Jul 22, 2020 Special Planning Advisory Board

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

[00:00:17]

>> WE HAVE PEOPLE IN THE CHAMBERS AS WELL AS PEOPLE ONLINE.

IF WE COULD HAVE THE ROLL CALL, PLEASE, MADAM SECRETARY >>

>> THIS IS THE FIRST MEETING WHERE WE HAD A WHOLE COMPLEMENT OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS.

WE HAVE SEVEN VOTING MEMBERS AND AN EXPERT WE WOULD LIKE TO WELCOME MEMBER GEIGER TO THE BOARD. JUST FOR ÃFOR EVERYONE'S UNDERSTANDING, MISS ANGER YOUR TERM, WE ALL ASSIGNED TERMS AT THE LAST MEETING, SO YOUR TERM WILL EXPIRE 12, 31, 32.

SO THAT IS THE CLASS Q AVM. HAVE A QUORUM. SHALL WE HAVE A PLEDGE

[2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE]

[3.1 Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) Amendments for Legislative Compliance: The Northeast Florida Regional Council will present required amendments addressing State of Florida mandated legislative requirements for “Peril of Flood,” “Seasonal Population,” and “Water Supply Facilities Work Plan” as determined by the 2019 Evaluation and Appraisal Review (EAR) report.]

SO AT THE LAST MEETING, WE HAD THE FIRST CONVERSATION AROUND THE SET OF YOUR MAJENSKI REGIONAL PLANNING THAT THEY PULL TOGETHER FOR US. WE HAD A PRESENTATION AND A VERY GOOD COVER ANALYSIS PROVIDED TO US BACK TO TREATMENT FOR MANY OF WHICH WE TRULY APPRECIATE IT. AND THEY HAVE PROVIDED US WITH SOME ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IN PREPARATION FOR THIS MEETING, WHICH WE WILL TAKE COMMENTS ON ANY LITTLE BIT.

BUT AT THIS POINT, KELLY, COULD YOU PLEASE WALK US THROUGH THE AGENDA ITEM IS ON THE TABLE FOR AND LET'S SEE WHAT QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE MAY NOT HAVE ATTENDED AND AT OUR PREVIOUS MEETING JULY 8, THE REGULAR BOARD MEETING THEY RECEIVE A PRESENTATION REGARDING PRE-TOPIC AREAS WHERE THE CITY IS CURRENTLY SEEKING TO GET INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATUTES AND THE TOPIC AREA INCLUDES SEASONAL POPULATION AND WATER FACILITIES SUPPLIES PLANS GROUP REGIONAL COUNCIL WAS CONTRACTED WITH TO PERFORM WORK ON THE CITY'S IN ORDER TO GET THE CITY INTO THE MIDDLE OF COMPLIANCE, WE NEEDED TO GET LANGUAGE PREPARED THAT WOULD ADDRESS THE STATE REQUIREMENTS FOR US THAT WE KNEW CONFIDENTLY WOULD GET APPROVED THROUGH THE STATE. WE RECOGNIZE THAT THE CITY WISHES TO TAKE UP A MUCH BROADER AND MORE COMPREHENSIVE LOOK AT ITS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, BUT AT THIS POINT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE MEETING THAT STATE REQUIREMENT IN ORDER TO FULFILL THE OBLIGATION OF EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT, AND THEN AS A SECOND EFFORT, THE CITY IS LOOKING TO REVISE ITS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE IMPLEMENTING DOCUMENT, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

SO THAT WOULD BE A SUBSEQUENT EFFORT. PART OF THE BOARD RECEIVED THE PRESENTATION AT A PRAYER MEETING AND WE DID DISCUSS AN AREA OF ASSOCIATED WITH THE SEASONAL POPULATION CHANGE FOR THE LAST MINUTE THAT WAS REQUESTED BY MR. BENNETT AND I KNOW AS ADDITIONAL COMMENTS HE WISHES TO OFFER AS PART OF THE PERCOCET CONSIDERATION TO SAVING IN ORDER TO FULLY FLUSH OUT THE CITY WILL BE REQUIRED TO ACCOMPLISH WHEN EVALUATING

[00:05:04]

BACKUP MATERIAL FOR THE CITY'S AGENDA ITEM. >> SO WHAT QUESTIONS DO WE

STILL HAVE AMONG THE BOARD MEMBERS? >> DO YOU WANT ME TO START?

WHAT THAT WILL BE FINE >> I WILL START. THE FIRST ITEM THAT I HAVE IS UNDER ÃTHIS IS UNDER NEW POLICY AND IT'S 5.03-1 ¦17. AND I AM HAVING A PROBLEM WITH THE TERMINOLOGY "REASONABLY SAFE FROM FLOODING." THE QUESTION IS WHO DEFINES REASONABLY SAFE FOR IT TO BE VERY ARBITRARY. DEPENDING ON YOUR LIST.

SO I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED. THAT'S ONE ITEM.

>> LET'S TALK ABOUT THEM ONE AT A TIME. AND THEN WE WILL MOVE ON SO WE DON'T GET CONFUSED OR SIDETRACKED. KELLY, IS IT POSSIBLE YOU CAN

BRING THAT STATEMENT UP FOR >> IT'S PAGE 2 OF THE PERIL OF FLOOD DOCUMENT.

>> GIVE HIM A MOMENT > SO WHILE WE ARE Ã >> KELLY, TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR YOU, I CAN PULL THIS UP ON MY SCREEN IF YOU PERMIT SCREEN SHARING.

>> THAT WILL ALLOW ME TO KEEP TAKING NOTES HERE. >> SO MARGO OR SEAN, CAN YOU SPEAK TO THIS PARTICULAR SENTENCE: GIVE US ONE SECOND JUST TO PULL IT UP ON THE SCREEN. HERE WE GO. CAN EVERYONE SEE MY SCREEN

>> YES. >> SO OUR EXPLANATIONS ÃWE WERE LOOKING AT NASSAU COUNTY AS A MODEL FOR THESE POLICIES AND THAT WAS THE CHARGE I WAS GIVEN TO MODEL THE POLICIES AFTER NASSAU COUNTY. AND WE USED CHANGES OF FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION.

THAT IS WHERE WE ARE COMING FROM WITH THIS SPECIFIC LANGUAGE.

>> ARE YOU ASKING THAT THEY WERE REASONABLY BE REMOVED OR BETTER DEFINED FOR WHAT?

>> MY POSITION WOULD BE IT NEEDS TO BE BETTER DEFINED AND I CONSIDER THE STATEMENT IN THERE TO BE VERY ARBITRARY. FOUR PEOPLE HAVE FOUR DIFFERENT JUDGES EFFORT REASONABLE IS.

>> SO WHAT WOULD YOU SUGGEST? >> I CANNOT COME UP WITH A SPECIFIC GOOD ONE.

I WAS HOPING THEY COULD COME UP WITH SOME OTHER LANGUAGE. 90 PERCENT PROBABILITY.

COULD BE TOO APPROACH HIM AGAIN IT'S MAKING A JUDGMENT BUT THERE MAY BE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A DATABASE THAT CAN BE USED FOR CALCULATING 90 PERCENT OR 80 PERCENT.

SEND BECAUSE I'M NOT CLEAR IT WOULD MAKE THAT DECISION. ON TOP OF IT.

>> SO I THINK WHAT THIS IS TRYING TO GET AT ANY POLICY STATEMENT IS THAT THE FLOODPLAIN MANAGER BUILDING OFFICIAL IS REVIEWING APPLICATIONS TO DETERMINE IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH FLOODING EVENTS. AND THAT WHERE OUR DEVELOPMENTS WITHIN FLOOD ZONE, THAT THOSE ACTIVITIES ARE CONSTRUCTED WITH, WHAT'S BEEN DETERMINED TO BE WITH CITY'S FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

I ACTUALLY THINK THEY GIVE YOU THINGS THAT YOU MIGHT REVIEW OF THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS TO

[00:10:01]

A DESCRIPTOR. >> I THINK I CAN DO BETTER THAN THAT.

YOU'RE PUTTING YOUR TECHNICAL PERSON IN THERE TO MAKE THE CALL, SO TO SPEAK.

IT MEETS THE GENERAL CRITERIA >> RIGHT. YOU DON'T HAVE A DESCRIPTOR OF REASONABLY SAFE FROM FLOODING. JUST IN REVIEWING THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS FOR IMPACTS

ASSOCIATED FUNDING. >> OKAY. >> HOW WOULD YOU REWRITE THAT SENTENCE? YOU SAY REVIEWING ALL APPLICATIONS AND SITE

DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DETERMINE WHETHER THOSE DEVELOPMENT SITES >> WILL BE SAFE FROM FLOODING.

>> TO REVIEW ÃTO DETERMINE FLOODING IMPACTS FROM FLOODING. ON THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

SITES >> OKAY. >> IMPACTS FROM FLOOD EVENTS ON

THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SITE. >> OKAY. >> SO THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS.

ANY THOUGHTS OR COMMENTS ARE WE OKAY TO CHANGE THIS MORNING? >> I HAVE A COMMENT

>> SHORT. >> HELLO? CAN YOU HEAR ME?

>> YES. YES. >> WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE COMMENT THAT MATT CONTRIBUTED HE SAID IT'S NOTEWORTHY THAT TEMPORARY FLOODING IS ALLOWED UNDER ST.

JOHNS WORT MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AND FDOT CRITERIA FOR DRAINAGE DESIGN, SO IS THERE A DIFFERENT TYPE OF FLOODING? SO I THINK WE NEED TO KEEP IN MIND THAT THERE IS STORM SURGE AND THERE IS SEVERAL DIFFERENT TYPES OF FLOODING THAT, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY COULD BE DISCUSSED IN THIS AREA. SO A FLOOD EVENT COULD BE THE RAINSTORMS AND CAPACITY TITLE SURGE FROM A HURRICANE. I JUST WANTED TO MENTION THAT, BUT THERE IS DIFFERENT TYPES OF

FLOODING THAT NEED TO BE CONSIDERED. >> ALL DEFINED TYPES OF

FLOODING >> I THINK YOU COULD SAY IMPACTS FROM FLOOD EVENTS AND

AT LEAST GET THE SENTENCE COMPLETED. >> OKAY.

I THINK SHE IS AGREEING WITH WHAT I DISCUSSED ANYBODY ELSE CAN SO WE WILL ACCEPT THAT

CHANGE, AND YOU HAVE NOT? >> IF YOU GO OVER TO ÃTHIS IS ACTUALLY GOING PAGE 4 OF THAT SAME DOCUMENT, AND IT TALKS ABOUT REVISED POLICIES, AND THERE IS A POLICY 5-POINT 03 POINT 012 AND THERE'S TWO OF THEM. AND I THINK ONE OF THEM NEEDS

TO BE A DIFFERENT IDENTIFICATION. >> KENYA MARSHALL IS A LITTLE

TRIP? >> NO PROBLEM. >> 50312?

>> YES >> IS UNDER NUMBER SIX, ENCOURAGE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO PARTICIPATE AND UNDER REVISED POLICY IT IS JUST SHOWING THE SAME POLICY NUMBER.

THERE IS JUST A TYPO, OR IS IT TWO DIFFERENT SENTENCES IN THE SAME POLICY?

THOUGH, SEAN, ARE YOU LOOKING US UP? >> MAKING A COMPARISON.

>> I COULDN'T FIND AN EQUIVALENT TO THE FIRST ITEM THERE.

I THINK NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE CONSTRUCTIONS >> AND 5.0.3.12 IN THE ACTUAL POLICY AND IN THE REVISION, CONSTRUCTION AND FLOODPLAIN MARKETEERS IN KEEPING WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM, THE CITY MUST MAINTAIN [INDISCERNIBLE] WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN, SO THAT IS THE FIRST ONE AND THEN ENTERING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE FLOODPLAIN'S CELL LOOKING AT THIS RIGHT NOW, IT LOOKS LIKE

[00:15:05]

YOU DON'T HAVE THE SAME POLICY REFERENCES >> IT'S TOO SENTENCES IN THE

SAME POLICY >> YES. THOSE ARE TWO SEPARATE SECTIONS OF THE SAME POLICY. I AM NOT SURE THE REASON WHY I INCLUDED THEM SEPARATELY, BUT WE CAN COMBINE THAT INTO ONE SENTENCE OR TWO SEPARATE SENTENCES WITH THE SAME POLICY

REFERENCE. >> IS ACCEPTABLE TO EVERYONE? >> YES

>> SO DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? >> YES.

ONE OF THEM IS ON SECTION J AND I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SIMILAR DISCUSSIONS ON THAT ONE. LET'S JUST HOPE THAT ONE. I THINK I MIGHT HAVE JUST ONE MORE. OKAY. IF WE GO OVER TO THE FERNANDINA BEACH WATER SUPPLY FACILITIES WORKPLAN, AND IT'S ACTUALLY PAGE 2, SECTION 1.

THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF A NITPICKING THAT YOU ARE USING TWO ACRONYMS FOR THE FIRST TIME IN THE DOCUMENT DEFINING ONE OF THEM EVER. THE OTHER ONE YOU SPELL OUT LATER. I WOULD JUST RECOMMEND AS A COURTESY TO THE PERSON WHO DOES READ THE DOCUMENT EVERY DAY AS IT SPELLED OUT. ON THE FIRST PARAGRAPH YOU HAVE THE MFR WSB IS NOT DEFINED THERE AND IS NOT DEFINED IN OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

I WOULD JUST SPELL IT OUT AND DO IT ONE TIME AND THAT'S IT. AND THEN UNDER THE SECOND PARAGRAPH WE'VE GOT THE SJR WND WHICH IS ST. JOHNS AND IT'S STILL SHOULD SPELL OUT THE

FIRST TIME. >> COULD WE MAKE THE ADMINISTRATIVE UPDATES? IS THAT ACCEPTABLE TO EVERYONE? AND IF YOU GO OVER TO ÃTHERE ARE BLANK SUMMER HERE IN THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH PROPERTY OWNERS, THIS IS ON PAGE 3

>> WE ANOTHER'S NEED Ã >> I DIDN'T KNOW IF WE WERE GOT THOSE.

>> KELLY STILL HAS THAT ACTION ITEM. >> IS APPROXIMATELY 55

AGREEMENTS. >> OKAY. LET'S SEE.

THE OTHER ONE ÃWE TOOK CARE OF THAT ONE. THE ONLY OTHER ONE IS THIS IS MORE OF A QUESTION. LET ME JUST ASK THE QUESTION. IF YOU GO OVER TO SECTION 7, THE SAME ONE. WATER CONSERVATION PRACTICES, THE CITY CURRENTLY IMPLEMENTS WATER CONSERVATION PRACTICES INCLUDING SOME THAT ARE ENABLED BY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

I THINK YOU NEED TO DEFINE WHAT THAT SUM IS. MAYBE NOT.

>> AND THE SUBSEQUENT PARAGRAPH DOES DEFINED AS SECTIONS OF THE CITY ÃPLAN FOR YOUR THOUGHTS

BEING PULLED FROM. >> OKAY. >> IF YOU ARE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT, THAT WAS JUST AS I WASN'T SURE IF THAT REALLY ÃSO IT DOES ÃTHE LISTING THAT FOLLOWS PROVIDES A POLICY REFERENCE

IF THAT TAKES CARE OF IT, THAT'S IT. >> ANYBODY ELSE? PROPOSED CHANGES OR PROPOSED AREAS OR AREAS YOU WANT TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT?

>> I HAVE A QUESTION. >> YES, SIR. IT'S REALLY JUST A QUESTION REGARDING THE SERVICE AREA ON THE DOCUMENT ON THE LEFT IF YOU CAN GO TO THE MAP OF THE ITEM, IT WAS THAT ONE AREA RIGHT THERE AND IT WAS AN AREA TO LOOK TO BE EXCLUDED.

>> THAT'S THE MARRIOTT. >> I UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS, BUT IT APPEARS TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE AREA. NOW IT'S SHOWING THE MASS OF OUR SERVICE AREA BUT THE WAY I LOOK AT IT, WHY IS IT THERE? DID WE EVER FIND OUT? JUST ON OUR END, ITEM STILL REQUIRES ADDITIONAL FOLLOW-UP. I HAVE TO GET IN TOUCH WITH THE WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT SO I

DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER AS OF RIGHT NOW. >> WE STILL ARE TRACKING IT AS AN ACTION ITEM, MR. BENNETT. AND WE KNOW WE ARE PROVIDING WATER TO PROPERTIES WITHIN THAT AREA, SO THE MAPPING DISCREPANCY WE DO NEED TO RECONCILE SO THAT WE UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S THERE, BUT WE KNOW THERE IS WATER AVAILABLE TO THOSE PROPERTIES WITHIN THE

[00:20:08]

AREA >> WELL, IT'S A PERTINENT MATTER.

>> ABSOLUTELY. IT APPEARS TO BE WRONG >> WE HAVE ACTION ITEMS TO GET

RESOLVED BEFORE THIS IS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OKAY. >> DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT MY ITEM THAT I EMAILED FOR YES, ABSOLUTELY. IT HASN'T CHANGED.

SOMETIMES WE HAVE A LOT OF THINGS IN OUR DOCUMENTS WITH NO WAY TO FOLLOW AND I SEE THIS AS ONE OF THEM. AND THIS WAS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE WITH ALL OF THE DAR MEETINGS WE HAD. SO I PERSONALLY DON'T THINK THE DATA IS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC OR TO THE CITY. WE CAN GET, I'M ASSUMING, OCCUPANCY AT THE HOTEL BROKEN UP JUST FOR THE CITY THROUGH THE CDC. BUT FOR THE OTHER ITEMS, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY DATA AT ALL PRODUCED REGARDING OCCUPANCY FOR SECOND HOMES FOR THE RENTALS. SO THIS WAY, IF THE DATA IS AVAILABLE, THE CITY CAN USE IT AND IF NOT THEY SHOULD PRODUCE THE DATA. THAT'S IT.

PRETTY CLEAR, I THINK. >> I WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THAT.

I 100 PERCENT AGREE WITH YOU, MR. BENNETT. AND I AGREE THAT WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO PUT TOGETHER SOME DATA THAT WOULD PRESENT AT LEAST THOSE THREE TOPIC AREAS IN A MEANINGFUL WAY SO THAT WHEN YOU ARE CONSIDERING LAND-USE AND ZONING CHANGES TO YOUR MAP THROUGHOUT THE CITY, THAT THOSE AREAS HAVE BEEN CONTEMPLATED AND REALLY THOUGHT THROUGH CAREFULLY. I THINK WE CAN GET TO A POSITION WHERE WE ARE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE THE SPIRIT BUT OVER TIME, WE WILL BE ABLE TO GET MORE DATA THAT IS ACCURATE AND A TRUER PICTURE. INITIALLY, THIS IS GOING TO BE A BIT OF A WORK IN PROGRESS IN TERMS OF GETTING DATA AND ALSO BECOMING ROUTINE ABOUT THE REPORTING OF THIS DATA.

SO I THINK WE WILL BE ABLE TO GET THERE AND TO BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE AND HANDLE THIS POLICY. BOTH AS IT'S WRITTEN BUT AS YOU PROPOSED IT SO WE CAN IMPLEMENT

THIS POLICY >> WE WILL ADD THIS VERBIAGE >> I DON'T TAKE ANY ISSUE WITH

ADDING THAT IN THERE. I THINK WE CAN COMPLY. >> MISSED ROBUST

>> I JUST WANT TO WORK ON THE SENTENCE STRUCTURE A LITTLE BIT, BASICALLY, THE LAST TWO SENTENCES THERE THAT STARTS WITH, THE TRACK AND CERTAINLY OPEN FOR DISCUSSION, BUT I THINK IT'S A LITTLE SUPERFLUOUS TO SAY BEST AVAILABLE DAM Ã DATA.

IF THE DATA IS UNAVAILABLE, THEN THE CITY WILL COMPILE THE DATA INTERNALLY.

I THINK THERE IS A LOT OF VARIABLES IN THERE. >> OKAY.

>> MR. BENNETT, IS NOT ACCESSIBLE TO YOU? >> IT SAYS THE SAME THING.

I WAS TRYING NOT TO DISRUPT HER. THE LANGUAGE IS ALREADY THERE.

THEY RECOGNIZE IF THE DATA WAS AVAILABLE WE WOULD USE IT AND IF NOT I DON'T WHAT SHE IS

SUGGESTING CHANGES AT ALL BUT THAT'S ALL RIGHT >> OKAY.

KELLY >> I HAVE ONE MORE ITEM >> LET'S FINISH THIS ONE.

LET'S FINISH THIS PARTICULAR SETENCE. SO ARE WE ALL COMFORTABLE WITH

THIS CHANGE? >> YES. I AM

>> MR. PETERSON, YOU HAD SOMETHING ELSE? >> MR. DECKER AND I HAD THE SAME PROBLEM WITH DEFINING WHAT COMMUNITY VISION IS. AS I CAN FIND TO FIND ANYWHERE?

>> WHAT >> IT'S THE SECOND AND THIRD WORD J.

>> IF I MAY, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE CONSENSUS ITEMS WE CAME OUT OF THE PUBLIC MEETING AND

[00:25:08]

ANYONE JUST LIVED THERE FOR TWO MONTHS UNDERSTANDS THE DIVISION >> BECAUSE IT WAS A PART OF THE DISCUSSION IT'S WORTH LEAVING IT IN. MAYBE THERE'S A BETTER WAY TO PHRASE THE SENTENCE WHERE THEY COULD ACKNOWLEDGE THAT COMMUNITY VISION PLAYS A ROLE IN ANALYZING OUR SEASONAL POPULATION. AS A WAY TO TRY TO CONFIGURE TO TALK ABOUT HOW IT WOULD BE USED. IN THIS PARTICULAR WAY WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT HOW IT WOULD BE USED. AND COMMUNITY VISION WILL CHANGE AS THE COMMUNITY CHANGES MAYBE IT'S A WAY TO FIGURE OUT IN TERMS OF THE ANALYSIS WE WOULD DO FOR SEASONAL POPULATION. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?

IS THERE SOMETHING WE CAN RECONFIGURE THEIR LITTLE? >> I'M HAVING TROUBLE WITH THIS

VERBIAGE AND COMMUNITY VISION >> IS BARB >> YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN HERE 20 YEARS, BUT IF I TALKED TO SOME OF THE GENTLEMEN WHO HAVE BEEN HERE FOR YEARS AND YEARS, AND I SAY ÃIF I ASKED HIM THAT QUESTION EACH HAVE A DIFFERENT DEFINITION.

SO I DON'T KNOW HOW TO WEAR THAT. >> AND I SUGGEST THIS WHOLE SECTION DEALS WITH WHERE IT SAYS AMENDMENTS SHALL BE BASED ON AVAILABLE SUSTAINABILITY AND COMPARABILITY OF PROPOSED USE. THAT'S PRETTY MUCH WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IN THE AREA.

>> RIGHT. >> CONSERVATION, THE THINGS THAT DISRUPT OUR LIVES.

SO THAT'S HOW I READ IT THE AREA OF CHANGING GOING FORWARD. AND I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN

DEFINE THE VISION. YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO. >> IT DEPENDS ON WHO YOU TALK

TO >> THE OPTION IS TO MAYBE JUST LEAVE COMMUNITY VISION J, RIGHT? AND THEN JUST SAY COMMUNITY VISION.

AND THAT K WHERE WE COULD THEN TALK ABOUT THE OPERATION OF REAL ESTATE MARKETS TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE CHOICES. JUST MAKE IT AS A STANDALONE COMMENT.

>> I'M SURE THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WAS GOING TO PROPOSE WAS JUST TO LEAVE J AS A COMMUNITY PRESENT BECAUSE THESE ARE ALL BULLETS AND THEN ESTABLISH PARAGRAPH K AND THEN REWORK THE SENTENCE STRUCTURE. WE WENT TO ÃWE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ACCOMMODATED THIS SET UP, AND THEN HOW WE THEN GO INTO THIS ANALYSIS THAT WE WANT TO DO AT LEAST SEASONAL POPULATION SO I WOULD AGREE WITH YOUR RECOMMENDATION, MADAM CHAIR

>> WE COULD JUST MAKE K START OFF WITH JUST ALLOWING ÃMAKE IT ALLOW FOR THE OPERATION AND REAL ESTATE MARKET TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE CHOICES AND SEASONAL RESIDENTS OR BUSINESSES, PERIOD. AND THE SECOND ÃANALYSIS CAN GO ON AND WE WOULD CHANGE THAT

[00:30:04]

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? WE DON'T HAVE TO DEFINE COMMUNITY VISION IN THIS DOCUMENT AT THIS POINT, BUT DEFINE IT SOMEPLACE ELSE AND USE IT AS A REFERENCE.

>> COULD YOU GO BACK AND REFER COMMUNITY VISION AS DISCUSSED IN THE REPORT

>> IS GOING TO CHANGE OVER TIME. >> OKAY.

I'M GOOD. >> WHAT DOES THAT SEEM LIKE TO EVERYBODY? IS THAT ACCEPTABLE? SO CAN WE MAKE THAT CHANGE, KELLY? ANY OTHER CHANGES I FEEL LIKE THAT SENTENCE ISN'T CORRECT. I FEEL LIKE WE ARE MISSING A VERB. LIKE IT'S NOT A COMPLETE SENTENCE UNLESS I'M OFF MIKE Ã I'M SORRY I DON'T RECOGNIZE VOICES. WHO IS SPEAKING?

>> YOU ARE NOT SHOWING UP ON THE SCREEN SO I'M SORRY. IF YOU COULD JUST ANNOUNCE YOURSELVES AND IT WOULD BE A LITTLE EASIER. SO WHERE DO YOU WANT TO CHANGE

THE VERB? >> SHOULDN'T THERE BE A VERB LIKE MAYBE IS TO PROVIDE FOR OR JUST ÃIT JUST SEEMS LIKE IT'S NOT A FULL, COMPLETE SENTENCE. ANY OTHER ENGLISH MAJORS AMERICA? I THINK BY CHANGING FROM THE ING TO JUST ALLOW ALLOW FOR THE OPERATION OF REAL ESTATE MARKETS TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE CHOICES FOR PERMANENT AND SEASONAL RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES. BECAUSE THESE ARE ALL BULLETS,

AND BULLETS DON'T ALWAYS FLOW AS NEATLY AS A SENTENCE. >> OKAY.

I'M SORRY. GO AHEAD. >> I MEAN THAT MAKE SENSE.

IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S MORE OF A PARAGRAPH INSTEAD OF TRYING TO CORRECT THE SENTENCE

>> HOW WOULD YOU LIKE IT YOU READ? >> I'M THINKING PUT THE WORD IS IN BETWEEN MARKET AND TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE CHOICES OR ARE TO PROVIDE

>> SO WE WOULD CONTINUE TO USE THE WORD ALLOW? THE COMMUNITY VISION AND

ALLOWING FOR OPERATIONS >> SO COMMUNITY VISION STOPS AND THEN THERE WILL BE A BULLETS K AND THEN SO HOW WOULD YOU ÃYOU WOULD CHANGE THE WORD ALLOW?

OR YOU WANT TO LEAVE THAT WORD AND ADD SOMETHING ELSE IN HERE? >> I SEE WHAT VICTORIA IS

SAYING. I WOULD SAY PUT THE WORD ALLOW. >> ALLOW FOR THE OPERATION?

>> ALLOW FOR THE OPERATION REAL ESTATE MARKET TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE CHOICES FOR PERMANENT

AND SEASONAL RESIDENTS. >> THAT SOUNDS GOOD. >> OKAY.

ANY OTHER CHANGES? >> ONE QUESTION FROM ONE OF OUR RESIDENTS.

I WILL JUST GO TO MR. DECKER AGAIN. BACK ON ÃTHIS IS UNDER THE PERIL OF LIFE, SO IT'S ON PAGE THE DOCUMENT.L OF FLOOD PART-OF THE VERY BOTTOM PARAGRAPH, NEW

POLICIES AND POLICY FIVE ÃZERO Ã19. >> I'M SORRY.

I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHERE WE ARE. >> IS PAGE 2 OF THAT LITTLE SECTION THERE. IT'S UNDER ITEM NUMBER TWO, ENCOURAGE THE USE OF BEST PRACTICES. THE POINT THAT MR. DECKER MADE WAS IT'S NOT REQUIRED, AND HE FELT IT WAS AN OVERREACH. I TEND TO AGREE IN THE STATEMENTS AS PURCHASING PROPERTIES IN AREAS MOST VULNERABLE TO DESTRUCTIVE STORM SURGE AND FLOODING RECREATIONAL USES AND OPEN SPACE. I QUESTIONED THIS, IS THIS THE KIND OF BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY WE WANT THE CITY TO BE THINKING ABOUT OR NOT? IF IT IS, IT'S FINE.

I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT >> I THINK IT IS. OKAY YOU ABSOLUTELY WOULD LIKE TO TAKE UP PROPERTIES THAT ARE ABLE TO STORM SURGE AND LEAVE, YOU KNOW, THE FLOOD ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROVIDES MONEY TO CITIES AND COUNTIES TO BUY UP PROPERTY IN THE PLACE I LIVED

[00:35:02]

I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THE CITY WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT ON A REGULAR BASIS.

AND UNDERSTAND HOW TO TAKE THAT PROPERTY AND TURN IT BACK INTO EITHER CONSERVATION,

RECREATION, OPEN-SPACE >> HOWEVER DO NOT? >> YES

>> OKAY. >> ALL RIGHT. I'M HAPPY

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> MADAM CHAIR? I WOULD LIKE TO ÃIN CONCERT WITH THIS POLICY, WOULD IT MAKE SENSE, THEN TO CHANGE THE SENTENCE TO SAY THE CITY MUST CONSIDER PURCHASING PROPERTIES IN AREAS MOST VULNERABLE TO JUST TALK TO STORM STORM SURGE AND FLOODING FOR CONSERVATION OR RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE, SUBJECT TO AVAILABILITY OF

FINANCIAL RESOURCES? >> EXCUSE ME? WHAT POLICY IS BEING REFERENCED

SO I CAN HAVE IT ON THE SCREEN? >> UNDER THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT, WE

ARE ON PAGE 2. THE LAST >> WHAT IS THE POLICY AGAINST X5 POINT NOT

>> IT'S ONE? >> YES. >> OKAY.

IT'S NOT EVEN ON THE SCREEN. >> IT IS ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE OF THE SCREEN.

>> OKAY. THE CITY MUST CONSIDER PURCHASING PROPERTIES IN AREAS TO DESTRUCTIVE'S STORM SURGE AND FLOODING FOR USE ÃFOR RECREATIONAL USES AND OPEN SPACES. AND MS. ROBISON IS RECOMMENDING THAT WE WOULD ADD THE WORD CONSERVATION AND WE WOULD ALSO ADD, BASED ON AVAILABLE FUNDING.

>> THAT MAKES ME MORE COMFORTABLE. >> I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE REASON FOR ADDING ADDITIONAL ENGLISH ABOUT MYSELF. I'M IT'S CLEAR RIGHT NOW AND IT

LEAVES AN OPENNESS >> MY CONCERN IS THAT I THINK THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CONSERVATION PROPERTY THAT IS PURCHASED FOR CONSERVATION AND PROPERTY THAT IS PURCHASED FOR RECREATIONAL USES. AND OPEN SPACE. AND I THINK IF THE CITY IS GOING TO PURCHASE PROPERTY AND I THINK IT SHOULD BE REALLY TIED UP TIGHTLY AND WE HAVE ALREADY ADDRESSED IN OTHER AREAS THAT CONSERVATION PROPERTY REQUIRES FIVE VOTES OF THE CITY COMMISSION A LOT OF HOOPS YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH IN ORDER TO SELL CONSERVATION PROPERTY. YOU REALLY CAN'T. AND SO I JUST THINK THAT IF THE CITY IS GOING TO PURCHASE THESE PROPERTIES, THAT MIGHT BE VULNERABLE TO DESTRUCTIVE STORM SURGE, THAT DEFINING THAT IT'S NOT JUST RECREATIONAL USES, BUT I THINK THAT IT SHOULD BE ACTUALLY LOOKED AT FROM A CONSERVATION PERSPECTIVE OR A RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE

PERSPECTIVE SUBJECT TO AVAILABLE FUNDS. >> I AGREE.

>> ALL RIGHT. I CONCEDE. I LOOKED AT IT AS OPEN SPACES

BEEN CONSERVATION MYSELF >> ADDING CONSERVATION TO THAT WOULD CERTAINLY CLARIFY

>> THAT'S MY QUESTION. IS OPEN SPACES IS NOT A ZONING TERM

>> NO. IT'S SOMETHING THAT I BELIEVE IS TO FIND.

SO I COULD PULL THAT UP >> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE USING WE ARE CALLING SOMETHING

ELSE THAT'S TO FIND SOMETHING ELSE. >> YOUR ELEMENT IS DEFINED AS

RECREATION AND OPEN SPACES. >> ALL RIGHT. IF WE COULD ADD THE WORD CONSERVATION IN THERE AND ALSO ADD BASED ON AVAILABILITY AND FUNDS.

I THINK THAT FIXES IT. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE? ALL RIGHT.

HEARING NONE, I AM GOING TO CLOSE THE FLOOR FOR THE BOARD AND OPEN UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

[00:40:04]

MY UNMUTE IT NOW? >> YES. OKAY.

I THINK THOSE ARE SOME GOOD CHANGES. WE WERE NOT TRYING TO HARASS EVERYONE TO DEATH BY TRYING TO PRESSURE THINGS WITH A SHORT TIMELINE, BUT THIS DOES GIVE YOU ÃTHESE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE WILL FOLD INTO THE EFFORT FOR A FURTHER REVISION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THEY ARE THINGS THAT TO A LARGE EXTENT OR TO THE LARGEST EXTENT REFLECT THE COMMUNITY VISION AS EXPRESSED IN THE DAR PUBLIC MEETINGS AND THINGS THAT WE FEEL ARE CRITICALLY IMPORTANT, BASED ON RECENT RESEARCH AND THE HAZARDS THAT WE FACE AS A BARRIER ISLAND IN FLORIDA. SO WE WILL HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSIONS AND I THINK THIS GIVES YOU A SMALL SENSE OF Ã ABOUT PRIORITIES AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO DISCUSSING NOT ALL THAT ALMOST ALL OF THE ELEMENTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WITH YOU.

WE DECIDED TO OPT OUT OF THE TORT AND THE SCHOOL FACILITIES. BUT THE OTHERS WILL WILL PROVIDE INPUT ON SO WE LOOK FORWARD TO DISCUSSING THIS WITH YOU

>> AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING YOU PARTNER WITH US AS WE MOVE THROUGH THESE CONVERSATIONS AND THE WORK AND WE WILL TALK ABOUT THAT ONCE WE GET THIS CLOSE.

I WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT SOME KIND OF NEXT STEPS IN TERMS OF WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE BUDGET AND WAS HAPPENING FOR NEXT YEAR. SO IS THERE ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? AND WE WILL CLOSE THE FLOOR TO PUBLIC COMMENT AND WE ÃI WOULD

BE GLAD TO HAVE A MOTION ON THIS. >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO

ACCEPT THE DOCUMENT AS MODIFIED TODAY >> IS THERE A SECOND

>> I WOULD SECOND THAT IF I RECOGNIZE >> YOU ARE.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS IF NOT, WE WILL HAVE ABOUT.

I REALLY WANT TO CHANGE THE REGIONAL COUNCIL FOLKS. I KNOW YOU PUT A LOT OF HARD WORK INTO THIS AND I KNOW WE NITPICK A LOT OF WORDS THAT IT WAS REALLY HELPFUL SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR WORK AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU IN THE FUTURE.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU. >> THE NEXT ITEM IS BOARD

[4. BOARD BUSINESS]

IF THAT IS TO EVERYONE'S AGREEMENT. YOU HAVE THAT ON THE AGENDA FOR

NEXT MONTH. THANK YOU FOR BRINGING LOST] >> SO THEY KNOW WE THEN

[00:45:12]

I'M SORRY I DON'T HAVE BETTER INFORMATION, BUT THAT WAS AS OF TODAY.

IT'S NOT YET JULY 31, SO MAYBE WE WILL KNOW SOMETHING NEXT WEEK.

>> WE HAVE NO INPUT INTO THAT, IS THAT CORRECT, ON THAT DECISION?

>> YOU MEAN WITH THE GOVERNOR OR WHETHER OR NOT WE WOULD ATTEND VIRTUALLY?

WHAT'S YOUR QUESTION? >> I GUESS KIND OF BOTH. WE ARE A BOARD OF SEVEN PEOPLE PLUS STAFF AND A LOT OF PEOPLE. TRYING TO GET EVERYONE TOGETHER IN THE CHAMBERS WAS GOING TO BE

A POTENTIAL ISSUE >> A MESSAGE WENT STRAIGHT TO THE GOVERNOR TODAY.

I FORGOT THE NAME OF THE COMMUNITY. THEIR MISSION CHAMBERS ARE 22 SQUARE FEET BY 24 SQUARE FEET AND THEY HAVE SEVEN COMMISSION MEMBERS.

SO THEY EXPRESSED AND THEY HAVE FORCED YOU. SO THEY CAN'T EVEN GET THEIR COMMISSION MEMBERS SAFELY INTO A ROOM WITH SOCIAL DISTANCING. THEY HAVE EXPRESSED THEIR ANXIETY AND THAT THEY WOULD LIKE A DECISION SOON. I CAN'T DO ANYTHING MORE THAN THAT. WE ARE WRKING WITH ALL THE RESOURCES WE HAVE INCLUDING MR. CAPS, OUR LOBBYIST. SO WE WILL HAVE TO WAIT AND SEE.

YOU WILL KNOW PROBABLY JULY 31, I WOULD SAY, AT THE LATEST. MAYBE AT THE EARLIEST.

>> DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT? >> I WILL JUST ASK ONE QUESTION.

IF WE DID HAVE AN EXTENSION, WOULD WE COMPLY IF WE HAD FOR MEMBERS OF THE PAB HERE AND

THREE VIRTUAL? DOES NOT MEET THE CRITERIA? >> I HAVE TALKED TO Ã TECHNICALLY, NO. TECHNICALLY, THE SUNSHINE WILL IT APPLIES TO YOU AND I HAVE BEEN ATTORNEY GENERAL'S AND THAT'S HOW THE COMMISSIONER ATTENDED THE MEETING.

THE OTHER FOUR COMMISSIONERS WERE PRESENT AND HE WAS ON THE PHONE BECAUSE OF A SINUS MEDICAL CONDITION. THAT'S THE ONLY EXEMPTION UNDER THE SUNSHINE LAW RIGHT NOW.

IF YOU HAVE A QUORUM PRESENT AND VOTING IN THE ROOM, WHICH IS FOR A FEW, I PROBABLY COULD LIVE WITH SINCE YOU ARE NOT DOING QUASIJUDICIAL HEARINGS I COULD PROBABLY LIVE WITH THREE BEING UNSEEN. BUT WE HAVE TO DO SOME KIND OF HYBRID LIKE THAT, WE CAN DO THAT. I THINK THE GOVERNOR IS GOING TO EXTEND THE ORDER.

THAT'S WHAT I THINK. AT LEAST FOR ANOTHER MONTH. >> SO AS SOON AS WE KNOW, YOU

WILL NOW. >> SO OUR MEETING IS THE 12TH >> OUR MEETING IS 12 AUGUST.

OKAY? SO I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A COUPLE OF MINUTES AND TALK ABOUT NEXT STEPS IN TERMS OF THE YOUR WORK AND THE POTENTIAL FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVEALS. SO WE HAVE BEEN KIND OF WORKING UNDER A PLANNING ASSUMPTION THAT THE CITY HAS PUT OUT A REQUEST FOR QUOTES, QUALIFICATIONS, FOR VARIOUS CONSULTING FIRMS THAT HAVE SKILLS IN THIS ARENA AND NOT NEXT WEEK, THERE IS A MEETING Ã NEXT THURSDAY, WHERE THOSE QUALIFICATION APPLICATIONS WILL BE REVIEWED AND THEY WILL BE REVIEWED BY KELLY, DALE MARTIN, AND A FORMER PLANNING BOARD MEMBER, DAVID BL.

ALL THAT DOES IS GET THEM ON THE LIST OF APPROVED VENDORS WE COULD PICK FROM SO OUR PLANNING ASSUMPTION HAS BEEN THAT WE PUT MONEY IN THE BUDGET TO HIRE CONSULTANTS TO START THIS WORK IN THE NEW PLANNING BUDGET YEAR. LAST NIGHT, IN CASH AT THE COMMISSION MEETING, MR. MARTIN SHOWED IN HIS BUDGET CONVERSATION A PLANNER/ PROJECT

[00:50:12]

THAT'S ABOUT AS MUCH AS I KNOW. >> YES? VICTORIA?

>> I DON'T KNOW IF YOU KNOW OR NOT, BUT IS THIS A FULL-TIME FOR EVER AND EVER POSITION? OR IS THIS ONE SPECIFICALLY TO HANDLE THIS PRETTY BIG PROJECT OF REVISING THE COMP PLAN AND

THE LDC >> IT WAS NOT CLEAR IN THE MEETING AND THERE WAS REALLY NO CONVERSATION ABOUT IT. IT WAS MERELY ÃIT WAS JUST A SLIDE ON A BOARD AND WE DON'T

REALLY KNOW. >> IT'S TEMPORARY. >> MR. LEDNOVICH SAYS IT'S TEMPORARY BUT I DON'T HAVE ANY MORE DETAIL THAN THAT. AGAIN, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE WORKED OUT AND UNDERSTOOD TO SEE WHAT THE PLAN IS FROM THE CITY MANAGER'S PERSPECTIVE. SO THAT'S ALL THE INFORMATION I HAVE.

[5. STAFF REPORT]

KELLY, DO YOU HAVE ANY MORE STAFF REPORT? >> NOW.

>> ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? >> WOULD WE WANT TO CONSIDER MAYBE A SPECIAL WORKSHOP MEETING IN AUGUST OR SEPTEMBER JUST TO HAVE IT ON THE CALENDAR

IN CASE WE WANTED TO START MOVING FORWARD >> SO I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO WAIT UNTIL WE CAN HAVE A CONVERSATION AND TO UNDERSTAND AND KELLY HAS PRETTY MUCH RESERVED THE FOURTH WEDNESDAY OF EVERY MONTH IN TERMS OF TIME IN THIS ROOM.

SO WE HAVE ÃWE HAVE SOME SPACE KIND OF RESERVES THAT WE CAN USE, AND SHE'S GOT IT SET ASIDE SO WE COULD USE IT, THE HDC AND THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN USE IT.

ALL THE DIFFERENT GROUPS THAT ARE UNDER HER PURVIEW, SO I THINK WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY SO MUCH ABOUT THAT, BUT I REALLY WANT TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THE CITY MANAGER BEFORE WE

GET VERY MUCH FURTHER DOWN THIS ROAD. >> THAT'S FINE.

>> OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? ALL RIGHT.

AGAIN, WELCOME TO THE TEAM AND I HOPE TO BE ABLE TO MEET YOU IN PERSON SOMETIME.

WITH THAT, I CALL THIS MEETING ADJOURNED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.