[* A portion of this meeting is without audio *]
[00:01:11]
[5. NEW BUSINESS]
FOR OUR MEMBERS THAT ARE HERE TONIGHT WE HAVE THREE ITEMS ON OUR NEW BUSINESS FOR AGENDA.ITEM 5.3 IS A QUASI-JUDICIAL ITEM.
QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARINGS ARE NOT THE SAME AS A COURT APPEARANCE, BUT BY STATE STATUTE AND CASE LAW, IT'S DIFFERENT THAN A REGULAR HEARING CONDUCTED BY THIS BOARD.
A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING IS LESS FORMAL THAN A COURT HEARING.
BUT SIMILAR IN PROCEDURES AND EVIDENCE MATTERS.
APPLICANTS TONIGHT HAVE THE BURDEN OF DEMONSTRATING THROUGH COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT HIS OR HER APPLICATION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THOSE OPPOSED THIS EVENING MUST ALSO DEMONSTRATE THROUGH COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT THE APPLICATION DOES NOT MEET THESE REQUIREMENTS.
WHILE THE BOARD WELCOMES COMMENTS FROM THOSE WHO HAVE AN INTEREST IN THIS PROCEEDING, FLORIDA LAW REQUIRES THE BOARD'S DECISION IN A QUASI-JUDICIAL JUDICIAL ACTION TO BE SUPPORTED BY COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE PRESENTED TO THE BOARD DURING THE HEARING ON THE APPLICATION.
COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE HAS BEEN DEFINED BY COURTS AS SUCH EVIDENCE THAT A REASONABLE MIND WOULD ACCEPT AS ADEQUATE TO SUPPORT A CONCLUSION.
THERE MUST BE A FACTUAL BASIS IN THE RECORD TO SUPPORT OPINION TESTIMONY FROM BOTH AN EXPERT OR A NON-EXPERT.
GENERAL OBJECTIONS WITHOUT SPECIFIC EVIDENCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE SUBSTANTIAL COMPETENT EVIDENCE.
RELEVANT EVIDENCE IS THAT WHICH IS ADDRESSES THE STATUTE OR CODE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE OR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THE APPLICANT OF ITEM 5.3 YOU ARE ALLOWED TO BE REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL SINCE THIS IS A QUASI JUDICIAL HEARING DO YOU WISH TO WAIVE AND BE GRANTED TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN COUNSEL OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROCEED? OKAY FOR THE RECORD THE GENTLEMAN HAS STATED HE WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED.
THE OTHER TWO ITEMS, 5.1 AND 5.2, ARE LEGISLATIVE.
SO AT THIS TIME, THE CHAIR AND I SPOKE EARLIER.
MR. CHAIRMAN, WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO SQUARE EVERYONE IN? YES, PLEASE.
ALL THREE OF THESE ITEMS UNDER NEW BUSINESS ARE RELATED TO THE SAME PROPERTY.
ONE IS A QUASI-JUDICIAL REZONING.
THAT'S THE 5.3 WE'VE DISCUSSED.
5.2 IS A FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT.
WANT TO GIVE TESTIMONY OR SPEAK TO ANY OF THESE MATTERS, WOULD YOU PLEASE STAND TO BE SWORN BY OUR RECORDING CLERK? AND MR. ALLEN, THAT WOULD INCLUDE YOU.
IF YOU'RE HERE FOR OR AGAINST, IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THESE, YOU WOULD STAND TO BE SWORN.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE ORAL AND OR WRITTEN TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE WILL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? THANK YOU.
AND AT THIS TIME, ALTHOUGH THE FIRST TWO ITEMS, BOARD, ARE LEGISLATIVE, WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO GO AHEAD AND DISCLOSE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS THAT MIGHT BE RELATED TO 5.3, THE REZONING, AND ALSO AT THIS TIME, IF ANY BOARD MEMBER NEEDS TO RECUSE THEMSELVES, WE SHOULD ADDRESS THAT AS WELL.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I WILL ABSTAIN FROM PARTICIPATION AND VOTING ON ITEMS 5.1, 5.2, AND 5.3 DUE TO A RELATIVE BEING AN APPLICANT.
AND FOR THE RECORD, THE BOARD MEMBER HAS FILLED OUT THE PROPER FORM AND WILL PRESENT IT TO THE RECORDING CLERK AND WILL NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE DISCUSSIONS ON ANY OF THESE ITEMS. DOES ANY BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS? NO.
EX PARTE DOES NOT INCLUDE SPEAKING WITH STAFF.
NO, I DO BELIEVE IF YOU'VE SPOKEN TO MARGARET WHO'S GOING TO GIVE TESTIMONY, THAT IS EX PARTE.
AND I HAVE SPOKEN WITH MARGARET.
[00:05:01]
MARGARET.ALRIGHT, AND WITH THAT, MR. CHAIRMAN, WE CAN PROCEED.
SO MARGARET, YOU'RE GOING TO WALK US THROUGH? YES, SIR.
YOU'RE GOING TO WALK US THROUGH ALL THREE AT THE SAME TIME? YES, SIR.
OKAY, GOOD EVENING, CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, MS. PRINCE.
THIS IS YOUR FIRST CASE, PAB CASE, AND ACTUALLY THE POWERPOINT SAYS 2026.
IT'S ON MY MIND, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY 2025.
IT'S BEEN IN THE SYSTEM, BUT WE HAVE BEEN WORKING THROUGH.
SOME OF THE APPLICATIONS AND DETAILS WE NEED.
SO IT'S ACTUALLY 2025-0023, 0024, AND 0025.
THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A VOLUNTEER, VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION, ASSIGNMENT OF THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP CATEGORY, AND A ZONING REQUEST FOR FOUR PROPERTIES THAT ARE LOCATED OFF OF CHIMSELL ROAD.
WHICH IS AN EXTENSION OF SIMMONS ROAD AND AS YOU CAN SEE IT'S HIGHLIGHTED ON THE MAP.
I HAVE PROVIDED YOU WITH A REVISED STAFF REPORT.
SOME OF THE INFORMATION ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL WAS OMITTED ON THE FIRST STAFF REPORT YOU HAVE AND SOME OF THE COMP PLAN HAS BEEN SOME ADDITIONAL SECTIONS OF THE COMP PLAN PERTAINING TO WATER, BODIES OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL HAVE ALSO BEEN INCLUDED FOR THE COMP PLAN CONSISTENCY SO THOSE BUT THOSE WERE THE CHANGES EVERYTHING ELSE IS THE SAME THE APPLICANT ASA GILLETTE AGENT FOR THE OWNERS BUTTERFLY PROJECT WITH A K LLC I REQUEST THIS VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION OF THE FOUR PROPERTIES OF LAND LOCATED OFF A BUTTERFLY TRAIL OFF OF CHIM CELL ROAD WHICH IS A CINCHON OF SIMMONS ROAD AND ALSO A REQUEST OF A CITY FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY OF LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND A ZONING DISTRICT OF LOW RESIDENTIAL R1 FOR ALL OF THE PROPERTIES THAT YOU SEE THERE.
IF YOU LOOK TO THE NORTH, THE PROPERTY ABOVE WHERE IT'S GOT THE 69 IS ACTUALLY LOCATED IN NASSAU COUNTY AND IS ALSO THE EXISTING USE AS CHIM CELL CLUB.
THE ZONING CATEGORY FOR THAT IN THE COUNTY IS RESIDENTIAL GENERAL ONE, BUT THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN FOR THE COUNTY DESIGNATES THAT AS RECREATIONAL.
TO THE SOUTH, IMMEDIATELY SOUTH IS ALSO NASSAU COUNTY.
THE FIRST LOT, WHERE IT'S A NUMBER TWO AT, WHICH IS ABOVE THE RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION THAT'S BELOW IT, IS ACTUALLY VACANT.
IT'S ZONED RESIDENTIAL R1 AND THE COUNTY'S FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATES IT A HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS TO THE EAST IS A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION RIVER BEND.
THE DATES OF BUILT IN THAT SUBDIVISION VARIES.
THE ZONING IS R3 AND THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATES THAT A HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
IT IS ACTUALLY MARSHLANDS AND THE YEAR BUILT OF COURSE IS IN A AND THE ZONING IS MARSH AND THE FLUME INDICATES IT TO BE FUTURE LAND USE OF CONSERVATION TOO.
SO THOSE ARE THE DESIGNATE SURROUNDING IT.
SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE ZONING THIS KIND OF LIKE OUTLINES THE ZONING.
THAT THE REQUESTED FLUME AND THE ZONING ASSIGNMENT ARE MORE RESTRICTIVE THE REQUEST AND ALSO STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN THE EXISTING NASSAU COUNTY FLUME AND ZONING DESTINATION WHICH WOULD ALLOW FOR MORE THAN DOUBLE THE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY AS WELL AS TOWNHOMES MULTIFAMILY DWELLING UNITS BOTH THE CITY AND THE COUNTY ARE ALIGNED AND ONLY ALLOWING RESIDENTIAL USES SO THERE WOULD BE NO COMMERCIAL AND EITHER EITHER USE THE ANNEXATION INTO THE CITY WOULD PROMOTE THE ELIMINATION OF SEPTIC TANKS IN A REGION NEAR THE RIVER TO ENSURE THE PRESERVATION OF HEALTHY AND FUNCTIONAL WATERWAYS.
R1 RATHER THAN R3 WOULD RESTRICT DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES THAT COULD JEOPARDIZE LIVES AND OR DAMAGE PROPERTY, AS WELL AS AFFECT WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY OR ANY OTHER IMPORTANT ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS THAT MAY ARISE FROM CHANGES TO EXISTING DRAINAGE STRUCTURES, NATURAL DRAINAGE, WEATHER PATTERNS.
R1 WOULD ALSO AVOID LOTS BEING SUBDIVIDED IN SUCH A WAY THAT THE RESULTS IN MULTIPLE LOTS EXTENDING TO THE WATER'S EDGE.
THE GENERAL AREA CONTAINS A MIX OF USE.
ZONING ASSIGNMENTS INCLUDE R3, RESIDENTIAL LOW,
[00:10:01]
MEDIUM AS YOU CAN SEE, AND R1.THEREFORE THE REQUESTED ZONING ASSIGNMENT WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND SO SOME OF THOSE ELEMENTS, IT COMPLIES WITH THE FLORIDA STATE AND MUNICIPAL CODES.
IT IS AN AREA THAT'S COMPACT AND IT REPRESENTS A LOGISTIC EXTENSION OF THE MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES WITH THE PROTECTION OF ADJACENT WATERWAY.
AND THEN IT'S A LOGIC EXTENSION OF THE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE LDC.
AND THEN THE PROPERTY CAN BE SERVED AT A LEVEL THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH OTHER PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITY.
SO THIS IS A VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION PROPERTY THAT COMPLIES WITH ALL OF THE STATUTES AND THE CITY CAN SERVE IT AT THE CURRENT LEVELS OR CAN IN SOME AREAS EXCEED THE LEVELS OF SERVICE THAT WE ALREADY PROVIDE.
SO IN CONCLUSION, STAFF RECOMMENDS, THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE DEVELOPMENT CODE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION, THE ASSIGNMENT OF THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND THE ZONING DISTRICT OF R1 FOR ALL THE PROPERTIES.
FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE ADVISORY BOARD, THE APPLICATION WILL BE FORWARD TO THE CITY COMMISSION IN THE FORM OF THREE SEPARATE ORDINANCES AT A PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HEARD AT THE NEXT AVAILABLE CITY COMMISSION MEETING.
AND WITH THAT, THESE ARE YOUR THREE MOTIONS AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? MR. CHAIRMAN, ONE THING THAT WE DIDN'T DO AHEAD OF TIME BUT WE COULD DO NOW IS ACCEPT THE ITEMS INTO THE RECORD THAT THE UPDATED STAFF REPORT IN YOUR PACKET, THE APPLICATION, THE LETTER OF INTENT, AND ALL OF THE DOCUMENTS IN THE PAB PACKET THAT HAS BEEN OFFERED AS EVIDENCED BY MS. PEARSON.
WOULD THE BOARD LIKE TO ACCEPT ALL THOSE RECORDS INTO EVIDENCE AND THE UPDATED STAFF REPORT THAT WAS PROVIDED TO YOU TONIGHT? ANY OBJECTION TO THAT? I HAVE NO OBJECTION.
DO YOU NEED A MOTION FOR THAT? I'LL MAKE A MOTION MR. CHAIRMAN THAT ALL THE DOCUMENTS THAT ARE AND THE AMENDED STAFF REPORT BE PUT INTO THE RECORD FOR THIS CASE.
THANKS TERESA. ANY OPPOSED? SO NOBODY HAS QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS, WHICH I'M ASSUMING THEN THAT WE WOULD BE, WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THREE MOTIONS AND THREE VOTES.
WE'RE GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW OPEN.
MR. ALLEN, IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK.
WELL, I MEAN, MR. CHAIR, I'M SO SORRY.
AT THIS TIME, THE APPLICANT MAY WANT TO SPEAK.
AS WELL AND GIVE A PRESENTATION OR RELY ON STAFF.
UM, CAN YOU START OVER? YEAH, ALEX BOLTON WITH GILLETTE ASSOCIATES ACTING AS AGENT FOR THE BUTTERFLY PROJECT.
MARGARET DID A GREAT JOB THERE OF EXPLAINING EVERYTHING.
SO THEY JUST WANT TO ANNEX IN FOR THE CURRENT ZONING THERE.
IT'LL BE A LESSER ZONING OF IT, LOWER DENSITY.
THEY JUST WANT TO ANNEX IN SO THAT THEY CAN CONNECT TO THE SEWER THAT'S OFF OF BAILEY ROAD, I BELIEVE IS THE CONNECTION.
IN DOING SO, THEY'LL ALSO BE UPGRADING THE ROAD THERE.
BLOOM AND RESIDENTIAL WILL BE CHANGING TO MATCH WITH THE CITY'S CODE FOR THAT.
IN DESIGN, EVERYTHING WILL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY'S CODE AND EVERYTHING THAT'S REQUIRED FOR THAT.
OUR ADDRESS IS 3009 RIVERSIDE DRIVE.
THAT'S BETTER KNOWN AS LOT 3 IN THE MAP THAT WE PULLED UP A FEW MOMENTS AGO.
I ALSO SEE ONE OF MY OTHER NEIGHBORS HERE THAT LIVES AT THE LOT 1, THAT BOTH ARE NEXT TO THE LOT 2 VACANT THAT WAS MENTIONED.
SO, YOU KNOW, THE FUNNY THING ABOUT THIS...
IF I WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING, I NEEDED TO FILL OUT THAT PIECE OF PAPER, BECAUSE ALL WE KNEW WAS WHAT WAS ON THIS FORM.
SO I WAS PLEASED AT MANY OF THE COMMENTS.
I BASICALLY CAME IN WITH THREE CONCERNS.
I THINK THAT WAS ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED.
SECOND IS THE WETLAND AND THE FLOOD ZONE AREAS, WHICH IS SUBSTANTIAL ON THAT PROPERTY.
IT'S ME HOW I KNOW I'M DEALING WITH IT MYSELF.
THAT I DIDN'T HEAR ADDRESSED, BUT IN THE SPIRIT OF THINGS, I FEEL LIKE I WANT TO MENTION THAT THERE'S QUITE A BIT
[00:15:01]
OF OLD GROWTH TREES ON THAT PROPERTY.AND IN KEEPING WITH, SINCE THIS WILL BE PART OF THE CITY NOW.
IN KEEPING WITH THE PRESERVATION OF TREES, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT AREA IS NOT OVERLOOKED.
AND TO ADDRESS THAT, IF I MAY.
SO ON THE FLOODPLAIN, WE DO ALLOW, YOU KNOW, TO BUILD IN THE FLOODPLAIN, BUT YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW STRICT RULES ON HOW YOU HAVE THAT CONSTRUCTION.
BUT IT DOESN'T REALLY ALLOW ANY MORE DENSITY OR ANYTHING.
LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT BUT THEY HAVE TO PROTECT THAT IF IT'S WETLANDS THEN THOSE WOULD BE DESIGNATED ON THE PLANS AND THOSE CANNOT BE DISTURBED I MEAN THERE WILL BE A BUFFER AROUND THAT AS FAR AS THE TREES GO THERE'S STILL A REQUIREMENT THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO A TREE SURVEY AND PRESERVE THE TREES THEY WOULD HAVE THEM YOU KNOW MARKED AND EVERYBODY WITH OUR ARBORISTS WOULD GO OUT AND LOOK AT THEM AND THEY'RE ONLY ALLOWED TO REMOVE WHAT WOULD BE IN THE FOOTPRINT BUT THEN THEY HAVE TO MITIGATE THAT.
AS WELL SO OUR ONE ALLOWS FOR A LOT AREA A LOT MORE A LOT AREA IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THE TREES THANKS OKAY ANY OTHER COMMENTS I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HERE THERE MY CLOTHES OKAY ARE WE GOING TO VOTE ON THIS ALL AS ONE? NO, WE'RE GOING TO VOTE THREE TIMES.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I'LL MAKE A MOTION.
I MOVE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL PAB CASE NUMBER 2025-0023 TO THE CITY COMMISSION, REQUESTING THAT A VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION FOR ALL PROPERTIES BE APPROVED AND THAT PAB CASE 2025-0023, AS PRESENTED, IS SUFFICIENTLY COMPLIANT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
TO BE APPROVED AT THIS TIME? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PAB CASE 2025-0024 TO THE CITY COMMISSION REQUESTING THAT ASSIGNMENT OF THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY FOR ALL PROPERTIES 00-00-30-044B-0068-0010 SEMICOLON 00-00-30-044B-0068 00-00-30-044B-0068-0020 00-00-30-044B-0068-30 00-00-30-044B-0068-0040 LOCATED ON BUTTERFLY TRAIL AS DEPICTED ON EXHIBIT A, BE APPROVED IN THAT THE PAB CASE 2025-0024, AS PRESENTED, IS SUFFICIENTLY COMPLIANT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO BE APPROVED AT THIS TIME.
COULD YOU GO BACK OVER THOSE NOTES? IT WAS A MOUTHFUL.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PAB CASE 2025-0025 TO THE CITY COMMISSION REQUESTING ASSIGNMENT OF LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL R1 ZONING DISTRICT FOR ALL PROPERTIES 00-00-30-044B-0068-0010. SEE ME CALLING.
00-00-30-044B-0068-0020 00-00-30-044B-0068-30 00-00-30-044B-0068-30 B AS IN BOY, DASH 0068 DASH 0040,
[00:20:03]
LOCATED ON BUTTERFLY TRAIL AS DEPICTED ON EXHIBIT A, BE APPROVED IN THAT PAB CASE 2025 DASH 0025 AS PRESENTED IS SUFFICIENTLY COMPLIANT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO BE APPROVED AT THIS TIME.THANK YOU, MR. ALLEN, FOR COMING.
[6.1 2026 Waterfront Area Redevelopment Plan Supplement]
OKAY, MARGARET, WE'RE GOING TO BOARD BUSINESS.THIS NEXT ITEM IS THE 2026 WATERFRONT COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA CRA PLAN SUPPLEMENT.
DID YOU HAVE TO SUPPLEMENT? NO, THAT'S FINE.
JUST KIND OF MOVE IT RIGHT HERE.
DO YOU SEE THAT? MR. CHAIR, WHILE WE WAIT, I DID FORGET TO ADVISE THAT NICE YOUNG MAN THE MOST IMPORTANT THING, THAT ALL FOUR OF YOU HAD TO AGREE TONIGHT BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER WE HAD.
WE TOLD HIM EVERYTHING ELSE, BUT IT WENT OKAY.
YES, BECAUSE WE DO HAVE A QUORUM WITH THE FIVE OF YOU, BUT WITH THE FOUR OF YOU ONLY BEING ABLE TO VOTE, IT TOOK ALL FOUR OF YOU TO HAVE IT BE RECOMMENDED AS APPROVAL OR RECOMMEND DENIAL, BUT IT WENT WELL.
OKAY, NOW THAT WE'VE GOT THE COMPUTERS, RIGHT? THE SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST AND SOME BACKGROUND INFORMATION, UPON REVIEW OF THE UPCOMING PROJECTS USING CRA FUNDING, THE LEGAL AND THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT FOUND SOME DEFICIENCIES IN THE 2005 CRA PLAN REGARDING HOW THE PROJECTS ARE FUNDED.
THIS WAS CONTRIBUTED TO LEGISLATIVE CHANGES.
TO ADDRESS THOSE DEFICIENCIES, A SUPPLEMENT TO THE CRA WATERFRONT PLAN IS PROPOSED.
THESE MODIFICATIONS DO NOT ALTER THE OBJECTIVES AND THE STRATEGIES.
SIGNIFICANTLY AMEND THE CRA WATER FRONT PLAN INSTEAD THEY AUGMENT THE EXISTING FRAMEWORK BY OFFERING FURTHER DETAILS AS IT RELATES TO THE CAPITAL THE CITY'S CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND STAFF HAS REVIEWED THIS WITH CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND I'LL GET TO THAT IN A MINUTE WITH THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION BUT I DID WANT TO DO GO THROUGH SOME OF THE CHANGES FOR YOU SO THIS IS THE ORIGINAL PLAN AND AS YOU NOTE, IT WAS ACTUALLY ADOPTED BY THIS BOARD IN 2004, BUT THEN IT, YOU KNOW, OF COURSE, WENT TO CITY COMMISSION, AND IT WAS FINALLY ADOPTED IN 2005, RESOLUTION 91.
AND SO I HIGHLIGHTED THAT JUST FOR YOU TO RECOGNIZE THAT IT HAS BEEN A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF TIME, SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT SURPRISING THAT THE STATE STATUTES HAVE CHANGED.
THERE WAS A RESOLUTION 113 AND THEN THERE WAS A RESOLUTION, THERE WAS SOME UPDATES, I THINK ORIGINALLY IN 13, AND THEN NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT A NEW REVISION HERE.
JUST TO KIND OF REFRESH YOUR MEMORY ON, LIKE THIS IS ACTUALLY THE CRA LAYOUT.
LET ME SEE IF I CAN GET IT BACK.
SO THIS IS KIND OF THE AREA WHERE THIS OUTLINE AREA THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS.
SO CHINA JUST TO GET AN IDEA OF THAT.
AND THEN SO THE FIRST THING THAT WAS CHANGED WAS HAD TO DO WITH THE WATERFRONT AND THE AREA OF THE INCENTIVES AND SPECIFICALLY THE CITY MARINA.
SO THE WORDING THAT WAS THERE BEFORE DID NOT IT TALKS ABOUT THE MARINE FACILITIES BUT IT DID NOT SPECIFICALLY MENTION BRETT'S WATERFRONT CAFE.
AND SO WE NEEDED TO ADD THAT WORDING TO THE PLAN.
THE NEXT THING THAT WAS ADDED WAS UNDER STRATEGY 0.5.5, TIME FRAME AND ONGOING.
IT WAS ONLY MENTIONED ABOUT PRIVATE LANDS.
AND SO WE NEEDED TO ADD THE LANGUAGE ABOUT PUBLIC LANDS.
I THINK THERE WAS AN UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE WOULD BE PUBLIC LANDS INVOLVED, BUT IT NEEDED TO BE SPECIFIC IN THIS.
AND SO ALSO WE WANTED TO ADD SOME INFORMATION THAT SAID IT SUPPORTS RESILIENT IMPROVEMENTS ALONG PUBLIC AND PRIVATELY OWNED AMELIA RIVERFRONT PROPERTIES.
SO WE JUST WANTED TO LIKE KIND OF MAKE THAT CLEAR IN MORE DETAIL.
AND THEN THERE WAS A CHART ABOUT CAPITAL PROJECTS AND
[00:25:02]
OPTIONS FOR FUNDING AND SO THIS CHART IS OUTDATED SO WE'RE ACTUALLY STRICT TRICKING THE WHOLE CHART AND REPLACING IT WITH A MORE DETAILED, EASILY UNDERSTOOD CHART AND THAT LISTS STUFF LIKE THE HARBOR MASTER PLAN, THE MARINA REDEVELOPMENT, OF COURSE THE BREADTH DEMOLITION AND REPLACEMENT, AND OVERHEAD TO UNDERGROUND CONVERSION OF ELECTRIC AND UTILITIES.AND SO WE KIND OF LAID OUT THE PROJECT TYPES, THE POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES, AN ESTIMATED COST, BECAUSE SOME OF THAT STUFF WASN'T IN THERE, A MORE DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION, THEN HOW IT RANKED IN THE PRIORITIES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND SO THAT'S THAT CHANGE AND THEN WE JUST KIND OF INCLUDED SOME FOOTNOTES TO MAKE SURE WE COVER ALL THE OTHER STUFF THE SEAWALL IS LISTED THERE AS WELL WHERE SOME OF THESE WEREN'T THEY WERE KIND OF GENERALIZED IN THE ORIGINAL PLAN SO WITH THAT STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND IT ALSO MEETS ALL THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OBJECTIVES.
NOTHING CHANGED FROM THAT, AND I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
AND I KNOW THAT KATIE NEWTON WITH THE DOWNTOWN DEPARTMENT AND JAY PLATT WITH THE PROJECT MANAGER, AND OF COURSE GLENN IS HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE FUNDING.
I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE FUNDING, BUT THIS, WHAT YOU HAVE REVISED, THE REPLACEMENT.
YOU'LL BE REVISING THIS ON AN ONGOING BASIS? CORRECT, AND I DO BELIEVE THAT EVERYBODY RECOGNIZES THE NEED FOR A LARGER AMENDMENT TO IT, BUT AT THIS TIME, JUST BECAUSE WE HAVE ACTIVE PROJECTS GOING ON, WE WANTED TO BE ABLE TO THINK THROUGH THOSE OTHER THINGS THAT WE'D LIKE TO CHANGE IN MORE DETAIL, BUT I KNOW THE ADVISORY BOARD IS WORKING ON THAT, AND SO WE WILL BE BRINGING SOME THINGS BACK TO YOU.
I WANTED TO MENTION THAT MISS PRINCE MAY HAVE SOME COMMENTS THAT SHE WOULD LIKE TO OFFER ON THE LEGISLATIVE CHANGES THAT PROMPT THIS.
YES AND AS MISS PEARSON WAS SAYING THE WORKING GROUP HAS DISCUSSED THAT AND MR. AKRAMOV WHO'S OVER A LOT OF THESE DEPARTMENTS HAS DISCUSSED WE WILL BE LOOKING AT THIS ON A REGULAR BASIS.
YOU KNOW NOT LETTING IT GO SO LONG.
AND YES, THE STATUTE THAT GOVERNS COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREAS REQUIRES MORE SPECIFICITY WITH YOUR FUNDING.
AND AS MS. PEARSON HAS ALREADY POINTED OUT, JUST BECAUSE WE GENERALLY TALKED ABOUT THE MARINA, WE DIDN'T SPECIFICALLY TALK ABOUT DEMOLISHING BREADS, RECONSTRUCTING THAT AREA, THE SEAWALL, EVERYTHING MS. PEARSON HAS ALREADY SAID IS JUST A CHANGE IN THE LAW.
YOU USED TO BE A LOT MORE GENERAL AND BE ABLE TO NOT HAVE TO DIRECTLY.
SPECIFY EXACTLY THE PROJECT BUT NOW THE LAW HAS CHANGED IN THE STATUTE YOU HAVE TO ALSO THE PREVIOUS ONE THAT'S STRICKEN COMPLETELY DID NOT CONTEMPLATE THE USE OF TAX INCREMENT FUNDS UNTIL MUCH LATER IN THE CHART AND SO THAT WAS A BIG CONCERN WITH FINANCE AND THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WAS THAT THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING WASN'T EVEN ABLE TO BE USED EXCEPT FOR PARKING AND SOME OTHERS SO IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT THE MONEY BE USED IN THE AREA IN THE MANNER IN WHICH IT NEEDS TO BE USED.
AND THAT AGAIN WAS JUST A CHANGE IN THE LAW.
THE THE ASTERISK AND THE FOOTNOTE THAT MS. PEARSON REFERENCES, THAT IS ALREADY IN THE STATUTE AND WE'RE JUST MAKING IT CLEAR TO EVERYONE THAT YOU CAN REIMBURSE IF WE HAD ANY OUTSIDE COUNSEL ON THIS, YOU KNOW, ANY KIND OF THE FINANCING COSTS IF WE WERE GOING TO DO A BOND LATER THAT YOU ARE ALLOWED TO ALSO USE THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING TO FINANCE THOSE MATTERS.
AND THEN UNDER THE CRA STATUTE, THIS BOARD DOES NEED TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT IT IS COMPLIANT WITH THE COMP PLAN AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND THAT'S WHAT IT'S IN FRONT OF THIS BOARD FOR.
MR. CHAIRMAN, SO WE CAN EXPECT TO SEE CHANGES PROBABLY WITH THE CAPITAL SIDE OF THIS MORE THAN ANYTHING MORE FREQUENTLY THAN THE LAST TIME, 2004.
AND I BELIEVE THAT, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE MAJOR PROJECTS THAT ARE GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME, SO MAYBE SOME OF THAT FUNDING MAYBE WOULD NOT COME, ANY CHANGES TO THAT WOULD COME IN A LATER TIME.
BUT I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO.
IT WAS INTERESTING TO ME TO SEE A NUMBER OF PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN CREATED OR FINISHED OVER THE TIME PERIOD.
YOU KNOW, SO IF YOU READ THROUGH THE WHOLE DOCUMENT.
[00:30:02]
AND ON THE INCREMENT FUNDING, ONLY THOSE PROPERTIES IN THE CRA, THAT INCREMENT FUNDING COULD BE USED FOR CRA IMPROVEMENTS.YOUR QUESTION WAS DOES THIS FUNDING HAVE TO BE USED FOR CRA IMPROVEMENTS AND YES THAT'S WHY MS. PEARSON WENT OVER THE MAP WITH YOU.
THESE ARE ALL PROJECTS WITHIN THE CRA PLAN.
AGAIN IF THESE ACTIVITIES AND I CAN'T REMEMBER HOW MANY YEARS AGO THE STATUTE CHANGED YOU KNOW CERTAIN PARTS OF THESE AMENDMENTS WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN REQUIRED AND THEY COULD HAVE SPENT THE MONEY WITHOUT DOING THIS.
NOW NOT REFERENCING THE TAX INCREMENT FUNDING MIGHT HAVE BEEN A PROBLEM BUT BUT, YEAH, THIS IS A CHANGE IN THE LAW THAT'S MAKING US BE MORE SPECIFIC.
AND AS MS. PEARSON HAS ALREADY SAID AND MR. AKRAMOV IS PROBABLY GOING TO GET INTO, WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THIS MORE THOROUGHLY.
LIKE, OTHER THAN LOOKING AT IT ON A REGULAR BASIS, WE'RE GOING TO, I THINK, A WHOLE CLOTH AMENDMENT IS PROBABLY IN THE WORKS.
BUT, MR. AKRAMOV, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PITCH IT BACK TO THE CHAIR? DO YOU HAVE ANY CHARTS SHOWING HOW MUCH THAT FUNDING HAS INCREASED OVER THE YEARS? BECAUSE I KNOW INITIALLY IT WAS DOWN THERE ANYWAY, AND IT'S NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY FUNDS.
I'M GUESSING THOSE FUNDS HAVE INCREASED ONLY BECAUSE PROPERTY VALUES HAVE INCREASED.
GLENNA KROMOFF, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER.
YES, SO TO THAT POINT, YES, THEY HAVE, BUT THE PROPERTY VALUES, THE WAY IT WORKS IS THE PROPERTY VALUES HAVE TO INCREASE WITH AN ENHANCEMENT.
SO THAT'S PART OF THIS PROCESS.
WE'VE HAD SOME WHAT WE WOULD SAY IS SIGNIFICANT MOVEMENT IN THE REVENUE.
ABOUT A LITTLE LESS THAN $400,000 ANNUALLY IN THE CRA AT THIS POINT.
BUT WITH ALL THE PROJECTS THAT WE'LL SEE IN THE FUTURE, BOTH OURS AND PRIVATE MONEY WILL INCREASE THE VALUE SIGNIFICANTLY, AND THAT WILL CONTINUE TO RISE.
AND YOU CAN SEE IN THE CRA, WE LOOK AT THE WATERFRONT AS ONE OF THE BIGGEST PIECES, BUT IT'S NOT THE ONLY PIECE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE CRA MAP, WHICH IS IN THERE.
ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT YOU CAN DO WITH THIS IS SOME PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS.
SO THAT'S PART OF EXPLORING THE ENHANCEMENTS AND A REWORK OF THE PLAN.
BECAUSE IT CONTEMPLATES THAT, OF COURSE, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE REGULATIONS ALLOW.
BUT WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN REALLY SPECIFIC ABOUT WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN THERE.
SO THIS YEAR, WE ACTUALLY DO A KICKOFF, I THINK, NEXT WEEK OR THE WEEK AFTER.
AND THAT HARBOR MASTER PLAN, THE FIRST PHASE OF IT IS FOCUSING ON THAT PUBLIC-PRIVATE CONVERSATION ON HOW WE WORK TOGETHER TO DEVELOP IN THE CRA, SPECIFICALLY THE WATERFRONT, BUT WE'LL INCLUDE THE ENTIRE CRA IN THAT.
SO THAT WILL TRIGGER A NUMBER OF UPDATES.
WE WON'T BRING IT BACK TO YOU UNTIL WE'RE FINISHED WITH THAT PLAN.
THAT'S EXPECTED TO BE AN EIGHT- OR NINE-MONTH PROJECT.
AND ONCE WE'RE DONE WITH THAT, WE'LL KNOW IT'LL HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS AND WE'LL BE ABLE TO BRING BACK A TOTAL UPDATE WE HAVE ALREADY IDENTIFIED A BUNCH OF THINGS THAT NEED TO HAPPEN.
SO HAS THE WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD THEY HAVE SOME THINGS THEY'VE DONE SOME UPDATES ON OBJECTIVES AND SOME OTHER THINGS LIKE THAT BUT AS WE GO THROUGH THAT PLAN, WE'LL BE ABLE TO HAND THEM A LOT MORE WHEN THEY'RE WHEN THEY'RE DONE WORKING WITH IT, THEN IT'LL COME HERE JUST LIKE THIS PROCESS IS AND THEN WE'LL GO TO THE COMMISSION AFTER THAT SO WE ANTICIPATE SOME PROBABLY OVER THE NEXT YEAR TO 16 MONTHS THAT WE'LL BE BRINGING THAT.
I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE WE BRING IT BACK ONCE WITH ALL THE MAJOR CHANGES IN IT.
IT WILL BE TYPICAL WITH THESE PLANS, LIKE THE COMP PLAN WE UPDATE EVERY SEVEN YEARS OR SO.
WE'LL PROBABLY PUT THIS ON A THREE TO FIVE YEAR SCHEDULE.
AND WE MAY SHRINK IT EVEN MORE DOWN TO EVERY OTHER YEAR FOR A WHILE BECAUSE THE CRA IS GOING TO CHANGE AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
DID I ANSWER ALL THE QUESTIONS? EXCELLENT.
I MOVE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE CITY COMMISSION THE 2026 WATERFRONT COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN SUPPLEMENT AND AS PRESENTED IS ADEQUATELY COMPLIANT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR APPROVAL AT THIS TIME.
[00:35:02]
I WAS CALLING ALONG.[7. STAFF REPORT]
YOU COUNT DOWN.I DO HAVE A COMMENT MR. CHAIRMAN.
AND GLENN, I EMAILED GLENN ON THIS AND JUST FOR CLARITY IT LOOKED LIKE THERE WERE 91 NEW RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS THAT WERE ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2025.
AND THOSE ARE NEW STRUCTURES, MEANING IT WAS...
EITHER A DEMOLISHED BUILDING BEING REPLACED OR A NEW BUILDING ON A VACANT LOT.
YES, AND AS I MENTIONED IN THE EMAIL THAT TOWNHOMES WOULD COUNT AS, SO IF WE BUILT ONE TOWNHOME AND HAD TWO UNITS, IT WOULD COUNT AS TWO, RIGHT? BUT YES, THAT'S 91.
AND THANK YOU, GLENN, FOR PROVIDING THAT.
I'D ASK THAT BECAUSE THE COUNTY PUBLISHES A MONTHLY NEWSLETTER THAT TELLS YOU THEY'RE ON-ISLAND AND OFF-ISLAND BUILDING PERMITS AND SINGLE-FAMILY, MULTIFAMILY.
AND I THINK IT SHOWS A SIGN OF HEALTHINESS OR UNHEALTHINESS, WHETHER GROWTH IS THERE OR NOT.
WHAT I KIND OF FOUND, WHICH I THOUGHT 91 WAS ACTUALLY A PRETTY HEALTHY NUMBER, IT SHOWS THAT THERE'S DIVERSITY OF PRODUCT AVAILABLE.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE THOSE 91 CAME FROM, BUT I SUSPECT A LOT OF IT'S INFILL OR REDEVELOPMENT.
SO I DID GO BACK AND COMPARE THAT TO NASSAU COUNTY'S INVENTORY, AND THEY ACTUALLY CATEGORIZE ON-ISLAND AND OFF-ISLAND.
AND THE POPULATION OF THE UNINCORPORATED PART OF THE ISLAND IS ACTUALLY GREATER THAN THE POPULATION OF THE CITY BASED ON THE 2025 OR 2006 DEMOGRAPHICS THAT I SAW.
BUT WHAT WAS KIND OF TELLING IS THAT THE COUNTY ONLY HAD 39 NEW BUILDING PERMITS.
THE UNINCORPORATED AREA WHERE WE HAVE 91.
OFF THE ISLAND, WHICH TO ME IS EVEN MORE STAGGERING, THEY ONLY HAD 650 FOR THE ENTIRE YEAR.
AND YOU WOULD THINK, WELL, MAYBE THERE'S MULTIFAMILY, BUT THERE'S ONLY FOUR MULTIFAMILY THAT WERE PULLED IN THE ENTIRE YEAR.
SO TO ME, THE CITY IS DOING A PRETTY GOOD JOB OF ACTUALLY NOT DISCOURAGING GROWTH.
AND LETTING THINGS HAPPEN THE WAY MAYBE THE MARKET MIGHT DICTATE, AS OPPOSED TO THE COUNTY, WHICH SEEMS, 39 SEEMS LIKE A WOEFULLY LOW NUMBER FOR AS MANY LARGE PARCELS THAT MIGHT BE OUT THERE IN THE COUNTY.
AND THOSE ARE ONLY COMPLETED PARCELS, RIGHT? THEY WOULD EITHER BE NEW PARCELS THAT WERE CREATED AND BUILT ON, OR REDEVELOPED PARCELS THAT WOULD BE NEW HOMES.
THEY DON'T SHOW THE NUMBER OF APPROVED THAT HAVEN'T STARTED BUILDING? NO, THEY DON'T.
BUT I MEAN, I THINK THE MARKET'S GOING TO BUILD WHAT THE MARKET IS ALLOWED TO BUILD AND CAN BUILD REASONABLY AND BE AFFORDABLE.
SO TO ME, I THINK IT'S A GOOD BAROMETER, AND I APPRECIATE THE CITY PROVIDING THAT BECAUSE I THINK IT SHOWS THAT MAYBE WE'RE A LITTLE HEALTHIER THAN I EVEN THOUGHT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY COMMENTS THEY'D LIKE TO MAKE? IF NOT, WE'RE ADJOURNED.
I JUST WANTED TO REMIND YOU OF THE WORKSHOP NEXT MONDAY.
WE PUT A PAMPHLET IN FRONT OF YOU GUYS.
IN FRONT OF YOU WITH ONE OF OUR LITTLE PINS THAT WE'RE GOING TO START GIVING AWAY.
[00:40:02]
WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO AT THE OPENING OF THE PARKS ON SATURDAY IS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A TABLE AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE PLEDGE CARDS AND WE'RE GOING TO ASK PEOPLE TO PLEDGE TO COME TO THE MEETING.AND BE PART OF THE PLAN AND SO WE'RE GOING TO GIVE THEM THESE BUTTONS AND HOPEFULLY THEY'LL WEAR THEM AND THEN IF YOU COME TO THE MEETING AND YOU PARTICIPATE YOU'LL GET A PIN SAYING YOU SUPPORT IT AND THAT WAY YOU CAN WEAR IT AND WE'RE HOPEFULLY THEY WILL COME TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WHEN WE BRING IT FOR FIGHT FOR APPROVAL AND WE'LL HAVE THAT SUPPORT SO WE HAVE A LOT OF UPCOMING EVENTS THAT WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO PROMOTE IT AND WE HOPE YOU GUYS CAN COME TO THE MEETING BELIEVE THAT THE CONVERSATION LAST MONTH WAS WHO MAY WOULD COME OR WERE YOU GOING TO DESIGNATE DESIGNATE ONE PER PER MEETING SO I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE ARE ON THAT ONE IF IF ANYBODY PARTICULARLY WAS GOING TO COME MONDAY NIGHT OR WHERE YOU WERE BUT WE COULD ALWAYS ADVERTISE IF WE NEED TO I MEAN I'M GOING TO TRY TO ATTEND AS MANY OF THEM AS POSSIBLE I'VE GOT THEM ON MY CALENDAR I THINK THAT, WELL, I JUST PLAN ON ATTENDING THREE OF THEM.
AND I FIND IT A LITTLE DIFFICULT TO WORK AROUND OTHER PEOPLE'S SCHEDULES.
SO, I MEAN, IF SOMEBODY ALL OF A SUDDEN CHANGES THEIR MIND TO SAY THEY CAN ATTEND ONE BUT MAYBE NOT THE OTHER, I THINK THAT'S A SCHEDULING NIGHTMARE FOR YOU.
I THOUGHT THE REQUEST WAS THAT YOU TELL...
MARGARET WHICH ONE YOU WANTED AND ONE WOULD SHOW UP AT EACH ONE WE HAD TALKED ABOUT THAT BUT COULD NO MORE THAN ONE SHOW UP WELL WE WERE JUST WE WERE THERE'S THREE OF THEM MR. CHAIRMAN WE WERE WE WERE TRYING TO SHE'S I'M SORRY WELL WE WERE LOOKING FOR THE DATES OF ALL OF THE MEETINGS WE CAN WE CAN GET YOU ALL OF THE DATES YES I NEED TO KNOW WHERE THEY ARE OR WHEN IT'S A SUNSHINE LAW CONCERN BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO BE VOTING ON IT TO HAVE MORE THAN ONE OF YOU IN THE ROOM AND DISCUSSING IT AND IF YOU WERE TO ENGAGE.
SO AT ONE OF THE MEETINGS I WAS HERE FOR, PLANNING HAD ASKED YOU TO SUGGEST ONE OF YOU FOR EACH ONE AT ONE POINT.
BUT THERE'S ONLY THREE MEETINGS.
THERE'S THREE BIG WORKSHOPS, BUT LIKE EVEN SATURDAY, THERE'S GOING TO BE PUBLIC COMING THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE HANDING OUT STUFF.
BUT THE WORKSHOPS, THERE'S THREE MAJOR WORKSHOPS, AND THEN THERE WILL BE ONE COMMUNITY.
THERE WILL BE A WORKSHOP KIND OF AT A COMMUNITY MEETING, AND THEN WE HAVE SOME POP-UPS.
SO SOME OF THEM ARE INFORMATIONAL, BUT SOME OF THEM ARE ACTUALLY WORKSHOPS, AND THAT'S THE THREE.
AS LONG AS WE DON'T TALK TO EACH OTHER ABOUT IT, IT SHOULD BE ALL RIGHT.
I MEAN, I'VE BEEN TO PROBABLY HUNDREDS OF MEETINGS OVER THE YEARS THAT THERE ARE PUBLIC MEETINGS.
I MEAN, WE SHOULD ALL BE INVITED TO THAT AND NOT BE EXCLUDED BECAUSE.
RIGHT, IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO COME BEFORE YOU, SO YOU CANNOT SPEAK TO ONE ANOTHER, YOU CANNOT, YOU KNOW, YOU JUST HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL.
STAY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROOM.
CAN'T TAKE ME TO LUNCH EITHER.
YOU CAN GO TO LUNCH, YOU CAN JUST TALK ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE THAT DOESN'T COME BEFORE YOU.
THERE'S NO REASON WHY WE ALL COULD NOT ATTEND ALL OF THOSE, IS WHAT I'M SAYING.
AS LONG AS YOU DON'T TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW.
BECAUSE IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT OTHER PEOPLE TALK ABOUT.
IT COMES DOWN TO THE INDIVIDUAL PARTIES INVOLVED.
IF YOU SPEAK TO ONE ANOTHER OR YOU EXPRESS YOUR OPINIONS TO ONE ANOTHER, YOU WILL BE VIOLATING SUNSHINE.
SO AS LONG AS YOU DON'T DO THAT, YOU'RE NOT VIOLATING SUNSHINE.
RIGHT. I THINK SHE'S JUST TRYING TO KEEP US OUT OF TROUBLE. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT IT STARTED OUT WHERE I DON'T WANT TO SEE BUT ONE OF YOU IN THE ROOM AT THE TIME. THAT WOULD BE MY PREFERENCE, CORRECT. THAT WOULD BE YOUR PREFERENCE, BUT THAT'S NOT NECESSARY IS MY POINT.
SUNSHINE COVERS THIS, AND WE ALL CERTAINLY CAN ATTEND THE SAME MEETING. WE JUST CAN'T COMMUNICATE WITH EACH OTHER ABOUT ANYTHING COMING TO THIS BOARD. CORRECT. JUST KEEP THAT IN MIND. YES. OKAY.
THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE? NOPE. NOW WE STAND ADJOURNED.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THAT'S A HAPPY HOUR.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.