Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[Call to Order]

[00:00:06]

>> WELCOME FOLKS. THIS IS THE FERNANDINA BEACH CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING. IT IS JULY 7, 2020. MADAM CLERK IF YOU COULD CALL ROLE PLEASE. JANUARY 7TH. SORRY. IF YOU COULD RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND REMAIN STANDING AFTERWARDS FOR THE INVOCATION BY AMERICAN LEGION POST MAYOR BRUCE MILLER.

. >> MAYOR. EVERYBODY BOW YOUR HEADS. OH GOD AS WE BEGIN OUR MEETING WE SEEK THY COUNSEL AND GUIDANCE. INSPIRE US WITH THY WISDOM. RULE OVER OUR DELIBERATIONS WE BESIEGE THEE. TEACH US TO GIVE. TO LABOR AND NOT ASK FOR REWARDS SAY THAT

KNOWING THAT WE DO THY WILL. AMEN. >> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU CHAPLIN.

BEFORE WE GET STARTED I JUST NOTICED THAT MY FATHER HAS COME INTO THE ROOM. HE IS VISITING FROM UPSTATE NEW YORK. WELCOME, DAD.

THIS IS THE FIRST TIME MY FATHER HAS ATTENDED A MEETING. HE IS FROM UP STATE NEW YORK. SO, IF YOU GUYS CAN BE ON YOUR BEST BEHAVIOR AND DON'T SCREW THIS UP WHILE THE OLD MAN'S HERE. ITEM

[Item 4.1]

4TH PRESENTATIONS. 4.1, THIS IS A PRESENTATION FROM THE NASSAU HUMANE SOCIETY. WE HAVE A DOG OF THE MONTH. I DON'T SEE THEM. THEY'RE PROBABLY BUSY. I CAN TELL YOU THAT MY WONDERFUL WIFE LORI HAD TEAR HER AWAY FROM GOING TO TWO DOGS SHE SAW ONLINE. THERE'S TWO AUSTRALIAN CATTLE DOGS. A YEAR AND A HALF OLD. A MALE AND FEMALE. IF YOU HAVE NEVER HAD AN AS YOUIE, THEY'RE -- AUSSIE THEY'RE THE SMARTEST DOG IN THE WORLD. PLEASE GET IT BEFORE MY WIFE DOES. THAT WOULD BE GREAT. I HAVE A FULL HOUSE

[Item 4.2]

OKAY. ITEM 4.2 HAS BEEN PULLED. THIS WAS A PRESENTATION FOR THE HARBOR MARINA MAINTENANCE UPDATE. THEY'RE WORKING CURRENTLY WITH WEST TREK TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS AND THEY'RE NOT QUITE THERE YET. ON SO SECTION 5. PUBLIC COMMENT REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON THE

[Item 5]

AGENDA. I HAVE A COUPLE HERE. MR. PETE STEVENSON. IF YOU WOULD STATE YOUR NAME AND

ADDRESS AND YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. WELCOME. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER:. PETE STEVENSON. FERNANDINA BEACH, FLORIDA. I AM HERE TO SAY ONE HUGE THANK YOU TO MAYOR, THE STAFF, THE CITY, AND THE WHOLE COUNTY BECAUSE WE HAVE MET OUR FUNDING GOAL FOR THE 2020 RISE AGAINST HUNGER. IF YOU HAVEN'T HEARD ABOUT IT, IT'S GOING TO BE FEBRUARY 1ST AT THE REC CENTER.

IT'S GOING TO RUN ABOUT TWO-AND-A-HALF HOURS. WE'D LIKE EVERYBODY TO BE THERE ABOUT 9:30 A.M. FOR A LITTLE TRAINING. AND YOU ARE GOING TO LEARN HOW TO PUT ONE OF THESE PACKS TOGETHER. A PACK RIGHT THERE SERVES SIX MEALS. IT'S NOT THE MOST DELICIOUS. IT LACKS A LITTLE BIT. IT'S COMPLETELY VEGETARIAN. IT TAKES NOTHING BUT WATER AND A HEAT SOURCE AND YOU CAN EAT IT. PREFERABLY IF YOU ADD SOME SEASONING STUFF WITH IT. ANY NATION IN THE WORLD CAN USE IT AS A BASIS. RICE AND SOY, VEGETABLES AND BASICALLY A NEWT REENT PACK LIKE VITAMINS AND MINERALS. ANYWAY, WE'RE GOING TO START ABOUT 9:30 A.M. IN THE MORNING.

UNLESS YOU WOULD LIKE TO COME VERY EARLY, WE'LL TAKE ALL THE HELP WE CAN GET FOR SOME OF THE HEAVY LIFT TO GET 50 POUND BAGS OF RICE FROM THE TRUCK INTO THE REC CENTER. WE'RE LOOKING FOR 350-400 PEOPLE. WE WILL TRAIN YOU IN 30 MINUTES YOU WILL BE AN EXPERT AND WE'LL START ABOUT 10:00 A.M. AND WE'LL END UP -- IT WILL -- THIS BAG HOLDS SIX MEALS. SO IT'S GOING TO BE OVER 9,000 BAGS PUT TOGETHER IN 2 HOURS. SO THAT'S ABOUT 70-PLUS A MINUTE. SO, YOU THINK ABOUT IT, THAT'S A PRETTY GOOD PRODUCTION LINE. WE'VE DONE IT AND WE'VE DEMONSTRATED IN THE LAST COUPLE YEARS WE CAN DO IT. WE'RE JUST TRYING TO UP THE CHALLENGE BY TEN PERCENT THIS YEAR. NOW, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WOULD HAVE TO MENTION IS THAT WE WORRY ABOUT HUNGER RIGHT

[00:05:05]

HERE IN THIS COUNTRY. THERE'S PROBABLY 12 PERCENT OF THE U.S. POPULATION THAT HAS SOME FOOD LACKING ADEQUATE FOOD. SO, YOU TALKING ANYWHERE FROM 10 TO 12 PERCENT. AROUND THE WORLD IT'S IN THE 10TH PERCENTILE RANGE. TO GIVE YOU ONE EXAMPLE, LAST YEAR THE BAHAMAS GOT NAILED WITH A HURRICANE. ABOUT 140,000 OF THESE PACKS WENT OVER THERE IN A MATTER OF DAYS. THEY CAME FROM ORLANDO AND WENT OVER. THEY'LL GET AN AIRPLANE AND LOAD IT UP AND GET IT IN. WE DO REQUIRE A HEAT SOURCE AND POTABLE WATER. SOMEWHERE WHERE THERE'S A WAY OF HEATING THE FOOD. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S HAPPENING WITH RISE AGAINST HUNGER IS WE'RE MOVING AWAY FROM JUST, LET ME CALL IT EMERGENCY OR DISASTER. NOW ABOUT 50 PERCENT OF THE FOCUS IS ON SUSTAINABILITY, WHERE PEOPLE LEARN TO GROW THEIR OWN FOOD CROPS AND NOT DEPEND ON THIS PACKAGE EVERY DAY. THE OTHER ONE IS TO FOCUS MORE ON CHILDREN LIKE IN SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAMS. WHERE THAT MAY BE THEIR PRIMARY MEAL FOR THE DAY. THE IDEA TO GET MORE INTO THE SOCIAL STRUCTURE. YOU CAN DO THAT -- WE CAN SHIP THESE TWO -- INSTRUCTIONS AND EVERYTHING ON ON IT. SO, YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE AN EXPERT TO MANAGE THE PREPARING OF THE FOOD. THERE'S REALLY THREE THINGS. IT'S KIND OF EMPOWER THE COMMUNITY AND THEN BASICALLY -- WHEN I SAY NOURISH LIVES, THE FOCUS IS ON THE CHILDREN. INADEQUATE FOOD TENDS TO BE A PRE-REQUISITE FOR LACK OF LEARNING OR SLOWNESS IN LEARNING. THEN YOU'VE ALWAYS GOT THE EMERGENCY. SO, WE'VE GOT LESS THAN 50 PIERCE PERCENT OF THIS FOOD IS GOING INTO WHAT I WILL CALL AN EMERGENCY SITUATION. IT'S MORE TOWARDS ONGOING SUSSY TENSE. -- SUSTENANCE. I WOULD LIKE IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PARTICIPATE, IF YOU ARE IN A CLUB OR GROUP OR SOMETHING, WEAR YOUR SHIRTS. WE LOVE TO SEE THEM. THE CHURCHES ARE GETTING THEM. ROTARY WILL BE THERE. THEY'LL HAVE THEIR SHIRT ON. SO, BRING IT ALONG.

THERE'S NO RULES AGAINST HAVING A BRAG SHIRT ON. I WOULD ASK THAT YOU WEAR A HAT. MOST PEOPLE ARE NOT IN MY POSITION SO THEY DOES HAVE HAIR AND, THEREFORE, IT IS A REQUIREMENT TO HAVE A HAT OR WE PROVIDE YOU WITH A BEAUTIFUL ORANGE HAIR NET WHICH I DON'T RECOMMEND BUT IT'S THE ALTERNATIVE. IF ANYBODY FEELS LIKE THIS IS A GREAT DEAL I'D LIKE TO MAYBE CONTRIBUTE TO IT, WE THINK WE'RE OKAY, BUT I'M ALWAYS NERVOUS UNTIL THE BANK ACCOUNT SAYS WE'RE 1UN HUH -- 100%. IF YOU'D LIKE TO DROP A DONATION ST. PETERS EPISCOPAL CHURCH HAS VOLUNTEERED TO COLLECT THE CHECKS. MAKE -- YOU CAN GIVE THEM TO ME TONIGHT IF YOU'D LIKE TO. WE'LL TAKE ALL COMERS. AND I JUST, AGAIN, WOULD LIKE TO INVITE -- I ALREADY KNOW SOME OF THE CITY STAFF IS GOING TO BE THERE. LET ME MENTION ONE OTHER POINT. IF YOU HAVE KIDS THAT NEED COMMUNITY HOURS, THIS COUNTS. WE TAKE CARE OF THAT. SO, SCHOOL BOARD'S SAID YOU GUYS CAN DO THAT ONE. SO, IF YOU WANT THEM, IF YOU HAVE A 4-YEAR-OLD CHILD, BRING HIM OR HER. IF YOU'VE GOT AN 90-YEAR-OLD GRANDMOTHER, BRING THEM.

BECAUSE WE'VE HAD PEOPLE -- I THINK WE HAD ONE PERSON THAT WAS OVER 100 WORK AND DID A FINE JOB FOR EVERYBODY. MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: FEBRUARY 1ST AT 9:30 A.M. MAYOR, THANK YOU. MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU. NEXT

SPEAKER IS MORE ROBERT LOOKS LIKE MAYBE SALA. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: THANK YOU.

SO, THERE'S A NUMBER OF US HERE -- ROBERT SALA 1130 WHITE STREET. THERE'S A NUMBER OF US HERE FROM OLD TOWN. WE'RE HERE TO BASICALLY VOICE OUR CONCERNS ABOUT THE ANIMOSITY THAT IS CREATED THROUGH THE HDC AND THE NEIGHBORS POINTING AT EACH OTHER. MY WIFE AND I MOVED HERE IN 2014. AND AFTER A NUMBER OF YEARS FIGURING OUT WHERE TO LIVE WE DESCRIBED ON AN OLD --

[00:10:04]

DECIDED ON AN OLD TOWN, A QUIET PLACE. WE MET WITH STAFF, AND WE REALLY WORKED WELL WITH EVERYONE. BUT EVERYONE KEPT TELLING US ABOUT THE CHALLENGE OF THE HDC. AND THEN ONCE WE WENT IN FRONT OF THE HDC WE REALIZED HOW THERE SEEMS TO BE MORE SUBJECTIVITY THAN OBJECTIVITY TO THE GROUP. AND A LOT OF DISPARITY BETWEEN HOW ONE PERSON IS TREATED OVER THE OTHER. I STARTED WONDERING MYSELF, MY BROTHER IS A CITY MANAGER IN FORT LAUDERDALE, I ASKED HOW DID HE DEAL WITH IT. HE SAID TO BE HONEST, BOBBY, WE DISSOLVED THAT BECAUSE WE FELT WE HAD THE RIGHT KNOWLEDGEABLE HISTORICAL STAFF ON THE CITY GROUP WITHIN THE CITY EMPLOYEES THEN WE USED THAT ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR CONSOLATION IF -- CONSULTATION IF HELP IS NEEDED.

I WAS THINKING OF THAT BECAUSE LITERALLY SOMETIMES THERE'S NEIGHBORS AGAINST NEIGHBORS BECAUSE OF THE WAY RULES COME ACROSS. I THOUGHT MAYBE THAT WOULD BE A SMARTER WAY OR A WAY TO CONSIDER ADDRESSING SOME OF THAT ANIMOSITY BETWEEN NEIGHBORS. I'M FORTUNATE. I HAD A GREAT -- WORKED WITH A GROUP, WE MET WITH THE HDC AND HAD BACK AND FORTH ABOUT WHAT WE CAN AND CAN'T DO. BUT I REALLY HAVE TO COMMEND MR. CA MELA, MS. BACH. THEY REALLY KNOW THEIR JOB. 99% OF WHAT HAS TO GET DONE IS DONE WITH THE STAFF OF THIS CITY. I THINK REALLY THAT HISTORIC GROUP -- IT'S ALMOST LIKE THE MARINA GROUP. IT IS AN ADVISORY GROUP NOT A JUDICIAL GROUP. AND I JUST FEEL THAT IT WOULD BRING THE NEIGHBORHOODS CLOSER TOGETHER AND LESS PEOPLE POINTING AT EACH OTHER WHAT TREES ARE BEING CUT AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO THAT'S IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH YOU HAVE

A QUESTION? >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: SO YOU BELIEVE THE SOLUTION IS

DISSOLVING THE HDC? >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: I NEVER WANT TO BRING UP A CRITICISM UNLESS THERE MIGHT BE AN OPTION TO CONSIDER. SO, ONE OF MY THOUGHTS IS, IS THERE A WAY TO TAKE -- I'VE WATCHED THE VIDEOS AND THE MARINA ADVISORY GROUP AND YOU'VE GOT FISHERMEN ON THERE. YOU'VE GOT THE MARINA MANAGER. BUT ULTIMATELY IT IS THE CITY THAT MAKES THE DECISION. LET'S SAY WE SUBMITTED OUR PLANS AND SOMETHING WAS WRONG, I THINK THERE'S A TRUE PROCESS TWO ARCHITECTS REFUSED TO DO THE WORKING BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T WANT TO DEAL WITH THE HDC. OF THE SEVEN BUILDERS, ONE OF THEM SAID I DON'T WANT TO DEAL WITH THE HDC I'M GOING TO TURN YOUR WORK AWAY. RIGHT THERE I START TO WONDER, WHAT IS -- I SEE THE NEED FOR AN HDC BUT FROM THE JUDICIAL POINT OF VIEW I JUST -- MAYBE I WOULD SEE -- I DON'T THINK I WOULD ABSOLVE IT. I GUESS YOU ARE RIGHT. IS THERE A NEED AT THIS POINT WITH THE PROFESSIONAL PEOPLE WE HAVE RUNNING THAT GROUP -- RUNNING THE DEPARTMENT. BUT I'M NOT HERE TO CRITICIZE ANY OF THEM. I THINK THEY ALL DO A GREAT JOB. I JUST FEEL AS THOUGH THERE'S MORE SUBJECTIVITY THAN OBJECTIVITY AS TO HOW THE DECISIONS ARE MADE. YOU CAN GO TO ONE MEETING AND DECISIONS ARE MADE ONE WAY AND ANOTHER MEETING AND DECISIONS ARE MADE ANOTHER WAY. AND I THINK THAT DOESN'T HELP THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY IN ANY WAY.

>> MAYOR MILLER: CONSISTENCY IS VERY IMPORTANT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: SCOTT JONES. CURRENT RESIDENCE IS 2057 HIGHLAND DRIVE. WANT TO TOUCH ON WHAT HE SAID AND ALSO JUST TELL MY QUICK STORY IN TWO MINUTES 57 SECONDS. WE STARTED OFF REALLY EXCITED TO BUILD IN OLD TOWN. IN OUR FIRST MEETING WE CAME BEFORE THE COMMITTEE AND WE PRESENTED A PLAN THAT SAL SAID WOULD BE FINE. WE PRESENTED IT. FIRST THING THEY TOLD ME WAS, YOU ARE WASTING OUR TIME. TWO OF THEM HERE SAID THAT THEN THE CHAIRMAN LAUGHED.

I SAID YOU ARE NOT GOING TO GIVE ME CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM OR IDEAS? NO. OKAY WELL I'LL GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD. THANK YOU. THEY TOLD ME TO PAY AN ARCHITECT. I JUST WENT FOR CONCEPTUAL. SO, I THOUGHT MAYBE THEY WOULD GIVE ME HELP. I WAS WRONG. STARTED BUILDING -- GETTING MY PERMIT. I WAS TOLD BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AT THAT TIME THAT AN OWNER/BUILDER

[00:15:04]

CANNOT DO HIS OWN PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL WHICH IS FLORIDA STATE LAW, YES YOU CAN. I ARGUED AND HE SAID NO. SO, I HAVE TO HIRE A ELECTRICIAN AND PLUMBER. THE EXTRA COST IS $18,000. NOW, I BUILT MY HOUSE. I TALKED TO THE OFFICIAL AND I TOLD HIM I'D LIKE TO MAKE THE BOTTOM STORY TEN FEET INSTEAD OF NINE FEET. HE SAID AS LONG AS YOU ARE NOT OVER 25 FEET ON THE WORKSHOP THAT WILL BE FINE OR 35 FEET ON A HOUSE. WE WERE 24.6. I GOT A CALL FROM THE CURRENT BUILDING OFFICIAL AND HE SAID THAT YOU ARE WAY TOO HIGH WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THIS. SO, I WENT AND MEASURED IT AND I WAS AT 24.6 TO THE SLAB. WHICH 8 INCHES GRADE I AM 2 INCHES TOO HIGH. I GOT AN EMAIL SAYING THAT IT'S ACTUALLY 24 FOOT. FIRST I GOT AN EMAIL FROM THE OFFICIAL SAYING IT'S 25 FEET. THEN IT SAYS 24 FOOT. WHAT I AM GETTING AT IS NOTHING IS CONSISTENT. TWO BUILDING OFFICIALS TOLD ME 25 FOOT. THEN I HAVE MIKE, YOU KNOW, SENT HIM AB EARNINGS MAIL -- AN EMAIL TELLING ME I SHOULD STOP WORK ON MY BUILDING. AND THEY PROBABLY WILL NOT GIVE ME A VARIANCE ON THIS. I DID WHAT I THOUGHT WAS RIGHT ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL AND NOW IT'S GOING TO COST ME ANOTHER $15,000 TO TAKE MY WORKSHOP DOWN. I REALLY WAS EXCITED TO MOVE HERE. I WAS WORN HERE. I LOVE THIS PLACE. I WISH I WOULD HAVE LISTENED TO EVERYBODY AND MOVED SOMEWHERE ELSE. THE CITY SHOULD BE FAIR THE WAY THEY TREAT PEOPLE. I'VE SEEN THEM DO THINGS THAT ARE PERSONABLE. I HAD TO CHANGE MY WINDOWS WAS SPOKEN BY ONE BOARD MEMBER, SO YOU SHOULD HAVE TO TOO. IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE LIKE THAT.

>> MAYOR MILLER: YOU MENTIONED YOU EMAILED MIKE. WHO IS MIKE? >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: I HAVE THE EMAIL. IT IS -- ONE SECOND. MIKE -- I HATE TO SAY THE NAME WRONG. SPINO. I BELIEVE HE EVEN SPOKE UP DURING OUR FIRST MEETING SAYING THIS IS RIDICULOUS THE WAY YOU ARE

TREATING ME. YOU CAN LOOK AT THE TAPE ANYWAYS. >> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU VERY

MUCH. LYNN GREEN. WELCOME, MA'AM. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: LYNN GREEN 1119 SAM ARELLA STREET. IT'S BACK TO THE HDC AND THE CONSISTENCIES. IT'S HARD TO TRY TO DO ALL THIS IN THREE MINUTES. IT KIND OF GOES BACK TO A YEAR -- OVER A YEAR AGO WHEN WE WENT BEFORE THE BOARD. AND THEY HELD US TO CERTAIN STANDARDS AND OTHER PEOPLE TO THESE CERTAIN STANDARDS. THEN IN JULY THERE'S A MEETING WHERE ONE OF THE MEMBERS ON THE BOARD WAS WANTING TO BUILD A HOUSE. AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THE STANDARDS THAT THE REST OF US HAD TO BE HELD TO WERE KIND OF THROWN OUT THE WINDOW WITH HIM. FOR INSTANCE, THE GRID IS THE MAIN THING THAT MAKES OLD TOWN HISTORIC. YOU HAD TO STAY FIVE FOOT WITHIN THAT LOT. THEY DID SAY THEY HAD ALLOWED SOMEONE TO GO 24 INCHES OVER THE LOT LINE. BUT IN HIS CASE HE WANTED TO GO 48 INCHES OVER THE LOT LINE. AND THEY VOTED TO LET HIM DO IT. ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD EVEN CAME UP WITH A SUGGESTION. IF YOU CHANGE THE PORCH, MOVE THE STEPS, YOU WILL STAY WITHIN THE GUIDELINES. THEY TOTALLY IGNORED THAT. THEY VOTED TO PASS IT. ALSO ANOTHER REQUIREMENT WAS THE MEDIAN LOT LINE WHERE YOU HAD TO MARK FIVE FOOT ON EACH SIDE OF THE MEDIAN OF THE PEONIES. A LOT OF PEOPLE IT COST A LOT OF MONEY. BECAUSE WE HAD TO DO THAT. BOTH OF OUR LOTS WERE MEDIANS. IT COST A LOT OF MONEY FOR PEOPLE. AND THEY JUST SAID IT WOULDN'T GO WITH HIS HOUSE ARC TEXTURALLY. SO THEY VOTED TO PASS THE HOUSE AND THERE WERE SEVERAL OF US VERY DISGRUNTLED WITH THE DECISION BECAUSE IT WAS NOT FAIR. YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT ACROSS THE BOARD. WE'VE EVEN HEARD MEMBERS OF THE BOARD SAY WE TELL ONE PERSON ONE THING AND SOMEBODY ELSE SOMETHING ELSE. YOU CAN'T DO THAT. THERE'S GUIDELINES. AT THE END OF THAT MEETING THERE WAS A PROCEDURE PRESENTED HOW YOU COULD APPEAL. SO WE MADE SURE WE DOTTED OUR I'S, CROSSED OUR T EXT, HAD THE PAPER WORK IN AND EVERYTHING. WE WERE APPEALING TO THE CITY COMMISSIONERS. A WEEK BEFORE WE GET AN EMAIL SAYING THAT DUE TO LAND CODE -- I CAN'T REMEMBER THE EXACT NUMBER -- THAT WE WERE NOT PERMITTED. THAT IT WAS ONLY THE APPLICANT. COME TO FIND OUT ON ALL THE NOTICES THAT GO OUT ABOUT THESE MEETINGS AND THE LITTLE CARDS WITH THE NOTICES, IT SAYS ANY PERSON THAT HAS A PROBLEM CAN APPEAL TO THE CITY COMMISSIONERS. SO WE WERE CONDITIONED OUR RIGHT TO APPEAL. AND WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS THE CITY COMMISSIONERS TO LOOK AT OUR APPEAL PACKET WHICH THE CITY HAS AND TO LOOK AT THIS AND LOOK AT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT

[00:20:01]

AND THE INCONSISTENCIES. >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER ROSS DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION?

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS: JUST A STATEMENT. THAT VERY ISSUE IS GOING TO COME UP TONIGHT IN THE

COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS. WHETHER TO CHANGE THAT. >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER

LEDNOVICH YOU ARE RECOGNIZED, SIR. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: THANK YOU. SO THE CARD THAT YOU RECEIVED AND YOU QUOTED THE BOTTOM SAYING THAT ON THE APPEAL PROCESS. IT SAYS ANY PERSON CAN APPEAL. AND THAT'S A CITY ISSUED CARD.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING I BELIEVE.

>> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: SO MY FEELING IS THE FOLLOWING. IF IT IS A CITY ISSUED CARD AND IT IS A CITY ISSUED STATEMENT WE NEED TO HONOR THE STATEMENT AND THEN MAKE THE CORRECTION GOING FORWARD. IT IS NOT THE RESIDENT'S FAULT THAT THEY RECEIVED MISINFORMATION AND A MISPLEDGE WHEN THE CITY IS SAYING THIS IS WHAT YOU CAN DO. SO WE NEED TO HONOR WHAT OUR CARDS ARE SAYING AND WHAT WE'RE TELLING PEOPLE AND THEN FIX IT. THAT'S MY OPINION.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: AND THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD LIKE. I AGREE. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: THANK

YOU. >> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU. MR. TIM GREEN.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: TIM GREEN. 1119 SAM ARELLA STREET. I HAVE A VIDEO THAT I'VE ASKED TO BE

BROUGHT UP. AND I HAVE THOSE CARDS RIGHT HERE. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: CAN I

TAKE A LOOK AT IT? >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: YES, SIR. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: DO

YOU NEED IT. I'LL GIVE IT BACK TO YOU. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: I'D LIKE FOR

THIS VIDEO TO BE SHOWN. >> I JUST WANTED TO EXPLAIN. I WANTED TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR.

AS I SAID EARLIER WHEN I SPOKE ABOUT THE-- >> THE SOUND IS MAXED OUT

>>S THAT ME. AND I'M PRETTY SURE THAT I SAY-- >> WE CAN LET THE PUBLIC HEAR IT

OKAY. >> HIS THREE MINUTES. >> YES.

>> THERE'S AN APPEAL PROCESS. AND THAT THE APPEAL GOES TO THE CITY COMMISSION. IF ANY OF YOU

FEEL LIKE ANY OF THE DECISIONS, NOT JUST THIS ONE -- >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: I HAVE IT

RIGHT HERE FOR YOU TO SEE. >> YOU THINK THE GUIDELINES WERE NOT APPLIED APPROPRIATELILY --

IF IT WAS GOING TO COURT-- >> I CAN'T PAUSE IT I CAN START IT OVER.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: MR. MAYOR CAN I READ WHAT THE CARD SAYS. THE NOTICE CARD SAYS... AN APPLICANT AGGRIEVED BY ANY DECISION OF THE HDC MAY APPEAL TO THE CITY COMMISSION WITH THE EXCEPTION OF VARIANCES WHICH MAY BE APPEALED TO A COURT OF RECORD AS OUTLINED IN SECTION 10.02.04.

>> AND IT SAYS AN APPLICANT. >> WHAT DOES THE OTHER CARD SAY. THAT'S THE NEW CARD. READ THE

OLD ONE. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: I'M SORRY THANK YOU FOR THAT CORRECTION.

>> THE OLD CARD SAYS... IF ANY PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE BOARD WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT SUCH HEARING THEY WILL NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE

APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: AM I ALLOWED TO SPEAK WHILE WE'RE WAITING ON

THE I.T.? >> MAYOR MILLER: HE IS HERE RIGHT NOW THEN WE'LL START THE

CLOCK. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: THANK YOU. >> MAYOR MILLER: SORRY, DAD, IT'S USUALLY MUCH SMOOTHER

[00:26:07]

IF EVERYBODY CAN BE VERY QUIET WE'LL SEE IF WE CAN PICK UP THE VIDEO.

>> MAKE IT VERY CLEAR. AS I SAID EARLIER WHEN I SPOKE ABOUT THE RULES. THERE'S AN APPEAL PROCESS. AND THAT APPEAL GOES THE CITY COMMISSION. IF YOU -- IF ANY OF YOU FEEL LIKE ANY OF THE DECISIONS, NOT JUST THIS ONE, IT'S NOT THE RIGHT DECISION, THE RULES WERE NOT FOLLOWED, THE GUIDELINES WERE NOT APPLIED APPROPRIATELY, THE WAY THAT I THINK YOU WOULD GO ABOUT IT -- IF IT WAS GOING TO COURT, I WOULD SAY NOTHING. I WOULD JUST LET YOU HIRE AN ATTORNEY AND BUT SINCE WE'RE KEEPING THAT APPEAL PROCESS HERE LOCALLY THE FIRST THING I THINK YOU WOULD DO AS A RESIDENT IS CONTACT SAL, HAVE A MEETING WITH HIM AND TELL HIM WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS ARE. AND HE CAN MAYBE HELP TO CLARIFY SOME THINGS AND WHY YOU MIGHT BE THINKING THAT A PARTICULAR DECISION WAS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GUIDELINES. HE MIGHT TELL YOU WHY IT IS AND HELP YOU OUT. IF YOU STILL FEEL AGGRIEVED OR HARMED IN SOME WAY OR JUST THAT IT WASN'T THE RIGHT DECISION, YOU HAVE IN THAT 30DAY TIME PERIOD ABOUT 33 TO 35 DAYS FROM NOW YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO GO TO THE CITY COMMISSION. THAT DOES NOT NECESSARILY -- I CAN'T TAKE ANY QUESTIONS BUT YOU CAN CALL ME TOMORROW. THE BOARD'S DECISION IS GOING TO BE THE BOARD'S DECISION DESPITE MY EXPLANATION. AND I'M JUST LETTING YOU KNOW THAT YOU DO HAVE ANOTHER AVENUE. YOU CAN ALWAYS CALL MY OFFICE ALTHOUGH I CAN'T EXPLAIN THE GUIDELINES TO YOU I CAN EXPLAIN THE PROCESS.

SO, YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A LAWYER TO COME TO THE CITY COMMISSION AND FILE AN APPEAL.

>> THANK YOU. >> YOU ARE WELCOME. >> BENJAMIN IS GOING TO EXCUSE

HIMSELF BECAUSE HE WORKS AT COT NER AND ASSOCIATES. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: WE WAS WITHIN THAT 30 DAY WINDOW. WE WERE HELPED BY THE CITY MANAGER I FEEL LIKE. THE CITY CLERK, I FEEL LIKE THEY WERE GREAT WITH US OKAY. AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU GOT IT ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT TO CHANGE SOMETHING THERE AT THE END. SO, HOW I COME ACROSS THIS INJUSTICE -- AND THAT'S WHAT IT IS, AN INJUSTICE -- IS THESE PEOPLE WHO ARE BUILDING BEHIND ME, I WALKED OUT THERE AND LOOKED AT THE THING AND SAID WAIT A MINUTE THIS SAYS ANY PERSON. I AM A PERSON OF FERNANDINA BEACH, MY WIFE IS AND MS. POWER IS ALSO. BUT IT'S KIND OF FUNNY HOW I GOT THE SAME NAME. AND THIS CARD HERE, YOU WANT THIS ONE HERE TO TAKE OVER FOR THIS AND WE'RE GOING TO PUT THIS ONE ASIDE OVER HERE, WHICH WAS MY RIGHTS. BUT TONIGHT WE'RE GOING VOTE TO BRING THIS ONE OVER HERE -- TO BRING THEM BACK. THE WAY I LOOK AT IT IS THIS HERE WAS THE RIGHTS OF THE APPLICANT. THIS WAS THE RIGHTS OF THE CITIZENS. AND MY RIGHTS WERE BASICALLY DENIED. MY WIFE'S RIGHTS, EVERYBODY'S NAME ON THAT APPEAL, OUR RIGHTS WERE DENIED. FOR WHAT REASON I DON'T KNOW. I GOT MY SUSPICIONS BUT I DON'T KNOW. BUT, I MEAN, HOW CAN YOU TONIGHT SAY WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THIS AND WE'RE GOING MAKE THIS ONE THIS BUT FOR RIGHT NOW WE'RE GOING TO THROW THIS ONE OUT AND BRING THIS ONE OVER HERE. IT'S THE SAME ADDRESS. IT'S RIGHT BEHIND MY HOUSE. AND BEING I GOT A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO TALK I AM GOING TO TALK. THE TOTAL CHAOS THAT THIS CITY HAS PUT ME AND MY WIFE THROUGH THE PAST YEAR AND A HALF IS DESPICABLE.

MR. MARTIN KNOWS IT. I SPOKE WITH HIM MANY TIMES ON IT. MR. ROSS HAS WITNESSED IT. THE

[00:30:02]

INJUSTICES THAT GOES ON IS JUST UTTERLY DESPICABLE YOU KNOW. AND I VOW I AM NOT GOING TO LET THIS DROP. I'VE REACHED OUT TO THE FLORIDA ETHICS DEPARTMENT. YOU KNOW, THIS HAS GOT TO STOP.

IT'S GOT TO STOP. BECAUSE YOU ARE CREATING A HOSTILE LIVING ENVIRONMENT OUT THERE. IT'S EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE DOING. I'LL TELL YOU STRAIGHT UP THERE'S PEOPLE I DRIVE RIGHT BY AND THEY DON'T SPEAK TO ME. WHAT REASON WOULD THAT BE? YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO TRUST. IF YOU FOLLOWED THAT WOODS AND GO IN BETWEEN THOSE TREES IT ALL LANDS RIGHT BACK ON THE SAME PORCH.

IT ALL LANDS RIGHT BACK ON THE SAME PORCH. AND SOMEWHERE ALONG THE LINE, WHEN I COME HERE THEY SAID YOU NEED TO GET THIS DONE JUNE, JULY AND AUGUST. I SAID WHY IS THAT? MIKE HARRISON IS NOT GOING TO LET YOU HAVE THAT. YOU NEED TO GET IT DONE WHILE HE IS OUT OF TOWN. I MEAN, HOW CAN

YOU EVEN -- IT'S WRONG. >> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU SIR. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: I ASK THAT

OUR APPEAL BE LOOKED AT. >> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR. ERIC OLIVER.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: ERIC OLIVER 702 AND 706 SAM ARELL IS AND 1619 NORTH FOURTH STREET. I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT SINCE I WAS 14. I LIVE THERE NOW WITH MY CHILDREN. AND I'M JUST HERE TO BACK THESE GUYS UP. BECAUSE IT'S ALL -- THAT'S WHAT'S GOING ON OUT THERE. THERE SEEMS TO BE ONE FAMILY WHO IS A PART-TIME FAMILY WHO GETS TO MAKE ALL THE RULES AND BEND ALL THE RULES. AND REALLY I THINK EVERYBODY SHOULD FOLLOW THE SAME RULES.

AND, YOU KNOW, I'VE SEEN THESE GUYS BUILDING A BEAUTIFUL HOME AND HAD TO DO SOME REALLY WEIRD STUFF TO APPEASE THAT HDC STUFF. AND NOW I HEAR THAT THAT OTHER FAMILY'S BUILDING A HOME RIGHT NEXT TO ME AND THEY GOT VARIANCES TO CHANGE EVERYTHING AND THAT JUST -- IT'S NOT RIGHT.

AND THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD, EVERYBODY, LIKE HE SAID, IT IS A BUNCH OF HE SAID SHE SAID AND EVERYBODY'S AGAINST EVERYBODY. IT WASN'T LIKE THAT WHEN I WAS A KID OUT THERE. IT REALLY IS PRETTY SAD. YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY THAT COMES HERE IS REAL EXCITED THEN A FEW MONTHS LATER THE TOPIC IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S IT. THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU. JUST TO VERIFY, THE AREA WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS OLD TOWN.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: THAT'S RIGHT. FROM THE CEMETERY TO THE BRIDGE BASICALLY.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LOOKS LIKE SANDRA CAREY. BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE AN ITEM NUMBER OR WHAT YOU WANT TO SPEAK ABOUT. IS THAT ON THIS ITEM?

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: NO, IT'S SOMETHING ELSE. IT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA.

>> MAYOR MILLER: WELCOME, MA'AM. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: IT IS AN OLD ITEM BUT REALLY A CURRENT ITEM IN A WAY. SIMMONS PARK. I TALKED TO YOUR GRANT ADMINISTRATOR LORI LEE JACOBS IN

OCTOBER. >> MAYOR MILLER: WE NEED YOUR NAME.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: SANDRA CAREY 1254 FOREST DRIVE. I WANTED TO FOLLOW UP ON THE GRANT PUT IN FOR MATCHING FUNDS FROM THE CITY DO THE IMPROVEMENTS AT THE PARK AND SHE WAS HELPFUL AND GAVE ME INFORMATION. I WENT TO THE GRANT SITE AND LOOKED IT UP. HE SAID THAT THE $200,000 THEY WERE LOOKING FOR IN THE GRANT SUBMITTAL WAS TO BE $180,000 CASH FROM CITY IMPACT FEES AND $20,000 FROM EIGHT FLAGS IN-KIND SERVICES. IN THAT GRANT YEAR THE LEGISLATURE DIDN'T ACTUALLY PROVIDE FUNDING BUT THE CITY GOT A GREAT RATING. 5 OUT OF THE WHOLE STATE FOR THAT AREA. I LOOKED AT OTHER CITIES THROUGHOUT THE SITE AND THERE'S A LOT OF MONEY THERE TO BE HAD.

MY QUESTION IS, I WAS CONCERNED THIS YEAR BECAUSE I SAID TO MS. JACOBS, WHY WITH SUCH A GREAT RATING WHEN YOU RESUBMIT THE GRANT IT'S ALREADY WRITTEN ALL YOU HAD TO DO WAS UPDATE THE MATERIAL, THE DATES AND THINGS. AND SHE SAID THE COMMISSIONER SAID WE DIDN'T WANT TO DO THAT.

I WANTED TO CONFIRM WHETHER THAT WAS TRUE AND WHETHER A VOTE WAS ACTUALLY TAKEN. BECAUSE THAT'S TAX PAYOR MONEY. AND TO THINK THAT IT SHOULD ALL JUST BE PUT BACK ON THE TAXPAYERS BECAUSE A GRANT CAN'T BE RESUBMITTED THAT ALREADY HAD EXTREMELY GOOD RATING IS REALLY KIND OF NOT

VERY EFFICIENT I DON'T THINK. >> MAYO SO WAS A VOTE TAKEN BY THIS COMMISSION TO NOT RESUBMIT THE GRANT. IT WAS $20,000 IN IN-KIND SERVICES BY 8 FLAGS AND IT HAD A RANKING OF FIVE. I AM WONDERING WHY IT WOULDN'T BE APPROVED TO RESUBMIT.

>> MAYOR MILLER: I DON'T REMEMBER -- EVERY GRANT WE'VE EVER HAD -- I DON'T THINK WE'VE

[00:35:05]

EVER VOTED TO NOT SUBMIT A GRANT. VICE >> MAYOR MILLER: WHAT WE DID

VOTE FOR WAS TO -- VICE. >> THE DECISION WAS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PARK. I'M A JUST ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION. IT WAS IN THE BUDGET AND VOTED IN THAT WITH 100% IMPACT FUNDS.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: BUT I THINK YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO USE EVERY OBLIGATION.

>> COMMISSIONER: I AM JUST ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: BUT YOU DIDN'T VOTE ON IT SO I WAS MISINFORMED BY ONE OF YOUR CITY STAFF. YOUR GRANTS ADMINISTRATOR. I ASKED HER, ARE YOU SURE THIS WAS NOT, YOU KNOW, VOTED ON OR NOT -- SHE SAID IT WAS. IT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF WHAT EVERYONE IS HEARING IS THE STAFF IS DOING THINGS EITHER WITHOUT THE PROPER AUTHORITY, THEY'RE NOT COMMUNICATING WITH ONE ANOTHER, NON-COMMUNICATING WITH THE COMMISSION AND THERE'S A REAL PROBLEM. AND ITS TAXPAYER MONEY THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. IT MAY JUST BE 20,000 VERSUS 180,000 BUT IT'S STILL TAXPAYER MONEY.

>> MAYOR MILLER: VICE MAYOR? >> COMMISSIONER: I WANT TO COMMENT ON THE OLD TOWN ISSUE.

IT SEEMS LIKE IT IS A SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM. I DON'T WANT TO NOT INDICATE WE NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE SITUATION. PARTICULARLY IF WE CAN'T HAVE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOODS COMING TO US WITH THIS KIND OF PROBLEM AND NOT ADDRESS IT IN SOME FORM. I'M NOT SURE HOW WE SHOULD ADDRESS IT AND I WOULD THINK THAT SOMEHOW WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT COMMITTEE AND HOW THINGS ARE DONE. I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE CARD AND WHAT THE CARD SAYS. I'M WORRIED ABOUT THE SITUATION THE PEOPLE ARE SAYING. I THINK WE HAVE TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT. AND IT SOUNDS LIKE TAMMI AND DALE ARE FAMILIAR WERE THAT. I WILL SAY THAT OUR BOARD ISSUE IS WE NEED TO LOOK AT ALL THE BOARDS I THINK BUT THAT'S A WHOLE OTHER ISSUE. I JUST WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I UNDERSTAND

AND RECOGNIZE THE PROBLEM. IT'S NOT ACCEPTABLE. >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER

ROSS YOU ARE RECOGNIZED. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: IN THE PACKET TONIGHT FOR ITEM WHATEVER

IT IS. >> 11.7. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: THANK YOU.

THE WHOLE ISSUE WITH ALL THE LETTERS THAT WENT BACK AND FORTH AND THE APPEAL ARE ALL IN THAT PACKET. AND I THINK THERE'S TWO ISSUES FROM WHAT I AM HEARING. ONE IS TO FIX -- AND WHAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT TONIGHT IS THERE'S THE RIGHT OF THE APPEAL IS DIFFERENT FOR DIFFERENT BOARDS AND THINGS AND HOW TO MAKE IT THE SAME ACROSS ALL BOARDS. AND DENYING SOMEBODY THEIR RIGHT THO APPEAL IS PROBABLY INAPPROPRIATE -- IS INAPPROPRIATE. THE SECOND ISSUE IS, THE MORE DIFFICULT ISSUE IS HOW TO DEAL WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE BOARDS AND

SO ON. I'D HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THAT. >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER

LEDNOVICH YOU ARE RECOGNIZED, SIR. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY ATTORNEY TO -- COMMISSIONER ROSS'S SECOND POINT, AND I THINK THE SECOND POINT, IF I HEARD THE SPEAKERS CORRECTLY, IS CONSISTENCY ON WHAT IS BEING BUILT AND HOW IT'S BEING BUILT. SO WHAT RECOMMENDATIONS IN SUPPORT OF THE VICE MAYOR -- BECAUSE WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO HAVE ADDRESSED US WITH A NEIGHBORHOOD PROBLEM.

AND WHAT I AM HEARING IS WE NED TO DO A BETTER JOB. SO, WHAT SUGGESTIONS DO WE HAVE ON HOW TO MOVE FORWARD ON THIS. SO, WE'RE JUST NOT HEARING THEM AND NOT DOING ANYTHING.

>> MAYOR MILLER: I WOULD AGREE. I MEAN, THIS IS A PROBLEM THAT I'VE HEARD -- I THINK WE'VE ALL HEARD AND ANYBODY THAT HAS LIVED HERE HAS HEARD FOR A LONG TIME. BUT IT'S MORE OF A PART OF FERNANDINA STORY THAN IT IS A COMPLAINT. IT'S ALWAYS LIKE OLD TOWN IS DIFFERENT. THE MINUTE YOU MOVE IN THEY'RE GOING TO COME OUT OF THE WOODWORK. IT IS A CITY WITHIN A CITY. WE'VE ALL HEARD THAT. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT IT'S COME TO LIGHT WHERE THEY'VE COME FORWARD AND ASKED FOR OUR ASSISTANCE IN ADDRESSING THE SITUATION. OBVIOUSLY IT'S EFFICIENT NOW.

IT'S BECOME ENOUGH A PROBLEM THEY'RE WILLING TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK PUBLICLY AND NAME NAMES. THAT'S NOT AN EASY THING TO DO. I WOULD AGREE AND I THINK MOVING FORWARD DO YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ON THIS OR DO YOU WANT TO DO A WORKSHOP? AND WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT A BIGGER PROBLEM.

I WATCH A LOT OF THESE -- I WAS ON THE PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD FOR A LONG TIME AND I SAW THAT BOARD CHANGE MEMBERS. I WATCH A LOT OF THESE BOARD MEMBERS THAT WE SEE. THE RECENT

[00:40:01]

ONE INVOLVED SIMMONS PARK. IT SEEMS TO BE A RECURRING THING OVER THE LAST SIX YEARS. WHEN NEW MEMBERS COME IN, THEY SPEND A LOT OF THEIR TIME IN THE COMMITTEE AND BOARD MEETINGS TALKING ABOUT WHAT THEIR ROLE IS. THEY'RE CONFUSED. I HEAR SPINNING OUR WHEELS. WE SEND THINGS UP AND THEY GET IGNORED. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE COMMISSION IS DOING. IT SEEMS LIKE THEIR ROLE IS NOT CLEAR. THE MARINA ADVISORY BOARD WAS MENTIONED, THAT'S OUR NEWEST COMMITTEE. WE MADE IT CLEAR WHAT WE NEEDED FROM THEM. THEY KNOW WE WANT THEIR ADVICE. BUT I THINK SOME OF THE ONES THAT HAVE EXISTED FOR A LONG TIME, THEY GET PUT ON THESE BOARDS AND THERE'S NO TRAINING PROCESS. THEY'RE NOT TOLD HERE IS WHAT WE NEED FROM YOU. IT IS THEIR FIRST DAY THEY'RE ON THE COMMITTEE THAT'S ALREADY EXISTED. SO, I THINK WE PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE A WORKSHOP AND MAYBE BRING THE CHAIRS OF EACH GROUP AND INVITE THE COMMISSION TO SIT OUT HERE AND HAVE A DISCUSSION WHAT THEIR ROLE IS AND ORGANIZE A WRITE-UP.

ALSO I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE CURRENT ISSUE AT HAND THAT WE HAVEN'T REALLY TALKED ABOUT.

WAS THE APPEAL IN THE ASSUMPTION -- IT SOUNDS LIKE FROM MY EXPERIENCE IF SOMEBODY PUTS IN A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE AND THEY'RE DENIED THERE'S AN APPEAL PROCESS THAT A PERSON IS MAKING THAT REQUEST. I HAVEN'T HEARD MUCH ABOUT PEOPLE WHO DIDN'T PUT IT IN APPEALING THE DECISION OF THAT BOARD EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE NOT THE ONES THAT MADE THE APPLICATION. A NEIGHBOR SAYING THAT'S NOT FAIR. WHAT IS THEIR REDRESS. IF SOMEBODY FEELS LIKE THAT SOMETHING WAS DONE FOR ONE AMERICAN THAT WASN'T EQUALLY DONE, IF THEY'RE NOT THE APPLICANT -- I THINK THAT'S THE QUESTION THEY WERE ASKING AT THAT MEETING. I THINK THERE WAS CONFUSION ABOUT WHAT THE PROCESS WAS. HOW DO WE MOVE FORWARD IF SOMEBODY FEELS LIKE JIM GOT A GREAT DEAL AND I GOT MESSED OVER AND IT IS THE SAME THING. HOW DO WE ADDRESS THAT?

>> SO THERE'S A FEW THINGS THAT I WILL ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. FIRST IS WITH THIS -- IN CHAPTER 8 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IT TALKS ABOUT THE HISTORIC DISTRICT COUNCIL AND HOW APPEALS -- AND THAT HAPPENS REALLY UNDER EVERY BOARD IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. IT SAYS "APPLICANT." THAT'S AN ORDINANCE THAT THE CITY -- PRIOR CITY COMMISSIONERS PASSED. AND I DON'T THINK THAT YOU CAN WAIVE THAT. IT IS A REGULATION. IT IS A LAW. AND I WANT TO SAY TO YOU ALL THAT I DIDN'T HEAR WHAT I SAID. I OBVIOUSLY WAS SAYING MUCH MORE THAN I NORMALLY SAY WHEN I SAY DURING QUASI JUDICIAL PROCEDURES. ANYONE CAN APPEAL A DECISION OF THE HDC. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT I SAID. IT SOUNDS LIKE I SAID MORE THAN THAT. IF I GAVE YOU THE IMPRESSION, NOT THAT YOU MISUNDERSTOOD, I MAKE MISTAKES TOO. I'M NOT PERFECT. THERE'S A LOT OF LAWS IN THE CITY. THIS IS THE ONLY TIME, ONLY APPLICANTS CAN APPEAL IS WITH THE HDC. I SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER. I APOLOGIZE IF I GAVE YOU THAT IMPRESSION. THAT'S MY FAULT AND I TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT. BUT I'M NOT PERFECT. AND I WANT YOU ALL TO KNOW THAT I TAKE IT VERY SERIOUSLY. WHEN I SENT THE EMAIL BACK TO YOU OR YOU GOT A COPY OF IT, I FORGET WHICH, THAT SAID YOUR APPEAL CAN'T BE HEARD BECAUSE OF THIS SECTION OF THE CODE, THAT'S A LAW IN THE CITY. WE CAN CHANGE IT, BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO AFFECT THIS APPEAL, UNFORTUNATELY.

COURT IS ANOTHER AREA OF REDRESS FOR YOU ALL. I'M NOT SAYING THAT THAT IS AN OPTION. WE KNOW IT'S EXPENSIVE BUT THERE ARE ALWAYS THE COURTS AM IF. IN THIS CASE, YOU HAVE CARDS THAT WENT OUT THAT WERE INACCURATE. I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY CARDS BUT I TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHATEVER I SAID THERE. IN TERMS OF YOUR RIGHTS, THEY WOULD BE AS AFFECTED PARTIES. ALL OVER THE REST OF OUR CODE, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD AND STUFF LIKE THAT, AFFECTED PARTIES CAN GO TO COURT UNDER STATE LAW. IT DOESN'T APPLY TO THIS. OR THEY CAN -- YEAH THEY GO TO COURT. THIS IS THE ONLY APPEAL TOO THAT COMES TO THE CITY COMMISSION. IT SAYS OH "APPLICANT." COMMISSIONER ROSS AND I TALKED ABOUT IT AND WE AGREE THE PROSE -- PROPOSAL FROM US AND STAFF WILL BE THAT AFFECTED PARTIES CAN APPEAL DECISIONS OF ANY BOARDS. SO, IT

IS ALREADY IN OUR CODE JUST NOT FOR HDC. >> MAYOR MILLER: THERE WAS A CASE -- AN EXAMPLE MADE OF A FENCE COLOR. SOMEBODY WAS TOLD THEY COULDN'T HAVE A BLACK FENCE AND SOMEBODY ELSE -- THEY WANTED A BLACK FENCE AND COULDN'T GET ONE THEN SOMEBODY ELSE DID PUT UP A BLACK FENCE AND NOTHING WAS DONE ABOUT THAT. WHAT'S THE REDRESS? I ASSUMED IT WOULD BE A

CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUE. >> I NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE FACTS. IS THIS IN THE HISTORIC

DISTRICT. >> MAYOR MILLER: I THINK IT WAS. YOU DON'T HAVE TO SAY BUT DOES

ANYBODY KNOW WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT WHEN IT CAME TO A FENCE. >> LET'S JUST ASSUME THAT'S THE

SCENARIO. SOMEBODY DID SOMETHING-- >> IT WAS IN THE HISTORIC

[00:45:01]

DISTRICT. >> SO A PROPERTY OWNER DID SOMETHING IN VIOLATION OF THEIR APPROVAL? THEY DID A DIFFERENT COLOR THAN WHAT WAS APPROVED AND THAT DOES HAPPEN. IT HAPPENED RIGHT BACK HERE WITH THESE BUILDINGS. THEY DID SOMETHING THEY WEREN'T SUPPOSED TO DO THEN CAME TO THE HDC AFTER THE FACT. THAT'S ONE WAY TO GET THE APPROVAL. EITHER GO TO M MR. COMELLA AND GET THE STAFF APPROVAL AFTER THE CACTI IF YOU CAN. OR COME TO THE HDC. FOR A FENCE AND COLORS IT'S USUALLY MR. COMELLA. THAT'S THE VERY FIRST PERSON THAT YOU CAN CALL.

CODE ENFORCEMENT WILL GET INVOLVED JUST AS A PROCEDURE MATTER IF THERE IS A VIOLATION OF OUR CODES AND THEY WOULD NOT COMPLY AND THEY WERE JUST OUT OF COMPLIANCE. IT WOULD REALLY BE THE PLANNING AND CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT AND MR. COMELLA THAT WOULD MAKE THAT COMPLAINT AND

WORK WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT. >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.

>> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: I AGREE THAT MANY OF THE COMMITTEES, THE MEMBERS ARRIVE ON THOSE HO THOSE COMMITTEES AND THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES ARE. BUT I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE DEEPER ISSUE AS I SAID ABOUT THE CONSISTENCY OF ENFORCING THE REGULATIONS.

AND I SAT IN HDC MEETINGS, AND I AM A LITTLE PERPLEXED BECAUSE WE HAVE OUR CITY ATTORNEY THERE, AND WE HAVE SAL THERE. AND THE REGULATIONS ARE THE REGULATIONS SO HOW DOES THE GOAL POST GET MOVED AND WHY IS IT GETTING MOVED I THINK THOSE ARE THE TWO QUESTIONS. HOW AND WHY?

>> I CAN ANSWER THAT SIMPLY BY SAYING BECAUSE THE REGULATIONS ARE NOT CLEAR; THEY'RE GUIDELINES. JUST BY THEIR VERY N NAME "GUIDELINES" IMPLIES AND IT'S BEEN PUT INTO PRACTICE AND I WILL SAY IN MY EXPERIENCE WITH DIFFERENT HISTORIC COUNCILS IN DIFFERENT WAYS. IT LENDS ITSELF TO MORE SUBJECTIVITY. I'M NOT SAYING THAT'S RIGHT BUT THAT'S -- AND THIS IS YOUR BOARD. SO, IF YOU HAVE A PART OF THE COMMUNITY THAT IS DISPLEASED WITH THIS BOARD AND THEY HAVE TO COME TO THIS BOARD THEN THERE'S WAYS FOR YOU TO DEAL WITH THAT BOARD. EDUCATION, SUNSETTING THE BOARD, RECONSTITUTING THE BOARD WITH NEW MEMBERS, FOR LACK OF BETTER WORDS FIRING CERTAIN MEMBERS YOU DON'T THINK ARE DOING THEIR JOBS APPROPRIATELY. THEY SERVE AT YOUR WILL. THEY SERVE WITHOUT COMPENSATION. THEY HAVE NO PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THEIR POSITION. AND YOU CAN REMOVE SOMEBODY OR ALL OF THEM AT ANY

TIME. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: I HAVE A FOLLOW-UP QUESTION. YOU TALKED ABOUT GUIDELINES. KIND OF SOUNDS LIKE PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN. THESE ARE GUIDELIES NOT RULES

>> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: OKAY. SO, IS THE ISSUE CHANGING GUIDELINES INTO RULES? CAN THAT

BE DONE? >> ABSOLUTELY IT CAN BE DONE. BUT I THINK THAT -- AND MR. COMELLA MAY BE HERE. I THINK HE WILL TELL YOU, AND HE HAS MUCH MORE EXPERIENCE, THAT THIS IS HOW IT'S DONE. AND THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS AND THE FACT THAT WE'RE DESIGNATED HISTORIC DISTRICT MEANS THERE'S SOME DESIGNATED PLACES THAT THERE'S WAYS IN WHICH YOU DO THIS AND THIS IS ONE OF THE WAYS. I THINK YOUR PROBLEM, JUST ME, IS THE BOARD ITSELF AND HOW THEY'RE APPLYING. AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT ANY ONE OR ALL NEED TO BE TERMINATED OR REMOVED, BUT I THINK THAT AT THE VERY LEAST THEY NEED TO BE EDUCATED WHAT THEIR ROLE IS AND

WHAT YOUR EXPECTATIONS ARE. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: HOW WOULD WE DO AN EVALUATION ON

BOARD PERFORMANCE? >> COMMISSIONER: WATCH VIDEOS. THAT'S WHAT I DID AND I SAW

ISSUES. THAT WOULD BE MY ADVISE. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: YOU ARE RIGHT. BUT I THINK WHAT I AM SAYING TO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS IS HOW CAN WE GET CONSENSUS ON THIS COMMISSION OF HAVING A GRADING BOARD PERFORMANCE? HOW CAN WOE ACHIEVE THAT FOR THE FIVE OF US SO THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH A PLAN?

>> I WOULD JUST SAY OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD I'M NOT SURE -- REMEMBER ALL OF OUR BOARD MEMBERS ARE CITIZEN VOLUNTEERS. AND I THINK SOME, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THEM INDIVIDUALLY, MIGHT FIND THAT OFFENSIVE. JUDGE MY PERFORMANCE? HOW ABOUT IF WE START WITH -- UNLESS YOU ALL HAVE TIME TO THINK AND DECIDE YOU WANT TO REMOVE SOMEBODY OR RECONSTITUTE THE WHOLE BOARD -- IS THAT WE HAVE A WORKSHOP WITH THEM, A JOINT WORKSHOP WITH THE HISTORIC DISTRICT COUNCIL AND YOU ALL GET TO AIR SOME OF YOUR -- WE'VE HAD GREAT SUCCESS WITH SOME OF THESE JOINT BOARD MEETINGS. AND YOU ALL GET TO AIR SOME OF YOUR, YOU KNOW, QUESTIONS, MAYBE DISAPP DISAPPOINTMENTS, AND THEY GET TO TALK WITH YOU ALL PERHAPS ABOUT THINGS THEY'RE THINKING. ONE OF

[00:50:04]

THE THINGS THAT YOU ALL CAN, WITHOUT CRITICIZING BUT MORE QUESTIONING, YOU CAN ASK THEM IS HOW DO THEY VIEW THE GUIDELINES AND THEIR ROLE? AND PERHAPS MR. COMELLA AND I CAN TRY TO HELP IF THERE'S GOING OFF THE RAILS WE CAN TRY TO HELP BRING THEM BACK TOGETHER. AS A WHICH ITION COMMISSION AND THEIR BOSSES TELL TEM THIS IS WHAT WE EXPECT. AND WE DON'T EXPECT SO MUCH SUBJECTIVITY THAT ONE CASE WITH NEARLY THE SAME FACTS IS GOING TO COME OUT WITH A

DIFFERENT RULE. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: WHAT DO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS THINK

OF THAT IDEA? >> COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN: I THINK THIS REALLY HITS THE ISSUE ON THE HEAD. I GET APPOINTED TO A BOARD, I JUMP IN. IT'S LIKE SAYING TO A KID, YOU ARE GOING TO LEARN TO JSWIM AND THEY THRO HIM IN A POOL. I'VE SAT THROUGH A LOT OF HDC MEETINGS AND I THINK ONE OF THE ISSUES IS THERE IS -- THERE ARE GUIDELINES BUT SOME PEOPLE LOOK AT THEM AS RULES. AND SOME PEOPLE LOOK AT THE RULES AS GUIDELINES. I THINK AT THE VERY LEAST WE NEED TO, AS A GROUP, SIT DOWN AND SAY, THEY'RE NOT GUIDELINES, THEY'RE RULES. AND THAT WAY THE RULE APPLIES TO EVERYBODY. IF THE GUIDELINES SAYS YOU HAVE TO PAINT YOUR FENCE, NOW THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF LEEWAY HERE AS TO WHAT COLOR I CAN PAINT THE FENCE. IF THE RULE SAYS THE FENCE HAS TO BE WHITE, BALM THAT'S IT. AND THAT WAY IT BECOMES FAIR TO ALL.

UNFORTUNATELY, WE'RE NOT LIKE THE NFL, WE CAN'T SHOW INSTANT REPLAY IN A PENALTY CHALLENGE.

BUT I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT -- AND I THINK COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH YOU WOULD AGREE.

WE'VE BOTH SAT IN CHAMBERS AND LISTEN TO THEM DEBATE ONE GUIDELINE FOR WHAT AN HOUR OR SO? AND IT'S LIKE THAT SHOULDN'T BE. IF THE GUIDELINE SAYS THIS, IT SHOULD BE THE SAME FOR EVERYBODY. AND, YOU KNOW, I JUST THINK SOME BETTER TRAINING, BETTER UNDERSTANDING MIGHT HELP

THE SITUATION. I DON'T KNOW. >> MAYOR MILLER: VICE MAYOR KREGER YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.

>> VICE MAYOR KREGER: THE HDC IS NOT AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE PER SE URN LIKE THE OTHER COMMITTEES WHEN IT COMES TO US. IF YOU REMEMBER WHEN WE DIDN'T LIKE SOME OF THE VARIANCE ISSUES WE TOOK THOSE AWAY FROM THE COMMITTEE. FOR EXAMPLE, COMBINING OF LOTS AND BRING IT UP TO THE COMMISSION. THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS IS THAT GOING TO -- IT'S NOT GOING TO NECESSARILY CORRECT THE PROBLEMS WITHIN THAT COMMITTEE. YOU KNOW, THERE ARE EFFECTIVE COMMITTEES. THERE ARE SOME THAT ARE -- THE EFFECTIVE COMMITTEES, THE LDC IS VERY GOOD ABOUT DEFINING WHAT THE PAB DOES. THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMITTEE IS VERY EFFECTIVE.

THE PARKS AND RECS COMMITTEE IS NOT COVERED AND THEY HAVE A JOB DESCRIPTION ISSUE. WITH THE HDC WE WOULD EASILY MAKE THEM A ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND DECISIONS WOULD COME TO THE CITY

>> COMMISSIONER:. NOW THAT'S KIND OF A DRASTIC INITIAL MOVE BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COULD

HAPPEN. >> MAYOR MILLER: MR. MORTAN? >> I THINK THAT IT MIGHT BE -- BEFORE WE -- WE CAN PLAN A JOINT SESSION WITH THE HDC BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE WISE SINCE MR. COMELLA IS THE CITY'S PROFESSIONAL HISTORIC PLANNER IS AT LEAST ASK HIM TO COMMENT ON THE CONCERNS, AT LEAST PROVIDE THE PERSPECTIVE. I KNOW HE WORKS WITH MR. SPINO AND OTHERS.

59 LEAST PROVIDE A PERSPECTIVE ON WHAT ARE THE SHORTCOMINGS, HOW DO WE ADDRESS. YOU BROUGHT THE ISSUE OF A FENCE AND I'M NOT SURE WHETHER WE ANSWERED OR WHETHER I WAS CLEAR ON WHAT YOU ARE ASKING IS OKAY IF COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN ASKED FOR A BLACK FENCE AND HE GETS TURNED DOWN AND I ASK FOR A BLACK FENCE AND GET APPROVED, WHERE'S THE CONSISTENCY. I THINK THAT IS THE HEART OF THE GREENS APPEAL. ALL ALONG THIS HAD BEEN DENIED AND NOW FOR WHATEVER REASON, GUIDELINES OR PERSONALITIES OR WHATEVER, SOMEBODY WAS ALLOWED TO DO SOMETHING THAT HAD BEEN CONSISTENTLY NOT PERMITTED. AND THAT IN TURN I THINK IS THE ROOT OF A LOT OF PROBLEMS WITH NOT JUST CITY GOVERNMENT BUT GOVERNMENT IN GENERAL IS THE LACK OF CONSISTENCY. AND SOME OF MY DISCUSSIONS WITH MEMBERS OF THE HDC, I WOULDN'T NECESSARILY SAY IT IS A RUNNING JOKE, BUT THE COMMENT WAS WE'RE CONSISTENT WITH THE INCONSISTENCY. I THINK THAT

[00:55:02]

NEEDS TO BE FIXED. >> MAYOR MILLER: ABSOLUTELY. CITY ATTORNEY.

>> CITY ATTORNEY: ONE THING THAT I CAN SUM IT UP TO SAY IS THAT SOMETIMES I SEE THE HDC BEHAVE LIKE AN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD IN A NEIGHBORHOOD WITH STRICT DEED RESTRICTS. AND THAT'S IS REALLY TAKING IT TOO FAR. FROM WHAT I HAVE SEEN -- AND I'VE SEEN OTHER PLACES WHERE HISTORIC DISTRICT BOARDS OPERATE. AND THEY'RE GETTING SOMETIMES LITTLE BIT TOO DETAILED ABOUT WHAT THEY WANT DESIGNED THERE. YOU KNOW, GIVING ARCHITECTS ADVICE.

PARTICULARLY WHEN THE ARCHITECTS ARE PUSHING BACK OR THE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE PUSHING BACK AND SAYING BUT THIS MEETS THE GUIDELINES, WHY DO I HAVE TO HAVE THE WINDOW MOVED OVER HERE? I MEAN, THAT'S THE DETAIL WE'RE GETTING INTO. THAT'S ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD

STUFF. AND THAT'S NOT THEIR ROLE. >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER

LEDNOVICH. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: I'VE HEARD TWO GOOD SUGGESTIONS. I'D LIKE TO SEE IF WE HAVE CONSENSUS ABOUT HAVING A WORKSHOP WITH HDC. A JOINT MEETING. AND HAVE THEM CONSIDER SOME OF THESE ALTERNATIVES SUCH AS COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN'S MAKING THE GUIDELINES RULES. OR COMMISSIONER KREGER'S SUGGESTION, MAIBLGING IT AN ADVISORY BOARD. AND SEE WHAT SOLUTIONS THEY OFFER. DO WE HAVE CONSENSUS ON THE COMMISSION

DOING THIS? >> MAYOR MILLER: I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA. WE'RE KIND OF CIRCLING BACK TO THE BEGINNING I THINK THAT'S WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN. NOT ONLY WITH THIS BOARD BUT WITH A LOT OF THE OTHER BOARDS TOO. WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT LATER. IF YOU GUYS WOULD AGREE WE'LL PUT IT ON THE SCHEDULE. GREAT. THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY. NOW WE'RE ON TO THE REST OF THE MEETING. THIS IS SIX. CONSENT AGENDA. DO I HAVE A MOTION?

[Consent Agenda]

>> COMMISSIONER: RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA. >> COMMISSIONER: SECOND.

>> MAYOR MILLER: CALL THE VOTE PLEASE. >> YES.

[Item 7.1]

>> MAYOR MILLER: 7.1 SUNSETTING THE PECK CENTER COMMITTEE AND THE PUBLIC EDUCATIONAL AND

GOVERNMENT PEG COMMITTEE. >> CITY ATTORNEY: COMMISSIONERS, I HAVE PREPARED THIS AT YOUR DIRECTION. THE PEG COMMITTEE HAS NOT MET NOR WAS THE PECK CENTER COMMITTEE IN YEARS. THIS IS SOMETHING THE CLERK'S OFFICE BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION SAYING THIS IS OLD STUFF HANGING OUT THERE. SO WE RECOMMEND THAT YOU APPROVE THIS. I WAS ASKED BY AT LEAST ONE COMMISSIONER PRIVATELY, HAS ANY MEMBER OF THESE COMMITTEES OR FORMER MEMBER, ANYBODY COMPLAINED ABOUT THIS ACTION? AND I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING. SO, I DON'T KNOW.

>> MAYOR MILLER: I HAVE NOT. I HAVE A QUESTION. YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT THE PECK COMMITTEE. IS THAT THE CHANNEL? I THOUGHT WE WERE REQUIRED TO HAVE A COMMITTEE FOR THAT. NOT A REQUIREMENT BECAUSE OF THE COMCAST RULE THAT THINGS HAD TO BE APPROVED BY A COMMITTEE?

>> CITY ATTORNEY: I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE COMCAST RULE. >> MAYOR MILLER: I THOUGHT THERE WAS A RULE BEFORE ANYTHING WAS PUT ON THERE THERE HAD TO BE A COMMITTEE AVAILABLE. MAYBE I AM MISTAKEN. BUT THAT PEG CHANNEL, I CAN'T BELIEVE WE DON'T USE THAT BETTER. COMMISSIONER ROSS?

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS: I THINK SOMEBODY ASK HAS A COMMENT ABOUT THIS.

>> YEAH. TO SPEAK ABOUT THE PEG XHABL OR THE COMMITTEE. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: HAPPY NEW YEAR. 501 DATE STREET. I AM A PAST MEMBER OF THE PEG COMMITTEE. I THINK THE PEG COMMITTEE CAN BE A GREAT ASSET TO THIS CITY AND IT SHOULD NOT BE SUN-SETTED. IN THE PAST, I THINK IT WAS CITY MANAGER ZIM BORE HAD THE SIERRA CLUB CREATE A RECYCLING VIDEO THAT WAS RUN REPEATEDLY ON THE PEG CHANNEL BUT IT DIDN'T HAVE THAT LONG OF A LIFE BECAUSE IT WAS RIGHT AT THAT POINT WHEN WE CHANGED TO A DIFFERENT BARREL AND GOT BIGGER CANS. SO THAT FILM WHICH THE CITY PUT THE MONEY INTO AND THERE WAS A LOT OF EFFORT PUT INTO IT AND IT WAS GREAT. THEN HAD TO BE TAKEN OFF AIR. BUT I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF HIGH SCHOOLERS THAT WORK WITH VIDEO AND IT HAS A GREAT POTENTIAL. IT JUST NEEDS PEOPLE THAT ARE PASSIONATE ABOUT IT. I HAPPEN TO BE PASSIONATE ABOUT IT BUT I HAVEN'T PUT OUT AN ALL POINTS BULLETIN TO LET'S GET THIS BACK TOGETHER. BUT I THINK THAT I'VE SEEN VIDEOS ON THERE THAT LOCAL -- I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS,

[01:00:06]

QUOTE, LEGAL, BUT LOCAL BUSINESSES HAVE DONE. THERE'S HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS THAT HAVE HAD THINGS ON. YEAH, THE CONTENT NEEDS TO BE UPDATED, BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN IT SHOULD GO AWAY. AND I HAD AN IDEA FOR THE SIERRA CLUB TO HAVE A READING FROM AN ENVIRONMENTAL BOOK AND MAYBE WE WOULD TAPE IT AND THEN PUT IT ON. I MEAN, THERE'S ALL KINDS OF THINGS THAT COULD

HAPPEN. BUT IT WON'T HAPPEN IF YOU SUNSET IT. >> MAYOR MILLER: I CAN SAY THAT I'VE REACHED OUT OVER THE YEARS TO THE HIGH SCHOOL SEVERAL TIMES AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS TO PUT SOMETHING TOGETHER AND GIVE THEM SOME CONTENT THAT THE PEG COMMITTEE COULD LOOK AT AND APPROVE. AND I'VE BEEN MET BACK WITH CRICKETS. THIS IS THE FIRST PERSON I'VE HEARD COME FORWARD AND SAY ANYTHING ABOUT OFFERING CONTENT. IT'S HARD TO APPROVE SOMETHING IF YOU HAVE

NOTHING TO APPROVE. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE IN TOWN THAT DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE PEG COMMITTEE STANDS FOR. IT STANDS FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION GOVERNMENT TELEVISION STATION AND IT'S PROVIDED AND THE EQUIPMENT IS PROVIDED BY COMCAST AS PART OF THEIR LEASE. SO, IF WE CAN GET THE WORD OUT THAT THERE IS A FACILITY, THERE IS A

NEED, ALL THAT COULD CHANGE. >> MAYOR MILLER: WE'VE TRIED SEVERAL TIMES. WE CAN TRY

AGAIN. COMMISSIONER ROSS? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: WOULD YOU BE WILLING -- WOULD LIKE TO SEE, SPLIT THIS IN TO TWO ISSUES. ONE THE PECK CENTER WHICH THERE IS NO NEED FOR. TWO, TO GIVE A TRIAL MONTH OF SIX MONTHS AND SEE IF ANYTHING COMES FORWARD AND USES THIS. IF NOTHING HAPPENS IN SIX MONTHS THEN I THINK SUNSET IT. BUT IF THERE IS A GENUINE NEED FOR THIS IN CHEMO ONT, I THINK -- COMMUNITY I THINK IT SHOULD BE RER PRESERVED AM

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: GENUINE NEED IS A QUESTIONABLE STATEMENT. I THINK IT CAN BE UTILIZED TO THE COMMUNITY'S BENEFIT BUT IT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME EFFORT. YOU KNOW, IT REQUIRES PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO KNOW HOW TO EDIT, YOU KNOW, AND PUT TOGETHER -- AND ONE OF THE BIG PROBLEMS WAS -- RIGHT NOW I CAN'T REMEMBER THE GUY WHO USED TO BE HEAD OF THE TECH DEPARTMENT.

>> MICHAEL BRUNEY. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: OKAY. IT WAS UNCLEAR TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE CONTENT -- I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE WORD IS BUT YOU KNOW WHAT FORMAT IT NEEDED TO BE FORMATTED INTO.

SO, THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS. IT'S NOT EASY BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN IT CAN'T HAPPEN. I'D BE

HAPPY TO BE A CONTACT PERSON, I GUESS. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: I'M ASKING FOR A LITTLE MORE

THE CONTENT AND MAKE IT HAPPEN? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: NO. YOU SAY THERE'S A NEED FOR THIS IN THE COMMUNITY. COME FORWARD WITH PEOPLE WHO REALLY WANT TO DO THIS. IT'S A VALUABLE

RESOURCE. AND COME FORWARD OR HAVE -- AS YOU SAID -- >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: I MEAN, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE RECYCLE VIDEO GO BACK UP AND MAKE SOME SLIGHT CHANGES TO IT THAT, YOU KNOW, INVOLVED THE DIFFERENT KIND OF CANS THAT WE HAVE NOW. BUT, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME WORK. I'VE GOT TO FIND THE FOOTAGE. I'VE GOT TO PUT WORK INTO IT. I CAN'T

REMEMBER HOW TO EDIT. I WENT TO SCHOOL TO LEARN IT BUT YOU KNOW. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: I'M NOT ASKING FOR YOU INDIVIDUALLY TO DO SOMETHING. WHAT I AM ASKING FOR IS THAT A GROUP COME FORWARD

WHO WANT TO UTILIZE THIS RESOURCE. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: OKAY.

ANYBODY INTERESTED IN BEING PART OF A GROUP? >> MAYOR MILLER: THE VICE MAYOR.

>> VICE MAYOR KREGER: I AGREE. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE CHANNEL BEFORE. THERE'S ALL KINDS OF GROUPS OUT THERE. IF YOU TOOK THE LEADERSHIP LATER TONIGHT WE CAN TALK ABOUT KEEPING ASSET BEAUTIFUL ADOPT A TREE PROCESS HERE. WE JUST HAD A JENLT -- GENTLEMAN TALKING ABOUT FEEDING THE WORLD. WE OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO COME UP WITH STUFF.

>> AND THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING -- >> MAYOR MILLER: FOLKS YOU CAN'T

TALK. >> COMMISSIONER: I THINK IT'S MORE THAN YOU. I THINK WE NEED SOME LEADERSHIP TO GO OUT AND GET PEOPLE. WE GOT PEOPLE SITTING HERE NOW.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: IT WOULD BE NICE. >> COMMISSIONER: MARGARET YOU

GUYS GOT THE MOVIE. WE GOT STUFF. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: WE'VE GOT TO FIGURE OUT WHAT'S THE CONTENT AND THE THING THAT THE PEG COMMITTEE DID WAS TO NOT ONLY GENERATE CONTENT BUT TO BE THAT, I DON'T KNOW, DECISION MAKER THAT THIS CONTENT MEETS -- I MEAN, THERE ARE SPECIFIC THINGS THAT CAN BE ON THAT STATION AND CAN'T BE ON THAT STATION.

THAT'S WHAT THE PEG BOARD DID IS MAKE THAT DISTINCTION. I THINK THE SUGGESTION TO PUT CITY MEETINGS ON THERE. THE CITY MEETING IS ALREADY ON THE WEBSITE SO WE DON'T REALLY NEED

[01:05:02]

THAT. >> MAYOR MILLER: THEY'RE ON THE PEG CHANNEL AS WELL.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: ARE THEY? >> MAYOR MILLER: YEAH. CITY MAN

MANAGER? >> CITY MANAGER: I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT TO THE MORE TO THE COMMUNITY THAT THIS IS SUNSETTING THE COMMITTEE. THIS IS NOT ELIMINATING THE PEG QUINOL. AGAIN, WHAT I WOULD SAY, I WOULD EXPAND OR RECOMMEND EXPANDING ON COMMISSIONER ROSS'S COMMENT. LET'S GO TO THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR. SO, YOU GOT NINE MONTHS INSTEAD OF SIX MONTHS. IFS THERE ADEQUATE SUPPORT AND WE NEED TO INVEST MORE MONEY IN IT, THEN WE ADD IT TO NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET. BUT BASICALLY YOU GOT NINE MONTHS TO TAKE COMMISSIONER ROSS'S

CHALLENGE. >> MAYOR MILLER: WHO IS ON THE COMMITTEE NOW? THERE ISN'T ANY.

IF YOU WANT TO SUBMIT THE VIDEO YOU HAVE NO NOBODY TO SUBMIT IT TO?

>> YES YOU DO. TO THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT. THE ISSUE WITH THE PEG COMMITTEE WAS NOT -- MY MEMORY IS IT WASN'T JUST IGNORED AND SET ASIDE. BUT THERE WASN'T EVER A QUORUM. THERE WAS -- AND I THINK IT WAS I.T. STAFF THAT WAS COORDINATING THOSE MEETINGS. BUT THERE WAS A QUORUM PROBLEM AGAIN WITH ANOTHER BOARD. AND PROBLEM GETTING PEOPLE TOGETHER. SAME THING WITH THE COMMITTEE.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: IT WASN'T NECESSARILY THERE WASN'T A QUAORUM IT WAS THAT PEOPLE'S

INTEREST FADED. >> CITY ATTORNEY: BUT ANY CITIZEN CAN SUBMIT TO THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT. WE HAVE RULES AND POLICIES. NO FUNDRAISING AND THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT THERE'S

ALL KINDS OF -- >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER ROSS?

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS: I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO SUNSET THE PECK COMMITTEE AND REVISIT THE

ISSUE OF THE PEG COMMITTEE IN NINE MONTHS. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: WHAT DO YOU

MEAN SUNSET IT? >> MAYOR MILLER: PECK. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: SORRY.

>> COMMISSIONER: I WILL SECOND. >> MAYOR MILLER: MADAM CLERK I DON'T SEE ANY LIGHTS CALL A VOTE

ON THAT. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS. YES. COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH. YES.

COMMI COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN. YES. VICE MAYOR. YES. MAYOR. YES.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: CAN I SAY MY TELEPHONE NUMBER. >> MAYOR MILLER: 7.2 PROPOSAL

[Item 7.2]

FOR APPROVAL FOR BHIDE & HALL ARCHITECTS, PA. >> SPEAKER: THIS IS FOR MANY YEARS IF NOT DECADES THE CITY HAS PLANNED OR PROPOSED TO MOVE THE CITY HALL OFFICES TO THE FORMER POST OFFICE ON CENTER STREET. THAT APPEARS -- THE VIABILITY OF THAT APPEARS TO BE FADING IN THE MINDS OF MANY. SO, CITY WILL HAVE TO WORK ON EITHER RENOVATING THE EXISTING FACILITY, RENOVATING OTHER FACILITIES OR BUILDING A NEW FACILITY. BHIDE AND HALL, I'M NOT SURE IF THERE'S A REPRESENTATIVE HERE TONIGHT, BUT THEY'RE ON THE ONLY ARCHITECT ON THE CITY'S PRE-APPROVED CC & A, COMPETITIVE CONSULTANT NEGOTIATION ACT, WHICH MEANS FOR LIMITED PROJECTS WE CAN TAP INTO THAT IF THE PROJECT EXCEEDS $20,000, WHICH THIS ONE DOES, IT DOES REQUIRE YOUR APPROVAL. SO, BASICALLY WHAT THEY ARE OFFERING TO DO IS TO EVALUATE FOUR SITES WHICH INCLUDE RENOVATING THE EXISTING CITY HALL, RENOVATING THE POST OFFICE, RENOVATING THE PECK CENTER, OR PERHAPS BUILDING A NEW CITY HALL ON THE SITE ADJACENT TO CITY HALL RIGHT NOW.

EVA EVALUATE THE FOUR SITES. GIVE THE PROS AND CONS OF THOSE VARIOUS SITES AND DETERMINE IF THERE'S A PREFERRED OPTION AMONG FIVE OF YOU ON WHICH SITE TO PURSUE OR PERHAPS ADDITIONAL SITES. AND THEN FIGURE OUT HOW TO PROCEED FROM THERE. THE INTENT WOULD BE THAT ONCE A DECISION IS MADE TO MORE THOROUGHLY VET OTHER SITES AND MOVE FORWARD WITH DESIGN, THE CITY WOULD DO A FORMAL REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS AND SELECT AN ARCHITECT TO EITHER MAKE THE RENOVATION PLANS OR THE PLANS FOR A NEW SITE.

>> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH YOU ARE RECOGNIZED, SIR.

>> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: THANK YOU. I WANT TO MAKE TWO POINTS. MY FIRST POINT IS, I HAD A DISCUSSION WITH BUDDY JACOBS YESTERDAY MORNING TALKING ABOUT THE POST OFFICE. I LOVE THE POST OFFICE. WHAT A WONDERFUL BUILDING THAT IS. I MEAN, WE NEED TO FIND A USE FOR IT.

WHAT'S PROBLEMATIC ABOUT THE POST OFFICE IS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SAYS IT'S NOT FOR

[01:10:02]

SALE. AND WE'VE BEEN NEGOTIATING WITH THEM FOR I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY YEARS. AND I RESPECT BUDDY'S EFFORTS IN TRYING TO GET AND MOVE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO YES LET THE CITY BUY BUT, BUT WE'RE NOT THERE. AND MY QUESTION TO MR. JACOBS YESTERDAY MORNING WAS: IF WE CONTINUE THE PURSUIT OF THE POST OFFICE, WHEN DO YOU THINK WOULD BE THE DROP-DEAD DATE FOR THE CITY TO DECIDE WHETHER TO FORGO THE POST OFFICE OR MOVE ON? AND HIS ANSWER TO ME WAS THE END OF THE YEAR. WE CAN'T WAIT UNTIL THE END OF THE YEAR. THIS BUILDING IS BURSTING AT THE SEAMS. SO MY FIRST POINT IS, WE'RE GOING TO PAY A CONSULTANT, AND WE ALWAYS GET CRITICIZED FOR HOW MANY CONSULTANTS WE HIRE AND SPENDING TAXPAYER MONEY ON CONSULTANTS.

SO, IF YOU TAKE ONE-FOURTH OF THIS $38,000, WHICH IS $8,500 OF TAXPAYER MONEY TO EVALUATE A BUILDING THAT ISN'T EVEN AVAILABLE. WHY WOULD WE DO THAT? IT'S NOT EVEN FOR SALE. SO THAT'S MY FIRST POINT. MY SECOND POINT IS WITH THE ARCHITECT THEMSELVES. THE CITY OF GREEN COVE SPRINGS LAST MAY TOOK THEM TO TASK, THIS SAME ARCHITECT, FOR RUNNING A QUARTER OF A MILLION DOLLARS OVER ON THEIR NEW PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION BUILDING. I'M GLAD TO SEE THAT THIS PROPOSAL SAYS NOT TO EXCEED. SO, IF WE GO FORWARD WITH THESE FOLKS, I THINK WE NEED TO KEEP A VERY CLOSE EYE ON THEM AND KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE PAYING FOR AND WHAT THEY'RE BILLING US FOR. SO, I WANTED TO PUT THOSE TWO STATEMENTS ON THE RECORD. THANK

YOU MR. MAYOR. >> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU, SIR. COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN?

>> COMMISSIONER: HAPPEN -- IF YOU LOOK AT THE FOUR POSSIBLE THINGS THEY'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THREE OF THEM LEAVE THIS BUILDING EMPTY. LIKE IT OR NOT, THIS IS A HISTORIC BUILDING. IT IS A PART OF THE HISTORY. IT USED TO BE THE FIRST FIRE STATION. SO, IF WE LEAVE -- IF WE TAKE ONE OF THE OTHER CHOICES AS PART OF THIS CONSULTANT I'D LIKE TO GET SOME FEEDBACK AS TO WHAT DO WE DO WITH THIS THING. DO WE JUST WRECKING BALL IT? I MEAN, WE HAVE A HISTORIC

>> COMMISSIONER: THAT'S TRYING TO WORK ON -- COMMISSION THAT'S TRYING TO WORK ON PRESERVATION SO I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE A PIECE OF THE REPORT THAT WE GET. WHAT HAPPENS TO THIS BUILDING IF

THE OTHER CHOICES ARE THE BEST ALTERNATIVES? THANK YOU. >> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU.

VICE MAYOR? VICE MAYOR KREGER: I GOT A COUPLE POINTS. FIRST OF ALL GETTING TO THE POST OFFICE. WE SHOULD FORGET ABOUT THE POST OFFICE. WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET THE POST OFFICE. WE'VE BEEN SCREWING AROUND FOR TEN YEARS. WE HAVE ONE TWO FORMAL RFPS THAT BOTH CAME BACK AT I THINK IT WAS ABOUT EIGHT YEARS AGO. SO WE NEED TO TAKE THAT OFF THE TABLE.

I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE PECK OFF THE TABLE TOO. ALTHOUGH I'VE HEARD OVER THE YEARS THAT THE COMP PLAN SAYS CITY HALL MUST BE DOWNTOWN, THAT'S REALLY NOT TRUE. WHAT THE COMP PLAN DOES SAY, IT ENCOURAGES RETAINING SERVICES IN THE HISTORIC DOWNTOWN DISTRICT. IT NAMES A FEW THE POST OFFICE AND THE LIBRARY. I PERSONALLY CONCUR WE WANT TO KEEP IT DOWNTOWN. IF THIS BUILDING RENOVATED WHAT IS THE COST AND ONE PROBLEM IS THE SIDES OF IT. IT'S ABOUT HALF THE SIZE WE NEED. OR DO WE BUILD A NEW ONE? THAT BRINGS IN THE ISSUE OF WHAT PHIL IS SAYING WHAT DO WE DO WITH THIS THEN? SO, I THINK IT IS A SIMPLE DECISION. IT'S MORE A MATTER OF LOOKING AT THE EFFECTIVENESS OF HISTORIC -- RESTORING THIS OR BUILDING IT ON PROPERTY ADJACENT AND THEN WHAT DO WE DO WITH IT. AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, YOUR POINT'S WELL TAKEN ABOUT THE ARCHITECT AND THE OVERRUNS. THAT'S NOT UNUSUAL. AND THAT'S ONE OF THE PROBLEMS WITH THE CCNA PROCESS IS, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU ONLY HAVE ONE. SO, I REALLY DON'T -- I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT GOING ON WITH THE CONSULTANT ON THIS AT THIS POINT. I THINK THE DECISION IS FOR THE COMMISSION TO DECIDE WHAT DO WE WANT TO DO WITH CITY HALL. DO WE WANT IT DOWNTOWN AND THEN GET A PROPOSAL TO LOOK AT THIS FACILITY. AND CAN WE EXPAND IT AND WHAT WOULD IT TAKE. AND THAT GETS TOUCHY. BECAUSE IF WE WANT TO BE HISTORIC AND RETAKE IT -- I LOOK

[01:15:06]

AT PICTURES IN THE HALL AND THIS BUILDING LOOKS NOTHING LIKE THE OLD BUILDING AND WHAT DO WE DO WITH THE SIZE. SO, I THINK WE SHOULD CONCENTRATE ON THOSE TWO OPTIONS.

>> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER ROSS? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: THERE IS SOMETHING ELSE TO MUDDY THE WATERS. THE BUILDING FUND HAS A $2 MILLION FUND THAT CAN ONLY BE USED FOR THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. THAT CERTAINLY WOULD BUY A NICE BUILDING FOR THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. NOT EVEN USING -- ONLY USING PART OF THAT FUND. SO, I THINK THAT SHOULD BE PUT INTO ANY CONSIDERATION WHETHER YOU PERHAPS MOVE THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT OUT AND THAT GIVES YOU MORE ROOM AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.

>> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN YOUR LIGHT IS ON. COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH YOU ARE

RECOGNIZED, SIR. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: SO IT SEEMS TO ME AFTER HEARING VICE MAYOR KREGER THAT INSTEAD OF MOVING AHEAD WITH THE CONSULTANT, THE VERY FIRST STEP WOULD BE FOR THIS COMMISSION TO ELIMINATE OR CONSIDER WHAT BUILDINGS AND WHAT SITES ARE VIABLE FOR CITY HALL. AND SO I HEARD VICE MAYOR KREGER SAY HE WANTS TO ELIMINATE THE POST OFFICE. GET THAT OFF OUR LIST. I HEARD VICE MAYOR KREGER SAY THE PECK CENTER, GET THAT OFF THE LIST. SO, THERE ARE FOUR OPTIONS. NOW WE'RE DOWN TO TWO. AND TO COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN'S SUGGESTION, DO WE RENOVATE THIS BUILDING OR DO WE BUILD NEW, OR DO WE DO A COMBINATION OF THE TWO? DO WE RENOVATE THIS BUILDING AND BUILD AN ACCESSORY BUILDING IN THAT PARKING LOT RIGHT OVER THERE? SO, TO ME THE FIRST STEP IS, LET'S DECIDE THE OPTIONS, THEN DECIDE, BASED ON

THOSE OPTIONS, WHAT TO TASK THE CONSULTANT WITH. >> MAYOR MILLER: VICE MAYOR KREGER? VICE MAYOR KREGER: I AGREE. CHIP BROUGHT UP AN EXCELLENT POINT. THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT IS SELF-FUNDED. THEY COULD BE IN ANNEX. WE COULD RESTORE THIS BUILDING OR LOOK AT THE COST TO RESTORE THIS BUILDING AND MAKE IT HISTORIC AND POSSIBLY PUT SOME OF THE OTHER FUNCTIONS IN THE ANNEX AND BRING THE GOVERNMENT TOGETHER. I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S A MORE VIE EYEBALLING -- VIABLE, SENSIBLE SOLUTION THAN JUST SPENDING MONEY OUT THERE FOR THINGS THAT AREN'T GOING TO HAPPEN. LIKE I SAY, THE POST OFFICE, I THINK WE GOT THOSE TWO PROPOSALS BACK. THE HISTORIC FOUNDATION WENT WITH AN RFP AND WE GOT ALL THE DATA BACK. IT WOULD BE EVEN -- IT'S EVEN LESSER NOW BECAUSE THEY DID DO A LITTLE COSMETIC

STUFF ON THE POST OFFICE. THE GOVERNMENT. >> MAYOR MILLER: THEY DID A LOT.

$1.6 MILLION WORTH OF COSMETIC STUFF. MR. MARTIN? >> CITY MANAGER: WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO REACH OUT TO THE CONSULTANT, ASK FOR A REVISED PROPOSAL BASED UPON THE TWO SITES WITH THE DIRECTION THAT YOU ARE SAYING IS RENOVATION COST AS WELL AS OPPORTUNITIES ON NEXT DOOR? AND JUST SAY WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO REVISE YOUR PROPOSAL AND BRING IT BACK AT A

FUTURE MEETING? >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: YEAH -- VICE MAYOR KREGER: I WOULD SOLICIT WHAT YOU ALREADY KNOW, WHAT IS IT WE REALLY NEED TO HAVE AS FAR AS THE CITY AND WHAT WE'RE GOING TO MOVE OVER HERE.

>> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER ROSS? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: I WOULD

MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE CITY MANAGER'S PROPOSAL. >> COMMISSIONER: SECOND.

>> MAYOR MILLER: >> COMM >> COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN: I WOULD AMEND IT TO INCLUDE RENOVATION AND RESTORATION. BECAUSE I THINK, YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE PUTTING THIS BIG PUSH TO KEEP, ESPECIALLY DOWNTOWN HISTORICAL, WE NEED TO MAKE A COMMITMENT TO

THAT. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR MILLER: BEFORE I CALL THE VOTE I SEE THE DIRECTOR OF THE MAIN STREET ORGANIZATION HAS RAISED THEIR HAND. MAYOR DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING NEW.

>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU. I JUST WOULD LIKE TO FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT THE CONSULTANT CAN SEND SOMEBODY WITH PRESERVATION ARCHITECTURAL SKILLS TO THE TABLE. THAT, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT A BUILDING LIKE THIS ONE IS EASY ENOUGH TO SAY JUST DEMOLISH IT IF YOU ARE NOT LOOKING AT IT

WITH A PRESERVATION EYE. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU, MA'AM. WITH THAT, WE'LL CALL THE VOTE. YOU ARE ASKING FOR THE AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE

RESTORATION? COMMISSIONER ROSS? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: SURE. WITH THAT WE'LL CALL THE VOTE

[01:20:01]

PLE PLEASE. >> YES

>> YES >> YES. >> YES.

[Item 7.3]

>> MAYOR MILLER: 7.3 AWARD A BID 19-24 FOR HAYWARD CONSTRUCTION GROUP LLC. THE CITY MANAGER.

>> CITY MANAGER: THIS IS FOR THE FOUR BEACH WALKOVERS TO THE CITY SOLICITED BIDS FOR. SEVEN BIDS WERE RECEIVED AND OPENED ON DECEMBER 19TH. AND CITY STAFF RECOMMENDS AWARDING THE BID TO

HAYWARD CONSTRUCTION GROUP IN THE AMOUNT OF $274,550. >> COMMISSIONER: RECOMMEND

APPROVAL. >> COMMISSIONER: I'LL SECOND IT. >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER

ROSS YOU ARE RECOGNIZED. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: I'VE GOT SOME CONCERNS. THE FIRST CONCERN TAKES INTO ACCOUNT TWO EMAILS THAT I GOT IN THE LAST DAY OR TWO. THAT IT'S UNCLEAR HOW THESE FOUR BEACH WALKOVERS FIT INTO THE OVERALL MANAGEMENT PLAN. PART OF THE PROBLEM BEING THERE IS NO OVERALL DUNE MANAGEMENT PLAN AND ONE HAS NOT BEEN DONE SINCE 2013. ONE EMAIL I GOT TODAY TALKS ABOUT BEACH RAMP 27 AND HOW IT'S TREACHEROUS AND GOT PROBLEMS. IT WAS REMOVED. AND THIS DOESN'T REPLACE IT. AND THIS CONSTITUENT IS WONDERING WHY ARE WE REPLACING OTHER BEACH WALKOVERS AND NOT REPLACING THE THREE WALKOVERS THAT WERE REMOVED LAST SUMMER. ANOTHER CONSTITUENT SENDS AN EMAIL ABOUT THAT THE BEACH WALKOVER 2 IS NOT EVEN NEEDED. WE DON'T NEED A BEACH WALKOVER THERE. AND THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.

SO MY CONCERN IS WE HAVE NO HELP GOING FORWARD PARTICULARLY HOW ARE WE GOING TO DECIDE HOW BEACH WALKOVERS ARE APPROVED? I KNOW THAT'S PROBABLY BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THIS EVENING BUT THAT'S A CONCERN THAT I HAVE. NUMBER 2, WITH THESE BIDS THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO ANALYSIS OF MAINTENANCE COSTS. WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT THE MAINTENANCE COSTS ARE IT'S HARD TO APPLES WITH ORANGES. SOME OF THESE WERE COMPOSITE, SOME WOOD. WHY WE DO NOT HAVE A MAINTENANCE COST AS PART OF THE ANALYSIS OF WHICH BID WE'RE GOING TO ACCEPT IS, I THINK, INAPPROPRIATE.

THREE, THERE'S NO ANALYSIS ON HOW -- THERE'S THE PRODUCT THAT HAS BEEN PROVED IS SOMETHING CALLED WEAR DECK WHICH IS REINFORCED LUMBER PRODUCT. THERE'S NO ANALYSIS OF WHY THAT PRODUCT WAS PICKED AS OPPOSED TO MANY OTHER PRODUCTS. IT MAY BE THE BEST THING SINCE SLICED BREAD BUT THERE'S NO ANALYSIS OF HOW THIS IS GOING TO LAST. I LOOKED AT THE WARRANTY AND WENT ON THE INTERNET. IT'S NOT PARTICULARLY COMPREHENSIVE. THE PROBLEM IS THAT WE'RE TAKING A COMPANY THAT MAKES THIS -- THEY'RE GOING TO USE THIS PRODUCT THAT'S MADE BY A SMALL COMPANY WITHOUT ANY EVALUATION OF HOW LONG THAT'S GOING TO LAST. ANOTHER PROBLEM IS THAT THERE WAS ABSOLUTELY NO VETTING OF THIS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY. THROUGH OUR BID PROCESS OR AT LEAST NONE WAS PROVIDED WHETHER HOW THIS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY THAT WE PICKED, WHAT THEIR TRACK RECORD IS, HAS ANYBODY CALLED THEIR REFERENCES? THERE ARE NO REFERENCES THAT WERE PROVIDED.

I KNOW WHEN I'VE LOOKED AT -- I THOUGHT THAT SOLAR TRASH COLLECTORS WERE THE BEST THING SENSED SLICED BREAD BUT THEN I HAD THE COMPANY GIVE ME A LIST OF TEN PEOPLE. BY THE TIME I WENT THROUGH ALL TEN OF THOSE I SAID THE SOLAR TRASH COMPACTORS WERE NOT TO BE. SO, I THINK NOT VETTING THESE COMPANIES OR AT LEAST HAVING THAT PART OF THIS IS INAPPROPRIATE. BUT HERE'S MY BIGGEST CONCERN. MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS THAT WE SPENT -- WE HAD MEETING AND TALKED ABOUT THE ACCESSIBILITY OF THESE WATCH WALKOVERS AND STAIRS. AND STAIRS VERSUS RAMPS. AND ALL THESE ARE BUILT WITH STAIRS. AND INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE UNABLE TO WALKED WITH IMPAIRED MOBILITY, AS PEOPLE GET OLDER THEY HAVE MORE TROUBLE BALK UP STEPS. -- WALKING UP STEPS. IF YOU GO TO THE WALKOVERS AND TALK TO PEOPLE THEY ALL TELL YOU I HAVE TROUBLE WALKING UP THESE STEPS. NOT ALL BUT MANY PEOPLE. SMALL CHILDREN HAVE TROUBLE WALKING THE STEEP STEPS. TODAY IT'S DIFFERENT THAN IT WAS 20 YEARS AGO. BECAUSE NOW PEOPLE HAVE STROLLERS, BEACH CARTS, FISHING CARTS, AND THEY CANNOT TAKE THOSE UP A SET OF STEPS. AND WHAT THEY END UP DOING IS

[01:25:06]

WALKING AROUND THESE BEACH WALKOVERS. SO, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE ARE BUILDING BEACH WALKOVERS THAT TOO PEOPLE, IF YOU GO UP TO THE NORTH END WHERE THOSE ARE GUYS TO -- GOING TO BE BUILT, THERE'S A TRAIL AROUND THEM AND PEOPLE WALK THROUGH THE TRAIL. NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES THEY FILL IT UP THEY STILL WALK AROUND THEM. SO, WHY ARE WE BUILDING BEACH WALKOVERS THAT WE KNOW PEOPLE ARE UNLIKELY TO USE AS OPPOSED TO BUILDING BEACH WALKOVERS WITH RAMPS? I TALKED TO -- IS IT GILLETTE? RAMPS ARE MORE EXPENSIVE, BUT IT'S MUCH MORE ACCESSIBLE FOR PEOPLE. SO, I CANNOT SUPPORT THESE PROJECTS UNTIL WE COME UP -- MAINLY BECAUSE OF THE ISSUE OF THE RAMPS. I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE BUILDING BEACH WALKOVERS

WITHOUT RAMPS. THAT'S IT. >> MAYOR MILLER: VICE MAYOR KREGER? VICE MAYOR KREGER: I AM GOING TO BACK UP TO WHEN WE ALL APPROVED THIS PROJECT. THESE BEACH WALKOVERS ARE BEING BUILT ON THE BASIS OF REPLACING BEACH WALKTHROUGHS. WE HAVE 48 BEACH WALKOVERS WHICH 13 ARE WALKTHROUGHS WHICH ARE GAPS IN THE DUNES. GAPS IN THE DUNE ARE A PROBLEM. THEY'RE PROBLEM WITH THE DUNE FORMATION, WITH PEOPLE WALKING THROUGH, THEY'RE PROBLEM WITH THE U.S. CORPS OF ENGINEERS. ON THEIR RECENT DUNE MANAGEMENT PLAN WHICH I'LL TALK ABOUT LATER WHICH WAS SENT UP IN OCTOBER TO WASHINGTON FOR APPROVAL. RELATIVE TO DUNE MANAGEMENT PLAN WE ALL SAT HERE AND SAY WE WOULD HOLD, BASED ON WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS STUDY. NOW, THESE WERE CHOSEN 8, 9 NORTH IN THE AREA WITH ONLY REPETITIVE DAMAGES TO CLOSE ADJACENCY TO HOUSES AND HAZARD TO LIFE AND PROPERTY IN THE CITY. 2 SOUTH WHICH IS ADDED ON. 5 SOUTH WE TALKED ABOUT THIS I BELIEVE IT WAS TWO COMMISSIONS AGO. WE STARTED OUT -- AND I WILL POINT OUT ALL THESE PROJECTS IN THE PROJECT WERE PRESENTED TO THIS COMMISSION AND WERE APPROVED -- THESE THREE BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE AS A LEGISLATURE REQUEST. THE LAST ONE, THE COASTAL PARTNERSHIP, WAS ACTUALLY LOOKING AT JASMINE WITH SAND FENCES. THE STATE CAME BACK TO US AND SAID THERE WAS A MATCH. THERE WAS A $10,000 GRANT. THE STATE SAYS, HOW WOULD YOU LIKE $75,000? WE SAID, WE'D LIKE THAT. AND YOU ASKED THE QUESTION. SO, I HAPPEN TO HAVE PHYSICAL MEASUREMENTS OF ALL THE 13 WALKTHROUGHS. AND I LOOKED AT THE BEST ONE IN TERMS OF COSTS THAT WE COULD PACK INTO THE 75,000 ALONGING WITH FENCES AND SEE OATS. THAT'S SOMETHING FOR THE PEG CHANNEL BECAUSE THAT'S ALL GOING TO BE DONE BY VOLUNTEERS. THE INTERESTING THING IS THOSE PEOPLE -- WHAT WE NEVER ABOUT RESOLVE WHICH IS A LITTLE OFF THE SUBJECT IS THOSE FAR SOUTH WALKOVERS. 35S, 2740 WHICH WERE THE LONG ONES WHICH WE PULLED THE WALKOVERS. THESE ALSO WILL HAVE CONTROLLED ACCESS. WE NEVER DID DECIDE ON WHAT THE PLAN WAS FOR THEM. SO, YOU KNOW, THE ESTIMATE, WE TALKED ABOUT THE ESTIMATE. THE ESTIMATE WAS DONE -- I DID THE ESTIMATE. I DID IT WITH WORKING WITH GILLETTE. I PUT APPROPRIATE CONTINGENCIES ON IT. I PUT COMPOSITE MATERIALS ON IT. THE ESTIMATE WAS SO GOOD WE CAME IN $90,000 BELOW. SO, YOU KNOW, MY POINT IS, LET'S GET THESE DONE. WE ACTUALLY HAVE NINE MORE IN HOUSE BILL IN THE LEGISLATURE. HOUSE BILL 2029. NINE MORE OF THESE SAME ONES.

NOW, WE CAN ADJUST THAT BEFORE HOPEFULLY WE GET THE MONEY. BECAUSE ONE PROBLEM HAPPENS, WE'VE ALREADY LOST A THIRD OF THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD FOR THESE WALKOVERS. WE CAN CONSTRUCT FROM 1 MAY. AND WE'RE BEING PENALIZED BY THE D. E. P. FOR THAT. I WON'T GET INTO THAT. I THINK IT'S IMPERATIVE WE MOVE. FOR THE LAST -- SINCE 2016 WE GOT $900,000 FROM THE STATE FOR STORM WATER. FOR 2017 WE GOT $500,000 WHICH WE HAVEN'T SPENT YET. 2018 WE GOT 450 ALONG WITH THESE AND WE HAD TO REPURPOSE IT. OUR CREDIBILITY, IF WE DON'T GET THESE THINGS DONE ON THE STATE FUNDING IS GOING DOWN THE TUBES. WE COMMIT TO DO SOMETHING, WE NEED TO DO IT. IF WE WANT TO LOOK -- MY OPINION. IF WE WANT TO LOOK AT RAMPS, YOU KNOW, I SPEND

[01:30:06]

PROBABLY TWO TO FOUR HOURS A DAY ON THE BEACH DURING THE SUMMERTIME. AND I DON'T SEE THAT SAME PROBLEM. PEOPLE ARE FINE GETTING TO THE BEACH. THEY DON'T ALL HAVE WAGONS. THEY HAVE A LOVELY TIME. SHOULD WE HAVE SOME MORE WITH RAMPS? I AGREE. WE'VE GOT THREE WALKOVERS WITH ADA ACCESS. NORTH BEACH PARK, SADLER AND MAIN BEACH. AND WE HAVE ANOTHER ONE DOWN SOUTH OF MIA SOUTH WHICH DOESN'T HAVE ANY PARKING. DO WE NEED MORE OF THOSE RAMPS? YEAH. BUT I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE HOLDING UP PROJECTS THAT WE ASKED FOR THAT WE ALL AGREED ON THAT THE SPECS WERE OUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT. AND ACTUALLY I GOT IT LATER. WE CAN TALK MORE ABOUT IT AS WE MOVE INTO THE FUTURE. BUT I THINK WE

NEED TO MOVE FORWARD AND GET SOME STUFF DONE. >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER

LEDN LEDNOVICH? >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: TO COMMISSIONER ROSS'S POINT ON EVALUATION. I LOOKED UP THE STATE VENDOR EVALUATION FORM.

HAYWARD CONSTRUCTION IS THE ONLY COMPANY AMONG THE COMPANIES THAT HAVE BEEN ON THE PROJECT THAT APPEARS ON THE LIST. SO, I CAN ON A SCALE OF 1-5, 5 BEING EXCELLENT, HAYWARD CONSTRUCTION WAS GRADED A 3 OVERALL, A 3 ON PERFORMANCE TO SPEC RATING, A 3 ON INVOICE RATING, AND A 3 ON DELIVERY RATING, AND A 3 ON CUSTOMER SERVICE. I CAN ALSO TELL MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS 80 PERCENT OF THE VENDORS ON THIS LIST ARE ABOUT 3. SO, I MEAN, IT'S AN AVERAGE SCORE. BUT AT LEAST WE HAVE AN EVALUATION ON ONE OF THE COMPANIES. SO THAT'S POINT NUMBER 1. ON POINT NUMBER 2 ON THE RAMPS. WE SPEND A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF TIME IN THIS CHAMBER SEEING PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE OF A STEEP WALKOVER STAIR, A SIGN WHICH SAID "DON'T WALK ON THE DUNE" AND A CLEAR PATH BYPASSING THE WALKOVER AND GOING RIGHT THROUGH THE DUNE. SO, I BELIEVE YOU ON THE MAJORITY THAT PEOPLE USE THE WALKOVER AND DON'T DESTROY THE DUNE. BUT I THINK WE HAVE SOME STEEP ACCESS WALKOVERS THAT PEOPLE WILL NOT CLIMB THOSE STEPS. AND WE HAD A PRETTY GOOD DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS BECAUSE WE TALKED ABOUT POST MORE SIGNS. WELL THE PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE WAS, THEY DON'T PAY ATTENTION TO THE SIGN, THEY DO WHAT THEY HAVE TO -- THEY WANT TO DO. SO MY RECOMMENDATION HERE IS, I DON'T THINK ALL 40-PLUS WALKOVERS NEED RAMPS, BUT I DO FEEL THAT THE VERY STEEP WALKOVERS REQUIRE A RAMP IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE DUNE. AND I THINK WE NEED TO IDENTIFY ON THIS PROJECT LIST THAT WE'RE ABOUT TO APPROVE WHICH OF THOSE WALKOVERS REQUIRE A RAMP AND THEN ADD THAT COST TO THE RAMP. I'M SORRY TO THE WALKOVER.

>> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER ROSS YOU ARE RECOGNIZED. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: I AM GOING TO SAY PSYCHOSIS IS DOING THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND EXPECTING A DIFFERENT RESULT WHICH I'VE SAID MANY TIMES. AND I'M JUST ADAMANT ABOUT STAIRS ARE INAPPROPRIATE FOR THESE DEVICES. ONE OF THE BIDDERS PUT IN FOR RAMPS AND THEIR BID WAS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER BECAUSE THEY'RE MORE EXPENSIVE AND THEY USE COMPOSITE MATERIALS. YOU ARE CORRECT THAT WE AGREED TO THESE FOUR AND I'M NOT DISPUTING THAT. I'M JUST BRINGING UP THE FACT WITH CONSTITUENTS THAT HAVE VOICED THEIR CONCERNS. THAT'S THEIR CONCERNS SO I AM BRINGING THEM UP. AND I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A REALLY GOOD WAY -- WE HAVE NO WAY THAT I KNOW OF GOING FORWARD AND DECIDING WHERE TO GO FROM HERE. I'D LIKE TO RESOLVE THAT AT SOME POINT. BUT I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE BUILDING MORE BEACH WALKOVERS WITHOUT PUTTING IN RAMPS. AND ONE OF THE BIDDERS HAD RAMPS, A DESIGN WITH

RAMPS AT EVERY ONE OF THEM. SO THAT'S JUST MY OPINION. >> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU, SIR.

DO I HAVE A MOTION? >> COMMISSIONER: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU SIR. MADAM CLERK WILL YOU CALL THE VOTE PLEASE.

[01:35:06]

>> YES >> YES. >> NO

>> NO >> YES. >> MAYOR MILLER: LET'S GO AHEAD AND I THINK WE HAVE 90 MINUTES. LET'S TAKE AN ACTUAL FIVE MINUT I HAD SOMEBODY TELL ME THEY CAN HEAR IT AT HOME. THE CONVERSATION. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE BACK IN SESSION. THIS IS ITEM

[Item 7.4]

7.4. IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY. THIS IS A RESOLUTION 2006 AWARDING BID 19-25 TO SEACOAST INCORPORATED FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THE MAIN BEACH BOARDWALK PHASE II.

>> CITY MANAGER: THE CITY DID SOLICIT BIDS FOR THE INSTALLATION. FIVE BIDS WERE RECEIVED. THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION RECOMMENDS AWARDING BID 19-25 TO THE LOW BIDDER

SEACOAST IN THE AMOUNT OF $268,000. >> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU, SIR.

>> COMMISSIONER: RECOMMEND APPROVAL. >> COMMISSIONER: I'LL SECOND IT.

>> MAYOR MILLER: AND COMMISSIONER ROSS, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.

>> COMM >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. THE LAST ONE WE PICKED COMPOSITE AND THIS IS WOOD. WHY? IS THE ISSUE OF SATISFACTORY REFERENCES.

>> CITY MANAGER: THE WOOD WILL MATCH THE EXISTING BOARDWALK. AND I BELIEVE MS. VOIT MAY HAVE TALKED TO REFERENCES REGARDING SEACOAST AND SHE MAY HAVE COMMENTS ON THAT, IF YOU'D LIKE

TO. >> SPEAKER: THIS IS PHASE II OF THE MAIN BEACH BOARDWALK PROJECT. PHASE I WAS WOOD. IN ORDER TO BE CONSISTENT AND HAVE THE CONNECTIVITY BETWEEN THE TWO, WOOD WOULD BE THE RECOMMENDATION. OR IS THE RECOMMENDATION. VOLUSIA CO COUNTY -- REFERENCES ON SEACOAST. VOLUSIA COUNTY USES THEM. I CHECKED REFERENCES WITH ALL OF THEM. AND THERE'S A SITE YOU CAN GO TO OTHER THAN THE ONE YOU WENT TO CALLED BUILD ZOOM AND IT ALSO RANKS AND RATES ORGANIZATIONS, CONTRACTORS. I LOOKED AT THE ONE YOU DID AND,

OF COURSE, I CALLED SOME LOCAL COLLEAGUES. >> COMMISSIONER: DOES BUILD ZOOM

GIVE THEM A SCORE? >> SPEAKER: I THINK HAYWARD WAS TOP FIVE PERCENT AND SEACOAST

WAS TOP SEVEN PERCENT. SO, 93% AND 95%. >> MAYOR MILLER: VICE MAYOR

KREGER YOU ARE RECOGNIZED SIR. >> VICE MAYOR KREGER: THIS IS A QUESTION, YOU KNOW, WE HAD GONE FROM FINANCING THIS WITH IMPACT FEES TO REQUESTING TDC FUNDING. HAVE WE GOT A RESPONSE FROM THE

TDC? >> CITY MANAGER: NO MR. LANG WAS AT THE OFFICE THIS MORNING WHEN I WAS MEETING WITH MS. BACH AND COMMISSIONER ROSS HE SAID ONCE THIS MOVES FORWARD -- WE DID SEND A LETTER ASKING FOR FUNDING FOR A PORTION OF IT. NOW THAT -- IF FUNDING IS AWARDED WE'LL REACH OUT AND LET THEM KNOW WHAT THE TOTAL COST IS AND SEE IF THEY'D BE WILLING TO

PARTICIPATE IN THAT COST. >> MAYOR MILLER: >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH:?

>> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: SO I UNDERSTAND THAT ANSWER CORRECTLY, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT

PERCENTAGE TDC WILL COVER? >> CITY MANAGER: CORRECT. THE ORIGINAL LETTER TO THEM ASKED FOR FUNDING OF A PORTION OF IT. AND A LOT OF THAT IN MY DISCUSSIONS WITH MR. LANGLEY WERE LET'S WAIT AND SEE WHAT THE

FUND. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: SO WE CAN MAKE THE ASSUMPTION THERE IS A POSSIBILITY WE'D BE FUNDING THE ENTIRE, WHAT IS THAT, 285 -- 268? THANK YOU.

>> VICE MAYOR KREGER: I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO MAKE THAT EXCEPTION. I CAN ALSO ASSURE YOU THE TDC BECAUSE WE ASKED IN ADVANCE WILL PAY A PORTION. WE'VE NEVER ASKED THEM FOR ANYTHING BEFORE IN TERMS OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND THEY HAVE COMMITTED THAT ARE ENTITLED.

SO, I'M SURE WE'LL GET SOMETHING. I HAD ALWAYS TRIED -- WE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE. YOU TRY TO USE SOME FORMULAS THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE TO THEM AND SAY 25 TO 30% SUPPORTED BY THE SURVEYS. BUT I BELIEVE WE'LL CERTAINLY GET SOME FINANCING.

[01:40:05]

>> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER ROSS? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: I BELIEVE

WE SHOULD ASK FOR 1 400%. I ME, YEAH. >> COMMISSIONER: I DON'T

DISAGREE WITH YOU. >> MAYOR MILLER: DO WE HAVE A MOTION? MADAM CLERK CALL THE

VOTE PLEASE. >> YES. >> YES.

>> YES. >> YES. >> YES.

>> YES. >> >> MAYOR MILLER: 7.5

[Item 7.5]

AUTHORIZATION TO DEFENDERIC SWENSON VERSUS DON PALACEK >> CITY ATTORNEY: I HAVE TO ASK FOR PERMISSION WHEN THE CITY GETS A LAWSUIT. THIS LAWSUIT IS FROM AN INMATE AND IT WAS A SHOOTING AND ACCESSIBVE -- IT I A SHOOTING AND EXCESSIVE FORCE CASE. IT WAS A SHERIFF'S DEPUTY THAT ACTUALLY FIRED THE SHOT THAT STRUCK THE PLAINTIFF HERE AND OUR POLICE OFFICERS WERE THERE AS BACK-UP, IF YOU WILL. THEY'RE NOT BOWING ACCUSED OF THAT BUT BEING ACCUSED OF NOT STOPPING THE DEPUTY FROM SHOOTING THIS GENTLEMAN. WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS AND WE HAVE TO DEFEND IT SO I'M ASKING YOUR PERMISSION. IT'S ALREADY BEEN SENT OVER TO INSURANCE.

>> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER ROSS? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: MOVE TO

APPROVE. >> COMMISSIONER: SECOND. >> MAYOR MILLER: CALL THE VOTE

>> YES >> YES. >> YES.

>> YES. >> YES. >> MAYOR MILLER: ITEM 7.6 A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WITH HARRELL LAND LLC WITH THE FERNANDINA

[Item 7.6]

BEACH MARKETPLACE. CITY ATTORNEY? >> I'LL LET MR. MARTIN TAKE

THIS. >> CITY MANAGER: THE EXISTING FRANCHISE AGREEMENT EXPIRED END OF 2019. TERMS WERE PRESENTED TO DOCTORS THE WHO ARE HERE THIS EVENING FOR A ARE EH NEWED AGREEMENT. THE MOST SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IS THE INCLUSION OF A CHARGE FOR ELECTRICAL USAGE. SO THE FRANCHISE FEE IS RECOMMENDED TO GO FROM $1,200 A YEAR TO $2,200 A YEAR. IT IS A FIVE-YEAR OFFICIAL TERM WITH THE REREVISION OR POSSIBILITY OF ADDITIONAL FIVE-YEAR EXTENSION AND SOME OTHER SMALL REVISIONS INCLUDING THE ABILITY OF THE BUSINESS OF THE WEEK TO ACTUALLY SELL MERCHANDISE. THE PRIOR AGREEMENT PROHIBITED THE BUSINESS OF THE WEEK FROM SELLING MERCHANDISE. THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT THE LESSEE REQUESTED BE ADDED AS WELL.

>> COMMISSIONER: I RECOMMEND APPROVAL. >> COMMISSIONER: SECOND.

>> MAYOR MILLER: I DO HAVE REQUESTS TO SPEAK ON THIS. MR. AND MRS. LEE YOU HAVE THREE

MINUTES. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: ELIZABETH LEE AND JOSEPH LEE. 95658 WATER BOULEVARD, FERNANDINA BEACH, FLORIDA. WE APPRECIATE THE HONOR AGAIN. SEVEN YEARS AGO WE WERE STANDING IN FRONT OF OF YOU AND I THINK MS. BACH IS THE ONLY ONE THAT WAS HERE. MAYOR FILL COUGH IS IN THE AUDIENCE BUT SHE WAS BACK THERE THEN. THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT THAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU IS THE SECOND FRANCHISE AGREEMENT THAT WE'VE RECEIVED. SO THIS ONE GOT EMAILED TO US ON NEW YEAR'S DAY. I EMAILED CONCERNS BACK TO MR. MARTIN. BUT THAT WAS ON NEW YEAR'S. I'M SURE IT WAS ALREADY TURNED OVER TO YOU SO THE ISSUES WERE NOT ADDRESSED. YES OUR OFFICIAL FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WAS FOR $1,200. OUR MARKET WAS THE FIRST TO EVER ENTER INTO A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY. THE PREVIOUS MARKET THAT MOVED, THEY DIDN'T HAVE A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT, AS FAR AS I KNOW, AND WERE NOT PAYING ANY MONETARY FEES. SO, BACK THEN WHEN WE AGREED UPON THE $1,200, WE SAT DOWN WITH THEM AND THE CITY SAID THAT THEY'RE NOT IN THE MARKET OF MAKING MONEY OFF THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS BUT THEY JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU DIDN'T INCURRED ANY COSTS FROM OUR MARKET. SO THEY CAME UP WITH THE $1,200 FRANCHISE FEE. AND THAT WAS TO INCLUDE ELECTRIC. THEY ALSO HAD IN THE INITIAL AGREEMENT AFTER THE FIRST YEAR THEY COULD RAISE THE RATE IF THEY SAW FIT. WHICH MEANT IF THEY FELT LIKE WE WERE USING MORE THAN THE $1,200, THEY COULD RAISE IT. AND WE THOUGHT THAT WAS FAIR BECAUSE WE DON'T THINK THAT THE TAXPAYERS SHOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR US USING THE ELECTRICITY ON THAT PROPERTY.

SO IT WAS NEVER RAISED. WE ARE ASSUMING THAT THE RATE THAT THEY GAVE US WAS FAIR. SO, WHEN WE HAD THE NEXT FRANCHISE AGREEMENT IT WAS RAISED $300 TO $1,500. SO WE SAID OKAY GREAT. WE'RE CERTAINLY NOT OPPOSED TO THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT BEING RAISED. THE AMOUNT. WE JUST WANT TO KNOW HOW DID YOU COME ABOUT THAT? BECAUSE IN FIVE YEARS OR IN TEN YEARS, HOW ARE

[01:45:04]

YOU GOING TO COME BACK WITH THE NEXT RATE AND HOW IS THE NEXT RATE GOING TO BE DETERMINED? JUST LET US KNOW. SO, HE SAID GO TO THE CITY AND FIND OUT HOW THE $300 CAME ABOUT. SO, THEN THE AGREEMENT THAT GOT EMAILED TO US PRIOR TO THIS MEETING, SAID WELL WE'RE GOING TO KEEP YOUR BASE RATE AT 1,200 BUT ADD IN A THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR THE ELECTRIC. I'M LIKE WAIT A MINUTE THE $990 WHICH YOU ASSESSED WAS HOW MUCH WE USED WAS ALREADY FACTORED INTO THE $1,200. SO, REALLY WE'RE STILL ABOUT $210 NOT COSTING YOU ANYTHING. SO, FAR OVER SEVEN YEARS THE CITY HASN'T COST YOU ANY MONEY FOR US TO RUN THE MARKET DOWN THERE. SO, I THOUGHT THAT WAS A BIT UNFAIR TO TAKE A FEE THAT WAS ALREADY INCLUDED IN OUR FRANCHISE AGREEMENT AND NOW SAY NO, NO, NO, THAT'S YOUR BASE FEE AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO ADD THIS $990 INTO YOUR RATE AND WE'RE GOING TO RAISE IT UP $1,000. WE LEASE ONE BLOCK OF THE STREET FOR 51 DAYS OUT OF THE YEAR. AND I HAVE SEEN OTHER FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS THAT ARE -- ONE THAT WAS JUST RECENTLY FOR $1,250 RAISING IT 1% A YEAR FOR 20 YEARS.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU MA'AM. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: SO I JUST FELT THAT A DIFFERENT WAY TO FIGURE OUT -- RIGHT NOW IT'S COSTING --

>> MAYOR MILLER: MA'AM, YOUR TIME IS UP. MAYOR MACEOR KREGER?

>> VICE MAYOR KREGER: THAT BEGS THE QUESTION -- HOW DID WE COME UP WITH -- ARE WE METERING, HOW

ARE WE DETERMINING THEIR COSTS? >> A PEDESTAL WAS INSTALLED AND BASED UPON REVIEW BY STAFF THAT PEDESTAL WAS USED SOLELY BY FARMER'S MARKET PATRONS OR VENDORS. AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE

EMAIL THREAD, THE ANNUAL COST OF THAT FOR THE LAST YEAR WAS $990 >> MAYO

>> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH? >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: DO

YOU CHARGE THE VENDORS FOR ELECTRICITY >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: WE CHARGE THEM FIVE DOLLARS. PER MARKET. SO, YOU KNOW, AT A -- IF THAT'S GOING TO BE ADDED ON -- IF 1,200 IS GOING BE OUR BASE COST AND YOU ARE GOING TO ADD ON ANOTHER THOUSAND DOLLARS IT REALLY ISN'T WORTH IT. BECAUSE HOW MUCH ARE WE GOING TO HAVE TO ADD TO THE ELECTRIC FEE FOR THESE VENDORS WHO LIKE I SAID WE HAVE SOMETIMES THREE, MAYBE FOUR AND SOMETIMES OUR MUSICIAN IT.

SO, I JUST FELT LIKE THAT WAS A COST THAT WAS ALREADY INCLUDED IN THE FRANCHISE FEE. I DON'T MIND GOING UP A THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR ELECTRIC AND WE'RE PAYING 1,200 THEN DO COST PLUS 30%.

THAT ADDS ANOTHER HUNDRED DOLLARS. YOU ARE STILL COMING UP $300 OVER EVERY YEAR. RIGHT NOW WE PAID $1,500 THAT WAS NOT GONE TO ANYTHING. THERE MAY BE SOMETHING YOU HAVE TO DO OUT THERE. BUT TO JUST ADD ON A COST THAT WAS INCLUDED I DON'T THINK IS FAIR.

>> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER ROSS? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: HOW MANY

YEARS HAVE YOU HAD THE FRANCHISE? >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: SEVEN.

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS: SO ELECTRICITY WAS NEVER INCLUDED? IT WAS INCLUDED IN THE FRANCHISE

AND NOW WE'RE ADDING IT. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: CORRECT. NOW YOU ARE SAYING THAT'S A BASE PRICE AND SAYING YOU HAVE USED $990 FOR ELECTRIC SO YOU GOT TO COVER IT BUT WE WERE COVERING

IT. >> WE HAD ALSO NOT AN ISSUE ON ELECTRIC BUT WE DID HAVE GARBAGE

COLLECTION THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE FRANCHISE FEE AND NOW -- >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: WE TOOK IT.

IT WASN'T ANYTHING THAT WE FELT LIKE WE HAD TO DO. >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER

ROSS? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: WHEN YOU SAID COST PLUS 30 PERCENT WHAT

DID YOU MEAN? >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: IF $990 WAS THE COST OF THE ELECTRIC, WE'RE PAYING $1,200. SO, IF YOU LOOK AT IT THAT WAY IT'S LIKE COST PLUS 20% IS WHAT WE'RE PAYING.

SO WHAT'S FAIR? I'M SAYING WHAT'S FAIR TO RAISE IT? COST PLUS 30 SO NOW IT'S 1,300? THE ONE PERCENT A YEAR? I MEAN, THAT FRANCHISE THAT'S GETTING ONE PERCENT A YEAR, THEY GET TO USE THE STREETS, YOU KNOW, SEVEN DAYS A WEEK, 365 DAYS A YEAR. AND THEY'RE GOING TO BE PAYING LESS -- IN 20 YEARS THEY'LL STILL BE PAYING LESS THAN US. PROBABLY $1,500 FOR THAT 20 YEAR AGREEMENT AND WE USE IT 51 DAYS A YEAR. I KNOW WE HAVE A COST BUT WE'RE COVERING THAT COST.

THE CITY IS NOT INCURRING ANY COST FROM THE FARMER'S MARKET. I DON'T MIND GOING UP. I DON'T

[01:50:01]

MIND HAVING THE CUSHION IN CASE THERE'S SOMETHING YOU GUYS NEED TO COVER. BUT HOW DO I FIGURE -- HAVE A WAY TO FIGURE IT OUT. COST PLUS 20, COST PLUS 30, THEN LET US GO WITH THAT.

IN FIVE OR TEN YEARS IT'S COST PLUS 40. THEN AT LEAST WE HAVE A WAY TO KNOW INSTEAD OF SAYING IT'S 300. WELL NOT REALLY IT'S $1,000. I MEAN, JUST HAVE A WAY TO TELL US SO WE KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT. AND WE DON'T WANT YOU TO HAVE ANY COST FOR THE MARKET. IT'S OUR BUSINESS. THE TAXPAYERS SHOULD NOT HAVE TO PAY ANYTHING FOR THAT MARKET TO BE THERE.

>> COMMISSIONER: I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE CITY MANAGER. WHAT ARE OUR COSTS?

>> CITY MANAGER: THERE IS GARBAGE COLLECTION ALTHOUGH THEY'VE INDICATED MOST OF THEIR

VENDORS DO TAKE THE GARBAGE AWAY. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: ALL OF THEM.

THE CITY TAKES NONE OF OUR TRASH. WE EVEN HAVE A RESENT COBBLE IN THE FRONT THEY CAN BRING THEIR STARBUCKS COFFEE AND PUT IT IN THERE AND WE TAKE IT BACK WITH US.

>> CITY MANAGER: THE PREDOMINANT COST IS ELECTRICAL. THAT PEDESTAL WAS INSTALLED NOT AT THEIR REQUEST. THAT WAS INSTALLED BY THE CITY FOR SAFETY BECAUSE THEY WERE RUNNING APPARENTLY CORDS THAT WERE CAUSING SAFETY HAZARDS. SO THE CITY'S ELECTRICIAN TOOK THE INITIATIVE TO INSTALL THAT PEDESTAL. THE COST WAS $35. AND HAS BEEN INVESTIGATED BY

CITY STAFF THE ANNUAL CHARGE FOR THAT ELECTRICITY IS $990. >> MAYOR MILLER: YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? I'VE GOT CONTROL OF THE BOARD. ARE YOU GOOD? VICE MAYOR KREGER?

>> VICE MAYOR KREGER: MY QUESTION WOULD HAVE BEEN: WHAT DOES IT COST US? IF WE'RE PAYING A GRAND FOR ELECTRICITY YOU KNOW WHAT ARE OUR ADDITIONAL COSTS? THEN WE GET INTO, YOU KNOW, DO WE WANT THESE GUYS HERE, ARE THEY A VALUE TO THE COMMUNITY? YOU KNOW, AND SO IT DOES SEEM A LITTLE, YOU KNOW, GOING FROM 1,200 AND ADDING A THOUSAND. IT SEEMS IF WE SAY YOU PAY $1,000

FOR ELECTRIC PSI AND -- ARE YOU MAKING MONEY ON THIS? >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: THE BUSINESS?

YES. IT IS A BUSINESS. >> COMMISSIONER: AND WE'RE NOT GETTING ANY -- BUT WE DON'T GET

ANY PERCENTAGE OF THEIR PROFITS? WE DO FOR SOME? >> CITY MANAGER: NO

>> CITY ATTORNEY: WHEN WE HAVE INSTRUCTORS AT OUR FACILITIES AND THEY'RE RUNNING THEIR BUSINESS AT CITY RECREATIONAL FACILITIES WHETHER IT'S KARATE OR WATER AEROBICS THE CITY TAKES

20% BUT THAT'S THE ONLY FEE. >> COMMISSIONER: WHAT ABOUT OTHER EVENTS THAT ARE FOR PROFIT

EVENTS? >> CITY ATTORNEY: WE CHARGE A SPECIAL EVENT FEE FOR EVENTS.

>> BUT IF IT'S COMMERCIAL WE DON'T TAKE PART OF THEIR PROFITS? LIKE WHEN WE DID THE

PARKING LOT HERE WE DIDN'T-- >> CITY ATTORNEY: RIGHT. >> COMMISSIONER: THAT'S AN INCONSISTENCY THAT'S NOT SO GOOD. I THINK THAT WE WANT TO KEEP THESE GUYS HERE AND WE WANT TO, YOU KNOW, I'D LIKE TO DO MAYBE ONE YEAR EXTENSION SO THAT THE CITY COULD COME UP WITH, IN MY MIND, A METHOD OF WHEN WE HAVE FOR COMMERCIAL FOR-PROFIT BUSINESSES, A FORMULA THAT WE GET SOMETHING BACK. SOME PERCENTAGE FOR EVERYTHING. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? BUT TO PUT THEM AND SAY, OKAY, IF WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT REALLY COSTS AND IT'S A THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR ELECTRICITY, SAY IF WE SAID $1,500 FOR ONE YEAR, AND WE EVALUATED SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE TO THE COMMISSION? >> MAYOR MILLER: I SEE

COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH'S LIGHT IS ON. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: I'M WRESTLING WITH THIS. BECAUSE THERE'S TWO PARTS OF THIS. AND DON'T GET ME WRONG, BUT FOR

SEVEN YEARS YOU GOT FREE ELECTRICITY. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: NO WE DIDN'T.

IT WAS INCLUDED. IT WAS INCLUDED. >> COMMISSIONER: IT WAS INCLUDED. IT WAS INCLUDED. LET ME RESTATE THAT. BUT NOW WE'VE FIGURED OUT FOR THE FIRST TIME THAT THE ELECTRICITY IS A LITTLE UNDER A THOUSAND DOLLARS. SO HOW DO WE BALANCE THEIR NEED AND OUR NEED? BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. HOW DO WE GET TO WIN-WIN?

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: WHAT IS YOUR NEED THOUGH? WHAT HAS YOUR NEED BEEN FOR ANY OTHER FRANCHISE.

>> COMMISSIONER: THAT'S A QUESTION FOR US. >> THINK ABOUT THE IMPACT TO THE STREET. WE'RE ON A SIDE STREET THERE'S NO ACTIVITY. WE'RE NOT ENCROACHING ON ANYBODY. THE COST OF THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WAS INCLUSIVE OF THE ELECTRIC AND GARBAGE. SO, IF THE CITY IS

[01:55:08]

IN -- IF THE CHASTITY OF THE CITY -- CAPACITY OF THE CITY IS TO MAKE MONEY OFF OTHER BUSINESSES, THEN YOU WILL HAVE TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION FOR THAT.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: BUT THE THING IS THE CITY SHOULD NEVER ENTER INTO A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WITH AN ENTITY THAT'S NOT BRINGING SOMETHING TO THE CITY THAT'S WORD WHY I OF THEM. THIS MARKET BRINGS 1,500 PEOPLE TO THE CITY. WE GET THEM FROM ST. AUGUSTINE, PONTE VEDRA. WE HAVE A FAMILY THAT COMES JUST FOR THE LEMONADE. OF COURSE, WHEN IT'S COLD WE DON'T SELL LEMONADE. WE HAVE A COUPLE THAT BRING THEIR BIKES. THEY COME TO OUR MARKET. THEY GET ON THEIR BIKES. THEY GO SHOP. I MEAN, THIS IS EVERY SINGLE FRIDAY. I MEAN, WE ADVERTISE. WE BRING PEOPLE IN.

WE'VE HAD SO MANY PEOPLE ON CHANNEL 25 MORNING. AND YOU KNOW WHAT THEY HAVE BEHIND THEM, THE VENDORS WHETHER IT'S OUR MARKET HIGHLIGHTED OR EACH INDIVIDUAL VENDOR, THEY HAVE THE FERNANDINA BEACH MARKETPLACE. A BIG OLD SIGN RIGHT BEHIND THEM. HOW MANY TIMES -- I CAN'T ASK THEM CAN I? MY MARKET MANAGER IS HERE. THEY'VE HIGHLIGHTED OUR MARKET MULTIPLE TIMES THEN TAKEN INDIVIDUAL VENDORS. THIS IS THEIR LIVELIHOOD. THIS IS HOW THEY'RE PAYING THEIR BILLS. HOW THEY'RE PUTTING THEIR KIDS THROUGH COLLEGE AND WE'VE GONE A YEAR WITHOUT A FRANCHISE

AGREEMENT. >> WE'VE BEEN HERE 25 YEARS. I DON'T KNOW MOST OF YOU GUYS BUT WE RUN TWO PRACTICES IN THE COUNTY AND OPERATING FOR 25 YEARS WITH SUCCESS. IF YOU THINK WE CAN RETIRE OFF THE MONEY WE MAKE OFF THE FARMER'S MARKET WE CAN'T.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: WE COULD HAVE THAT BLOCK PLUS TWO MORE BLOCKS FULL IF WE WANTED TO. WE HAVE KEPT THIS MARKET IN WHAT WE FEEL LIKE IS SOMETHING THAT THE CITY WOULD BE PROUD OF AND THE PATRONS THAT COME WOULD BE PROUD OF. THAT SMALL TOWN MENTALITY WHERE WE VET EVERY VENDOR THAT COMES IN. WE COULD HAVE 20 OF ONE VENDOR AND WE DON'T. WE'VE TURNED PEOPLE AWAY BECAUSE IT'S NOT ABOUT THE MONEY, IT'S ABOUT THE QUALITY OF THE MARKET WE HAVE HERE. AGAIN, WE ALSO OFFER CART BLANCHE ACCESS TO THE CITY. AND YOU MAY NOT KNOW THIS, BUT THE CITY -- I WAS LOOKING BACK.

WE GIVE FREE SPACE TO THE CITY FOR WHATEVER YOU NEED TO HAVE BOOTHS. ANGIE LESTER HAS BEEN THERE A BUNCH OF TIMES. KELLY GIBSON HAS BEEN THERE. THE APPRAISER'S OFFICE. CITY BUILDING INSPECTOR. NO COST. MARCH 16TH, APRIL 20TH, MAY 18, JUNE 15TH, JULY 20TH, AUGUST 17TH, SEPTEMBER AND DECEMBER. JUST SO YOU GUYS CAN GET YOUR WORD OUT. THAT'S PROBABLY $400 WORTH OF JUST YOU BEING ABLE TO GET OUT THERE. WE DON'T OFFER THAT TO ANYBODY ELSE. BUSINESS OF THE WEEKS, THEY GET ONCE A QUARTER. SO, FOUR TIMES A YEAR THEY CAN COME OUT FOR FREE. BUT YOU GUYS -- WE'VE HAD DAYS WHERE WE'VE HAD TWO CITY OFFICES ON THE SAME DAY. THAT'S 1,500 PEOPLE YOU GUYS CAN HAND SOMETHING TO, GET A MESSAGE ACROSS TO. SO, I THINK WE DO OFFER A SERVICE THAT'S FAR MORE THAN JUST HOW MUCH ELECTRIC OR HOW MUCH YOU

CAN MAKE OFF SOMEBODY'S BUSINESS YOU KNOW. >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER

ROSS? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: I THINK THIS GOES THE QUALITY OF LIFE THAT WE HAVE HERE. AND I'VE BEEN TO YOUR MARKET MANY TIMES. AND I DON'T THINK THE TAXPAYERS, AS YOU POINT OUT, SHOULD BE PAYING FOR ANYTHING. BUT, ON THE OTHER HAND, THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MAKES OUR COMMUNITY SPECIAL. I MEAN, THIS MARKET AND A LOT OF THE EVENTS THAT WE HAVE. SO, I WOULD WONDER IF WE COULD TABLE THIS FOR A MONTH AND HAVE THE CITY MANAGER PERHAPS COME BACK WITH -- OR EVEN UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING -- COME BACK WITH A PROPOSAL THAT COVERS OUR COSTS BUT KEEPS SOMETHING HERE THAT'S A GOOD QUALITY OF LIFE FOR OUR CITIZENS. IF THEY GO AWAY, MAYBE SOMETHING ELSE WOULD REPLACE THEM --

>> MAYOR MILLER: IF YOU ARE MAKING A MOTION TO TABLE A DISCUSSION WE STOP UNTIL WE HAVE

A VOTE. IS THAT A MOTION? >> COMMISSIONER: BUT WE ALREADY HAVE A MOTION.

>> MAYOR MILLER: WE'LL HAVE TO VOTE ON THAT. BUT I STILL HAVE MORE LIGHTS ON.

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS: THIS IS A QUALITY OF LIFE. WE TALK ABOUT QUALITY OF LIFE HERE ALL THE TIME AND THIS IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT TRULY CONTRIBUTES TO THE QUALITY OF LIFE. IT IS A COOL THING. I'VE GOT A GAZILLION PLANTS THERE. YOUR PLANT GUY IS AWESOME. BUT THE CITY ALSO SHOULDN'T PAY ANY MONEY. WE DO THIS FOR MANY PEOPLE AND I WOULD LIKE TO COME UP WITH SOME WAY OF CRAFTING A DEAL FOR THINGS THAT GIVE TO THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF THIS

COMMUNITY SO WE NURTURE THEM AND MAKE IT A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: AND EVERY

[02:00:03]

DECISION WE MAKE IS WITH THAT IN MIND. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: AS THE JUDGE ONCE SAID, QUIT TALKING WHILE YOU ARE A HEAD YOU ARE TALKING ME OUT OF IT HERE

>> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN YOU ARE RECOGNIZED. >> COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN: THANK YOU. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE ELECTRICITY WILL BE A THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR THE YEAR; IS THAT

CORRECT? >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: 990. SO, YES A THOUSAND.

>> COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN: SO IF YOU BREAK IT DOWN, THAT'S $83 A MONTH. YOU ARE LOOKING AT 12 MONTHS. YOU LOOK AT FOUR WEEKS IT BRINGS IT DOWN TO ABOUT $20 A WEEK FOR THE ELECTRICITY. HOW

MANY VENDORS ARE USING THE CITY ELECTRICITY? >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: ONE TO THREE.

FIVE DOLLARS APIECE. >> COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN: I FIND IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR YOU TO BASICALLY BE SAYING A VENDOR IS GOING TO GO UNDER IF YOU HAVE TO CHARGE THEM FIVE DOLLARS A WEEK

MORE TO PAY THE CITY. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: BUT THAT'S NOT THE POINT. THE POINT IS THAT IT WAS INCLUDED IN OUR INITIAL AGREEMENT AND NOW YOU ARE SAYING IT WASN'T AND WE'RE

GOING TO TACK IT ON. >> COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN: TIME. EXCUSE ME. ISN'T THIS A NEW

AGREEMENT? THAT'S A YES OR NO. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: IT IS A NEW AGREEMENT.

>> COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN: THAT'S ALL -- >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: THEN DON'T SAY THE OTHER WAS A BASE. IN MY I MAIL WITH MR. MARTIN HE IS LIKE WE'RE GOING TO KEEP THE BASE AGREEMENT. WELL THAT INCLUDED ELECTRIC. NOW YOU ARE SAYING THERE'S JUST A FEE. NOW

IT IS A $1,200 FEE WITH A THOUSAND DOLLAR ELECTRIC. >> COMMISOMMISSIONER CHAPMAN: PS

THE CHOSE OF WORD BASE WAS INCORRECT. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: IT WASN'T LIKE YOU ARE INCLUDING IT FOR FREE. THEY DID AN ASSESSMENT BECAUSE THEIR MAIN CONCERN WAS THAT THE CITY DID NOT HAVE ANY COST AS A RESULT OF OUR MARKET. THAT THAT'S WHAT THEY DID. THEY HAD THE WHOLE NEXT YEAR THEY SAID THEY WERE GOING TO REEVALUATE IT TO MAKE SURE THERE IS NO COST THIS CITY IS HAVING FOR THE COST AND THERE WASN'T BEEN APPARENTLY IF WE'RE ONLY

USING $990 WORTH OF ELECTRIC. >> COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN: WHO IS PAYING THE LIGHT BILL?

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: THE $1,200 FEE WE'VE BEEN PAYING. BECAUSE YOU ARE BEING REIMBURSED BY THAT. THAT'S WHAT THE $1,200 IS FOR. WE'RE PAYING YOU $1,200 IN ADVANCE TO PAY THAT $990 ELECTRIC FEE. AND WE PAY AT THE END OF THE YEAR FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR. SO, YOU'VE GOT THAT MONEY IN THE BANK EVERY MONTH WHEN THAT FEE COMES TO YOU. THAT MONEY IS THERE TO PAY

THE ELECTRIC. >> MAYOR MILLER: MR. MARTIN I SEE YOUR LIGHT.

>> CITY MANAGER: THE BASE FEE IS WHAT WE CHARGE THE TROLLEY AND OTHER FRANCHISE PEOPLE. IF THE TROLLEY PERSON THAT IS PAYING A $1,200 FRANCHISE FEE SAYS WHAT COSTS ARE THERE TO THE CITY FOR ME RUNNING MY TROLLEY? I MEAN, WE CHARGE $1,200 FOR OTHER FRANCHISE FEES.

>> MAYOR MILLER: YOU HAVE TO LET THE COMMISSION DISCUSS IT. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: I'M SORRY.

>> CITY MANAGER: YES. WE HAD A DISCUSSION WITH THE PREVIOUS COMMISSION MEETING THAT SAYS LET'S MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE COVERING THE ELECTRICAL COSTS. AGAIN, IF WE'RE CHARGING THE TROLLEY, AS WAS POINTED OUT $1,200 A YEAR, WHAT'S THE COST -- IF THE TROLLEY OPERATOR CAME AND SAID I ONLY WANT MY FRANCHISE FEE TO COVER THE COST TO THE CITY. THERE'S MINIMAL COST. SO, IS HIS FRANCHISE FEE FIVE DOLLARS? THIS IS WHAT, YOU KNOW, THE FRANCHISE FEE IS

INTENDED FOR. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: CAN I ASK A QUESTION?

>> MAYOR MILLER: MA'AM, ONCE AGAIN. YOU HAVE TO STOP INTERRUPTING. WE HAVE TO

DISCUSS. THIS IS A BUSINESS WE'RE TRYING TO CONDUCT. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: SORRY.

>> CITY MANAGER: YES IT WAS A BASE FEE OF THE SAME $1,200 WE CHARGE OTHER FRANCHISEES FOR OTHER SERVICES PROVIDED. AND ON TOP OF THAT, THERE IS THE COST, YES, I RECOGNIZE, IT WAS PREVIOUSLY INCLUDED IN THE FRANCHISE FEE. BUT THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE CITY TO REVISIT THESE FEES AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE. WE GET BURDENED BY THAT'S THE WAY WE'VE ALWAYS DONE IT THEN EVERYBODY WONDERS FIVE YEARS LATER WHY DIDN'T WE REVISIT THAT ISSUE WHEN WE HAD A CHANCE. SO, HERE'S A CHANCE. I'LL FULLY SUPPORT IF YOU WANT TO SAY LET'S TABLE IT AND TALK ABOUT IT SOME MORE, THAT IS FINE. BUT THIS IS WHAT WAS PRESENTED FOR THE TOPIC

OF DISCUSSION. >> MAYOR MILLER: LET'S CALL THE VOTE. ONCE AGAIN THIS VOTE IS TO APPROVE. IF IT'S NOT APPROVED THE MOTION FOR THE TABLE WILL BE ON THE FLOOR. IF

THIS IS VOTED DOWN WE'LL MOVE ON TO YOUR TABLE MOTION. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: SO YOU

HAVE TO VOTE NO. >> MAYOR MILLER: IF YOU WANT TO TABLE IT YOU WOULD VOTE NO.

THIS IS A MOTION TO APPROVE AS PROPOSED. IF IT IS APPROVED THE TABLE IS OFF THE TABLE. IF YOU WANT TO TABLE THIS FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION, THIS WILL HAVE TO FAIL. WITH THAT WE'LL CALL THE

[02:05:04]

VOTE. >> NO. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH?

>> NO. >> >> COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN:?

>> YES. >> >> COMMISSIONER ROSS:.

>> NO. >> MAYOR MILLER? >> NO.

>> MAYOR MILLER: DO I HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND TO TABLE. CALL THE VOTE PLEASE.

>> YES. >> YES. >> YES.

>> YES. >> YES. >> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU. ON

[Item 8]

TO SECTION 8. THIS IS ITEM 8.1 LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT. STANDARDS FOR BUILDING HEIGHTS

AND VARIANCES. CITY ATTORNEY? >> CITY ATTORNEY: ORDINANCE 2020-01 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH FLORIDA AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BY AMENDING SECTIONS 4.02.03 CALCULATION OF BUILDING HEIGHTS AND MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SCREENING AND 10.02.01 DISALLOWANCE OF CERTAIN VARIANCE REQUESTS PROVIDING FOR

SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. M >> MAYOR MILLER: MARE

COMMISSIONER ROSS? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> MAYOR MILLER: CALL THE VOTE PLEASE. >> YES.

>> YES. >> YES. >> YES.

>> YES. >> MAYOR MILLER: YES. ON TO SECTION 9. LAND DEVELOPMENT

[Item 9.1]

CODE AMENDMENT RIGHTS-OF-WAY STANDARD. >> CITY ATTORNEY: 2019-28 THE CITY COMMISSION AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BY AMENDING SECTIONS 7.01.00 ACCESS AND DRIVEWAY DESIGN REQUIREMENTS AND 7.01.01 STREETS AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY. PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. I'D LIKE TO OFFER ON BEHALF OF STAFF ONE CHANGE BECAUSE IT IS A MISTAKE IN THE DRAFT. THERE'S A STRIKE THROUGH WHERE IT SAYS "LOCAL STREETS" IT HAS THE NUMBER 60 AND 50 AND BOTH HAVE A LINE THROUGH THEM. THE PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION -- STAFF RECOMMENDATION WAS 50 AND THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION

WAS 60 TO KEEP IT AT 60. >> MAYOR MILLER: IS THERE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS?

>> CITY ATTORNEY: YES. >> MAYO >> MAYOR MILLER: OPEN THE PUBLIC

HEARING. CLOSE THE HEARING. COMMISSIONER ROSS? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: LOCAL STREETS ALL OVER HAS A LINE. MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT WHOLE LINE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE REMOVED.

AND I TALKED TO JACOB -- I THINK I TALKED TO JACOB-- >> CITY ATTORNEY: AND THAT WOULD BE YOUR MORE ACCURATE. WHERE YOU SAY LOCAL STREETS ALL OTHER THERE'S A 60 AND 50 AND THE WHOLE THING IS LIKED -- LINED THROUGH. THAT'S A MISTAKING WHAT I AM SAYING.

THAT WOULD BE THE CHANGE TO THIS DOCUMENT. WHAT I AM SAYING IS I'M GIVING YOU ALL THE FACTS. I

CAN'T SAY SHOULD IT BE 50 OR 60. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: WHAT I AM SAYING IS JACOB TOLD ME, I BELIEVE IT WAS HIM, THAT THE WHOLE LINE WAS SUPPOSED TO GO OUT. JUST AS IT IS.

>> LOCAL STREETS ALL OTHER SHOULD NOT BE STRICKEN ACCORDING TO WHAT COMMISSIONER ROSS IS

SAYING. >> I DON'T RECALL THAT. THAT CHANGE.

>> I THINK WHAT COMMISSIONER ROSS IS SAYING OTHERWISE YOU GOT LOCAL STREETS SHOWN ON THE 1857 CITY PLAT, LOCAL STREETS IN OLD TOWN, WHAT ABOUT ALL THE OTHER LOCAL STREETS? WE'RE A STRIKING THAT. I THINK HE TRIED TO CLARIFY, APPARENTLY HAS CLARIFIED WITH MR. PLAT, THAT STRIKE THROUGH SHOULD BE REMOVED, NOT THE LANGUAGE, AND THE STRIKE THROUGH ON THE 50

SHOULD BE REMOVED AND RETAINED AT 60. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: EITHER THAT -- IF YOU ARE GOING TO KEEP THAT LOCAL STREETS ALL OTHER I WOULD MAINTAIN DO WHAT THE PAB DID. AND I HAVE ONE OTHER CHANGE I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE. WHICH IS TAKE THE -- IT SAYS IN PARAGRAPH B2, DEVIATIONS FROM THE STANDARDS MUST BE APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. I WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE THAT TO MUST BE APPROVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION. SO, I AM GOING TO MOVE THAT THIS BE APPROVED WITH THE LOCAL STREETS ALL OTHERS NOT BEING STRUCK THROUGH. THERE BE 60 INSTEAD OF 50. AND THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS BE CHANGED TO CITY COMMISSION.

>> CITY ATTORNEY: AND THAT WOULD BE TOTALLY APPROPRIATE. IF IT WAS INTENDED TO BE ALL STRICKEN WE WOULD BE MISSING SOME STREETS THAT ARE NOT ON THE 857 PLAT.

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS: I MAY HAVE MISUNDERSTOOD WHAT HE SAID. SO THAT'S MY MOTION.

>> COMMISSIONER: I'LL SECOND IT. >> MAYOR MILLER: VICE MAYOR KREGER?

[02:10:02]

>> VICE MAYOR KREGER: IF ALL OTHER LOCAL STREETS, IF WE SAY 50 AND THERE'S 60 NOW, THEY'RE

GRANDFATHERED IN. >> 60 BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE BOARD OF PAB SAYS IT IS.

>> WE NEED TO KEEP THEM AS ROBUST AS POSSIBLE. >> MAYOR MILLER: I HAVE A MOTION

AND A SECOND. MADAM CLERK CALL THE VOTE >> YES.

>> YES. >> YES. >> YES.

>> YES. >> MAYOR 9.2 CODE AMENDMENT FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT.

[Item 9.2]

>> CITY ATTORNEY: 2019-26 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF FERNANDINA BEACH FLORIDA AMENDING THE CODE CHAPTER 22 ARTICLE 5 FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT. SECTS 22-29.1 FOR LOCAL ADMINISTRATIVE AMENDS. ADOPTS SECTIONS 22-19.2, 22-19.3, AND 22-29.4 FOR LOCAL TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY, BEAVERBILITY AND

EFFECTIVE DATE. PLEASE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> MAYOR MILLER: OPEN THE PUBLIC

HEARING. WELCOME SIR. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: GOOD EVENING. I AM MARK SCRAPY. I AM AN ATTORNEY WITH THE ROGERS TOWERS LAW FIRM. 1301 RIVER PLACE BOULEVARD JACKSONVILLE. I AM SUBSTITUTING FOR EMILY PIERCE. I AM SURE YOU WOULD RATHER SEE HER THAN ME BUT SHE HAD A CONFLICT TONIGHT. SO, AS YOU KNOW THE FIRM REPRESENTS THE RANGE AT CRANE ISLAND. THE OWNER AND DEVELOPER OF CRANE ISLAND. ON BEHALF OF THE RANGE WE'VE EXPRESSED OUR CONCERN ABOUT THE IMPACT OF SUBSECTION 1 PROPOSED SECTION 22-212 AS REVISED UNDER THE ORDINANCE UNDER CONSIDERATION 2019-26. SUBSECTION 1 LIMITS TO 6 INCHES THE AMOUNT OF FILL THAT CAN BE PLACED TO IMPROVE DRAINAGE. WE ADDRESSED THIS IN A LETTER TO THE MAYOR AND COPIED TO THE OTHER COMMISSION MEMBERS AND KEY STAFF BACK ON DECEMBER 6TH. AS WE EXPLAINED IN THE LETTER, THE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS FOR CRANE ISLAND HAVE BEEN PERMITTED BY THE ST. JOHN'S RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT. THOSE PERMITS ARE BASED ON LOW IMPACT DESIGN THE PURPOSE OF WHICH IS TO MINIMIZE RUN-OFF BY MAXIMIZING WATER STORAGE AND TO PRESERVE THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF TREES POSSIBLE. THERE'S A VARIETY OF TECHNIQUES TO ACCOMPLISH THIS. IN THE CASE OF CRANE ISLAND, AN IMPORTANT FEATURE OF THE LID, THE LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT STORM WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, IS THE USE OF SWAILS THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT IN LIEU OF STORM WATER PONDS OR RETENTION PONDS. THE SWAIL SYSTEM WILL REQUIRE THE REPLACEMENT OF FILL IN EXCESS OF SIX INCHES. SO WE PROPOSED, IF THE CODE IS AMENDED TO INCLUDE SUBSECTION 1, WE'D BE IN VIOLATION AND WOULD HAVE TO BRING DEVELOPMENT TO A HALT. SO WE PROPOSED MODIFYING THE SECTION TO EXEMPT OUT PROJECTS WITH A PERMIT FOR THE WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT PRIOR TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE ORDINANCE. BUT WE UNDERSTAND THE COMMISSION IS NOT INCLINED TO MODIFY SUBSECTION 1 PREFERRING INSTEAD FOR CRANE ISLAND'S RELIEF TO BE ADDRESSED ADMINISTRATIVELY THROUGH THE POWER DELEGATED TO THE STORM WATER DIRECTOR IN SUBSECTION 1. SO WE WANT TO BE ON RECORD REGARDING THESE MATTERS AS THE COMMISSION CONSIDERS THE ORDINANCE TONIGHT TO ADVISE IN THE EVENTS THE ORDINANCE IS ENACTED WE ANTICIPATE SUBMITTING AS EARLY AS TOMORROW, IF IT'S TONIGHT THAT IT'S ENACTED, A LETTER TO THE STORM WATER DIRECTOR REQUESTING A WAIVER FOR CRANE ISLAND FROM THE FILL PLACEMENT LIMITATIONS OF SUBSECTION 1 IN THE INSTALLATION OF ITS PERMITTED STORM WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. THE RESULT WOULD BE WE WOULD HOPE THAT WE WOULD HAVE FAVORABLE CONSIDERATION TO AVOID A TERRIBLE RESULT FOR THE CITY AND THE DEVELOPER OF A LOCAL REGULATION TRUMPING A STATE ISSUED PERMIT AND APPROVED

DEVELOPMENT. THANK YOU. DO YOU HAVE ANY YESES FOR ME? >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER IS THIS FOR THAT? OKAY. THANK YOU SIR. ANYBODY ELSE? CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONER

ROSS YOU ARE RECOGNIZED SIR. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: I WOULD JUST LIKE TO COMMENT ALTHOUGH IT DOES SAY THERE'S NO FISCAL IMPACT WHAT THAT REALLY MEANS IS THERE'S NO FISCAL IMPACT TO THE CITY ITSELF BUT THERE IS TO OTHER PEOPLE. BUT THERE'S ALSO A FISCAL IMPACT WE DON'T PASS

[02:15:06]

THIS. I THINK THIS ORDINANCE HAS BEEN VETTED VERY CAREFULLY OVER A LONG PERIOD OF TIME. I THINK IT IS A GOOD ORDINANCE. THE QUESTION IN THIS COMMUNITY IS NOT IF IT'S GOING TO FLOOD IT'S WHEN AND HOW OFTEN. I THINK THIS IS BEGINNING TO BUILD OUR RESILIENCY SO WE CAN RECOVER

FROM FLOODING WHICH WILL OCCUR. SO, I MOVE TO APPROVE. >> COMMISSIONER: I SECOND.

>> MAYOR MILLER: VICE MAYOR KREGER? >> VICE MAYOR KREGER: STORM WATER MANAGEMENT CAN GIVE A VARIANCE ON THIS PER THE CODE IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY.

>> MAYOR MILLER: MADAM CLERK PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. >> YES.

>> YES. >> YES. >> YES.

>> YES. MAYOR 9.3 CODE AMENDMENT CONSTRUCTION SITE MANAGEMENT.

[Item 9.3]

>> CITY ATTORNEY: ORDINANCE 2019-27 AMENDING CHAPTER 22 ARTICLE 3 SECTION 22-65 APPLICATION FOR BUILDING STRUCTURE, AMENDING SECTION 22-73, DESIGN CONDITIONS; CREATING A NEW CONSTRUCTION SITE MANAGEMENT PLAN REQUIRED; CREATING SECTION 22-251, SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS; CREATING SECTION 22-252, APPROVAL OF PLAN. WAIVERS; CREATING SECTION 22-253, GRADING PLAN, GRADING AND SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT STANDARDS; CREATING SECTION 22-254, PARKING DURING DEVELOPMENT OF PROJECT; CREATING SECTION 22-255, MATERIAL STORAGE; CREATING SECTION 22-256 SIGNS; CREATING SECTION 22-257, SITE CLUBLINESS; CREATING SECTION 22-258, TEMPORARY TRAILERS; CREATING SECTION 22-259, CHEMICAL TOILETS; CREATING SECTION 22-260, LANDSCAPING;EE ATING SECTION 22-261, DUMPSTERS; CREATING SECTION 22-262, PERMITTED DAYS AND HOURS FOR CONSTRUCTION WORK; CREATING SECTION 22-263, CONSTRUCTION RELATED TRAFFIC CONTROL; CREATING SECTION 22-264 REQUIREMENTS DURING WEATHER EMERGENCY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN AFFECTIVE DATE. PLEASE OPEN

THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> MAYOR MILLER: OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. CLOSE THE PUBLIC

HEARING. COMMISSIONER ROSS? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> COMMISSIONER: SECOND. >> MAYOR MILLER: MADAM CLERK CALL THE VOTE.

>> YES. >> YES. >> YES.

>> YES. >> YES. >> YES.

[Item 10.1]

MAYOR MILLER: ON TO SECTION 10 BOARD APPOINTMENTS. 10.1 ONE APPOINTMENT TO THE ARTS AND

CULTURE NASSAU BOARD. >> COMMISSIONER: MOVE TO APPROVE MARCIA JOYNER TO REAPPOINTMENT

FOR THREE YEAR TERM. >> MAYOR MILLER: PLEASE CALL THE VOTE

[Item 10.2]

>> YES. >> YES. >> YES.

>> YES. >> PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE ONE APPOINTMENT

>> COMMISSIONER: RECOMMEND REAPPOINTMENT OF JOY BEAHN >> COMMISSIONER: SECOND.

>> MAYOR MILLER: PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. >> YES

>> YES. >> YES. >> YES.

>> YES. >> YES. MAYOR MILLER: 11.1 LAND

[Item 11.1]

CONSERVATION. THIS ITEM WAS PUT ON THE AGENDA AT THE REQUEST OF COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH. YOU

HAVE THE FLOOR, SIR. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: THANK YOU MR. MAYOR. MR. MARTIN, COULD YOU PUT UP THAT SLIDE FOR ME PLEASE. I AM GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE TREE ORDINANCE. 2 2006-14. THE REASON I AM BRINGING THIS UP IS BECAUSE AS WE KNOW AMELIA BLUFF HAS SUBMITTED THEIR TREE MITIGATION P PLAN. AND WHAT'S COME TO LIGHT IS THE -- OUR TREE ORDINANCE AND HOW INSUFFICIENT THE PENALTY IS WITHIN THE CITY FOR TAKING DOWN A TREE. LAST SEPTEMBER THE CITY OF TAMPA FOUND A DEVELOPER WHO CUT DOWN 23 GRAND OAKS ILLEGALLY

[02:20:06]

AND FINED THEM $840,000. THAT'S $28,000 PER TREE. THE MAYOR, JANE CASTOR SAID OF THE FINE, "IT CAN'T BE LOOKED UPON AS WE'LL JUST CUT DOWN THE TREES AND CONSIDER THAT THE COST OF DOING BUSINESS." WE HAVE A VERY ROBUST TREE CANOPY, ONE OF THE BEST IN THE WORLD, AND WE SHOULD EMBRACE THAT. AND I WOULD ECHO THAT YOU COULD SAY THE SAME THING, ONLY MULTIPLY IT FOR A BARRIER ISLAND. AND WHAT I'VE DONE HERE IS I'VE TAKEN THE AMELIA BLUFF EXAMPLE AND IT'S TOO LATE TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT THEIR MITIGATION COSTS. BUT ESSENTIALLY WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE IS FOR THE TREES THEY'RE NOT REPLACING, IT EQUALS 14 TREES. AND THE FINE IS $18,750.

SO, YOU CAN SEE OUR FINE PER TREE IS $1,339 PER TREE. NOW LOOK AT THE DISPARITY BETWEEN THOSE TWO NUMBERS. WHICH OF THOSE TWO NUMBERS IS MORE LIKELY TO HAVE A DEVELOPER THINK ABOUT TAKING DOWN A TREE IN TAMPA OR FERNANDINA BEACH? SO, THE REASON I'M BRINGING THIS UP IS THAT AT TOMORROW'S PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD THEY WILL BE REVISITING THE TREE ORDINANCE.

AND UNDER SECTION 11.0804 SECTION A THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT A REVISION OF THE PENALTY TO INCREASING IT TO $2,500 PER VIOLATION. SO WHAT WOULD THAT $2,500 PER VIOLATION MEAN? SO, INSTEAD OF THE $18,000 IT WOULD BE $35,000. THAT'S WHAT THAT NUMBER MEANS. SO, YOU CAN SEE EVEN $35,000 COMPARED -- AND I'M NOT SAYING GO TO THE EXTREME OF TAMPA. BUT MY GOODNESS --

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: WE'RE BARRIER ISLANDS. >> MAYOR MILLER: I AM GOING TO SAY THIS ONE MORE TIME. YOU CANNOT SPEAK FROM THE CHAIRS. THIS HAS GONE ON ALL NIGHT SO

IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO STOP. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: IF WE WENT TO $14,000 A TREE, THAT FINE WOULD BE 150 TO $160,000. I THINK THAT WOULD MAKE A DEVELOPER THINK TWICE ABOUT TAKING DOWN A TREE. SO WHAT I AM ASKING FROM MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS IS THAT THIS MEETING IS TAKING PLACE TOMORROW. I WOULD THINK THE COST OF A TREE SHOULD BE AT LEAST $14,000. I'D LIKE TO GET MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER'S THOUGHTS ON WHAT PRICE THEY WOULD PUT ON TAKING DOWN A TREE AND WHAT ADVICE THEY WOULD GIVE TO THE PAB GOING INTO THEIR

DELIBERATIONS TOMORROW ON THAT COST. >> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU SIR.

I DON'T SEE ANY LIGHTS YET SO I'LL START. I'M SORRY COMMISSIONER ROSS GO AHEAD.

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS: AS YOU KNOW I AM -- I AM AN ADVOCATE FOR THESE SORTS OF THINGS. BUT HERE'S MY CONCERN. MY CONCERN IS WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS THE EVIL DEVELOPER COMES IN OR THE DEVELOPER COMES IN AND CUTS DOWN A BUNCH OF TREES. BUT I'VE BEEN CAREFULLY LOOKING AT HOW MANY PIECES OF LAND ARE LEFT GOING THROUGH AND OTHER THINGS THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT LATER ABOUT WHAT'S LAND IS LEFT FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THIS CITY. AND MOST OF THE PARCELS THAT ARE LEFT I THINK ALL THE PARCELS THAT ARE LEFT ARE SMALL RESIDENTIAL PARCELS. SO IT'S BASICALLY WHAT I'LL CALL HARRY HOMEOWNER WHO OWNS THE PARCEL. SOMEBODY OWNS THAT PARCEL. SO, BECAUSE UNDER THE LAW EVERYTHING HAS TO BE THE SAME. YOU CAN'T CHARGE A DEVELOPER ONE FEE FOR CUTTING A TREE DOWN AND A HOMEOWNER ANOTHER TREE FOR CUTTING A TREE DOWN. WE HAVE TO VERY CAREFULLY CONSIDER WHEN A HOMEOWNER GOES AND CUTS DOWN A TREE, $14,000 IS AN EXTRAORDINARY AMOUNT OF MONEY FOR MOST OF THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THIS CITY. IT TRULY IS.

$2,500 IS A BIG DEAL TO A LOT OF PEOPLE. I WOULD BE WILLING TO BET THAT HALF OF THE PEOPLE IN THIS -- A LOT OF THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE CANNOT AFFORD THAT $2,500. IT IS A BIG DEAL TO

[02:25:03]

THEM. SO, I AGREE THERE NEEDS TO BE A WAY OF TRYING TO PRESERVE TREES. BUT MAYBE IT NEEDS TO BE MORE ROBUST THAN JUST LOOKING AT A PENALTY OF -- A MONETARY PENALTY OF LOOKING AT OTHER WAYS OF DOING THAT. BECAUSE THERE'S GOING TO BE AN UPRISING WHEN $14,000 I CUT DOWN A FREE AND IT'S $14,000 HOW ARE THEY GOING TO PAY FOR IT? I MEAN, THEY'RE NOT. SO, I DON'T HAVE A GOOD -- I DON'T HAVE A SOLUTION BUT I THINK THAT JUST BASICALLY PUTTING A MONETARY PENALTY ON IT IS NOT THE SOLUTION. PERHAPS PART OF THE SOLUTION IS THAT THEY HAVE TO REPLANT ENOUGH TREES OR SOMETHING AS PART OF THAT AND THEY HAVE TO GUARANTEE THOSE TREES ARE GOING TO -- WHERE I LIVED BEFORE IN CALVERT COUNTY THEY HAD A BOND THAT YOU PAID INTO WHEN YOU PLANTED TREES. THEN YOU GOT YOUR MONEY BACK IF THE TREE LIVED FOR THREE YEARS.

SO, I THINK THERE'S OTHER SOLUTIONS. SO WHAT I SAY TO THE PAB AND I'LL BE AT THE OCEAN HIGHWAY PORT AUTHORITY MEETING INSTEAD OF THERE IS LOOK AT THIS BUT IT'S MORE THAN JUST MONETARY. THERE NEEDS TO BE OTHER THINGS WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT. THAT'S ALL.

>> MAYOR MILLER: BEFORE WE GET TOO FAR INTO THE WEEDS I CITY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S LIGHT IS ON.

CAN I ASK THE CONSERVATION DIRECTOR TO COME UP REAL QUICK? I ADDRESS THIS TO YOU BECAUSE I SAW THIS COMING UP. CAN YOU GO OVER BEFORE WE GET TOO FAR INTO THIS WHAT WE CAN AND CAN'T DO.

THERE IS A LIMIT, A STATE LEGISLATION THAT WAS PASSED REGARDING RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND I BELIEVE THERE'S A CAP ON -- AND HOW THIS -- WHAT THE SITUATION IN TAMPA WAS ABOUT THE ZONING AND EVERYTHING. HOW THAT DIFFERS FROM WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TOMORROW. THANK YOU

>> SPEAKER: KELLY GIBSON, PLANNING DIRECTOR. MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE SITUATION THAT OCCURRED IN TAMPA -- AND I HAVE REACHED OUT TO THEM AS A PROFESSIONAL TO DETERMINE HOW EVERYTHING OCCURRED THERE AND ALSO TO HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF HOW THEIR FEES HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED FOR WHAT I WILL SAY IS UNPERMITTED TREE REMOVAL AT THIS POINT, IS THAT A PROPERTY OWNER WENT ON TO A PROPERTY WHICH HAS BEEN USED CUSTOMARILY AS RESIDENTIAL LAND, THERE'S A MOBILE HOME PARK FOR THE PAST NUMBER OF YEARS. THE PROPERTY ITSELF IS ACTUALLY ZONED COMMERCIAL. AND UNDER THE NEW FLORIDA LAW PASSED IN 2019 THAT WOULD PREVENT A PROPERTY OWNER ON A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY -- THE CITY, PREVENT THE CITY FROM DENYING A PERMIT WHERE THERE'S DETERMINED TO BE A HAZARDOUS TREE TO A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. BUT IN TAMPA, IN THIS SITUATION, THAT PROPERTY WAS DETERMINED TO BE COMMERCIAL AND NOT RESIDENTIAL BECAUSE OF ITS ZONING AND LAND USE ASSIGNED TO IT AND, THEREFORE, THE CITY WENT AFTER THE PROPERTY OWNER AS WELL AS THE CONTRACTOR, IN THIS CASE, AND LEVIED FEES INDEPENDENTLY ON BOTH. WHICH IS WHAT ESCALATED THAT PRICE POINT TO THE POINT THAT YOU SEE IT AT I THINK $840,000. BECAUSE THEY WENT AFTER THE PROPERTY OWNER AND CONTRACTOR. WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED AND REVIEWED BY THE PLANNING BOARD AT TOMORROW'S MEETING IS A FEE ESTABLISHED PER VIOLATION IS HOW IT READS AT THE PRESENT TIME. AND I KNOW THAT COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH AND I HAVE DISCUSSED THAT IT NEEDS TO FURTHER CLARIFY IS THAT FOR VIOLATION ASSOCIATED WITH THE LOT ITSELF OR THE TREE. AND THAT'S SOMETHING WE'LL DISCUSS TOMORROW NIGHT. BUT RIGHT NOW IT DEFERS TO A REQUIREMENT FOR RESTORATION STRATEGY. AND THEN WITHIN THAT RESTORATION STRATEGY WHERE YOU ARE UNABLE TO MEET THE INCHES REPLACED IN THAT OVERALL PLAN, THERE'S A PER-FEE INCH ALLOWANCE TO PAY INTO A FUND.

THE FEE THAT IS BEING PROPOSED THIS EVENING WOULD BE IN ASHEN IN ADDITION TO THAT REQUIREMENT.

SO, YOU WOULD HAVE BOTH EFFECTIVELY; A SET FINE, PENALTY IF YOU WILL, FOR HAVING A VIOLATION OF THAT TREE PROTECTION ORDINANCE, AND YOU ARE STILL REQUIRED TO PROVIDE, UNDER A RESTORATION PLAN WHERE YOU ARE UNABLE TO MEET ALL THE INCHES OF THAT RESTORATION PLAN YOU WOULD HAVE THE ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITY TO PAY THAT PER-INCH REQUIREMENT. SO, THERE ARE TWO SECTIONS WHERE YOU COULD LOOK AT FEE INCREASES. ONE IS ADDING IN THAT PENALTY. THE SECOND SECTION WOULD BE THAT COST PER INCH RATIO AMOUNT AND WHAT YOU MIGHT WANT TO HAVE THERE. IT'S CURRENTLY $125 PER INCH WHERE YOU ARE UNABLE TO MITIGATE ON SITE. THAT'S FOR PROPERTIES

[02:30:01]

OUTSIDE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE LANDS. THOSE ARE $250 PER INCH. SO, I HOPE THAT

HELPS. >> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES, MA'AM.

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS TALKED ABOUT THE DWINDLING ABOUT OF PROPERTY FOR DEVELOPMENT. IS THERE -- CAN YOU TELL ME, WHAT LAND IS AVAILABLE IN THE CITY FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS

LIKE AMELIA BLUFF? >> SPEAKER: I CAN THINK OF AT LEAST TWO WHERE YOU COULD REASONABLY EXPECT TO SEE 12 OR MORE HOMES DEVELOPED ON THAT TRACT OF LAND. AS ITS CURRENTLY CONFIGURED. THAT'S NOT CONTEMPLATING WHERE YOU MIGHT ASSEMBLE PARCELS OF LAND AND

REDEVELOPMENT THOSE PROPERTIES. >> COMMISSIONER: OKAY. AND ARE THERE OTHER PARCELS THAT WOULD

ACCOMMODATE FOUR OR MORE HOUSES? >> SPEAKER: CERTAINLY. >> COMMISSIONER: WHAT WOULD YOUR

GUESSTIMATE BE ON THAT? I WON'T HOLD IT TO YOU. >> SPEAKER: I REALLY DON'T FEEL

COMFORTABLE TRYING TO MAKE AN ASSESSMENT. >> COMMISSIONER: HOW ABOUT

COMMERCIALLY? WHAT ARE SOME OF THE LARGE COMMERCIAL PLOTS? >> SPEAKER: YOU ARE VERY LIMITED IN THE CITY TO LARGE COMMERCIAL PLOTS. PRINCIPAL TO REDEVELOPMENT AT THIS POINT.

YOUR LARGER COMMERCIAL ACREAGE LIES JUST OUTSIDE THE CITY BOUNDARY. THAT YOU WOULD ANTICIPATE COMING INTO THE CITY BECAUSE THEY NEED WATER AND SEWER SERVICES.

>> COMMISSIONER: OKAY. >> SPEAKER: BUT VERY FEW AT THE PRESENT TIME.

>> COMMISSIONER: SO WOULD YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THAT ASSESSMENT THAT PUNITIVE TREE

ASSESSMENTS ARE NOT NEEDED OR NOT EFFECTIVE? >> SPEAKER: MY CONCERN ABOUT PUNITIVE FEE ASSESSMENT IS THAT YOU RAISE IT TO A POIN WHERE YOU END UP GOING TO COURT AND IT COST THE CITY MORE TO RECUPERATE ANYTHING BACK OUT. MY INITIAL RATIONALE IN PROPOSING A $2,500 PER VIOLATION AMOUNT WAS ON AN INDIVIDUAL HOMEOWNER THAT REALLY HURTS. YOU ARE GOING TO LEARN YOUR LESSON AND NEVER CUT A TREE DOWN AGAIN WITHOUT GETTING EXPLICIT PERMISSION TO DO SO.

BUT EVEN AS A DEVELOPER, AND LET'S SAY YOU HAVE CUT DOWN A COUPLE OF TREES ON A SITE YOU ARE DEVELOPING, THAT ALSO IS A PROBLEM FOR YOU TO MOVE FORWARD WITH YOUR CONTRACT AND POTENTIALLY EVEN MEET YOUR MITIGATION INCHES BECAUSE THOSE ARE INCH FOR INCH NOW INSTEAD OF

AT THE RATIO THAT WE PRESET. >> COMMISSIONER: OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR MILLER: VICE MAYOR KREGER? >> VICE MAYOR KREGER: MY POSITION IS LET'S LET THE PAB ADVISORY BOARD DO THEIR JOB AND COME BACK TO US AND LOOK AT

THEIR INFORMATION. >> MAYOR MILLER: CITY ATTORNEY? >> CITY ATTORNEY: THE LAST THOUGHT THAT I HAD CERTAINLY NOT LEGAL IS BECAUSE OF THE LIMITED AMOUNT OF LAND AND THE FACT THAT WE'RE A BARRIER ISLAND AND WE KNOW WHAT THE CITY'S RECORD IS, YOU KNOW, PLANTING TREES, UNLESS WE HIRED A CONSULTANT WE WOULD NEVER BE ABLE -- WE HAVE TO AS KELLYING PROPOSING MAKE SURE THAT WE FOCUSED PREDOMINANTLY ON TREE MITIGATION AND REPLACEMENT AND NOT JUST FINES. WE HAVE TO HAVE FINES AND PUNITIVE DAMAGES ON TOP OF IT BUT WE NEED TO GET THOSE TREES BACK. BECAUSE ONCE THEY'RE GONE IF WE DON'T REQUIRE THEM TO GO BACK WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO REPLACE THEM AT THE RATE THAT, FOR EXAMPLE, AMELIA BLUFF IS GOING TO REPLACE 450 OR 400 INCHES OF TREES. NOT THAT WHAT THEY DID WAS GOOD BUT IT'S BETTER THAN IF WE JUST COLLECTED, LET'S SAY, HALF A MILLION DOLLARS IN FINES. THOSE TREES ARE STILL GONE. AND I WILL JUST DISCLOSE WHAT I HAVE SAID JUST FOR THOUGHT. AND I AM PREPARED NOW, MR. LEDNOVICH AND I MET WITH MR. MARTIN TODAY TO ASSIST WITH MAKING SURE THAT THE PLANNING BOARD HAS THE INFORMATION AND WHAT SOME OF THE THOUGHTS THAT YOU ALL EXPRESS HERE TONIGHT. I CAN LEGALLY JUSTIFY VERY EASILY, AND I SPOKE I THINK WITH KELLY ABOUT THIS BRIEFLY TODAY, $5,000 PER TREE WITHOUT FOR SURE STAY UTE OF COURT. $5,000 COMES FROM THE CODE ENFORCEMENT STATUTES. AND IF THERE'S AN IRREFUTABLE FOR IRREVERSIBLE VIOLATION OF THE CITY CODE YOU CAN CHARGE $5,000 PER VIOLATION. SO THAT WOULD BE $5,000 PER TREE. AND THAT WE WOULD SAY THAT'S WHERE WE END UP WE WOULD SAY THAT'S HOW WE'RE JUSTIFYING IT. SO, OUR ORDINANCE WOULD SET FORTH A LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS THIS IS HOW WE JUSTIFIED IT'S REASONABLE. BECAUSE WHAT KELLY IS TALKING

[02:35:04]

ABOUT WITH COURT IS THAT WE GET ACCUSED AND THEY ARE SUING IN TAMPA AND I HAVEN'T READ THE COMPLAINT BUT I WOULD VENTURE TO GUESS IT'S AN ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS ARGUMENT. THAT MEANS YOU DON'T HAVE A REAL BASIS FOR SETTING THAT FEE OR FINE. AND WHEN YOU ARE FINING SOMEBODY IN A PUNITIVE WAY, THEN THE COURTS LOOK AT THAT VERY SERIOUSLY AND THEY WANT YOU TO HAVE SOME JUSTIFICATION. SO, I CAN JUSTIFY FIVE NOW AND WE'LL DO FURTHER RESEARCH AND SEE IF WE

CAN DO MORE. >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONERS I SEE BOTH OF YOUR LIGHTS ON.

BEFORE YOU SIT DOWN, WHENEVER WE HAVE THESE DISCUSSION IS GET QUESTIONS AFTERWARDS ABOUT THE HOMEOWNERS THINKING THEY CAN'T CUT DOWN TREES ON THEIR PROPERTY WITHOUT PAYING A LARGE FINE OR FEE. BUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS TREES THAT ARE CUT DOWN WITHOUT A PERMIT. IF YOU BUY A HOME AND MOVE IN AND CUT A TREE DOWN AND SOMEBODY NOTICES AND COMPLAINS THAT STARTS THIS PROCESS. IF YOU ARE A HOMEOWNER AND YOU DO HAVE A HOME HERE AND THESE TREES DO HAVE LARGE EXTENDING BRANCHES THAT EXTEND OVER HOMES. THEY TERM THAT WAS USED IS HAZARDOUS TREE. THAT DOESN'T MEAN THE TREE IS DYING. IT MEANS IF THAT BRANCH WAS TO COME OFF IN A STORM IT COULD DESTROY YOUR HOME OR CAUSE LIFE OR DEATH PROPERTY ISSUES. IF YOU HAVE A TREE OVER YOUR HOUSE, COME TO THE CITY AND GET A PERMIT, AND DO IT THE RIGHT WAY. DON'T THINK YOU HAVE TO DO IT AT NIGHT OR A WEEKEND OR SNEAKY BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT GOING TO GET THIS DONE THE RIGHT WAY. SO MANY TIMES WE'VE SEEN PEOPLE THINKING THEY WON'T BE ALLOWED TO TOUCH A TREE DO IT WITHOUT ASKING PERMISSION THEN GOING BACK AND HAVING TO PAY AND IT'S FRUSTRATING. IF YOU DO FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE A NUISANCE TREE OR ISSUE COME TO THE CITY AND MEET WITH THE PROFESSIONALS AND THEY'LL HELP YOU GET THROUGH IT. DON'T TAKE IT ON YOURSELF TO TRY TO SKIRT THE SYSTEM.

>> SPEAKER: IF I CAN JUST ADD. THE WAY THE STATE LAW READS IS THAT A CERTIFIED ISA ARBORIST DOES NEED TO MAKE A DETERMINATION ABOUT THE HAZARD ASSOCIATED WITH THAT TREE. SO, IF YOU DO NOT COME BEFORE THE CITY TO GET A PERMIT WHICH YOU ARE NO LONGER REQUIRED TO DO -- RESIDENTIAL ONLY PROPERTY -- IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT YOU HAVE THAT CERTIFIED ARBORIST ASSESSMENT IN HAND SO THAT WHEN A COMPLAINT IS ISSUED, AND IT WILL BE, YOU HAVE THAT TO

PRESENT TO CODE ENFORCEMENT AND TO OUR ARBORIST TO REVIEW. >> MAYOR MILLER: GET OUT IN

FRONT OF IT. >> SPEAKER: YES. >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER

ROSS YOU ARE RECOGNIZED. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: I JUST HAD ONE OTHER ISSUE.

>> MAYOR MILLER: >> COMMISSIOCOMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH?

>> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: I AM GOING TO DISAGREE WITH COMMISSIONER ROSS AND WITH OUR CITY ATTORNEY SOMEWHAT. MITIGATION IS REACTIVE. MITIGATIONS AFTER THE DAMAGE IS DONE. WE'RE AT A CRISIS POINT WITH OUR TREES. WE HAVEN'T REPLACED OUR TREE CAN APOO EH.

WE DON'T EVEN HAVE A TREE CANOPY PLAN. CORRECT? OKAY. IN FACT, WE'VE DECREASED THE TREE CANOPY.

NOT INCREASED IT TO THE GOAL. SO, MITIGATION'S REACTIVE. MITIGATION UNDER THE AMELIA BLUFF PLAN -- THEY TOOK DOWN A 20 INCH OAK AND THEY'RE REPLACING IT WITH A 4 INCH OAK.

EVERYBODY IN THIS ROOM IS GOING TO BE DEAD BEFORE THAT OAK DOES ANY PROTECTION OF THIS ISLAND.

SO THAT'S MY POINT ON MITIGATION. INSTEAD OF BEING REACTIVE WE HAVE TO BE PROACTIVE. PROACTIVE MEANS DOING THIS. PUTTING THE FEAR OF GOD IN TO DEVELOPERS AND BUILDERS. IF I TOLD ANYBODY ON THIS COMMISSION THAT WE'RE GOING TOO HAVE 150 PROTECTED TREES IN AMELIA BLUFF AND THEY TAKE DOWN 52. IF I TOLD YOU THAT IN ADVANCE, WHAT WOULD YOUR REACTION BE? YOU WOULD BE APPLLED. YOU'D GO OUT THERE AND GUARD THE TREES. SO, THIS IS THE MEASURE THAT WE NEED TO TAKE. AND IF IT'S 5,000, LET'S MAKE IT 5,000. BUT LET'S NOT SIT ON YOUR HANDS ANYMORE. LET'S NOT LET THESE TREES COME DOWN. AND LET'S PUT THE FEAR OF

GOD INTO THESE DEVELOPERS AND MAKE IT HURT. >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER

ROSS? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: I AGREE WITH THAT BUT IT'S ALSO -- MY POINT IS I DON'T THINK DEVELOPERS IS WHERE THE BIG PROBLEM IS GOING TO BE IN THE NEXT TEN YEARS. THAT'S MY POINT. AND I DIDN'T SAY THERE SHOULDN'T BE A REASON TO PREVENT PEOPLE FROM CUTTING DOWN TREES. IF I CAME ACROSS AS SAYING THAT I MISSPOKE. I THINK THERE

[02:40:02]

SHOULD BE. BUT I ALSO THINK THAT MITIGATION ONCE IT HAPPENS IS JUST AS IMPORTANT. I MEAN,

IT IS A TWO-PRONGED ATTACK. THAT'S MY POINT. >> MAYO

>> MAYOR MILLER: THERE IS A REQUEST TO SPEAK. MS. JULIE FERRER.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: JULIE FERRER 501 DATE STREET. SO, I THINK THE REAL BASIS THAT TAMMI WAS REFERRING TO IS THAT TREES TAKE A LONG TIME TO REACH MATURITY. AND THEY'RE NOT EASILY REPLACED LIKE COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH WAS JUST SPEAKING ABOUT. SO, FINES FOR DESTROYING THEM FOR EITHER PERSONAL GAIN OR FINANCIAL GAIN SHOULD REFLECT THE NUMBER OF YEARS OF GROWTH THAT WAS UNDONE.

AND ALSO THE COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC'S HEARTFELT, SINCERE DESIRE TO PROTECT OUR TREE CANOPY GOING INTO THE FUTURE. FOR 18 YEARS I'VE SAT AND WATCHED THIS HAPPEN TO OUR TREE CANOPY AND IT'S ALWAYS OOPS. OOPS, OH THAT WAS A MISTAKE. AND WAY TOO OFTEN THAT'S BEEN ACCEPTED BY THIS COMMUNITY AND THIS CITY AND ALSO AT THE COUNTY. AND IF WE LEVY FINES, THEY'RE SMALL, INSIGNIFICANT FINES. SO, OBVIOUSLY, THE PENALTIES THAT WE'VE HAD JUST GET ROLLED INTO THE COST OF DOING BUSINESS. SO, PUTTING TEETH INTO IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT. AND I'LL SAY TO COMMISSIONER ROSS THAT WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW IS WE NEED TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT REDEVELOPMENT. WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A HURRICANE COMES AND TAKES STUFF DOWN. NOW I'VE JUST BEEN IN THE LAST FEW DAYS DOWN AT AMELIA LANDINGS WHICH IS ON SADDLE ROAD. THAT'S A BEAUTIFUL SETTING. IT'S CONDOMINIUMS. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY BUILDINGS ARE THERE. I HAVE A FRIEND BUYING A CONDO THERE. TREES EVERYWHERE. MAYBE THOSE TREES ARE GOING TO PROTECT THAT CONDOMINIUM AND LET'S HOPE SO. BUT LET'S SAY THAT THE CONDOMINIUM GETS DESTROYED TO THE POINT WHERE THEY CAN'T BE REBUILT OR WHATEVER. I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE AS THE CITY THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE TO REBUILD ON YOUR SAME FOOTPRINT. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S PART OF OUR REGULATIONS OR NOT. BUT LET'S SAY IT WANTS TO COME BIGGER AND BETTER AND THERE ARE LOTS AND LOTS OF TREES IN THERE. SO, I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO REFLECT THE COMMUNITY'S INTENSE INTEREST IN THIS ISSUE AND, YOU KNOW, NEW YORK CITY, WE'RE NOT NEW YORK CITY, BUT THEY CHARGE $15,000 OR ONE YEAR IN JAIL IF YOU TAKE DOWN A TREE ILLEGALLY. SO, YOU KNOW, OKAY WE'RE IN FLORIDA. SO, MAYBE IT IS $5,000 FOR THE FIRST TREE AND $7,500 FOR THE SECOND TREE. AND, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER. $12,000 FOR THE THIRD ONE. $25,000. WHATEVER IT IS. BUT, YOU KNOW, LET'S MAKE IT SO THAT IT SCARES PEOPLE AND IT MAKES DEVELOPERS GO, WAIT A MINUTE, THIS IS NO LONGER THE COST OF DOING BUSINESS. YOU KNOW, THIS IS, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY TIMES HAVE UNAUTHORIZED TREES BEEN TAKEN DOWN? I MEAN, LOTS. LOTS AND LOTS. I DON'T KNOW I JUST REALLY HOPE THAT --

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU MA'AM. >> I SWEAR YOU PRACTICE THIS AT HOME. BECAUSE EVERY TIME YOU END YOUR COMMENTS IT'S JUST ABOUT THE THREE MINUTE MARK.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: I'VE GOT MORE TO SAY. I JUST SHUT UP

THAT'S GREAT. THANKS. >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER ROSS?

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS: ON THE NEXT TOPIC? ON LAND CON ERR IS INVESTIGATION. IN YOUR PACKET IS INCLUDED COMMISSIONER KREGER BROUGHT UP THE MOONI CODE -- MUNI CODE CONSERVATION AND PRESERVATION OF LAND ORDINANCE THAT WE PASSED. I WENT AND READ IT. WHAT I TRIED TO DO -- AND I'VE PROVIDED IT IN THE PACKET -- WAS EXTRACT WHAT THAT SAID IN A WAY THAT IS READABLE.

AND IT TOOK ME ABOUT FOUR OR FIVE HOURS. I WOULD JUST HOPE YOU WOULD READ THIS. BECAUSE NEXT -- THE NEXT MEETING NORTH FLORIDA LAND TRUST IS GOING TO COME AND GIVE A PRESENTATION.

SO WE WOULD BE KNOWLEDGEABLE TO ASK APPROPRIATE QUESTIONS ON HOW THEY CAN HELP US OUT WITH THIS ORDINANCE. I TRIED TO DISTILL IT DOWN INTO SOMETHING THAT WAS A LITTLE BIT MORE READABLE AND

IT'S JUST THERE FOR YOUR INFORMATION. THAT'S ALL. >> MAYOR MILLER: CITY ATTORNEY?

>> CITY ATTORNEY: SO I'VE HAD SOME TIME TO THINK SINCE OUR MEETING THIS MORNING AND I'M NOT

[02:45:06]

SURE -- I KNOW YOU WILL TELL ME TO BE QUIET IF IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. GOING THROUGH ALL THESE STEP ONES AND THE TIMELINES WE'RE NEVER GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO THE THINGS -- WE COULD, BUT WE'VE ALREADY GOTTEN WAY AHEAD OF OURSELVES WITH THE NORTH FLORIDA LAND TRUST, THE LIST THAT WE'VE MADE. AND I KNOW I HAVE NOT SAID THIS TO -- THIS IS SOME THOUGHTS I HAD THIS AFTERNOON. WE NEED TO REALLY CONSIDER HOW WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS AND HOW IT'S GOING TO MEET OUR NEEDS. BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HEARD ALL OF YOU SAY AND EXPRESS IS THAT YOU WANT TO TRY TO STOP SOME OF THE TRAGIC LOSSES THAT WE'VE ALREADY HAD AND THAT WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF TIME BECAUSE THERE'S NOT A LOT LEFT. IF WE FOLLOW THIS ORDINANCE STEP BY STEP BY STEP, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WE WOULDN'T EVEN HAVE LISTS APPROVED FOR A YEAR. I DON'T HAVE ANY LEGAL PROBLEM WITH THAT. I'M JUST GOING TO STOP THERE AND LET YOU KNOW THAT I DON'T HAVE ANY LEGAL PROBLEM WITH GIVING YOU SOME SOLUTIONS ON HOW TO WORK -- THE PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE WAS TO MY MEMORY, WAS SUSTAINING A TRUST FUND -- ESTABLISHING A TRUST FUND AND MAKING SURE THAT CITY ADMINISTRATION KNEW THIS MONEY HAD TO BE SET ASIDE FOR THIS SPECIFIC PURPOSE. AND THEN THE AUDITORS KNOW SO WE CAN'T BREAK THOSE RULES. THE OTHER PARTS OF IT WERE THINGS THAT WE TOOK FROM -- I FORGET WHAT JURISDICTION WE USED. I THINK NAPLES IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY.

AND IT TAKES A LONG TIME TO GO THROUGH THIS. IT SAYS WE SHALL DO THIS. WE SHALL OR WE MUST.

AND IT PUTS ALL OF THESE -- AND MR. KREGER AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT IT AND I KNOW YOU TALKED ABOUT IT WITH THE CITY MANAGER. WE NEED TO BE FOLLOWING OUR ORDINANCE. BECAUSE IT LOOKS KIND OF SILLY WE'RE WORKING WITH NORTH FLORIDA LAND TRUST AND WE'VE CLOSED ON THREE PARCELS AND VICE MAYOR KRIEGER IS SAYING WHAT ABOUT THE ORDINANCE GUYS? WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE NOMINATING PROPERTIES. I'VE DONE SO. SO, WE'VE GOT TO DECIDE WHAT TO DO AND IF THIS IS GOING TO WORK

WITH OUR TIMELINE. >> MAYOR MILLER: VICE MAYOR KREGER?

>> VICE MAYOR KREGER: MY POINT WAS WE PASSED THIS IN JUNE 2018. THERE WERE PROPERTIES NOMINATED AND WE BOUGHT ONE OF THEM. AND THERE'S A -- TWO WERE NOMINATED AND A THIRD PROPERTY WAS NOMINATED. IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE AN ANNUAL MEETING. IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE OTHER THINGS. WE ACTUALLY HAVE TWO OR THREE LISTS. AND, YOU KNOW, LET'S DO IT YOU KNOW. PEOPLE ARE WAITING FOR US -- I THINK WE GOT A FORM NOW. DO WE HAVE A NOMINATION FORM? YEAH. I THINK ONE CAME

OUT IN NOVEMBER. >> CITY ATTORNEY: KELLY IS SHAKING HER HEAD THERE IS A E M ORDINANCE GUYS. I MEAN, THIS ISN'T LIKE WE -- THAT'S A PROBLEM WITH ADOPTING SOMETHING AND NOT FOLLOWING UP. WE SHOULD HAVE AN ANNUAL MEETING AND REVIEWING THESE THINGS. TO NOW

SAY IT'S TIGHT IS RIDICULOUS. LET'S JUST GET SOMETHING DONE. >> CITY ATTORNEY. I HAVE NO

PROBLEM SAYING YOU GOT TO FOLLOW YOUR ORDINANCE. >> VICE MAYOR KREGER: WHY DID WE

ENACT THE ORDINANCE. >> CITY ATTORNEY: BECAUSE WE WANTED A CONSERVATION TRUST

FUND. >> VICE MAYOR KREGER: TO IDENTIFY PROPERTIES, TO HAVE A NOMINATION PROCESS. I THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO DO THE ORDINANCE. THAT'S WHY I NOMINATED PROPERTIES RIGHT AFTER IT WAS PASSED. AND I NOMINATED PROPERTY ONE OF THE TWO.

>> CITY ATTORNEY: BUT WHEN I READ IT AND WE COULD HAVE DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS. THE WAY THAT I READ IT AND I READ IT FIVE TIMES EACH SECTION. THE WAY IT TALKS ABOUT HOW PROPERTIES ARE NOMINATED, HOW THEY'RE VETTED BY STAFF, THAT IT IS ABSOLUTELY REQUIRED THAT STAFF DO AN EVALUATION AND IT BE ANALYZED WITH THESE CRITERIA, NONE OF THAT IS BEING DONE.

>> VICE MAYOR KREGER: WHEN THE LAND TRUST COMES AND WHAT CHIP IS SAYING IS THAT I DO BELIEVE AND I'VE TALKED TO KELLY ABOUT THIS THAT THAT CRITERIA -- AND IT FITS A LITTLE BIT INTO WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH THE REFERENDUM TOO YOU KNOW. THAT CRITERIA NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT A LITTLE CLOSER AND STANDARDIZED WITH STATE REQUIREMENTS. BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN, YOU KNOW, THE ANNUAL MEETING WAS SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN IN JUNE 2019. SO, I AM JUST SAYING, MY WHOLE POINT WAS TO IMPLEMENT THE ORDINANCE. WE CAN'T PASS AN ORDINANCE, YOU KNOW, GO OUT AND CUT AND PASTE AND SAY WE'RE GOOD. THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. WE'RE GOING TO BE ON OTHER PEOPLE TALK ABOUT PEOPLE UP HERE WHO DON'T FOLLOW THE ORDINANCE AND WE DON'T FOLLOW OUR ORDINANCES.

>> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER ROSS? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: I HAVE NO PROBLEM FOLLOWING THE ORDINANCE. WHAT I DID IS TOOK THE ORDINANCE AND SHOWED YOU ALL THE STEPS. I

[02:50:04]

THINK SPEAKING TO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S POINT, IF YOU PRECISELY FOLLOW ALL THOSE STEPS, IT'S GOING TO BE YEARS BEFORE YOU DO ANYTHING. SO, I THINK I AGREE WITH YOU, WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD, BUT WE NEED TO COME UP WITH A WAY OF USING THAT ORDINANCE AND MOVING FORWARD.

THAT'S MY POINT AND I WOULD JUST HOPE EVERYBODY AGREES. >> CITY ATTORNEY: AND I THINK ROUT OVERCOMPLICATING IT I THINK IT'S GOING TO REQUIRE A FEW CHANGES AND STREAMLINING THE ORDINANCE AND THE PROCESS A LITTLE. SO, I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE, IF YOU ARE ALL OKAY WITH THAT, IS IN FEBRUARY JUST BEING REALISTIC, THE SECOND MEETING IN FEBRUARY I THINK THAT WE CAN, IF YOU CALL AGREE, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU DO, WE CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE NORTH FLORIDA LAND TRUST AND THAT IN THE SECOND MEETING IN FEBRUARY I'LL MAKE SOME SUGGESTIONS, I'LL GET WITH THE TREE CONSERVANCY AND, OF COURSE, MRS. GIBSON AND SAY IT'S NOT GOING TO BYPASS ANY OF THE VERY IMPORTANT CRITERIA AND THE THINGS. IT JUST MAY SUM UP THE STEPS. WE MAY BE ABLE TO -- WE DON'T HAVE TO DO, FOR EXAMPLE. AND NOTHING THAT IS IMPORTANT. I DON'T WANT TO MISS ANY OF THAT. BUT I ALSO DON'T WANT TO HAVE THIS ONEROUS ORDINANCE THAT PREVENTS US FROM DOING THINGS IN A TIMELY MATTER. AND BEFORE WE KNOW IT YOU ARE OFF THE COMMISSION BEFORE WE'VE

EVER DONE ANYTHING. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: I JUST HAVE A PROCEDURAL QUESTION.

WHEN AN ORDINANCE SAYS WE AREIRED TO HAVE AN ANNUAL MEETING, WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY IS IT? IS IT THE MAYOR? IS IT THE CITY MANAGER? IS IT THE CITY ATTORNEY? WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY IS IT TO SAY, HEY, ORDINANCE SAYS WE HAVE TO HAVE AN ANNUAL MEETING LET'S SCHEDULE THE

MEETING? >> I BELIEVE IN THIS CASE IT DOES SPECIFICALLY SPECIFY THE

CITY MANAGER. IN THIS CASE. IN OTHER CASES -- >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH:

THAT'S WHAT I AM ASKING. OKAY. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU.

WITH THAT WE'LL TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK. >> MAYOR MILLER: WE'RE BACK IN

[Item 11.2]

SESSION. WE ARE ON ITEM 11.2 WATERFRONT PARK DEVELOPMENT. THIS WAS PLACED ON THE AGENDA AT

THE REQUEST OF MR. LEDNOVICH. THE FLOOR IS YOURS. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: THANK YOU. OUT OF RESPECT OF TIME I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING AT THIS TIME. HOWEVER, I WILL ASK IF

OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE PIGGYBACKED ON THIS. >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER

ROSS? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: THIS IS PROBABLY THE LAST BIG DEAL AT THE MARINA. THE FPU WHICH IS PUBLIC UTILITIES DELIVERED AND INSTALLED THE TWO TRANSFORMERS ON THE SECOND OF JANUARY. THEY'RE BEING WIRED AS WE SPEAK. THEN ALL THE WIRING'S IN ON ALL THE TEN YOU ATOR AND THAT. THAT IS THE LAST BIG DEAL THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. SO, THIS IS A MILESTONE AND WE'RE GETTING REALLY CLOSE. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE A SHOUT OUT TO THREE PEOPLE. THOSE SILVER BOXES AND THOSE GREEN BOXES WOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE MIDDLE OF PARKING LOT B, EIGHT FEET UP IN THE AIR IF THIS HADN'T BEEN BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE CITY. IT WAS BROUGHT TO THE CITY AND OUR ELECTRICIAN WORKED REALLY HARD TO GET THEM OVER THERE. IT DID COST THE CITY SOME MONEY BUT I THINK ALTHOUGH THEY'RE NOT GREAT THEY'RE CERTAINLY BETTER THAN BEING IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PARKING LOT. I WANT TO GIVE THEM AN ATTABOY. THAT'S IT.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU. OKAY. 11.3 BEACHES. THIS ITEM WAS PLACED ON THE AGENDA AT THE

[Item 11.3]

REQUEST OF VICE MAYOR KREGER. THE FLOOR IS YOURS, SIR. >> VICE MAYOR KREGER: I SENT THE COMMISSIONERS A LOT OF DOCUMENTS, BUT MY POWER POINT WAS LATE. SO, I WON'T USE IT.

A COUPLE OF POINTS I WANT TO MAKE. WE HAD AMPLE DISCUSSION OF THE WALKOVER SITUATION. I DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT I HAVE BEACHES ON AS A CONTINUING ISSUE AND I WILL BE ADDRESSING THE MAINTENANCE OF THE EXISTING WALKOVERS IN THOSE ISSUE OF THE LONG WALKOVERS PROBABLY NEXT MEETING. NOW THE GOOD NEWS FOR TONIGHT. IN WHAT IS AN EXAMPLE OF A VERY EFFECTIVE CO LIEGE AL

[02:55:03]

RELATIONSHIP WITH THE COUNTY, THE AMELIA ISLAND BEACH HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN WILL BE OPEN, THE RFP WILL BE OPEN THURSDAY AFTERNOON AT 1,400 HOURS. THAT'S A PLAN WHICH WILL ACTUALLY TAKE A YEAR TO A YEAR AND A HALF THAT WILL ULTIMATELY ACCUMULATE IN THE SUBMISSION OF AN INCIDENTAL TAPE PERMIT REQUIRED BY LAW. THIS IS A PROCESS THAT THE COUNTY ACTUALLY BASICALLY DEFERRED TO US. IT'S OUR RFP. AMELIA ISLAND. THE SELECTION COMMITTEE WILL MEET ON THE 13TH OF FEBRUARY. THAT WILL BE NAN, KELLY, ADRIAN BURKE, DOUG AND MARY WILL MAKE THE SELECTION AT THE JOINT COMMITTEE EITHER APPROVING IT OR NOT APPROVING IT. THIS WAS WORKED IN CONJUNCTION WITH FWC, U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE IS AWARE OF IT. MOST BEACH COMMUNITIES DID THIS 20 YEARS AGO. I MENTIONED THE BEACH WALKOVERS. ANOTHER THING THAT'S GOING ON IS ANYBODY WHO LIVES NEAR THE BEACH OR HAS BEEN DOWN THERE RECENTLY THE $15 MILLION RE-NOURISHMENT PROGRESS IS BACK STARTED. PIPES ON THE BEACH. THE FIRST OF TWO DREDGES WILL BE HERE TOMORROW.

THEY'LL PROBABLY START PUMPING WITHIN TWO DAYS. HOPEFULLY THIS PROJECT -- BECAUSE WE HAVE TWO DREDGES -- WILL ACCUMULATE. IT WILL START AT FORT CLENCH AND GO NOT QUITE TO MAIN BEACH.

TOTALLY NAVY FUNDED. HOPEFULLY THEY'LL PUMP ABOUT 20 DAYS. WITH THAT, THE MEETING TO TALK ABOUT NEXT YEAR'S BEACH RE-NOURISHMENT WHICH WILL BE A NAVY PROJECT IS IN FEBRUARY.

THAT IDEALLY WAS GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE NAVY -- THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS DOING ITS RESILIENCY DESIGN PLAN WHICH THEY PRESENTED TO US HERE. AND I SENT COPIES TO EVERYBODY AND THE MEDIA.

I'LL BE HAPPY I TO SEND THEM TO. IN OCTOBER THAT WAS FORWARDED TO WASHINGTON, D.C. FOR APPROVAL OF THAT PLAN. WHAT THAT PLAN DOES IS BEACH RE-NOURISHMENT HAS NEVER INCLUDED DUNES.

RE-NOURISHMENT WAS ALWAYS JUST THE BEACH. THIS IS A RESULT OF HURRICANE SANDY HAS DETERMINED THAT THE DUNES ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO INCLUDE. THAT WOULD INCLUDE THEORETICALLY NEXT YEAR A RE-NOURISHING SOME OF THE DUNES IN THE PLAN. NOT LIKELY TO HAPPEN NEXT YEAR BECAUSE AS WE MOVE FORWARD THAT'S GOING TO REQUIRE US SOME EASEMENTS. AND THOSE EASEMENTS FOR THIS PLAN TOOK UP TO TWO YEARS. BUT IT IS A VERY POSITIVE THING. AND THE ONLY OTHER THING, YOU KNOW, I MENTIONED BEFORE, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE THE SECOND YEAR STARTS OF SOUTH ATLANTIC COASTAL STUDY, THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS, THAT'S A THREE-YEAR STUDY. THAT'S ACCUMULATION OF A LOT OF DATA.

MOST OF THAT DATA ON A LOT OF WEBSITES THAT WILL HELP US WITH PLANNING. HOPEFULLY OUR WATERFRONT ARCHITECTS. I KNOW THEY'RE LOOKING AT IT. THE OTHER STUDY WHICH I MENTIONED IS THE FLORIDA STRATEGIC PLAN FLORIDA OCEANS AND COASTS. THAT'S A GRANT GIVEN TO THE OCEAN ALLIANCE. AND THAT STUDY IS GOING TO BE COMPLETED BY JUNE. WE TALKED ABOUT THAT DATA AND THEY HAD SOME LOCAL MEETINGS BUT THEY HAVEN'T PUBLISHED ANYTHING. AND IT CONCERNS ME BECAUSE ALL THE PEOPLE ARE SOUTH FLORIDA. AND GOING BACK, KIND OF BACK STEPPING THE RENOIR IRMENT, WE'RE GOING HAVE TO RENEW OUR 50 YEAR CONTRACT WITH THE DEP. AND THE CRITERIA IS DIFFERENT. IT FAVORS POPULATION AREAS. IT SHOULDN'T HURT BECAUSE THE DEP CONTRIBUTION IS 90 PERCENT. THAT'S WHAT I TALKED WITH THE FLORIDA STRATEGIC PLAN IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE IN NORTH FLORIDA GET OUR DATA IN THERE SO THAT WE'RE NOT LEFT OUT. ITS THAT'S BEACHES

FOR TONIGHT. >> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> CITY ATTORNEY: CAN YOU CONDUCT MARY DUFFY IF YOU HAVEN'T.

>> VICE MAYOR KREGER: I HAVE. >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER ROSS?

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS: ONE SLIDE THAT WILL TAKE THREE MINUTES. THERE'S A HOTEL BEING BUILT AT THE END OF ATLANTIC. AND THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF MORE PEOPLE, MORE PEOPLE WALKING. AND FOR THOSE OF US -- WELL I GUESS WE ALL DO -- DRIVE DOWN THERE, THAT INTERSECTION IS

[03:00:01]

BECOMING MORE AND MORE PROBLEMATIC FOR PEDESTRIANS. SO, I WONDERED IF THE CITY MANAGER -- WHICH HE HAS DONE -- CAN CONTACT AND I'M GOING TO KEEP BRINGING IT UP, TO FIND OUT WHAT THE STATE AND COUNTY CAN DO TO MAKE THAT INTERSECTION THERE A FLETCHER ON ATLANTIC MORE

WALKABLE FOR PEDESTRIANS. WELL MORE WALKABLE. THAT'S ALL. >> MAYOR MILLER: DALE, IF YOU COULD ADD ON TO THAT I DID HAVE A REQUEST THAT YOU HELPED ME OUT WITH A WHILE BACK ABOUT PEOPLE THAT ARE VISUALLY IMPAIRED. IF THEY'RE GOING TO PUT A NEW CROSSWALK OR SOMETHING THERE, PIGGYBACK ON TO THAT TO HAVE THE AUDIBLE CROSSING SOUNDS. IT IS A LOT EASIER TO DO IT WHEN YOU

FIRST PUT THEM IN THEN TO ADD THEM ON LATER. >> CITY MANAGER: I THINK I SHARED WITH YOU I DID GET A CONTACT FROM MR. LESTER WHO IS STATE FDOT. THESE ARE STATE ROADS SO THEY'RE OUTSIDE OF YOUR JURISDICTION. THAT CONTACT WAS MAINTENANCE. BUT HE HAS FORWARDED MY REQUEST FOR SORT OF REVIEW DONE. THAT'S BEEN FORWARDED TO THE CORRECT

PERSONNEL WITH FDOT. WHEN I HEAR BACK I'LL LET YOU KNOW. >> MAYOR MILLER: THAT LAST ONE WAS FDOT AND THEY HELPED US OUT. THERE WAS A PERSON WHO CAME TO ME WHOSE WIFE IS VISUALLY IMPAIRED AND THAT STOP IS PROBLEMATIC. YOU DO HAVE TO ASK FOR IT. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE FOR BEACHES? ALL RIGHT. ITEM 11.4 DOWNTOWN PARKING SURVEY. IT WAS ON THE AGENDA AT THE

[Item 11.4]

REQUEST OF COMMISSIONER ROSS. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: THANK YOU.

THIS IS JUST AN INFORMATIONAL PIECE. I HAVE READ ALL THE -- BECAUSE IT CAME UP A LOT ABOUT PARKING AND HOW MUCH PARKING AT THE WATERFRONT AND THERE'S NOT ENOUGH FOR THE MARINA AND NOT ENOUGH FOR THIS AND THAT. I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT ALL THE OLD PARKING STUDIES. WHICH I HAVE INCLUDED IN THE PACKET. I THINK YOU SHOULD READ BEFORE WE DO OUR VISITING SESSION.

BECAUSE ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT'S GOING TO COME UP IS PARKING. A LOT OF THIS WORK HAS BEEN DONE.

I WAS JUST CURIOUS AS TO HOW MANY PARKING SPACES ARE AVAILABLE BASICALLY DOWNTOWN NOT ON THE WATER SIDE OF THE TRACKS BUT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE TRACKS. AND I WAS GOING TO GO COUNT ALL THESE SPACES AND I KEPT PUTTING IT OFF. AND I WAS SITTING WITH A CONSTITUENT, STEPHEN COOK, I SAID I'VE BEEN THINKING ABOUT IT, AND HE IS AN ARCHITECT. AND HE KINDLY SAID THAT'S SOMETHING I COULD DO. SO, HE DID IT AND HE CAME UP WITH IN THE PLANS HERE JUST FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. AND HE BASICALLY CONFIRMED THAT THERE IS WITH THE OTHER PARKING STUDIES HAVE SHOWN IS THERE'S WELL OVER A THOUSAND PARKING SPACES IN THE CITY IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. AND IT'S JUST FOR INFORMATIONAL USE ONLY. IT'S USED FOR THE PLANNING. IT DIDN'T COST THE CITY ANYTHING. IT'S JUST FOR THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO USE. AND IT'S JUST ANOTHER PIECE OF INFORMATION THAT'S AVAILABLE. THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.

>> MAYOR MILLER: THAT WAS VERY NICE OF HIM TO DO THAT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ITEM 11.5.

[Item 11.5]

THIS IS COMMISSIONER LIAISON ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES. THIS WAS PLACED ON THE AGENDA BY

COMMISSIONER ROSS. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: THIS HAS BECOME A CONUNDRUM. I AM NOT SURE WHAT MY ROLE IS. AND OTHER COMMISSIONERS ARE NOT SURE.

COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN VOICED HIS FRUSTRATION AT ONE OF THE MEETING HE DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT HE DID AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT I AM SUPPOSED TO DO. SO, I THINK DIFFERENT PEOPLE HAVE DIFFERENT IDEAS. MAYBE CITIZENS HAVE DIFFERENT IDEAS. BOARD MEMBERS HAVE DIFFERENT IDEAS. I WAS JUST WONDERING IF WE COULD SOMEHOW -- AND I LOOKED UP AND IT'S NEVER BEEN DEFINED IN ANY OF THE CITY RULES OR ANYTHING AS TO WHAT OUR ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ARE AS A LIAISON. AND I WAS WONDERING IF WE COULD COME TO A -- MAYBE TO ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY OR CITY MANAGER OR AMONGST OURSELVES COME UP WITH AN IDEA OF WHAT WE THINK OUR ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITY IS AS THE LIAISON TO THESE DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES WHICH WE APPOINT EVERY YEAR. AND THEN IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE NOT QUITE SURE WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING. I

WAS JUST WONDERING WHAT OTHER PEOPLE THOUGHT. >> MAYOR MILLER: I CAN TELL

YOU -- ARE YOU GOING. GO AHEAD, SIR. >> COMMISSIONER: I THINK IT'S KIND OF AN INTERESTING THING TO LOOK AT. I'VE BEEN A LIAISON FOR FOUR YEARS FOR THE AIRCRAFT ADVISORY COMMITTEE. AND, YOU KNOW, THAT IS MY MIND IS ONE OF THE VERY FUNCTIONAL COMMUNITIES.

IT IS A SPECIALIZED COMMITTEE AND THEY KNOW WHAT TO DO. ONCE IN A WHILE -- AND YOU GUYS GO TO

[03:05:03]

SOME OF THEM. ONCE IN A WHILE I'LL REMIND THEM OF THE JOB DESCRIPTION SAYING YOU GUYS NEED TO DO THIS. YOU KNOW, YOU NEED TO MAKE THE MOTION OR MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION. ONCE IN A WHILE I PROBABLY SAY TOO MUCH. BUT YOU KNOW WHAT IS THE ROLE? WHAT IS OUR REAL JOB THERE? ONE OF THE PROBLEMS THAT I THINK WE ALL HAVE IS WHEN YOU GO AND START TALKING SOMETIMES YOU MAY INFLUENCE THEM INAPPROPRIATELY. I WOULD RATHER -- AND I DON'T GO TO OTHER ADVISORIES GENERALLY BECAUSE I WANT THEM TO MAKE THE DECISION AND THEY COME TO US. ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK WE SHOULD DO AND ONCE IN A WHILE WE DO IS TO ENSURE THAT AS LIAISONS TO ENSURE WE GET OUR COMMITTEES TO COME HERE AND DO A PRESENTATION ON SOME KIND OF PERIODIC BASIS. QUARTERLY OR

WHATEVER IS APPROPRIATE. >> MAYOR MILLER: I CAN TELL YOU ON THE PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD I WAS VERY CAREFUL NOT TO GIVE AN OPINION ON THE WAY I FELT BECAUSE IT MIGHT BE CONSTRUED HOW THE COMMISSION FEELS. MY ROLE I THOUGHT WAS TO ANSWER PROCEDURAL QUESTIONS. THEY WOULD SAY WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? IF I KNEW FOR SURE I WOULD TELL THEM. IF NOT, I WOULD TELL THEM I'D GET WITH TAMMI OR KELLY OR DALE AND GET BACK WITH THEM BY EMAIL TO THE CHAIR. THE OTHER ONE I AM ON AT THE MAIN SITE. THAT IS DIFFERENT BECAUSE WE HAVE SKIN IN THE GAME WHEN IT COMES TO ANIMAL CONTROL BECAUSE THE BUDGET PAYS THE ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICERS AND THEIR FUEL AND VEHICLES. BUT THEY ALSO HAVE THEIR PRIVATE BOARD AS WELL.

IT'S NOT IN THE SUNSHINE. WHAT I DO ON THAT ONE IS JUST GO TO THE ANIMAL CONTROL THINGS. AND IF THEY HAVE AN AGENDA THAT INVOLVES ANIMAL CONTROL THEY TELL ME. IF IT'S A JUST ABOUT THE HUMANE SOCIETY AND THE KENNEL I AM NOT AT THOSE. THOSE ARE CLOSED DOORS. THAT'S THEIR

PRIVATE COMMITTEE. COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH? >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: I HAD A ROBUST CONVERSATION PRIOR TO THE MEETING WITH THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY ATTORNEY ABOUT THIS VERY SUBJECT. AND I SHARED WITH THEM, AND I THINK I SHARED WITH THIS COMMISSION AT OUR LAST MEETING WHEN THIS WAS BROUGHT UP, THAT IN MANY INSTANCES THE COMMITTEE MEETINGS THAT I ATTEND THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS ARE UNAWARE OF THE ACTIONS OR THE MOTIVATIONS OF THE CITY COMMISSION. SO, THEY'RE UNAWARE OF WHAT WE DID, THE DIRECTION WE'RE GOING, AND THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAD OR HAVE. SO, THEY'RE FLYING, FOR LACK OF A BETTER ANALOGY, WITHOUT INSTRUMENTS. FLYING BLIND. BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE THIS INFORMATION. SO, I FIND MYSELF OFTENTIMES COMING TO THAT PODIUM TO PROVIDE THEM THAT INFORMATION IN ORDER FOR THEM TO MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION. NOW, IF I HAD MY DRUTHERS, I'D RATHER NOT DO THAT. ALL RIGHT. BUT AS I STATED AT THE LAST MEETING, I'M NOT GOING TO SIT IN THAT AUDIENCE AND LET A COMMITTEE STRUGGLE OR MAKE A BAD DECISION BASED ON BAD INFORMATION. SO THE SOLUTION THAT WE TALKED ABOUT WAS HAVING THE CITY STAFF PERSON PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION TO THESE BOARDS. SO, THIS VERY EXAMPLE WILL COME UP TOMORROW AT THE PAB MEETING IN WHICH I AM THE LIAISON FOR THIS COMMISSION.

SO, I AM HOPING THAT MS. BACH AND MRS. KELLY WILL RELAY TO THE PAB THAT SLIDE THAT I SHOWED AND THIS DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD THIS EVENING WHEN THEY DELIBERATE THE REVISIONS TO THE TREE ORDINANCE.

SO, I THINK THAT'S ONE WAY TO EFFECTIVELY CREATE LESS INVOLVEMENT BY US. BECAUSE I DO FEAR THE INFLUENCING OF THEIR DECISION. OKAY I DO FEAR THAT. AND I HAVE TAKEN THE POSITION AT MOST OF THESE COMMITTEE MEETINGS THAT I DON'T ADDRESS THEM UNLESS THEY ASK ME, UNLESS I AM SPECIFICALLY ASKED A QUESTION. THAT HAPPENED THIS MORNING. AT PARKS AND REC SUB-COMMITTEE THEY HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS ABOUT REALLY PROCESS OF THE COMMISSION. SO, I THINK THAT'S ONE WAY. BUT, ONCE AGAIN, A LIAISON IS THERE TO SUPPORT THE COMMITTEE. SO, I BELIEVE THE ROLE IS A SUPPORT ROLE BUT ALSO BEING MINDFUL OF THE INFLUENCE FACTOR. THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING

[03:10:04]

OF WHAT A LOW AS ION IS. >> MAYOR MILLER: I'M WITH YOU ABOUT 95 PERCENT OF THAT. I WOULD BE AFRAID OF WHAT I WOULD SAY MAY BE MISCONSTRUED AS BEING -- AND I MIGHT MISCONSTRUE SOMETHING. I MIGHT MISUNDERSTAND THE DIRECTION OF THE COMMISSION AND SEE A DIFFERENT WAY. IT'S HARD TO DISSEMINATE THAT BETWEEN A BOARD. SO, I WOULD JUST HAVE THEM GO BACK -- REFERRING THEM BACK. BUT IF THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE A VOTE THAT'S INCORRECT YOU MIGHT JUST SAY YOU MIGHT WANT TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THAT BEFORE THEY DO THAT. BUT MOST OF THE

VOTES WE CAN FIX THAT. >> YOU CAN BE SURE WE'LL BE DISCUSSING COMMITTEES AT GOALS.

I THINK IT'S ANOTHER AREA WE NEED TO LOOK AT CLOSELY. >> MAYOR MILLER: IT'S COME UP A COUPLE TIMES TONIGHT EVEN. OKAY. COMMISSIONER ROSS DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, SIR?

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS: UM, IF I HAD MY DRUTHERS I'D LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING IN WRITING THAT SORT OF -- CITY ATTORNEY: DOES WHAT COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH SAID SOUND REASONABLE AND RIGHT? THEN I'LL RIGHT IT UP IN THE COMMISSION RULES AND PROCEDURE.

>> AND I'LL WORK WITH CITY STAFF. >> MAYOR MILLER: ALL RIGHT. ARE YOU GOOD SIR. OKAY. ITEM 11.6 PROPOSED SIMMONS ROAD PARK AIR QUALITY MONITORING. THIS IS ON

[Item 11.6]

THE AGENDA AT THE REQUEST OF COMMISSIONER ROSS. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS: I WAS AT THE PARKS AND REC COMMITTEE MEETING AND BEEN AT OTHER BOARD MEETINGS AND THE BOARDS OFTEN SAY WE DON'T LISTEN TO WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY AND THEY MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS AND THEY NEVER HAPPEN. THIS WAS A RECOMMENDATION MADE BY ON THE 10 DECEMBER MEETING OF THE PARKS AND REC. THEY PASSED THE FOLLOWING MOTION. THEY RECOMMENDED PLACEMENT OF AN EPA QUALITY MONITORING DEVICE BE PLACED AT SIMMONS ROAD PARK.

PERSONALLY, EXPOSURE TO PM2.5 FOR CHILDREN IS A SERIOUS POTENTIAL HEALTH CONCERN AND I THINK THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION THAT IS WORTH INVESTIGATING AND PERHAPS THE WAY TO DO THAT IS TO SEND THAT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE TO COME UP WITH RECOMMENDATIONS. I'M JUST BASICALLY SAYING THAT

THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED THIS AND THAT'S IT. >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER

CHAPMAN? >> COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN: I DO HAVE SOME PROBLEMS WITH THIS PRESENTATION. FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE MAP IT SAYS "MY HOUSE" BUT IT DOESN'T DESIGNATE WHOSE HOUSE "MY HOUSE" IS. THAT'S A LITTLE CONFUSING. AND SINCE THIS WAS YOUR PROPOSAL, COMMISSIONER

ROSS, I ASSUME THAT'S YOUR HOUSE THAT IS ON THIS MAP? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: PROBABLY.

IT WASN'T MY PROPOSAL. IT WAS -- FIRST OF ALL, THIS WAS NOT MY PROPOSAL. LET'S MAKE THAT PERFECTLY CLEAR. I HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH MAKING THIS PROPOSAL.

>> COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN: IT WAS YOUR WIFE'S? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: MY WIFE CAN SPEAK FOR HERSELF AND YOU WOULD HAVE TO ASK HER. NO, IT'S NOT MY HOUSE.

>> COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN: I ALSO HAVE AN ISSUE WITH ON THIS MAP IT LISTS PROPOSED PARK. UNLESS I AM MISTAKEN, THAT PARK IS NOT PROPOSED. WE VOTED 3-2 TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT. SO, I DON'T KNOW WHY IT'S LISTED ON HERE AS "PROPOSED." IT TALKED ABOUT HOW THE JET APPROACH AND THE WHOLE BASIC ARTICLE WAS ABOUT THE DANGERS OF PM 2.5. NOW, PERHAPS YOU'D LIKE TO EXPLAIN TO THE PEOPLE WHAT PM 2.5 IS. BECAUSE I'M SURE THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT MAY NOT KNOW.

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS: SURE PM2.5 COME OUT OF EXHAUST FROM SOME RESOURCES. MY MOTION HAS NOTHING DO WITH PRESENTATION. THIS WAS A PROPOSAL BY THE PARKS AND REC COMMITTEE AND THEY RECOMMENDED THIS BE DONE. AND I'M JUST BRINGING UP THEIR PROPOSAL. I'M NOT HERE TO ADVOCATE IT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. I THINK IT IS A GOOD PROPOSAL. I THINK IT'S MAYBE SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE DONE AT ALL PARKS. BUT THIS WAS BASICALLY THE PARKS AND REC COMMITTEE MADE A PROPOSAL, I'M BRINGING IT FORWARD TO SEE IF YOU WANT TO JUST SAY WE DON'T WANT TO DO THIS, THAT'S THE COMMISSION. BUT I THINK I WOULD PERSONALLY THINK THAT IT'S SOMETHING TO LOOK INTO AND THIS

[03:15:06]

IS A COMMITTEE THAT'S SHOWN INTEREST AND SEND IT BACK TO THEM AND HAVE THEM COME AND MAKE

A PROPOSAL. >> COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN: BECAUSE IT IS BEFORE US TONIGHT, I JUST WANT TO PRESENT MY CONCERNS ABOUT THIS. YOU OFTEN EXPRESS YOUR CONCERNS ABOUT ISSUES. I'M EXPRESSING MY CONCERNS. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT IS IN THIS PRESENTATION IT SAYS AIRCRAFT ARE SIGNIFICANT SOURCES OF AIR POLLUTION INCLUDING PM 2.5. ANY COMBUSTION FROM AB ENGINE CREATES PM 2.5. WHETHER IT IS A CAR, A BOAT, A TRUCK, AIRPLANE, A JET. SO, I THINK FOR ANYONE TO SUGGEST THAT WE ONLY MONITOR ONE PARK -- AND I AM LITTLE CONFUSED. IN MY PREVIOUS JOB I WAS A SCIENCE TEACHER. I TAUGHT POLLUTION AND GRAVITY. I REALLY DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW FROM ONE INTERPRETATION OF THIS PRESENTATION THAT THE PARTICLES THAT COME OUT OF THE PLANE ONLY FALL ON THE SIMMONS PARK SITE. I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THAT WORKS. I KNOW THAT IN RESEARCHING THIS THE AMOUNT OF PM 2.5 DEPENDS ON MANY FACTORS WHEN YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT AIRCRAFT. ONE IS THE SIZE OF THE AIRCRAFT. WHETHER YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT A SMALL JET OR A MUCH LARGER JET. I'VE LEARNED THAT -- WELL I KNEW THAT PM 2.5 CAN CERTAINLY MOVE WITH THE AIR. WE'RE SURROUNDED BY MILITARY BASES. THEY MUST HAVE SOME INFLUENCE ON THE AIR QUALITY. DON'T BE SURPRISED IN THE FUTURE WHEN WE START TO GET THE POLLUTION FROM THE FOREST FIRES IN AUSTRALIA. BECAUSE THEY WILL COVER THE GLOBE. IF YOU REMEMBER BACK WHEN MOUNT ST. HELENS ERUPTED IN WASHINGTON STATE, I LIVED IN MASSACHUSETTS, WE SAW THE PARTICLES FLOATING IN THE ATMOSPHERE FROM MOUNT ST. HELENS. I THINK THAT WHEN YOU -- TO ME, THIS IS JUST A SCARE TACTIC AGAINST SIMMONS PARK. I DON'T REALLY SEE ANY OTHER WAY TO LOOK AT THIS. AND WHEN YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT PM 2.5 COMING FROM COMBUSTION, ONE OF THE THINGS I HAVE CONCERN ABOUT IS WE'RE DISCUSSING SPENDING PROBABLY MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON A WATERFRONT PARK WITH A MARINA THAT HAS BOATS, THAT HAVE ENGINES, THAT CREATE PM 2.5. ARE WE LOOKING AT BUILDING A PARK IN AN AREA THAT IS GOING TO BE POLLUTED BY COMBUSTIBLE ENGINES? I JUST -- I'M NOT QUITE SURE THAT WE SHOULD EVEN PURSUE THAT IN LIGHT OF THIS. SO, I JUST HAD TO GO ON THE RECORD TO SAY THAT I HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT THIS REPORT. I THINK IF PM 2.5 BY THE WAY, EVEN SHOW UP IN YOUR HOUSE. IF YOU FRY FOOD, YOU CREATE PM2.5. SO, IF YOU HAVE A FIREPLACE AND YOU BURN WOOD OR IF YOU HAVE A GAS FIREPLACE, YOU ARE CREATING PM 2.5'S IN YOUR HOME. SO, TO ME THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO DERAIL THE SIMMONS PARK PROJECT AND IT'S ALSO AN ATTEMPT TO THE SKY IS FALLING, THE SKY IS FALLING. WHERE WE LIVE WE'RE SURROUNDED BY MILITARY BASES. THEY FLY AIRCRAFT ALL THE TIME. THEY ARE CERTAINLY CONTRIBUTING. ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS STAND BY THE ROADS AND WATCH THE CARS AND TRUCKS ROLL BY. PARTICULARLY THE LOG TRUCKS. THEY ARE CONTRIBUTING TO THE AMOUNT OF POLLUTION. SO, TO TRY TO PIN THIS ON AIRCRAFT THAT HAPPEN TO APPROACH THE AIRPORT FLYING OVER THE SITE, I DON'T THINK IS BEING TRANSPARENT AND BEING TRUTHFUL TO THE CITIZENS OF FERNANDINA. THANK

YOU. >> MAYOR MILLER: VICE MAYOR KREGER?

>> VICE MAYOR KREGER: I THINK THE CONCERN WITH AIR QUALITY IS CERTAINLY A LEGITIMATE CONCERN AND I'LL MOVE INTO A FEW THINGS IN A MINUTE ABOUT WHAT I THINK WE SHOULD BE DOING. MY CONCERN WITH THIS WAS THAT I DO BELIEVE IT'S SPECIFICALLY A SIMMONS PARK ISSUE. AND I BELIEVE THAT

[03:20:03]

BECAUSE THEY FAILED -- IF THE AIRPORT WERE THE ISSUE, THEN WE CERTAINLY WOULD BE LOOKING AT THOSE FIELDS THERE. SO, AIR QUALITY THROUGHOUT THE CITY IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE. I FORWARDED THE COMMISSIONERS AND IT'S AVAILABLE ONLINE IN OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN OUR COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT WE HAVE AN AIR QUALITY OBJECTIVE. AND THOSE OBJECTIVES TALK ABOUT COORDINATING AIR QUALITY. THERE IS A SITE CALLED AIRNOWEPA. YOU CAN PULL THAT UP AT ANY GIVEN TIME AND GO TO NASSAU COUNTY AND IT WILL SHOW YOU THE AIR QUALITY. THERE'S ABOUT SEVEN OR EIGHT DIFFERENT CATEGORIES. ALMOST 99 PERCENT OF THE AIR QUALITY IN NASSAU COUNTY IS GREEN. AND IT DEFINES PARTICLES AND IT MOVES FROM GREEN TO YELLOW TO RED AND THEN IT GETS LIKE PINK THEN MAROON. AND WHEN IT GOES REALLY UNHEALTHY THERE ARE DECISIONS THAT HAVE TO BE MADE. SOME OF YOU MAY REMEMBER WHEN WE HAD THE FIRES IN OKIE MA NOACKY PROBABLY SEVEN, EIGHT YEARS AGO WHERE YOU COULD NOT SEE ACROSS THE STREET. WHEN THAT HAPPENED IN THIS CITY THE LIFEGUARDS WERE SENT HOME. THE KIDS IN CHILDCARE ON THE PLAYGROUND WERE NOT. AS A RESULT OF THAT STARTED MONITORING. SO, WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE CITY COMMISSION TODAY ON FRIDAY WE'LL BE PUTTING AIR NOW ON THE CITY WEBSITE. WHEN IT GOES ON -- AND THAT'S GREAT BUT THERE WILL BE AN EDUCATION ELEMENT AND ALSO PEOPLE THAT ARE TASKED AT SOME POINT IS WHEN YOU PUT SOMETHING UP YOU ASSUME SOME RESPONSIBILITY. SO, WHEN IT REACHES THIS LEVEL YOU HAVE TO DO SOMETHING. WHO DO YOU NOTIFY, WHAT DO YOU DO. IT IS A LITTLE MORE COMPLEXED. BUT WE DID THAT RIGHT AFTER THE PRAIRIE FIRE. AND THAT'S A LEGITIMATE AIR QUALITY FOR THE ENTIRE CITY NOT JUST THE KIDS, NOT JUST SIMMONS PARK, BUT THE WHOLE CITY. AND SO I THINK THE AIR QUALITY ISSUE IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE AND WE'RE REQUIRED AS WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT IT AGGRESSIVELY. THAT'S IT. THAT'S ALL.

>> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH? >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: SO I WOULD AGREE THAT TAKE -- BY LOOKING AT THIS MAP AND JUST SINGLING SIMMONS ROAD PARK IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS THE PERCEPTION COULD WELL BE TAKEN THAT THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO THWART THE DEVELOPMENT OF SIMMONS ROAD PARK. THE BIGGER QUESTION IS THAT IF WE ARE SERIOUS ABOUT PM 2.5, WOULDN'T WE BE MEASURING THE PARK SITE BUT ALSO THE SOCCER FIELDS, ALSO THE GOLF COURSE, AND I CAN TELL YOU I LIVE RIGHT OFF THE GOLF COURSE AND AIRPLANES COME OVER MY HOUSE ALL THE TIME. SO, IF THIS IS A SERIOUS INITIATIVE AND WE THINK IT'S A PROBLEM, THEN WE SHOULD NOT ONLY DO IT ON THE SIMMONS ROAD PARCEL BUT ALSO THE OTHER PARCELS I MENTIONED. AND THE ONLY WAY WE'RE GOING TO DETERMINE IF THIS IS A PROBLEM OR NOT IS TO GET THE DATA.

OTHERWISE WE'RE JUST GUESSING. AND I WAS AT THE PARKS AND REC MEETING WHERE THIS WAS DISCUSSED. I THINK THE MY HOUSE THING WAS ONE OF THE OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS. I THINK IT WAS THEIR HOUSE. JUST FOR CLARIFICATION. BUT IF WE'RE SERIOUS ABOUT DOING THIS, AND IF I RECALL THE DISCUSSION AT THE PARKS AND REC, ONE OF THESE MONITORS IS LIKE 250 TO 500 BUCKS. OKAY. SO, FOR AS LITTLE AS -- IF YOU SAID 5 GRAND, WE COULD GET TEN MONITORS, PLACE THEM ABOUT AND THEN FIND OUT. THEN ONCE YOU FIND OUT WHAT THE MEASUREMENTS ARE, NOW YOU CAN TAKE SOME STEPS. SO, YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING UNTIL YOU HAVE DATA. SO, YOU HAVE TO MEASURE IT. BUT I AGREE WITH MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, IT'S NOT -- IT SHOULD NOT BE ISOLATED TO THAT PARCEL. WE SHOULD MEASURE ALL AROUND THE AIRPORT TO SEE THE IMPACT. AND AT THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING I THINK YOU WERE AT THE LAST ONE YOU WILL REMEMBER ALL OF THE FOLKS FROM CARLTON DUNES WHO SAID THE JETS FLY RIGHT OVER THEM. YOU REMEMBER THAT? AND

[03:25:04]

THAT'S COUNTY. SO, THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE IMPACTED BY THAT AIR TRAFFIC.

>> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER ROSS? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: I'M NOT SO MUCH CONCERNED ABOUT AIR TRAFFIC BUT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT KIDS. AND I WOULD PUT ONE OF THESE MONITORS -- I WOULD START MONITORING AND IT'S NOT JUST GOT TO DO WITH AIR FLIGHTS. YOU ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. IT'S SHIPS AT THE PORT, DIESEL TRUCKS, ALL KINDS OF THINGS. ONE OF THE THINGS ABOUT MONITORING IF YOU HAVE MONITORS THERE THAT PEOPLE CAN -- AT ALL PARKS WHERE KIDS ARE. BECAUSE KIDS ARE MUCH MR. MORE SENSITIVE AN ADULTS. IT'S GOT TO DO WITH BE THIS LUNGS, ASTHMA PROBLEMS, ALL KINDS OF HEALTH ISSUES. SO, I THINK THESE SHOULD BE AT ALL.

WHAT THE IDEA WAS WHAT YOU CAN DO WITH THESE MONITORS WHICH IS PRETTY COOL IS PEOPLE CAN GO ON AND SEE WHAT THE LEVEL IS AT ANY TIME AND IF IT'S GREEN YOU ARE GOOD TO GO. IF IT GOES WAY UP IN THE AIR YOU CAN LEAVE WITH YOUR KID. PM 2.5S AT ONE PARK MAY BE GREEN AND AT ANOTHER PARK MAY BE RED. YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, IT'S GOT TO DO WITH TRUCKS GOING BY AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. I THINK THIS WAS PERHAPS ONE OF THE IDEAS HERE COULD BE TO PUT IT AT ALL THE PARKS WHERE KIDS ARE AND SEE IF -- AND THEN -- BECAUSE YOU CAN GO ON YOUR PHONE AND MONITOR IT. SEE IF WHAT THE AIR QUALITY IS THERE AND IF IT IS A PROBLEM THEY CAN LEAVE OR STAY WHICHEVER THEY WANT. SO, I CAN SEE HOW IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN CONSTRUED AS A NEFARIOUS WAY TO OBSTRUCT THE PARK BUT I THINK IT'S MORE GENERALIZED TO ALL PARKS AND ALL KIDS. I THINK OUR MAIN CONCERN

SHOULD BE WHAT CAN WE DO FOR THE KIDS IN THIS CITY. MORE >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER

CHAPMAN? >> COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN: I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU BUT AT THE PARK AND REC BOARD THEY VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO SPECIFICALLY MONITOR THE AIR AT SIMMONS PARKS. IF YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT CHILDREN, THEN WHY AREN'T WE MONITORING THE AIR DOWNTOWN? WE HAVE TWO MILLS. AT SOME POINT, GOD WILLING, WE'LL HAVE A MARINA. ALL OF THOSE WILL BE CONTRIBUTING TO AIR POLLUTION. AND, YOUR KNOW, AGAIN, I BRING UP THE POINT THAT IF WE'RE REALLY GOING TO BE MONITORING WE NEED TO BE MONITORING THAT WATERFRONT PARK. I'VE OWNED A BOAT. WHEN I HAD THE OUTBOARD YOU START THAT THING UP YOU IN SOME CASES WENT INTO A FOG. SO, IF WE'RE GOING TO MONITOR AND WE'RE TRULY CONCERNED ABOUT CHILDREN, THEN WE NEED TO PUT MONITORS DOWNTOWN. WE NEED TO PUT THEM ON OUR SCHOOLS BECAUSE OUR CHILDREN WALK TO THOSE SCHOOLS. AND ANY PLACE ELSEWHERE CHILDREN MIGHT CONGREGATE. CERTAINLY THE ATHLETIC FIELDS, CENTRAL PARK, YO NOT AT THE BEACH BECAUSE YOU NEVER KNOW WHERE PREVAILING WINDS MIGHT CARRY POLLUTION. ARE WE GOING TO BECOME A CITY WHERE EVERYWHERE YOU TURN AROUND THERE'S A POLLUTION MONITOR? DO I THINK IT IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE? YES I DO. BUT I THINK THAT -- I DON'T THINK THERE'S BEEN ANY DATA THAT SAYS FERNANDINA BEACH IS BASICALLY DYING BECAUSE OF PM 2.5S. SO, I JUST THINK, AGAIN, THIS IS A LITTLE OVER THE TOP FOR THE SITUATION. AND IF THEY HAD SAID, I WANT MONITORS IN EVERY SINGLE PARK, I COULD HAVE

ACCEPTED THAT, BUT THEY DIDN'T. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER

LEDNOVICH? >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: SO THE QUESTION IS, AND I SLIGHTLY DISAGREE WITH COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN, IN THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY DATA. AND WHAT I AM SAYING IS LET'S COLLECT SOME DATA. SO WE EITHER THROW THIS BACK TO PARKS AND REC AND SAY COME UP WITH A PLAN TO BEGIN THE MEASUREMENT OF PM 2.5S AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE AIRPORT.

SPECIFICALLY THE GOLF COURSE, THE SOCCER FIELDS, THE PARK PARCEL. LET'S GATHER SOME DATA FIRST. WE'RE NOT GOING TO LOSE ANYTHING. BECAUSE ONCE WE HAVE THE DATA FROM THOSE AREAS WE CAN TAKE THOSE SAME MONITORS -- AND AGREE WITH YOU COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN. BEFORE SPENDING WATERFRONT PARK LET'S MEASURE THE IMPACT AT THE WATERFRONT. AND ONCE AGAIN WE CAN MOVE THE

[03:30:03]

MONITORS FROM THE WATERFRONT ONCE WE HAVE THAT DATA. BUT LET'S AT LEAST BEGIN SOMEWHERE.

SO WE CAN EITHER KICK THIS BACK TO PARKS AND REC AND SAY COME UP WITH A PLAN STARTING AT THE AIRPORT SITE OR AS FIVE CITY COMMISSIONERS WE CAN INSTRUCT THE CITY MANAGER TO DO THAT.

>> MAYOR MILLER: ANYBODY ELSE? I DO HAVE REQUESTS TO SPEAK. GO AHEAD, SIR.

>> COMMISSIONER: I WANT YOU ALL TO KNOW AT 21:00 HOURS TONIGHT AT 9:00 P.M. THE AIR QUALITY IN NASSAU COUNTY WAS GOOD. OZONE 28 PARTS PER MILLION. PM 2.5 IS 26 PARTS PER MERLE. THAT'S ALL GOOD IN THE GREEN. WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT ACTION THIS INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE REALTIME. IT'S BROAD BASED AND IT DOESN'T LOOK AT THE PARK BUT THIS WILL GO ON OUR WEBSITE FRIDAY. AND THE GOOD START IS LET SOME WORK BE DEVELOPED AS TO LOOKING AT MODERATE AND HAZARDOUS AND WHAT STEPS YOU CAN TAKE. PUTTING THAT MONITOR AT THAT POINT, WE BETTER BE CAREFUL ON LIABILITY ISSUES OF WHAT WE'RE TELLING PEOPLE TO DO. SO, IF WE DEVELOP THE DATA ON A BROAD BASIS THEN WE CAN FURTHER MOVE INTO INDIVIDUAL BASIS. AS A FOLLOW UP ON AIR QUALITY, YOU KNOW. SO, WHEN YOU GET -- THERE'S ALL THESE FINE RESPIRATORY PROBLEMS. WHAT IS IT DANGEROUS. WHEN YOU GET TO HAZARDOUS YOU BETTER ALL GO HOME. IF WE GET THERE -- AND WE'VE HAD HAZARDOUS. WE'VE HAD IT, YOU KNOW, ON DIFFERENT OCCASIONS. BUT GENERALLY WHEN THERE'S FOREST FIRES. AND THE GOOD POINT IS, I MEAN, WE'RE GOING TO NON-SULFUR FUEL ON SHIPS. MANDATORY THIS YEAR BECAUSE OF THE AIR QUALITY ISSUES.

ISSUES. THAT'S OUT BY YOUR HOUSE, JIM. I THINK THIS IS A START AND I THINK ACKNOWLEDGING

IT IS AN ISSUE IS IMPORTANT. AND WE ARE LOOKING AT IT. >> MAYOR MILLER: ONE MORE THING TO WORRY ABOUT. SEEMS LIKE EVERY TIME ATURN AROUND THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE WE GOT TO WATCH OUT FOR. I THINK I WORKED AT PARKS AND REC WHEN THE FIRE WERE GOING AND WE CLEARED THE SKATE PARK. IT'S HARD TO GET EVERYBODY OUT OF THE PARK. PARENTS HAVE A TENDENCY TO BE OVER ZEALOUS. TELLING KIDS THEY HAVE TO GO HOME. KIDS HAVE IN OF YOU TO WORRY ABOUT. WE DIDN'T WEAR BICYCLE HELMETS. WE DIDN'T TURN OUT THAT GREAT

MS. FERRER? >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: JULIE FERRER 501 DATE STREET. I AM SPEAKING AS THE CHAIRPERSON OF NASSAU COUNTY SIERRA CLUB NOT JULIE. FOR THE PAST YEAR AND A HALF WE'VE NOT MADE A PROPOSAL TO THE CITY BUT FOR THE PAST YEAR AND A HALF THE SIERRA CLUB EXECUTIVE BOARD HAS BEEN TALKING ABOUT AIR QUALITY. AND WE DO NEED TO KNOW ABOUT WHAT'S IN OUR AIR. WE NEED TO HAVE A BROAD BASIS. SO, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT WE DISCUSSED THE FACT THAT WE REALLY NEED AIR MONITORING DOWN AT THE MARINA. AND IT WOULD BE NICE TO SEE IT SPREAD INTO OTHER AREAS. I THINK THAT WE NEED TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT PUBLIC HEALTH. I'LL BE THE NAY SAYER BECAUSE I ALWAYS AM BUT WE HAVE A HISTORY IN FERNANDINA BEACH OF A STRONG PERCENTAGE OF RESPIRATORY PROBLEMS. WE HAVE A HISTORY OF STRONGER -- BEING A CANCER POCKET. AND I KNOW NOBODY WANTS TO HEAR THAT AND I KNOW THAT I AM NOT SUPPOSED TO SAY THAT BUT THERE IS, YOU KNOW, BREAST CANCER IS ESPECIALLY VERY PREVALENT IN THIS COMMUNITY. AND IT WAS PROVEN BY WHATEVER HOSPITAL WAS MOVING IN TO PARTNER WITH BAPTIST HOSPITAL A FEW YEARS AGO THAT CAME OUT IN THE PUBLIC. SO, IT IS A PROBLEM. AND I THINK WE SHOULD BE MONITORING. I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE FOCUSED ON SIMMONS PARK. HOWEVER SIMMONS PARK IS GETTING READY TO BE BUILT. SO, MAYBE THAT CAN BE INCORPORATED THERE AND, YOU KNOW, AS A WATERFRONT DEVELOPS LET'S PUT ONE THERE AND THINK OF OTHER PLACES TO PUT IT AND LET'S GET SIGNIFICANT DATA AND FIGURE OUT WHAT WE HAVE AND WHAT WE'RE ALL BREATHING. IF YOU NEED A PROPOSAL BY THE SIERRA CLUB,

WE'D BE HAPPY TO MAKE THAT. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR MILLER: YOU SAID THAT YOU REPRESENT THE SIERRA CLUB AND YOU SAID WE ARE IN A CANCER POCKET IN OUR AREA? THAT'S THE

POSITION OF THE SIERRA CLUB? >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: SO I'LL SAY THAT FOR MYSELF. BECAUSE IT HAS

[03:35:09]

BEEN IN THE PUBLIC REALM THAT THAT'S TRUE. >> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU.

ALSO WE DO AIR QUALITY. WE DON'T BUT THE MILLS DO. PEOPLE GET CONCERNED BECAUSE THEY SAY THE MILL SELF-MONITORS. THAT STRUCK ME WAS WELL. UNTIL I WENT OUT AND TALKED TO THE DIRECTOR AND HE SHOWED ME THE PROCESS WITH ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS. THEY DO SELF-MONITOR. THEY HAVE METERS AND THEIR OWN, YOU KNOW, PROGRAM WHERE THEY CHECK IT. BUT THEY'RE UNDER FEDERAL OVERSIGHT. AND THE DIRECTOR AT THE TIME TOLD ME I LOVE THIS COMPANY, I'VE BEEN HERE 40 YEARS. MY FAMILY IS IN LOGGING. BUT I'M NOT GOING TO JAIL FOR RAINIER.

IF WE UNDER REPORT, IF IT'S EVEN CLOSE THEY OVER REPORT. SELF-MONITORING IS NOT ALWAYS WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE. THERE'S A LOT OF OVERSIGHT WHEN IT COMES TO MONITORING.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: CAN I SAY ONE MORE THING. >> MAYOR MILLER: TIME'S UP.

THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO ADD? >> VICE MAYOR KREGER: BECAUSE YOU TALKED ABOUT THE MILLS YOU REMEMBER THE SULFUR DIOXIDE NONCOMPLIANCE ISSUE BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE IN THE AIR QUALITY LAWS. A LITTLE BIT LATER AFTER YEARS WORTH OF WORK THE BILLS WERE BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE. THE FIRST TIME IN THIS COUNTRY THAT THAT HAPPENED. AND I TRIED TO CONVINCE THE MILLS THEY SHOULD COME AND DO -- COME ON GUYS WE'LL DO A PROCLAMATION.

THEY DIDN'T WANT TO. BUT I THINK WE HAVE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THERE'S SIGNIFICANT WORK. THE FIRST TIME IN THIS COUNTRY -- AND THE EPA WAS EVEN ACTUALLY AT AN E. A. R. MEETING AND THEY COULDN'T BELIEVE WE WEREN'T STANDING ON THE TABLE. THAT'S NOT GOOD. I MEAN, WE NEED TO BE TRUTHFUL AND LOOK AT FACTS AND WE NEED KNOWLEDGE POSITIVE HAPPENINGS. AND AIR QUALITY

WISE THAT'S SIGNIFICANT. >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH?

>> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: TO END THIS DISCUSSION, BECAUSE THIS DISCUSSION WAS ABOUT TO END WITHOUT DOING ANYTHING. SO, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE CONSENSUS OF THE COMMISSION WHAT THEIR PLEASURE IS. ARE WE GOING TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT COLLECTING DATA OR NOT?

>> MAYOR MILLER: THIS IS JUST A POINT OF ORDER ON DISCUSSION ITEMS WE DON'T TAKE ACTION. YOU CAN ASK FOR MORE STUDY OR SOMETHING BUT WE DON'T TAKE ACTION. YOU CAN PUT IT ON THE AGENDA. IF WE'RE GOING TO TAKE ACTION YOU NEED TO PUT IT ON AN AGENDA ITEM AND OPEN TO THE PUBLIC FOR DISCUSSION. SO, GIVE IT TO CITY MANAGER AND WORK OUT A DATE TO HAVE IT ADDED. THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE COMMISSIONER ROSS? OKAY. ITEM 11.7 LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ADVISORY BOARD

[Item 11.7]

APPEAL ITEM. THIS WAS PLACED ON THE AGENDA AT THE REQUEST OF COMMISSIONER ROSS.

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS: I THINK WE ALREADY HEARD A GREAT DEAL ABOUT THIS EARLIER IN THE MEETING AND THIS CAME ABOUT AS CONCERNS OF THE GREENS. AND THE GREENS ARE RIGHT. I MEAN, IF YOU LOOK AT THE HDC IS THE ONLY BOARD THAT DOESN'T HAVE AN APPEAL PROCESS FOR ANYBODY BUT THE APPLICANT.

ALL OUR OTHER -- WHENEVER THERE'S A DECISION THERE'S AN APPEAL PROCESS FOR EVERYBODY ELSE. IF YOU GO THROUGH OUR LDC AND OUR CODE OF ORDINANCES SOME OF THEM SAY THE AGGRIEVED PARTY, SOME SAY ADVERSELY AFFECTED PARTY, SOME OF THEM SAY OTHER THINGS. SO, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO HAVE THE CONSENSUS OF THE BOARD, THE WHICH ITION TO ASK THE CITY -- COMMISSION TO ASK TASK THE CITY ATTORNEY WITH MAKING ALL THE WORDING IN ALL THESE THE SAME. AN EFFECTIVE PARTY IS BASICALLY WHAT WE HAVE ALREADY WHICH IS ANYBODY IN THE CITY. SO, THERE'S DUE PROCESS UNDER THE LAW AND EQUAL PROTECTION UNDER THE LAW SO THAT THE GREENS HAD BEEN -- COULD HAVE APPEALED THE DECISION JUST AS THE APPLICANT DID. SO THAT'S WHY I BROUGHT THIS UP. IN THE PACKET IS ALL THE -- INCLUDING THE CARDS AND EVERYTHING ELSE AND THE EMAILS AND WHAT THEY WERE GOING TO PRESENT AS THEIR COMPLAINT AND WHY THEY THOUGHT THEY WERE TREATED UNFAIRLY.

>> MAYOR MILLER: YOU GOT SOMETHING? COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.

>> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: AS ALWAYS, HOW DO WE FIX THIS? WHAT IS THE SOLUTION? WHAT ARE THE STEPS REQUIRED IN ORDER TO RIGHT THE WRONG? THAT'S THE QUESTION I HAVE.

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS: WHICH WRONG? >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: THAT

[03:40:04]

THIS BOARD IS THE ONLY BOARD THAT DOES NOT HAVE AN APPEAL PROCESS.

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS: I THINK IT'S PRETTY CLEAR. YOU SAY TO COME BACK WITH A CHANGE IN THE - ORDINANCE. AND USE THE SAME WORDS IN ALL THE BOARDS. I MEAN, IT'S SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT LANGUAGE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE HDC, YOU LOOK AT THIS, YOU LOOK AT THAT. THEY'RE ALL SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT. MAKE IT ALL THE SAME ACROSS -- AND WE TALKED ABOUT THIS WHOLE ISSUE OF CONSISTENCY

SO THAT IT'S CONSISTENT ACROSS ALL THE ORDINANCES. >> CITY ATTORNEY: I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT TO DO. I ALREADY HAVE THE NOTE DOWN. I'LL SHOOT FOR FEBRUARY 21ST FIRST READING.

ANY OBJECT TO THAT? >> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY. I WOULD AGREE WITH BOTH OF YOU GUYS. I MEAN, I THINK THAT -- I MEAN, IF YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE A BOARD OR COMMITTEE THAT CAN MAKE A DECISION THAT AFFECTS PEOPLE TO THIS LEVEL, WHICH I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT OBVIOUSLY WE DISCUSSED THAT TONIGHT, YOU AT LEAST HAVE TO GIVE THEM A PROCESS WHERE I CAN APPEAL TO THE COMMISSION. IT WAS SO FRUSTRATING NOT BEING ABLE TO TELL THESE PEOPLE -- BECAUSE I DIDN'T HAVE A FIX FOR THEM. I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A FIX. NOTHING IS MORE FRUSTRATING THAN SAYING THERE'S NOTHING I CAN DO. WE NEED TO HAVE SOMETHING WE CAN DO. SO, LET'S MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT FOR SURE. THERE IS A REQUEST TO SPEAK ON THIS. MS. ANDREA POWER. WELCOME MA'AM.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: 913 WHITE STREET. IN ADDITION TO BEING MISLEAD FOR A VERY LONG PERIOD OF TIME ABOUT THE APPEALS PROCESS AND OUR RIGHTS, I'M ALSO CONCERNED THAT AN INSIDER WAS APPROVED FOR A RIGHT THAT NOBODY ELSE WOULD BE APPROVED FOR. ALLOWING ONLY THE APPLICANT TO APPEAL OPENS UP OPPORTUNITY FOR BOARD TO PROVIDE SPECIAL PRIVILEGES TO CERTAIN PARTIES AND THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED HERE. THE APPLICANT, IN THIS CASE, IS AN HDC BOARD MEMBER. IT UNDERSCORES THE NEED TO ALLOW ANY PERSONS AFFECTED BY THE DECISION TO APPEAL. I FEEL STRONGLY THE HDC APPROVAL OF CASE 2019-16 VIOLATES THE OLD TOWN GUIDELINES AND DEGRADES THE HISTORIC GRID AND GUIDELINES THAT WERE CREATED TO PROTECT US. WE EXERCISED OUR RIGHT TO APPEAL BEFORE THE REQUIRED TIMELINE AND WE'RE DENIED THAT RIGHT. HOW CAN WE CORRECT THIS?

>> CITY ATTORNEY: THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT -- >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: HOW DO WE ADDRESS THE FACT THAT AN INSIDER WAS APPROVED FOR SOMETHING THAT NOBODY ELSE HAS BEEN APPROVED

FOR? >> CITY ATTORNEY: BECAUSE IT WAS NOT A -- I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT. THE QUASI JUDICIAL PROCESS, THE EVIDENTIARY HEARING, THAT BOARD IS UNDER THE LAW MAKING THE DECISION BASICALLY IN A VACUUM WITH THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED THERE, WITH THE CODE THAT EXISTS NOW, OR THE GUIDELINES THAT EXIST NOW.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: DO YOU KNOW THE BOARD HAS DISCUSSED THIS S - PARTICULAR APPROVAL THAT HAS BEEN GRANTED AND REWRITING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. YOU KNOW THEY'RE WORKING ON REWRITING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS. WELL IN JUNE AT THEIR JUNE WORKSHOP THEY HAD -- THE BOARD HAD A CONSENSUS THAT THEY WANTED TO REWRITE THE CODE TO NOT ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN AGAIN. THERE WAS ONE DISSENTING MEMBER. HAPPENS TO BE THE APPLICANT. SO, THEN IT WAS PUSHED OUT TO AUGUST DISCUSSION. AGAIN IT GOT PUSHED OUT. GOT PUSHED OUT TO SEPTEMBER DISCUSSION. GOT PUSHED OUT TO OCTOBER. AT OCTOBER THE BOARD DISCUSSED YEAH WE REALLY DO AGREE THAT THIS NEEDS TO BE REWRITTEN. HARRISON SAID HE CREATED CONFUSION AND ASKED A WHOLE BUNCH OF CONFUSING QUES QUESTIONS. NOW THEY'RE PUSHED IT OUT TO SUMMERTIME. THEY'RE MEETING WITH BILL TILLSON ABOUT THE WHOLE REWRITING OF THE OLD TOWN GUIDELINES. BILL TILLSON IN JUNE MET WITH SAL COMELLA AND RECOMMEND THE LDC BE CHANGED. I THINK WE HAVE IMPROPRIETYRIES HERE THAT NEED TO BE INVESTIGATED. SO, TELLING ME WE CAN'T APPEAL. I CAN ACCEPT THAT. BUT THIS COMMISSION MUST HAVE SOME WAY OF INVESTIGATING

INPROPRIETARY. >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH YOU HAVE A QUESTION?

>> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: WHEN YOU USE THE TERM "INSIDER" ARE YOU REFERRING TO A MEMBER OF THE

COMMITTEE? >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: YES. THE MEMBER THAT WAS APPROVED IS A

BOARD MEMBER. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: THAT'S WHAT I NEEDED TO KNOW.

>> MAYOR MILLER: SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A SPECIFIC CASE. AN ADDITION I BELIEVE OF A

STRUCTURE OR CHANGE OF THAT PROPERTY. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: IT IS A

BRAND-NEW CONSTRUCTION. >> MAYOR MILLER: WHERE IS THAT RIGHT NOW IN THAT PROCESS?

[03:45:04]

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: IT'S BEEN APPROVED. >> MAYOR MILLER: WHERE IS THE

CONSTRUCTION. IT HASN'T STARTED YET. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: NO. IT WOULD

BE NICE TO PUT IT ON HOLD. >> MAYOR MILLER: THIS HAS GOTTEN A LOT OF ATTENTION. IS IT

POSSIBLE TO PUT A STOP WORK >> CITY ATTORNEY: SO LET ME JUST PROCESS FOR A MINUTE. THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, NUMBER 1, ISSUES STOP WORK ORDERS. GENERALLY BECAUSE THERE'S A VIOLATION OF THE BUILDING CODE. BUT IF THERE'S A VIOLATION OF OTHER PARTS OF OUR CODE THEY CAN ISSUE A STOP WORK ORDER. THIS APPLICATION WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS, GOT APPROVED BY THE HDC THROUGH A QUASI JUDICIAL PROCESS. I'M NOT SAYING THAT -- AND I KNOW EXACTLY THE CODE PROVISION AND ALL THE CONVERSATIONS THAT HAVE HAPPENED. I CAN'T -- TONIGHT I'M SAYING NO WE CANNOT GO BACK AND ISSUE A STOP WORK ORDER WHILE WE INVESTIGATE. WHEN YOU SAY IMPROPRIETIES AND THIS IS THE ONLY TIME THIS BOARD CAN TALK. I THINK WE NEED TO CALL IT WHAT IT IS. IT'S MIKE HARRISON WHO IS ON THE HISTORIC DISTRICT COUNCIL AND FOR THIS BOARD TO KNOW THERE IS -- WE HAVE NOT FOUND, AND I HAVE TALKED TO SAL COMELLA, TO KELLY GIBSON WHO HAVE LOOKED AT ALL THE APPLICATIONS, THE APPEAL APPLICATION. AND WE WERE THERE.

THERE'S NOTHING ILLEGAL THAT HAPPENED. THERE IS A PERCEPTION -- I'M NOT SAYING THAT IT'S WRONG. THERE'S A PERCEPTION IN THE COMMUNITY THAT'S BEEN VOICED HERE TONIGHT, AND I'M SURE OTHERS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO COME, THAT THERE IS BIAS, BIAS ON THE PART OF ONE, AT LEAST ONE, HDC MEMBER THAT IS AFFECTING DECISION MAKING BY HIM, MR. HARRISON, AND PERHAPS BY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS. BUT I HAVE NOT HEARD ANYTHING ELSE. USING THE TERM IMPROPRIETY TO ME IS A LITTLE BIT STRONG. I HAVE FOUND NO EVIDENCE OF THAT. MR. GREEN, YOU CAN LAUGH AND SHAKE YOUR HEAD, I'M TELLING YOU THAT MYSELF, KELLY GIBSON AND SAL COMELLA HAVE LOOKED AT THIS AND LOOKED AT THIS. YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO GIVE US MORE BEFORE YOU ACCUSE ANYBODY, A CITIZEN OR SOMETHING OF SOMEHOW BEING, YOU KNOW -- THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS, IF WE HAVE ONE BOARD MEMBER THAT HAS A BIAS AND THEY DID -- HE DID ABSTAIN FROM VOTING OBVIOUSLY ON HIS OWN CASE BECAUSE THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN INAPPROPRIATE. THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS VOTED. AND SO YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO TELL ME SOME BACK DEALING, SOME EVIDENCE THAT THERE WAS SOMETHING THAT THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS WERE SOMEHOW BIAS AND DID NOT MAKE THAT DECISION. THE TIME TO GO TO COURT HAS ALSO EXPIRED FOR THAT QUASI JUDICIAL DUE PROCESS.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: WHAT ABOUT THE MISLEADING? YOU KNOW, I CAN'T THINK OF ONE HDC MEETING WHERE YOU -- WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT THE QUASI JUDICIAL PROCEDURES WHERE YOU CALLED OUT

THAT ONLY THE APPLICANT-- >> CITY ATTORNEY: I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. I MADE THE MISTAKE.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: THEN WE HAD THE DOCUMENTATION THAT WAS INCORRECTLY WORDED. AND THEN WE HAD AFTER THAT MEETING WHEN YOU COULD SEE WE WERE CONCERNED SOME RESIDENTS WERE CONCERNED YOU SPECIFICALLY SPOKE TO US AS SHOWN IN THE VIDEO. WHO TOLD YOU THAT IT WAS ONLY THE APPLICANT? BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY YOU DIDN'T KNOW. YOU DIDN'T KNOW THAT ALL THESE YEARS.

>> CITY ATTORNEY: IT'S NOT ALL THESE YEARS. WHEN THE APPEAL COMES IN, WHEN THE APPEAL CAME IN, I HAVE TO LOOK AT IT FOR SUFFICIENCY AND COMPLETENESS AND I GO TO THE CODE AND CHECK THE CODE. AND I CHECKED THE CODE AND SAID THEY'RE NOT THE APPLICANT.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: WE HAD A HEARING SCHEDULED. >> CITY ATTORNEY: ALL I CAN SAY

IS I APOLOGIZE. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: I FORGIVE YOU. I UNDERSTAND. BUT IF THE VIDEOS ARE WATCHED OF THE WORKSHOPS AND THE MEETINGS, THERE IS A BIG PROBLEM. AND I CAN CITE ALL OF THE MINUTES, ALL THE MEETINGS AND THE TIMEFRAMES ON THE VIDEOS FOR YOU ALL TO

REVIEW. >> CITY ATTORNEY: ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE DELIBERATIONS

OF THE BOARD? >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: I'M TALKING ABOUT WORKSHOP DISCUSSIONS AND

THE BOARD DISCUSSIONS. >> CITY ATTORNEY: AND THAT'S BASICALLY HOW I WAS TRYING TO FRAME IT. THERE IS WHAT YOU ALL PERCEIVE AND THERE'S ENOUGH OF YOU THAT SPOKE TONIGHT AND THERE'S PROBABLY OTHERS OUT THERE THAT PERCEIVE THAT MR. HARRISON OR DR. HARRISON HAS TOO MUCH OF A BIAS. WE HAVE A CODE OF CONDUCT IN OUR CODE OF ORDINANCES COMMISSIONERS THAT TALKS ABOUT BIAS. IF A BOARD MEMBER IS NOT RECOGNIZING THEY HAVE THAT MUCH OF A BIAS, AND

[03:50:01]

THEY MAKE THEIR DECISIONS AND THEY VOICE THEIR DECISIONS BECOMES APPARENT THEY DO,

THEY'RE VIOLATING CODE OF CONDUCT. >> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSION

LEAD? >> CITY ATTORNEY: CHAPTER TWO OF OUR CITY CODE.

>> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: I HAVE A COUPLE OF CONCERNS. I WANT TO MAKE THIS POINT.

MR. HARRISON'S NAME HAS BEEN MENTIONED SEVERAL TIMES. COMMENTS ABOUT MR. HARRISON HAVE BEEN NEED. MR. HARRISON IS NOT HERE. SO, I THINK WE SHOULD PROCEED WITH CAUTION AND ALSO GOING FORWARD PROVIDE MR. HARRISON AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THIS BOARD AND ADDRESS THESE CONCERNS. SO THAT'S POINT NUMBER ONE. MY QUESTION OF YOU IS, YOU MENTIONED IMPROPRIETIES.

IMPROPER IS THE ROOT WORD. WHAT SPECIFICALLY WHEN WE TALK ABOUT MR. HARRISSON JUST GIVE ME ONE

EXAMPLE OF IMPROPER ACTION. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: I'M TALKING ABOUT THE BOARD. THE BOARD'S DECISION. THE BOARD'S GROUP DECISION AND MOVING THIS CHANGE IN THE LDC DOWN THE ROAD REPEATEDLY. IT WAS STATED IN THE STAFF REPORT FOR THE MEETING THAT WE HAVE -- THAT THEY HAVE NEVER ALLOWED A FULLY CROSSING OVER INTO THE VIEW CORRIDOR. AND IN THE PAST AND A VARIANCE WOULD TYPICALLY BE REQUIRED. BUT SINCE WE HAVE THESE GRAY AREAS I FEEL THAT WE SHOULD TAKE THIS ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS. WELL AN HDC MEMBER DESIGNING A BRAND-NEW HOUSE IN OLD TOWN HAS THE PERFECT OPPORTUNITY TO SHOW THE PUBLIC EXACTLY WHAT THE PERFECT DESIGN IS TO GO BY ALL OF THE RULES OF THE GUIDELINES AND TO REALLY RESPECT THE GRID. THIS PLAN TOTALLY DISRESPECTS

THE GRID. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: I WAS AT THAT MEETING. WAS THAT A

UNANIMOUS VOTE. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: YEAH. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: THANK

YOU. >> MAYOR MILLER: VICE MAYOR KREGER?

>> VICE MAYOR KREGER: THERE'S SOMETHING WRONG HERE. YOU GOT ONE GUY BUT THE BOARD APPROVED IT. SOUNDS LIKE THE BOARD HAS RUN AMOK. I THOUGHT WE KIND OF FIGURED THAT OUT BEFORE. I MEAN, WHATEVER HE SAYS, I MEAN, THERE'S FIVE OF US, YOU KNOW, NONE OF US CAN BUFFALO THE OTHER FOUR INTO DOING WHAT THEY WANT HAPPENS WHEN ONE GUY CAN GET FIVE -- YOU KNOW I THOUGHT WE DECIDED WE WERE GOING TO LOOK AT

THAT SERIOUSLY. WHAT CAN I SAY. >> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU. OKAY IS THAT GOOD COMMISSIONER ROSS? VICE MAYOR ARE YOU GOOD? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT ITEM 12. CITY MANAGER REPORTS.

[Item 12]

>> CITY MANAGER: FIRST I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER MY COLL DOLENSES TO JUDGE FOSTER FOR THE PASSING OF ROBERT FOSTER JUNIOR. THANK YOU LIGHT UP AMELIA AND OTHER SPONSORS. HAD A GREAT TIME.

DIDN'T HAVE A PARKING PROBLEM. I WAS REMISS AT THE DECEMBER MEETING. COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN'S MOTION, ORIGINAL MOTION TO APPROVE THE SIMMONS ROAD PARK DID ASK FOR PRESENTATION OF A TIMELINE FOR THE PARK. THE TIMELINE THAT I AM PASSING YOU WAS PRESENTED TO THE PARKS AND REC ADVISORY COMMISSION AND RECEIVED WITH NO COMMENT. SO, THIS IS THE CURRENT TIMELINE FOR SIMMONS ROAD PARK DEVELOPMENT. WITH REGARD TO THE EVALUATION OF APPRAISER REPORT. I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH MS. GIBSON ON THIS. WE DO HAVE -- THE GENERAL INTENT APPEARED TO BE FROM FOLLOWING THE JOINT MEETING WITH THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD IS WE WANT TO EXPEDITE THE COMPLETION OF THE E. A. R. PROCESS AND MOVE ON AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE TO WHAT I BELIEVE IS THE DESIRE TO REVISE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. SO, WITH REGARD TO THAT THERE WERE

[03:55:03]

THREE COMPONENTS THAT REREGIONAL COUNCIL POINTED OUT THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED AS PART OF THE E.

A. R., EVALUATION APPRAISAL REPORT PROCESS. BASED ON DISCUSSION WITH MS. GIBSON THE COUNCIL HAS OFFERED A PROPOSAL TO ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES, THOSE THREE ISSUES. IT IS SUBJECT TO NEGOTIATION BUT I BELIEVE MS. GIBSON SAID THE PROPOSAL IS FOR $25,000 FOR THE REGIONAL COUNCIL TO ADDRESS AND PREPARE LANGUAGE TO ADDRESS THE E. A. R. SHORTCOMINGS THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED. SO, I WILL CONTINUE THAT DISCUSSION WITH BOTH MS. GIBSON AND INDIVIDUALLY WITH ALL OF YOU. FOLLOWING RECENT DECISION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE EXPENDITURE OF IMPACT FEES, SPECIFICALLY WITH THE LIGHTS AT CENTRAL PARK, THERE WAS AN APPARENT LACK OF DISTINCTION OR LACK OF CLARIFICATION FOR HOW WE DETERMINE WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO SPEND IMPACT FEES. SO, I PUT A TEMPORARY STOP ON THE EXPENDITURE OF IMPACT FEES UNTIL I COULD GET CLARIFICATION FROM THE BOARD AS TO HOW WE DEVELOP A POLICY OR AT LEAST SOME CLARITY ON WHAT TYPE OF PROJECTS ARE WE GOING TO ALLOW IMPACT FEE SPENDS ON. SO, I'LL WORK WITH MS. BACH AND WE'LL PROBABLY BRING SOMETHING TO YOU IN FEBRUARY ASKING, YOU KNOW, FOR SO THAT WE'RE ALL OPERATING ON THE SAME PAGE WITH REGARD TO THAT. I MAY ALLOW SOME PROJECTS TO MOVE FORWARD THAT TRULY ARE LET'S SAY NEW AND NOT CAN BE SQUIRRELLED AWAY AS IS THIS A REPLACEMENT, MAINTENANCE OR ON SO AND SO FORTH. BUT I WILL REVIEW THOSE ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS. WITH REGARD TO SCHEDULING ISSUES.

TOMORROW EVENING IS BRIDGING THE GAP. THAT IS PREPARED LED BY REVEREND ANTHONY DANIEL OF THE AME CHURCH. IT IS AN EFFORT TO BRING VARIOUS NEIGHBORHOODS TOGETHER. THURSDAY EVENING? MY BAD. THOUGHT IT WAS TUESDAY. WEDNESDAY. THANKS FOR THE CORRECTION. GUNS AND ROSES.

THE ANNUAL COMPETITION BETWEEN THE POLICE AND FIRE IS SATURDAY AT THE NORTHEAST FLORIDA LEAGUE OF CITIES MEETING WHICH WE WILL BE HOSTING FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER IS SCHEDULED FOR NEXT THURSDAY, THE 16TH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH TO FORMER COMMISSIONER POI NER AND THE USE OF UPSTAIRS CAFé CARIBOU. HOPEFULLY ALL OF YOU ARE ABLE TO ATTEND OR AS MANY AS POSSIBLE AND WELCOME YOUR FELLOW LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS FROM THROUGHOUT NORTHEAST FLORIDA. COMMISSIONER ROSS AND I AT THE CURRENT TIME ARE SCHEDULED TO ATTEND THE FINE MEETING IN ST. AUGUSTINE ON JANUARY 17TH TO ADDRESS ISSUES RELATED TO THE DREDGING AND THE FINE SITE. MONDAY JANUARY 20TH IS THE COMMEMORATION OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. CITY OFFICES WILL BE CLOSED AND THERE WILL BE A PARADE THROUGH DOWNTOWN ON THE TRADITIONAL PARADE ROUTE AND THE C COMMISSION VISITING SESSION IS SCHEDULED FOR JANUARY 28TH. THAT'S MY REPORT.

>> MAYOR MILLER: MR. LEDNOVICH? >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: I HAVE TWO REGARDING THE AMELIA TREE MITIGATION PROPOSAL. THE FIRST IS IN RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON MY CITY COMMISSION PAGE.

AFTER I HAD POSTED THEIR PROPOSAL. AND MANY OF THE QUESTIONS WERE WHY DOES THE CITY MANAGER DECIDE THE APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE PLAN, WHY DOESN'T IT GO BEFORE THE CITY

COMMUNITY? IF YOU COULD WALK US THROUGH THAT. >> PROBABLY THE WAY THE

ORDINANCE WAS WRITTEN. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: I'M ASKING THE QUESTION TO ANSWER THE QUESTION. THE SECOND IS: WILL YOU WALK PEOPLE THROUGH YOUR INTENDED PROCESS FOR

APPROVAL? AND YOU AND I DISCUSSED THIS. >> CITY MANAGER: RIGHT. WHAT I DID WAS IN ORDER TO PROVIDE AN OBJECTIVE OPINION AS POSSIBLE I WORKED WITH MS. GIBSON AND MR. HOLLY THE CITY'S ARBORIST AND SAID I WOULD LIKE TO SEE AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW BY OTHER QUALIFIED PERSONNEL OF THE PROPOSED MITIGATION PLAN. AND I WOULD USE THAT AS A FACTOR IN MY DECISION AS TO THE APPLICABILITY OF THE MITIGATION PLAN. SO, I WILL WORK WITH MS. GIBSON AND

[04:00:07]

WHEN THOSE REPORTS COME IN, I WILL REVIEW THOSE AND SHARE THOSE COMMENTS WITH THE COMMUNITY, THE COMMISSION, THE DEVELOPER AND SAY, BASED UPON SOME EXTERNAL, PROFESSIONAL ROW VIEWS, THE THE PLAN IS SATISFACTORY IN THIS REGARD OR COMES UP SHORT IN THIS REGARD AND, YOU KNOW, I'LL HAVE TO REVIEW WHAT MY OPTIONS ARE. CAN I REJECT IT IN PART? DO I HAVE TO REJECT IT IN WHOLE? CAN I ASK FOR AMENDMENTS TO IT? BUT I HAVE ASKED FOR OUTSIDE, PROFESSIONAL REVIEW SO THAT IT'S NOT INCUMBENT UPON SIMPLY CITY STAFF. THAT WE HAVE SOME OTHER

PEOPLE WHOSE OPINION I CAN VALUE YOU. WE'VE REQUESTED TWO. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: AND

WHAT'S THE TIMELINE? >> CITY MANAGER: THE DEADLINE FOR MY REVIEW IS 30 DAYS FROM THAT. JANUARY 18TH IS WHEN I NEED TO RENDER MY REPORT TO THE COMMUNITY.

[Item 13]

>> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: THANK YOU. >> MAYOR MILLER: CITY ATTORNEY.

>> CITY ATTORNEY: ON FRIDAY I WILL BE ATTENDING THE FLORIDA MUNICIPAL ATTORNEY'S ASSOCIATION ANNUAL MEETING. I'M ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND I JUST GOT ELECTED AS TREASURER. BUT I'LL BE IN ORLANDO ON FRIDAY. THAT'S IT. NOT SO QUICK. I FORGOT SOMETHING THAT COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH IF I MAY FIRST. SO, I SENT AN EMAIL TO ALL OF YOU AND COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH REGARDING COMMISSIONERS ATTENDING BID OPENINGS, PRE-BID MEETINGS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. AND I SAID PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE DO NOT COMMUNICATE OR TALK WITH THE CONTRACTORS THAT ARE THERE OR VENDORS THAT ARE THERE BECAUSE WE DO HAVE AN ANTI-LOBBYING PROVISION IN OUR BID DOCUMENTS. SO, IF THE CONTRACTORS BITS AND PROPOSALS COULD GET THROWN OUT IF THERE IS INDEED SOME DISCUSSION. AND THAT COULD BE PERCEIVED AS LOBBYING AND IS LOBBYING ACTUALLY. SO, PLEASE, IF YOU DO ATTEND THESE, I KNOW THAT YOU ALL ARE VERY INTERESTED AND ACTIVE AND WE WOULDN'T TRY TO SAY DON'T ATTEND, DON'T DISCUSS TOGETHER THE BIDS.

OBVIOUSLY THAT'S A VIOLATION OF SUNSHINE. AND PLEASE DO NOT COMMUNICATE WITH CONTRACTORS.

SO, IN MY CONVERSATION WITH COMMISSIONER ROSS ABOUT THIS TOPIC TODAY, HE HAS SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT WE HAVE HAD SOME STRUGGLES OR CHALLENGES GETTING ENOUGH BIDDERS ON SOME THINGS.

AND HE HAS ASKED, ISN'T IT OKAY IF A CITY COMMISSIONER JUST LIKE CITY STAFF SET CALLS UP TO CONTRACTORS, VENDOR AND SAYS YOU SHOULD BID ON THIS PROJECT OR PLEASE KNOW THAT WE HAVE THIS BID GOING OUT OR BID OR PROPOSAL IS ALREADY OUT THERE PUBLISHED YOU SHOULD LOOK AT IT. NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. WHEN YOU MAKE THOSE PHONE CALLS WHAT I EXPLAINED TO HIM IS THAT IT'S HARD FOR ME TO BELIEVE ANYWAY THAT THAT'S WHERE EVERYBODY IS GOING TO STOP THE CONVERSATION.

OKAY THANK YOU SO MUCH COMMISSIONER ROSS. THERE COULD BE QUESTIONS. WHAT'S THE BID ABOUT? AND THEN AN ANSWER FROM A COMMISSIONER AND THERE COULD BE OTHER CONVERSATIONS. AND AT THAT POINT THAT BECOMES A PROBLEM. IF THAT CONTRACTOR ACTUALLY DOES SUBMIT A BID OR

PROPOSAL. >> SO IF WE TO GO OUT AND ASK CONTRACTOR ABC TO BID ON THIS MARINA PROJECT AND THEY BID. AND THEN IT COMES BEFORE ME TO VOTE ON IT, COULDN'T THAT BE SEEN AS A CONFLICT BECAUSE I RECRUITED THAT PERSON TO PLACE THE BID?

>> CITY ATTORNEY: YES. IT COULD. IT COULD. BUT I KNOW THAT COMMISSIONER ROSS AND I AND WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT, HE FEELS COMFORTABLE THAT HE KNOWS THE RULES, AND HE ALSO KNOWS THE

RISK. >> COMMISSIONER: LEGALLY IT COULD BE CHALLENGED?

>> CITY ATTORNEY: YEAH. THIS IS A BID PROCESS. I'M DONE WITH THAT.

>> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER ROSS IS RECOGNIZED. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: OPA.

>> CITY ATTORNEY: YES I THINK VICE MAYOR KREGER HAS A QUESTION ABOUT THE BID STUFF.

>> VICE MAYOR KREGER: I FOUND THE EASIEST WAY TO HANDLE THAT IS FOR US TO CONTRACT OUR PURCHASING AGENT AND HAVE THEM SEND THEM THE INFORMATION AND, YOU KNOW, EXAMPLE. HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN, IT IS VERY LIMITED PEOPLE. SO, YOU GET THE LIST AND GIVE IT TO PURCHASING

[04:05:02]

AND THEY SEND IT OUT AND YOU DON'T TALK TO THEM AFTER THAT. YOU NEVER TALK TO THEM ONCE THE

BIDS OUT. THAT'S THE EASIEST, CLEAN WAY TO DO IT. >> CITY ATTORNEY: I DON'T DISSAY GREW WITH THAT. THAT'S TRUE. HE PROMPTED ME. THE PORT AUTHORITY AND WHERE WE ARE. WE HAD A CONFLICT ASSESSMENT MEETING AT 3:00. THAT'S FOR GOING THROUGH THE MOTIONS.

WE'VE DETERMINED THAT BASED UPON THE PORT AUTHORITY'S REFUSAL TO PAY BEYOND 2020, THEIR $50,000 PILOT PAYMENT, PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES, THAT WE WILL NOT ACCEPT AT THIS POINT THAT THAT 2020 IS THE END OF THEIR OBLIGATION. SO THEY DID NOT PAY 2019 AND THEY OF COURSE HAVEN'T PAID 2020. THEY WANT THE OBLIGATION TO END AFTER TWO YEARS. THE CITY BELIEVES THAT AS LONG AS THAT DEVELOPMENT IS THERE THEY OWE THAT MONEY. IT IS STATED IN THE DRI THAT IT IS USED TO OFFSET THE COST TO THE CITY OF PROVIDING SERVICES. MOSTLY POLICE AND FIRE BUT WE ALSO PROVIDE ROADS AS YOU KNOW. THAT IS STATED IN THE DIR. WE THINK IT'S BINDING. THEY HAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION. SO WE DID MEET AND WE COULDN'T COME UP WITH A RESOLUTION. SO WE STARTED THIS TODAY WE JUST FRAMED THE LEGAL ISSUES AND SAID THIS IS THE CITY'S POSITION, THIS IS THE PORT'S POSITION. THEY STARTED THEIRS. OF COURSE, WE DIDN'T HAVE AGREEMENT. THE NEXT STEP IS A JOINT PUBLIC MEETING. AND MEDIATION I SUSPECT.

>> COMMISSIONER: YOU NEED TO PROVIDE TO US DAYS YOU ARE NOT AVAILABLE OVER THE COURSE OF THE

NEXT THREE WEEKS. >> CITY ATTORNEY: BEFORE JANUARY 28TH. MOST OF US HAVE

CALENDARS ON OUR PHONE, CAN YOU BY TOMORROW-- >> I'LL SEND AN EMAIL REMINDER.

>> CITY ATTORNEY: AND TELL US WHEN YOU ARE NOT AVAILABLE PLEASE. AND WE'LL SET THE MEETING. WE'RE VERY -- THEY'RE HAVING A REAL HARD TIME ON TUESDAYS AND WEDNESDAYS. WE TALKED ABOUT THAT. WE SAID OUR MAYOR IS REALLY ONLY AVAILABLE THEN. BUT WE DID TALK ABOUT

PERHAPS A 10:00 A.M. ON ANOTHER DAY OF THE WEEK. >> MAYOR MILLER: THAT'S OKAY. I

GOT TO BE THERE. >> BELIEVE ME THIS MEETING WILL BE SHORT

IF I WEAR A VEST AND A TIE. >> CITY ATTORNEY: NO BRING COCKTAILS.

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS: MY SECOND QUESTION MOVING THE CHANNEL. WHERE ARE WE ON THAT? TWURTLE

DOESN'T SOUND GOOD. >> CITY ATTORNEY: I WAS ASKED TO DRAW UP A LOCAL AGREEMENT AND I DID. I SENT IT TO THEIR ATTORNEY WHO IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THEY DIDN'T AGREE WITH SOME OF THE TERMS OR WANTED SOME OTHER TERMS IN THERE AND THE REPORT TO ME FROM I FORGET IF IT WAS COMMISSIONER ROSS WAS AND I SENT THAT REPORT WAS THAT BOY THEY'RE NOT INTERESTED IN

DOING THIS OR THIS ISN'T GOING TO WORK. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: THEY

HAVEN'T RESPONDED BACK TO YOU? >> CITY ATTORNEY: NO BECAUSE I MADE THE CHANGES THEY ASKED ME

TO MAKE. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: COULD YOU SPEND ME THAT SO I CAN TAKE IT

TOMORROW NIGHT. >> CITY ATTORNEY: YES. WE'RE NOT GETTING ANYWHERE ON THE

CHANNEL RIGHT NOW. >> COMMISSIONER: JUST ON SO ADD BECAUSE I WAS AT THE SPECIAL MEETING YESTERDAY. WHEN MOVING THE CHANNEL WAS DISCUSSED, MR. RA GUCCI STOOD UP AND GAVE THEM MISINFORMATION THAT RAIN EAR -- RAINIER HAS NEVER GIVEN THEIR APPROVAL. AS YOU SAW I PROVIDED THEM THE LETTER GIVEN TO THE CITY MANAGER FROM RAINIER.

>> MAYOR MILLER: VICE MAYOR? >> VICE MAYOR KREGER: ON THE SUBJECTS I HAD THE DISCUSSION AT THE REQUEST OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS, THEY WERE CONTACTED BY REPRESENTATIVE RUTHERFORD'S OFFICE. AND THEY RESPONDED I DON'T HAVE THE LETTER THEY RESPONDED IS THE BALL GAME IS IN THE CITY'S HANDS IN OPA. THAT RUTHERFORD, YOU KNOW, CONGRESSMAN AND SENATORS CAN'T INFLUENCE REGULATORY PEOPLE WHEN WE HAVEN'T DONE WHAT WE HAVE TO DO. SO, AGAIN, WE HAVE A SITUATION OF THE LETTER GOES OUT AND THEY JUMP ON THE COURT AND THAT DOESN'T DO WELL FOR

INNER-GOVERNMENT RELATIONS IN THE END. >> MAYO

[04:10:05]

>> MAYOR MILLER: ARE YOU ALL DONE? >> CITY ATTORNEY: YES. WE TALKED ABOUT CHANGES TO THE APPEAL LANGUAGE. REMEMBER IT'S GOT TO GO TO THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD FIRST. WE WILL DO OUR ABSOLUTE VERY BEST. THE AD IS DUE THIS FRIDAY TO GET IT

ON THE FEBRUARY AGENDA FOR PAB. >> MAYOR MILLER: CITY CLERK? >> I HAVE NO COMMENT, SIR.

[Items 15 & 16]

>> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER ROSS? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: FIRST THE SHRIMP DROP. SHOUT-OUT TO LIGHT UP AMELIA. IT WAS EXCELLENT. A GREAT THING. LOTS AND LOTS OF PEOPLE THERE. A NICE TIME. I'D LIKE TO READ SOMETHING. THIS WAS A EMAIL I RECEIVED TODAY.

IT WAS SENT TO MR. MARTIN AND COMMISSIONERS. I'M FOLLOWING UP ON MY INITIAL EMAIL REGARDING THE RE-NOURISHING OF THE SAND ROADS IN OLD TOWN. MR. LESTER'S CREWS HAVE NEARLY COMPLETED MUCH NEEDED IMPROVEMENTS I'LL ASK YOU TO DRIVE THROUGH FOR A FIRST HAPPENS LOOK AT THEIR FINE WORK.

I THANKED MR. LESTER TODAY. HE DESERVES KUDOS FOR POSITIVE END RESULT. I CAN TELL YOU THIS PERSON OFTEN CRITICIZES WHAT THEY DO. SO, I THINK WELL DONE BY MR. LESTER'S DEPARTMENT.

SEC SECOND -- FINALLY, THIS SATURDAY AT 1:00 I'M GOING TO MEET WITH THE -- I FORGET THEIR NAME -- APLEX THANK YOU AND IT CAME ABOUT -- AND I'LL TELL YOU HOW THIS CAME ABOUT. I GOT AB EVENING THAT SAID GOOD EVENING. THIS WAS BACK IN DECEMBER. OVER THE LAST DAY OR SO I'VE BEEN REFLECTING ON OUR EMAIL EXCHANGE AND SAW INPUT FROM OUR FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS WE HAVE AN IDEA FOR YOU. THEN THEY ASKED ME TO PARTICIPATE WITH THEM IN A EXERCISE OF GETTING IN A WHEELCHAIR AND SEEING IF CERTAIN PARKS ARE ACCESSIBLE OR NOT.

AND IT WILL GO TO VARIOUS ELEMENTS AND HAVE FUN. WE SHOULD GO TO PIRATE'S PARK AND A COUPLE PARKS. ARE YOU IN? I SAID I'M IN. SO THAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN CENTRAL PARK THIS COMING SATURDAY AT 1:00. I'M GOING TO GET IN A WHEEL CHAIR AND SEE WHAT I CAN DO.

>> MAYOR MILLER: BE CAREFUL. I DID SOMETHING SIMILAR. REMEMBER THE ISSUE WITH THE CROSSWALK ON CENTER AND FRONT STREET AND THE TRAIN -- THE RAILROAD SAID IT TAKES TIME RAILROADS MOVE SLOW.

I TRIED THAT. THANK GOD SOMEONE WAS THERE TO SPOT ME BECAUSE I ALMOST WENT DOWN. DEFINITELY

TAKE SOMEBODY WITH YOU. ANYTHING ELSE? >> COMMISSIONER ROSS: THAT'S IT.

>> MAYOR MILLER: OKAY. COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN? >> COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN: SATURDAY I WENT INTO THE MEAL YEAH PAINT AND -- THE AMELIA PAINT AND HARDWARE STORE AND I MET -- OR ANDY CAME UP AND HE ASKED WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE DUMPSTERS. I STOOD THERE DUMBFOUNDED BECAUSE I HAD NO IDEA WHAT WAS GOING ON WITH THE DUMPSTERS. HE THEN TOLD ME THAT THE CODE ENFORCEMENT HAD BEEN IN TELLING HIM THAT HE HAD TO MOVE HIS DUMPSTER. A DUMPSTER THAT WAS PLACED BY THE CITY WHERE IT IS NOW IN EITHER 1981 OR 1982, SOME 38 YEARS AGO MORE OR LESS.

SO, ANDY BEING ANDY GOT ON THE PHONE AND CALLED THE CITY MANAGER AND ASKED HIM WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE DUMPSTERS? ACCORDING TO ANDY, HE WAS TOLD THAT COMMISSIONERS ARE ON HIS BACK. SO, IN THE SPIRIT OF TRANS PAIRENCY, FIRST OF ALL, THROUGH YOU MR. MAYOR I WOULD LIKE TO POLL MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS TO SEE IF THEY ARE ON THE BACK OF THE CITY MANAGER

CONCERNING THE DUMPSTERS IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. >> MAYOR MILLER: YOU CAN ASK AND

PEOPLE CAN DECIDE WHETHER TO ANSWER OR NOT. >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH?

> THIS IS THE FIRST I'VE HEARD OF WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. >> COMMISSIONER KREGER?

>> I SENT AND RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM ED BONNER ABOUT CLOSING DUMPSTERS WHICH I FORWARDED TO

THE CITY COMMISSIONER. CLOSING ONE DUMPSTER. >> MR. MAYOR? MORE MORE

>> MAYOR MILLER: NO I DON'T HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

>> I HAVE BEEN AN ADVOCATE FOR CHANGING THE DUMPSTERS FOR MORE THAN TWO YEARS. I DON'T KNOW THAT I'VE SAID ANYTHING RECENTLY. BUT I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THE CITY MANAGER AND THE MAIN STREET AND OTHERS WERE WORKING ON A DUMPSTER PLAN FOR DOWNTOWN BECAUSE THE TRASH CANS ARE A PROBLEM AND THE DUMPSTERS ARE A PROBLEM. AND UNDER OUR CODE THE DUMPSTERS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE SCREENED. SO, THEY'RE NOT FOLLOWING THE LAW BUT I HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING

RECENTLY. >> ANDY LATER RELATED HE WAS TOLD BY THE CITY MANAGER THAT HE HAD A MEETING WITH YOU COMMISSIONER ROSS AND THAT HE WOULD TALK TO YOU ABOUT IT. I

[04:15:07]

HAVE SEVERAL QUESTIONS THAT BOTHER ME. ONE IS, WHY WAS CODE ENFORCEMENT ORDERED TO TAKE THIS ACTION? THIS HAS HAPPENED ONCE BEFORE AND THEN IT DIED. I REALLY DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS TO SEND THEM OUT TO TAKE THE FLACK OF THE MERCHANTS AND THEN IN MANY CASES OR IN THE PAST CASE NOTHING HAPPENED. I BELIEVE THAT IT'S REALLY NOT FAIR TO CODE ENFORCEMENT PEOPLE. SO, I JUST HOPE THAT SOME CLARITY CAN BE BROUGHT TO THE MERCHANTS, PARTICULARLY ANDY, THAT HE WOULD LIKE AN EXPLANATION AS TO WHY. YOUR DUMPSTER HAS BEEN SITTING THERE FOR 38 YEARS, PLACED THERE BY THE CITY, IS THERE A QUESTION OF IT'S GRANDFATHERED IN? THE OTHER QUESTION I WOULD ASK IS, MR. MARTIN, DID THE CITY -- WAS THE CITY INFORMED BY CODE ENFORCEMENT THAT THE DUMPSTERS BY THE BATON COURSES ARE IN VIOLATION? THEY'RE NOT SCREENED IN. SO, IF WE'RE HOLDING MERCHANTS TO THE CODES OF SCREENING IN DUMPSTERS, THE CITY BETTER MAKE SURE THAT OUR DUMPSTERS ARE SCREENED IN. THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME WE'VE HELD CITIZENS TO CODE VIOLATIONS AND WE ARE THE BIGGEST OFFENDER. SO, I THINK IF WE ALL TAKE A LOOK AT THE PéTANQUE COURTS WE'RE GOING TO SEE UNSHIELDED DUMPSTERS. SO, I ASK, AGAIN, HOW DO WE EXPECT THE MERCHANTS TO FOLLOW OUR RULES HEN WE DON'T? THE OTHER THING, JUST FOR THE RECORD, COMMISSIONER ROSS, IN CASE YOU WRITE ANOTHER ARTICLE, THERE'S NO NEED TO REFER TO ME AS A FELLOW COMMISSIONER. I GIVE PUBLIC PERMISSION FOR YOU TO USE MY FULL NAME REFERRING TO ME AND MY COMMENTS. I PROUDLY STAND BY WHAT I SAID. AS MY MOTHER SAID ONLY TWO THINGS. ONLY THE TRUTH HURTS AND IF THE SHOE FITS WEAR IT. THANK YOU.

>> WE'VE HAD THIS ONGOING DISCUSSION WITH DUMPSTERS. THE CITY CODE SAYS DUMPSTERS NEED TO BE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. IS THERE A SCREEN ISSUE? YES. BASED UPON THE DISCUSSION WE HAD ABOUT THE LAND CONSERVATION ORDINANCE AND NOT FOLLOWING IT OR THE FACT WE DIDN'T FOLLOW OUR OWN ORDINANCE, I MEAN, I LOOK FOR THE DIRECTION FROM THE CITY COMMISSION, DO WE WANT TO ALLOW DUMPSTERS TO CONTINUE TO BE NON- ON PUBLIC PROPERTY WHETHER IT WAS PLACED BY US, HOW DO WE PROCEED. I'VE BEEN MEETING WITH JEREMIAH AND ARLENE AND WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO ADDRESS DOWNTOWN TRASH ISSUES. THE CODE SAYS YOU CAN'T HAVE THEM THERE. IF WE WANT TO IGNORE THAT PART OF THE CODE, I JUST NEED SPECIFIC DIRECTION THAT WE'RE GOING TO IGNORE THAT MART OF THE CODE.

>> COMMISSIONER: IS THERE A SITUATION WHERE DUMPSTERS WOULD BE GRANDFATHERED IN?

>> CITY ATTORNEY: WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT IS REALLY -- SO AVERAGE POSSESSION. IF YOU PUT YOUR FENCE ON SOMEBODY ELSE'S PROPERTY. SO, HERE WE'VE PROVIDED HIM WITH DOES HE HAVE A REASONABLE EXPECTATION THAT HE WILL FOREVER BE ABLE TO HAVE THAT DUMPSTER THERE?

>> COMMISSIONER: I BELIEVE HE DID. >> CITY ATTORNEY: HE THINKS IT'S REASONABLE. UNDER THE LAW THERE IS NO THE. IT'S ON PUBLIC PROPERTY. IT IS A DUMPSTER THAT DOES NOT BELONG TO HIM. IT BELONGS TO THE SANITATION COMPANY. AND I THINK THAT -- SO THE ANSWER IS NO, HE DOESN'T HAVE A LEGAL REASON TO ARGUE BACK OR PUSH BACK ON THE CITY AND SAY YOU CAN'T DO THIS BECAUSE I HAVE -- I AM GRANDFATHERED IN. BUT I DO THINK THAT CERTAIN PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN HERE A LONG TIME AND WHEN THINGS LIKE THAT HAPPEN THAT THEY NEED TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE NOTICE THAN A CODE COMPLAINT OR CODE OFFICER.

THAT'S ALL. BECAUSE THIS IS THE KIND OF STUFF THAT WE GET IS I'VE HAD IT HERE FOR, YOU KNOW, 20 YEARS AND THIS IS A REAL SLAP IN THE FACE AND NOT RIGHT. AND THAT'S WHAT HE IS SAYING. I MEAN, WE DO HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE HIM WITH A WAY TO REMOVE HIS TRASH. AND I THINK THAT WHEN THE CITY -- THE RIGHT THING TO DO -- REMEMBER I'VE DISCUSSED HERE BEFORE THERE'S LEGAL AND THERE'S MORAL. AND WE SHOULD THINK ABOUT BOTH WHEN WE OBVIOUSLY WHEN WE CAN. AND, IN

[04:20:01]

THIS CASE, MORALLY WE SHOULD PROBABLY TRY TO WORK WITH HIM. IF WE PUT A DUMPSTER THERE TO ACCOMMODATE HIS BUSINESS WE SHOULD PROBABLY TRY TO WORK WITH HIM.

>> COMMISSIONER: THE OTHER THING I HAVE AN ISSUE IS WE STILL HAVE TRASH TOTES ALL OVER DOWNTOWN ALL HOURS OF THE DAY AND NIGHT. I THOUGHT I HAD COME UP WITH A RELATIVELY SIMPLE SOLUTION IS PUT THE NAME OF THE BUSINESS ON THE CANS. THAT WAY THE PUBLIC GETS TO SEE WHO IS NOT MEETING THEIR OBLIGATIONS TO BRING THEIR CANS IN AND, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, YOU CAN TAKE ACTION BY NOT GOING THERE. I KNOW ONE PERSON WHO HAS TOLD ME REPEATEDLY, THEY'RE TIRED OF SEEING THE TOTES, THE TRASH TOTES IN THE HANDICAP PARKING SPACE. I THINK THAT'S A DISGRACE. SO, YOU KNOW, TO ME IT'S SIMPLE. WE RIDES AROUND AND PICK THE CANS UP. THEY CALL CITY HALL WHERE DID MY CAN GO? YOU DIDN'T PUT IT AWAY LIKE THE CODE SAYS SO WE TOOK IT. IF YOU DO THAT A COUPLE OF TIMES I THINK WE'RE GOING TO SEE A BIG REDUCTION IN TOTES NOT BEING PUT AWAY. THANK YOU.

>> CITY ATTORNEY: IT'S LATE I KNOW. I'M SURE YOU ALL WILL THINK ABOUT THIS IF NOT TONIGHT WHEN WE'RE MORE AWAKE. I HAVE SEEN THIS ACTUALLY HAPPEN AND SOME PEOPLE, I'M NOT SAYING ALL OF THEM THAT GET THEIR TOTES TAKEN AWAY, THEY WILL DUMP THEIR TRASH IN THE STREET.

>> COMMISSIONER: OR THEY'LL PUT IT IN THE CITY DECORATIVE BINS. DOWNTOWN TRASH IS AN ONGOING ISSUE AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE ARE KIND OF PATIENTLY WAITING FOR IS A SCHEDULED TRANSITION FROM ADVANCE DISPOSAL TO WASTE MANAGEMENT. WHATEVER WE TRY -- AND BELIEVE ME WE'VE MET HALF A DOZEN TIMES TRYING TO SOLVE THIS ISSUE. AND YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE THE PUSHBACK WHETHER IT'S FROM A VARIETY OF PROPERTY OWNERS OR BUSINESS OWNERS. AND THAT'S SOME O THE DISTINCTION WE HAVE IS BUSINESS AND PROPERTY OWNERS AREN'T AS CONGRUENT AS THEY USED TO BE. WE'LL REACH OUT TO WASTE MANAGE. AND SAY HERE IS OUR DOWNTOWN TRASH ISSUE WHETHER IT'S THE ZERO LOT LINES AND NO PLACE TO STORE THE TOTES, HOW DO YOU HANDLE IT IN SOME OF YOUR OTHER COMMUNITIES. IT IS AN ONGOING ISSUE AND NOT AN EASY ISSUE TO ADDRESS WHETHER IT'S DUMPSTERS IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY BECAUSE BELIEVE ME THAT'S NOT THE ONLY LOCATION WHERE A DUMPSTER IS SITUATED LIKE THAT. BUT IT IS A CHALLENGE AND THERE'S GOING TO BE PUSHBACK. I KNOW MAIN STREET IS WORKING HAND IN HAND WITH THE CITY TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT AND THERE'S PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT TRULY BELIEVE THERE'S NOT A PROBLEM. AND THENS THERE PEOPLE THAT THINK IT IS A SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM. AND WITH REGARD TO THE CODE ENFORCEMENT. IF YOU LOOK AT THE MONTHLY REPORT THAT SHE PROVIDES TO YOU, WE'RE TRYING TO EMPHASIZE AN AREA OF FOCUS FOR THE COMING MONTH. SO, YOU ARE AWARE OF, ALL RIGHT, THIS MONTH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT ALL CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUES BUT WE'RE GOING TO FOCUS ON OVERGROWN YARDS. HOPEFULLY TO GET YOUR CONSENSUS OR YOUR KNOWLEDGE THAT LE RATTY WE'RE WORKING ON THAT THIS MONTH. BUT YEAH IT'S NOT AN EASY ISSUE TO

RESOLVE. >> COMMISSIONER: I KNOW. THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR MILLER: COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH? >> COMMISSIONER LEDNOVICH: COMMISSIONER KREGER AND I MISSED OUR GUESS ON WHEN THIS MEETING WOULD END BY AN HOUR AND THIRTY

FIVE MINUTES. >> COMMISSIONER: I'M STILL UNDER

>> MAYOR MILLER: YOU CAN GO AGAIN IF YOU WANT TO. >> COMMISSIONER: AN HOUR THIRTY

FIVE OVER. AND SECOND HAPPY NEW YEAR. >> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU.

VICE MAYOR? >> VICE MAYOR KREGER: MY CONDOLENCES TO THE BROOKS FAMILY. KATHY BROOKS RECENTLY PASSED AWAY. KATHY BROOKS WAS A VERY SERIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL LADY HERE. SHE WAS KEY IN MEDIA FROM DAY ONE INVOLVED IN A LOT OF OTHER STUFF. THE OBSERVER DID HAVE AN ARTICLE OR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF IT. I MENTIONED EARLIER WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT PECK AND JUDY IS ON IT NOW, YOU KNOW, RECENTLY I WENT TO KEEP NASSAU BEAUTIFUL TREE PLANTING. I THINK YOU WERE THERE TOO WEREN'T YOU? THEY'RE DOING A FABULOUS JOB. JUST SO HAPPEN ON THE 11TH THEY GOT AN ADOPT A TREE EDUCATIONAL WORKSHOP IN YOU'LLEE. I THINK THE OBSERVER PUBLISHED THAT. AND STILL TIME TO SIGN UP FOR IT. ON THURSDAY TDC'S GIVING I BELIEVE $25,000 CHECK TO THE MUSEUM AT 9:00. ON THURSDAY ALSO SENATOR BEAM IS GOING TO BE AT THE FIRE STATION IN THE COUNTY OUT THERE BASED ON SOME LEGISLATIVE STUFF THAT'S

HAPPENING. WITH THAT, HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYBODY. >> MAYOR MILLER: THANK YOU SIR.

[04:25:13]

SHRIMP DROP ANOTHER FANTASTIC SUCCESS. I DID THE MATH OF THE CITY ATTORNEY THE OTHER DAY AND I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THE REORGANIZATION WAS GOING TO BE AFTER CHRISTMAS BUT APPARENTLY IT'S BEFORE. SO THAT WAS MY LAST SHRIMP DRIVE AS MAYOR. I WOULD HAVE GONE LONGER HAD I KNOWN THAT. KIND OF BUMMED OUT. LOOKING FORWARD TO GIVING A GOOD LONG SPEECH. AT THAT DROP I DID MENTION THAT, YOU KNOW, THESE THINGS ARE DIFFICULT TO PUT TOGETHER. THAT'S JUST ONE ASPECT OF IT. AND POLICE AND FIRE, WELL DONE. YOU GET ACCOLADES WELL DESERVED. BUT, I MEAN, YOU GOT GUYS DOING SANITATION DURING THE HOLIDAYS AND PICKING UP TRASH AND CLEANING UP THE DUMPSTERS AND ALL THAT STUFF AND PICKING UP AFTERWARDS AND ALL THE VOLUNTEERS. NOT ONLY FOR THESE EVENTS BUT ALL OVER. I MENTIONED THE HUMANE SOCIETY TODAY. I THINK I TOLD THE STORY ABOUT THE OLD GUY THAT WOULD SIT IN THE PEN WITH THE GERMAN SHEPHERDS. THEY SAID HE SITS THERE ALL DAY. THAT'S THE KIND OF GLUE THAT HOLDS OUR COMMUNITY TOGETHER. YOU CAN'T PAY FOR THAT KIND OF STUFF. WE'RE SO FORTUNATE TO HAVE THE COMMUNITY AND THE HOLIDAYS AMPLIFIES THAT. I THINKS THAT SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND. COUNCIL ON AGING, MEALS ON WHEELS. WHEN YOU DRIVE DOWN THE STREETS OF FERNANDINA YOU WOULD BE SURPRISED HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE LIVING FROM THESE HOUSES THAT DON'T LEAVE THEIR HOMES THAT ARE COMPLETELY DEPENDENT ON THESE ORGANIZATIONS. AND THE CHRISTMAS DINNERS. THAT WAS A HUGE SUCCESS. AND THAT'S ALL MR. MARTIN. YOU PUT THAT TOGETHER AND YOU HAD A LOT OF HELP I'M SURE. I READ YOUR ARTICLE -- I WOULD HAVE HUNG AROUND AND HELPED YOU WITH CHAIR. IT WAS A GREAT TURNOUT. THOSE KIND OF THINGS ARE REALLY WHAT MAKE A COMMUNITY A COMMUNITY. REALLY QUICK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CODE ENFORCEMENT STUFF. ONE THING I WANT THE COMMUNITY TO KNOW, WHEN YOU DO THINGS IN CODE ENIS TOMENT THAT YOU DO IN POCKETS AND YOU TALKED TO DALE ABOUT THIS. I'M SEEING A WHOLE LOT OF THESE ADVERTISING FLAGS. THE BIG ONES AND THE TEAR SHAPE ON IT. THOSE THINGS AREN'T CHEAP. THEY'RE NOT INEXPENSIVE. AND WHEN ONE PERSON GETS IT THEIR NEIGHBOR THINKS THAT MUST BE OKAY IT'S BEEN OUT THERE FOR TWO WEEKS.

THEY'RE NOT IN CODE THEY'RE IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. SO, IF YOU PLAN ON BUYING -- WE'RE GETTING READY TO ENFORCE THAT. SO, DON'T BUY THESE THINGS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, NOW YOU ARE GOING TO GET TOLD EVERYBODY ELSE HAS ONE HOW COME I COULDN'T GET ONE. A LOT OF THEM HAVE A NAME SO IT'S NOT LIKE YOU CAN SELL IT. SO, DON'T BUY ADVERTISING FLAGS. THIS IS THE FIRST COMMISSION MEETING OF FISCAL YEAR 2020 THAT THIS IS THE LAST YEAR THIS COMMISSION IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE THIS. BY THIS TIME NEXT YEAR IT IS GOING TO BE A VASTLY DIFFERENT COMMISSION. SO, I WANT TO SAY PERSONALLY I'VE REALLY ENJOYED THIS TERM. DO WE KNOW WHAT NUMBER THIS IS LIKE IN

CONGRESS? >> COMMISSIONER: 10,263

>> MAYOR MILLER: I DIDN'T SAY HOW MANY TIMES DID YOUR LIGHT GO ON IT'S BEEN A VERY INTERESTING YEAR. AND I LOOK FORWARD TO REALLY GOING AT IT FULL FORCE THE LAST YEAR AND GETTING THINGS DONE BEFORE WE FINISH UP. SO, THANK YOU GENTLEMEN AND LADIES FOR ANOTHER FANTASTIC YEAR AND I

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.