTHING ELSE?

>> NO.

>> STAFF REPORT.

>> I WOULD SAY THANK YOU TO GLENN.

YOU'RE ALREADY FILLING A GAP THAT WE FELT LIKE WE'VE HAD FOR QUITE A WHILE.

I THINK JUST THAT COMMUNICATION PROCESS COMING BACK.

THE STAFF IS, WELL, YOU'RE DOWN TO WHAT 15 HOUR DAYS, THEY'RE DOING A JOAN'S JOB.

>> THERE'S NOTHING ELSE ON DECLARES ADJOURNED.

[01:35:01]

>> WAIT WHAT? DID STAFF WE FINISHED THE AGENDA?

>> YES.

>> WE DID FINISH THE AGENDA. WITH THE STAFF REPORTS?

>> NOTHING.

>> NO SPORT.

>. IT'S GOOD. WE'RE ADJOURNED.

>> THANK YOU.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.