[Call to Order by Chair]
          [00:00:16]
          >> GOOD MORNING. AN EXCITING DAY TODAY. GOOD MORNING, WELCOME TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ST. 
          JOHNS COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS. ON THE AGENDA ITEM TO EXCESS ALL THE SUPPORTING MATERIAL. PUBLIC COMMENT IS LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES. SHOULD THE PRESENTER HAVE ANY EXHIBITS OR PHOTOGRAPHS, PLEASE PROVIDE THOSE MATERIALS TO THE CLERK OF COURT FOR THE INCLUSION INTO THE RECORD. BEFORE WE GO TO THE ROLLCALL, I NEED TO CLARIFY ON A BOARD ROLE SITUATION. APPARENTLY, COMMISSIONER ARNOLD WANTS TO CALL IN. IS SHE FACING 
          AN EMERGENCY? ADMINISTRATOR? JILL ANDREWS. >> MADAM CHAIR, I AM NOT MADE 
          AWARE OF THE SITUATION. >> IS SHE CALLING IN TODAY? >> THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING. 
          >> I NEED CONFIRMATION. IS SHE COMING IN TODAY -- CALLING IN TODAY? 
          >> THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING, YES. >> DOES SHE HAVE AN EMERGENCY? 
          >> THAT IS A QUESTION SHE WILL HAVE TO ANSWER FOR YOU. >> IS SHE ON? 
          >> I DO NOT KNOW THE LOGISTICS WHETHER OR NOT SHE IS ON. >> I CANNOT DO ROLLCALL IF SHE 
          IS NOT HERE. >> I AM HERE. >> DO YOU HAVE AN EMERGENCY, 
          MA'AM? >> NO, COMMISSIONER US UP. SO -- 
          >> IF YOU DO NOT HAVE AN EMERGENCY, YOU CANNOT VOTE. BUT IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PARTAKE IN 
          THE MEETING, THAT WOULD BE FINE. >> I WOULD ASK LEGAL ON THAT. 
          >> DOES COMMISSIONER JESSUP HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO PREVENT ME FROM VOTING? I BELIEVE IT IS A 
          CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT IS GRANTED TO ME BY THE VOTERS. >> CORRECT. YOU ARE EACH INDIVIDUAL CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS, SO YOU DO NOT SIT IN SUPERVISION TO VOTE FOR ONE ANOTHER. I AM NOT AWARE OF A LEGAL PROVISION THAT WOULD PREVENT A COMMISSIONER FROM 
          VOTING WHEN THEY APPEAR REMOTE. >> IS AS 4.501. UNLESS OTHERWISE REQUIRED BY STATE THAT SHOOT, ORDINANCE, OR INDICATED BY THE RULES, ALL ACTION BY THE BOARD SHALL BE MADE BY THE MAJORITY VOTE OF THOSE COMMISSIONERS PRESENT. AND SHE IS NOT PRESENT. 
          AND EARLIER, IT SAYS THE ONLY TIME, THIS WOULD BE A COMPLETE NEW THING THAT THIS BOARD HAS DONE FROM THE HISTORY, WALDRON WAS IN THE HOSPITAL, COMMISSIONER BLOCHER DID NOT APPEAR BECAUSE HE WAS ON DEPLOYMENT. AND I THINK COMMISSIONER ARNOLD, BECAUSE SHE HAD COVID. AND SHE WAS IN TALLAHASSEE. I THINK THIS IS THE FOURTH TIME THAT SHE IS NOT PRESENT. SO, WHERE IS THAT STATUTE? I ACTUALLY HAVE, IT ALSO SAYS PUBLIC MEETING OR USING TECHNOLOGY BY HONORABLE RON DESANTIS, AND THE CONCLUSION OF THAT IS THE NATURE OR EXTENT OF POTENTIAL DURATION OF THE CURRENT EMERGENCY REGARDING COVID-19 PRESENT UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES. HOWEVER, WITHOUT WHICH THE OF ACTION, THEY DO NOT CHANGE EXISTING LAW. IT IS MY OPINION THAT UNLESS AND UNTIL LEGISLATIVELY OR JUDICIALLY DETERMINED, OTHERWISE, IF A QUORUM IS DETERMINED TO CONDUCT LOCAL BUSINESS, LOCAL GOVERNMENT BODIES MAY ONLY CONDUCT MEETINGS BY CONFERENCING OR OTHER MEANS IF A STATUTE -- BY MEANS OF THE OTHER, THEN IN PERSON OR THE IN PERSON REQUIREMENT CONSTITUTING A QUORUM IS LAWFULLY SUSPENDED DURING A STATE OF AN EMERGENCY. 
          I DO NOT THINK IT IS A STATE OF EMERGENCY, AND WE HAVE A QUORUM 
          >> THAT IS ESTABLISHING A QUORUM PRESENT IN THERE. THERE IS A SUBSEQUENT ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION I THINK WHAT YOU ARE REFERRING TO IS 2020, THERE IS A 2021 QUORUM THAT DEALS WITH ADVISORY BOARDS AND SCHOOL BOARDS, WHICH MAKES REFERENCE TO THE FACT THAT THE PURPOSE OF THE GOVERNMENT IS FOR THE PUBLIC TO BE ABLE TO BE PRESENT, PARTICIPATE, AND BE HEARD. WITH THAT LEGAL REQUIREMENT THAT IS IN STATUTE, AS LONG AS A QUORUM IS PRESENT IN THE ROOM, WHICH IS ESTABLISHED BY THE BOARD MEETING, THAT IT DOES NOT PRECLUDE SOMEONE FROM 
          PARTICIPATING IN VOTING IN THE MEETING REMOTELY. >> OH, WHAT STATUTE IS THAT? I 
          WANT TO GET THIS ON THE RECORD FOR YOU. >> EVERYTHING WE ARE SAYING IS 
          ON THE RECORD. >> WHAT IS THE STATUTE NUMBER, PLEASE? 
          >> I SAID IT IS NOT CONTAINED WITHIN THE STATUTE. THE SUNSHINE ACT? 
          >> NO, WHAT IS THE STATUTE THAT ALLOWS HER TO WAIT ABLE TO VOTE TODAY WHEN SHE DOES NOT HAVE AN EMERGENCY AND SHE IS NOT PRESENT? MOST BOARDS I HAVE BEEN ON, LIKE THE CITRUS COUNTY 
          HOSPITAL BOARD, I HAD TO BE PRESENT. >> SO THE STATUTE DOES NOT 
          PRECLUDE IT IS WHAT I SAID. >> SO CAN WE VOTE? CAN THE BOARD HERE VOTE ON THIS, WHETHER WE ALLOW HER TO VOTE? I DO NOT MIND HEARING HER OPINIONS ON EVERYTHING. I JUST DON'T WANT TO START SOMETHING WHERE WE HAVE NEVER HAD SOMEONE WHO COULD GO ON VACATION AND CALL IN TO THIS 
          [00:05:08]
MEETING. BECAUSE THE CONSTITUENTS DESERVE TO HAVE THEIR PERSON HERE. SO SOMEONE COULD BE ON A CRUISE OR JUST BE DECIDING TO NOT COME IN, AND THEN CALL IN PRAYER THAT HAS 
          NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE ON THIS BOARD. >> THAT IS NOT TRUE. 
          >> THAT IS NOT TRUE. BECAUSE COMMISSIONER BLOCHER WAS NOT APPEARING TOWARDS THE END OF HIS 
          TERM, AND IT WAS NOT FOR REASONS THAT YOU DESCRIBED. >> BEING DEPLOYED? HE WAS 
          DEPLOYED. >> NOT AT THE END. >> HE DID NOT SHOW UP AT THE END 
          IT ALL BECAUSE I BEAT HIM. BUT OTHER THAN THAT. >> YOU CAN SAY OTHER THAN THAT, BUT YOU CANNOT SAY THAT THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD THAT PEOPLE HAVE NOT BEEN ALLOWED TO 
          PARTICIPATE REMOTELY. >> CAN WE HAVE A VOTE OF THE BOARD? 
          >> I HAVE ATTENDED SCHOOL BOARD MEETING AND THERE HAVE BEEN PEOPLE THAT HAVE CALLED IN THAT COULD BE THERE AND THEY DID NOT VOTE. THEY DID NOT VOTE. THEY WERE ABLE TO CALL IN AND THAT HAD COMMENTS AT THE END, BUT THEY DID NOT VOTE. THAT IS OUR LOCAL SCHOOL BOARD. 
          >> THAT WAS THE CONVENTIONAL LEGAL WISDOM PRIOR TO COVID. AND THEN WHEN COVID OCCURRED, WITH THE GOVERNOR'S EXECUTIVE ORDERS AND THE -- THAT EXTENDED THEM -- 
          >> NO, THIS IS AFTER COVID. >> I KNOW, I'M GIVING THE HISTORY OF HOW WE GOT THERE. 
          WHEN THE GOVERNOR'S ORDERS SUSPENDED THE IN PERSON QUORUM REQUIREMENT , THAT IS WHAT THOSE ORDERS DO, AND THOSE ORDERS ULTIMATELY EXPIRED. AFTER THE EXPIRATION OF THOSE ORDERS, THERE WERE INDIVIDUAL GROUPS THAT SOUGHT TO CONTINUE TO MEET VIA COMMUNICATION MEDIA TECHNOLOGY, AND THAT IS THE OPINIONS. ESSENTIALLY, THE  THE- ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE CAME TO THE OPINION THAT COMMUNICATION MEDIA TECHNOLOGY DID NOT AFFORD THE PUBLIC THE RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE. AND BECAUSE OF THAT, THERE STILL HAD TO BE A PLACE FOR PEOPLE TO COME, AND THERE STILL HAD TO BE A QUORUM THAT WAS ESTABLISHED IN THE ACTUAL ROOM WHERE PEOPLE ATTEND. BUT IT LEFT OPEN THE CONCEPT THAT PEOPLE COULD PARTICIPATE AND ALSO VOTE 
          REMOTELY. >> I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW, CAN I MAKE A MOTION TO SEE IF THE 
          COMMISSIONERS HERE WILL ALLOW HER TO VOTE? >> YOU CAN, BUT COMMISSIONER 
          ARNOLD GETS TO VOTE IN THAT MOTION. >> SHE CANNOT BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT DETERMINED IF SHE CAN VOTE. AND I HAVE NOT HAD A ROLLCALL YET. 
          >> QUESTION. QUESTION. >> YES, SIR. >> MR. COMMANDO, WHAT DOES 
          PRESENT MEAN? >> YOU CAN BE, SO THE PRESENT TO ESTABLISH A QUORUM THAT MEANS 
          PHYSICALLY PRESENT. >> SO, I THINK WE SHOULD MAKE A MOTION AND SEE WHAT THE BOARD FEELS. WHETHER SHE -- I DO NOT MIND HER BEING ON THE CALL. BUT LET'S MAKE A MOTION TO DENY HER OPTION TO VOTE ON ANY TOPIC TODAY BECAUSE OF HER LACK OF PRESENCE. 
          >> AGAIN, YOU DO NOT HAVE THE LEGAL AUTHORITY TO INFRINGE UPON THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT AFFORDED TO EACH COMMISSIONER, JUST LIKE SHE COULD NOT DO IT TO YOU. JUST LIKE YOU CANNOT TELL THE SHERIFF WHO YOU NEED TO ARREST HIM JUST LIKE YOU CANNOT TELL THE CLERK HOW TO RECORD RECORDS. THERE ARE CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITIES GRANTED BY THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION, EACH ONE OF THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS. -- CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS. 
          >> BEFORE WE DO ROLLCALL, WE WILL DO PUBLIC COMMENT AND THEN WE WILL GO FROM THERE. THERE IS NOT ANYTHING EXCEPT THAT WE JUST TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT. JUST DO PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE ROLLCALL. 
          >> AT THIS TIME, WE WILL TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS NOT ON THE REGULAR AGENDA. WHEN ADJUSTING THE BOARD, PLEASE COME TO EACH OF THE THREE PODIUMS, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. 
          EACH PERSON WILL BE PROVIDED THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. THE COMMISSION WILL ASK THAT YOU SPEAK DIRECTLY INTO THE MICROPHONE. SPEAKERS WILL COMPLY WITH THE BOARD'S RULES OF CIVILITY AND DECORUM. IF YOU NEED A LIST OF THOSE, PLEASE ASK, I WILL GIVE THEM TO YOU. 
          ANY PERSON WHO FAILS TO COMPLY WITH THESE RULES MAY BE REMOVED FROM THE AUDITORIUM. FINALLY, ANY SPEAKER THAT WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT MATERIALS, PLEASE UTILIZE THE CENTER PODIUM. PAPER MATERIALS CAN BE PLACED ON THE CAPITAL ? FOR OUR OVERHEAD CAMERA TO DISPLAY. THE LAPTOP WILL BE SET UP FOR ANY USB PRESENTATIONS. AFTER THE PRESENTATION, PLEASE PROVIDE THE MATERIALS TO THE STAFF AND CLERK OF COURSE WE CAN BE ENTERED INTO THE RECORD. THANK YOU. 
          >> GOOD MORNING. >> AND MORNING. IMAGES FOR THE RECORD. 
          >> BOB HAVEN, 301 FOUR. FOR THE CHAIR, I WOULD LIKE TO INQUIRE, WHEN WAS THE CHAIR INFORMED THAT 
          THE COMMISSIONER WOULD NOT BE PRESENT TODAY. >> LAST NIGHT AT 6:00 P.M. 
          [00:10:02]
          >> WAS THE STAFF INFORMED? >> I HEARD FRIDAY. AS THE ADMINISTRATOR, I AM NOT SURE. 
          >> CAN WE ASK THE ADMINISTRATOR IN THE CHAIR IN THE RECORD WHY YOU WERE NOT TOLD? 
          >> WE CAN RIGHT AFTER YOUR THREE MINUTES. >> OKAY. IN THE WORDS OF THE LATE, GREAT U.S. SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN, THE REGULAR BOARD, PLEASE, THIS HAS NEVER HAPPENED TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. AND I HAVE BEEN A CITIZEN OF THIS COUNTY SINCE NOVEMBE 5TH OF 1999, WE MOVED HERE. WE LOVE THIS PLACE. THE COMMISSIONER IS NOT PRESENT, SHE IS NOT ALLEGING A PHYSICAL DISABILITY, THERE IS NO EMERGENCY, THERE IS NO REMOTE ATTENDANCE. AND UNDER THE PRESIDENTS OF THE FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL, INCLUDING ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINIONS 83-100 AND 89-39, PHYSICAL PRESENCE -- NOW, IF THE LADY, I AM SORRY, THE STUNTMAN ARE TALKING OVER HERE. I'M GETTING KIND OF DISTRACTED, PLEASE KEEP IT DOWN. 
          THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND ONE OF HIS STAFF ARE TALKING AND CHATTERING. I WOULD LIKE TO 
          MAYBE ASK THE CHAIR TO ASK -- >> COMMISSIONER MURPHY, CAN YOU JUST GET IN ORDER HERE. 
          >> YES, MA'AM. CAN WE HAVE ORDER IN THE ROOM, PLEASE? CONTINUE. 
          >> THANK YOU. AT ANY RATE, THE PRESIDENTS OF THE FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL APPLY. HE IS NOT GIVING YOU , THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, AT INTERIM, HAS NOT GIVEN YOU A WRITTEN LEGAL OPINION. THIS SEEMS HIGHLY IRREGULAR, AS THEY WOULD SAY ON HARRY MASON, HIGHLY IRREGULAR. 
          AND I CANNOT BELIEVE THAT THE CHAIR OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WAS NOT TOLD UNTIL WHEN? THAT THE COMMISSIONER -- TODAY? LAST NIGHT. THAT DOG WON'T HUNT. COULD WE PLEASE HAVE IT VOTE TO DIRECT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO PROVIDE A WRITTEN LEGAL OPINION ON THIS, CITING LEGAL AUTHORITY TO INCLUDE THE FLORIDA SUNSHINE LAW AND FLORIDA ETHICS LAWS , AND THE FLORIDA OPEN RECORDS LAWS? ALSO, COULD WE PLEASE CONFERENCE IN OR CONTACT MS. PATRICIA GLEASON, WHO WAS THE SPECIAL COUNSEL TO THE STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL, FOR OPEN RECORDS AND SUNSHINE? SHE HAS BEEN AT CAPACITY FOR ABOUT 44 YEARS. AND BEFORE THE INTERIM COUNTY ATTORNEYEVER AGAIN EXPRESSES AN OPINION WITHOUT A WRITTEN OPINION , IT SHOULD BE IGNORED. 
          IT IS NOT SCHOLARLY, IT IS NOT CONSTITUTIONAL. AND I THINK IT IS, AT BEST, FACETIOUS FOR THE INTERIM COUNTY COMMISSIONER TO SAY INSTITUTIONAL TO EXCLUDE AN ABSENT COMMISSIONER. THERE WAS A CASE WHERE SOMEONE WAS BLIND OR DISABLED, SURE, YOU WOULD LOVE THEM TO PARTICIPATE. THIS IS 
          WRONG. SHE IS ON VACATION. THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> GOOD MORNING. I HAVE NEVER DONE THIS. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I HAVE EVER -- 
          >> SO LET ME HELP YOU. >> PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME -- >>! YOU. IF YOU WOULD GIVE ME 
          YOUR NAME? >> MY NAME IS ROSE TO MUSE. MY ADDRESS IS 415 CHELSEA COURT , 
          SAINT AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA. >> THANK YOU. YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES TO TALK ABOUT ANYTHING 
          THAT IS NOT ON THE AGENDA ITEM TODAY. >> OKAY. I AM APPALLED AT WHAT I HAVE JUST WITNESSED AND WHAT I AM WITNESSING. I HAVE WORKED FOR THE STATE OF FLORIDA. OR DID, I AM RETIRED. YOU AND I SPOKE A WEEK AGO ON THE PHONE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR PICKING IT UP. 
          >> YES, MA'AM. >> AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE STATE, I HAVE NEVER EXPERIENCED THIS AT ALL. EVER. IT IS APPALLING TO SEE. I DO NOT KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE BACK HERE HAVE NEVER DONE THIS BEFORE. BUT TO SEE ELECTED OFFICIALS BEHAVE THIS WAY IS JUST UNCONSCIONABLE . WHEN I WORKED CHILD PROTECTION IN THIS COUNTY, FROM 32259 ALL THE WAY DOWN TO FLAGLER STATES, I NEVER POLITELY WALKED INTO A ROOM, INTO A HOME, AND DID THIS. EVER. THAT IS ALL I WANT TO SAY. 
          BECAUSE WE ELECT ALL OF YOU. THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN A CONVERSATION THAT OCCURRED OUTSIDE THIS ROOM. WE ARE NOT FOYERS POLITICALLY. WE LIVE IN THIS COUNTY. I DON'T THINK 
          ANYONE IN HERE WANTS TO HEAR THIS. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> NICOLE CROSBY, NECK ROAD. TWO WEEKS AGO, COMMISSIONER ARNOLD ADVOCATED VERY HEAVILY TO POSTPONE, I THINK IT WAS THE TREE PART OF THE AGENDA OF TODAY'S MEETING . AND SHE SAID 
          [00:15:09]
THAT SHE WASN'T DOING THAT ON BEHALF OF THE RESIDENCE. NOW IT IS CLEAR THAT IT WAS FOR HERSELF, THAT SHE WAS TRYING TO DO THAT. AND THAT MEANT THAT TWO WEEKS AGO, SHE KNEW SHE WAS NOT GOING TO BE HERE TODAY, OR THERE WAS A GOOD CHANCE THAT SHE WOULD NOT BE HERE TODAY. THAT MEANT THAT SHE HAD TWO WEEKS TO SPEAK TO THE CHAIR, TO SPEAK TO THE ATTORNEY, AND TRY TO WORK THIS OUT IF THERE WAS ANYTHING TO BE WORKED OUT, IN THE PREVIOUS TWO WEEKS, AS OPPOSED TO BEGINNING LAST NIGHT. SO, THAT IS ONE THING. THE OTHER THING IS THAT SHE HAS BEEN A COMMISSIONER FOR, WHAT? THREE YEARS OR SO? THAT IS THREE YEARS SHE HAS HAD TO SAY, HEY, I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE A DIFFERENT SCHEDULING OF OUR MEETINGS. LET'S SCHEDULE AROUND SPRING BREAK. LET'S TAKE THOSE FIRST TWO WEEKS IN JANUARY THAT THEY GIVE US OFF, AND LET'S MAYBE CONSIDER TRADING THOSE TWO WEEKS FOR THE SPRING BREAK WEEKS. I MEAN, THERE ARE REALLY GOOD WAYS OF SOLVING THIS PROBLEM THAT SHOULD BE OR COULD BE DISCUSSED WITH RESIDENTS, WITH COMMISSIONERS, WITH AMPLE TIME, RATHER THAN THE LAST MINUTE, LAST DITCH EFFORT TO BE ON VACATION AND CALL IN. IF THIS IS ALLOWED TODAY, WE CAN PRETTY MUCH LOOK FORWARD TO EVERY SPRING BREAK MEETING, COMMISSIONERS CALLING IN AND VOTING. I THINK WE ALL KNOW THAT IS NOT RIGHT. FRANKLY, I AM SHOCKED THAT OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY IS ADVOCATING SO HEAVILY FOR THIS. I DO THINK THAT IS A REFLECTION OF HIS PATTERN OF SUPPORTING DEVELOPER FUNDED COMMISSIONERS. I THINK THAT COMMISSIONER TAYLOR MADE A VERY GOOD POINT. SHE HAS SEEN CURRENT ELECTED OFFICIALS BEING DENIED THE RIGHT TO VOTE WHEN THEY CALL IN REMOTELY. THAT SHOULD BE AMPLE PRECEDENT. THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU. AND IF I MAY, WE ACTUALLY HAVE THREE MICROPHONES. IF YOU GUYS JUST KIND OF WANT TO HELP US ON THE TIME DELAY, JUST BE READY FOR THE NEXT SPEAKER. THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          >> CHUCK LEBOWSKI, NORTH PERIL. I FIND IT KIND OF CONFUSING. OUR STATE REPRESENTATIVES, CRACKED ME PLEASE IF I AM WRONG, ARE NOT ALLOWED TO VOTE UNLESS THEY ARE PRESENT. CDD, I KNOW FOR A FACT, YOU CANNOT VOTE UNLESS YOU ARE PRESENT, THERE PHYSICALLY IN THE MEETING. THE AJO WAY IS THE SAME WAY. THESE ARE STATUTES THAT ARE OUT THERE. IT IS CONFUSING ME HOW WE CAN ALLOW THE SAME THING TO HAPPEN HERE. THERE HAS GOT TO BE A STATUTE OUT THERE SOMEWHERE THAT SAYS YOU HAVE TO BE 
          PHYSICALLY PRESENT IN ORDER TO PLACE A VOTE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. NEXT? 
          >> CARRIE JACOBSON, 92 MAGNOLIA BEACH TRAIL ON THE BEACH OF FLORIDA. GOOD MORNING. I CAME HERE TO SPEAK ABOUT THE TREE THING, BUT I WALKED IN AND SAW SOMETHING IS GOING ON. YOU KNOW, I HAVE LIVED IN THIS COUNTY FOR 10 YEARS AND HAVE NEVER BEEN ABLE TO CALL IN TO EVEN GET A COMMENT. AND TO SEE THAT WE MIGHT BE CHANGING THINGS UP TODAY BECAUSE SOMEBODY WENT ON VACATION, I DO NOT THINK THAT IS FAIR. I HAVE TO LEAVE TO GET HOME FOR SPRING BREAK AND COME HERE TODAY, I HAVE A 1:00 APPOINTMENT, I HAD TO COME IN THIS MORNING SO THAT I COULD GIVE MY COMMENT. I AM SHOCKED THAT, YOU KNOW, THE ABDICATION WAS DONE TO MOVE IT BY MS. RNOLD VERY HEAVILY, AND THEN NOW SHE IS NOT HERE. I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT AS A RESIDENT, I WANT THE GROUP TO WORK WHEN THEY ARE SCHEDULED TO WORK, AND TO WORK TOGETHER. LIKE I SAID, I AM NOT ABLE TO GIVE A CALL IN TO GET A COMMENT. SO I DO NOT THINK IT IS VERY FAIR THAT SOMEONE CAN VOTE WHEN CALLING IN, AFTER 10 YEARS OF NOT BEING ABLE TO EVEN GIVE A COMMENT. THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> MARTIN, 42 ED COVE I CAME IN I GUESS AFTER THE FACT THAT THE COMMISSIONER, I GUESS, WENT ON VACATION. SO I DO NOT KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IS GOING ON WITH THAT. I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT SOME DISTURBING THINGS I HEARD ABOUT IN THE LAST COMMISSIONERS MEETING. ALL RIGHT? MY WIFE IS ACTUALLY GOING THROUGH A PRETTY TRAUMATIC EXPERIENCE WITHIN THE 
          COUNTY. >> OKAY, ALL RIGHT. IF YOU WILL EXCUSE ME FOR JUST A MINUTE. I 
          MISUNDERSTOOD. THIS PUBLIC COMMENT IS ABOUT THE -- >> ROLL CALL. 
          >> WE ARE NOT STARTED YET, WE ARE ABOUT TO GET STARTED, SO BE READY. 
          >> THIS IS SPECIFICALLY ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS AN ISSUE WITH COMMISSIONER ARNOLD BEING 
          HERE OR NOT. I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. NEXT? >> I WAS PREPARED TO MAKE A 
          PUBLIC COMMENT ON SOMETHING ELSE. >> NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE. 
          >> SORRY, TERRENCE MAHONEY, FOR 10 BUCKET COURT. HONESTLY, AS A BOARD, A PROFESSIONAL BOARD, 
          [00:20:10]
EXTEND THE COURTESIES. WE TALK TO EACH OTHER, WE DISCUSS ISSUES. WE DO NOT SHUT DOWN PEOPLE. MS. ARNOLD MADE AN EFFORT TO GET ON, EVEN THOUGH SHE IS ON VACATION WITH HER FAMILY. WE ALL HAVE FAMILIES . WE ALL WANT TO SPEND TIME WITH OUR FAMILIES. THE LAW IS THE LAW, I AM NOT DEBATING THAT. I DO NOT KNOW THE LAW, I AM NOT A LAWYER. BUT I DO KNOW THAT IF THIS BOARD WANTS TO WORK TOGETHER FOR THE GOOD OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY, WE OUGHT TO EXTEND EACH OTHER COURTESIES SO THAT ALL POINTS OF VIEW ARE HEARD AND ALL OF YOU BENEFIT FROM IT. THAT 
          IS MY ONE MINUTE. >> THANK YOU. YES, SIR? >> JUST A POINT OF ORDER, IS 
          THIS GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT? >> NO, SIR. IT IS NOT. >> OKAY, IT HAS TO DO WITH? 
          >> THIS SPECIFIC ISSUE OF THE ROLLCALL. >> OKAY. 
          >> WOULD YOU LIKE TO COMMENT ON THAT? >> YES, I WOULD. MY NAME IS JOHN NIEMAN. FROM FLORIDA, 32216. YOU KNOW, SHOW UP. THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF THIS. YOU KNOW, I ATTEND A LOT OF MEETINGS. ACTUALLY, AFTER THIS, I MIGHT BE HEADING BACK UP TO DO -- COUNTY. IF YOU ARE NOT PRESENT, IT DOES NOT COUNT. SO, REALLY, THAT IS WHAT I WANT TO JUST SHARE. YOU KNOW, THERE IS, YOU KNOW, IT IS IMPORTANT. YEAH. YOU NEED TO BE HERE TO MAKE IT 
          COUNT. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU FOR THAT. >> ALL RIGHT, YES MA'AM. 
          >> GOOD MORNING. ELLEN AVERY-SMITH HERE IN SAINT AUGUSTINE. I WOULD HIGHLY ADVISE THIS BOARD TO PLEASE FOLLOW THE LAW, WHICH ARE COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS TOLD YOU. I AM HERE REPRESENTING THREE APPLICANTS WHO HAVE DULY NOTICED HEARINGS. THEY ARE SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING TODAY. THEY HAVE THE LEGAL RIGHT TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING TODAY BEFORE A FULL BOARD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW. AND IT WOULD BE A VIOLATION OF THEIR DUE PROCESS RIGHTS TO NOT HAVE THEIR LEGALLY NOTICED HEARINGS. AND SO, PLEASE FOLLOW YOUR COUNTY ATTORNEY'S ADVICE BECAUSE HE IS CORRECT ON THE LAW, AND PLEASE LET COMMISSIONER ARNOLD ATTEND AND VOTE, AS SHE IS ALLOWED TO BY LAW, TO PRESERVE ALL THE DUE PROCESS RIGHTS OF APPLICANTS AT THIS 
          BOARD TODAY. >> MA'AM, CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION, MA'AM? THERE HAS BEEN IN THE PAST WERE YOU HAVE HAD PEOPLE WHO HAVE BROUGHT PROJECTS TO US THAT WE HAVE NOT HAD A FULL BOARD. AND THEN YOU WOULD WAIT AND BRING THEM TO ANOTHER DAY WHEN EVERYONE WAS SITTING 
          HERE. SO THAT DOES NOT MATTER? >> I AM POINTING OUT THAT YOU NEED TO FOLLOW THE LAW. IF COMMISSIONER ARNOLD WERE NOT ATTENDING VIA PHONE, IF SHE WAS JUST NOT AVAILABLE AT ALL TO ATTEND AND VOTE AT ALL, THEN I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT. BUT SHE IS AVAILABLE HERE TO VOTE TODAY. 
          AND SO I AM JUST ASKING YOU, AS A PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS RIGHT OF THE APPLICANT'S ON YOUR 
          AGENDA TODAY , TO ALLOW HER TO VOTE. >> IF IT IS A BOARD ROLE, WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT THAT? YOU JUST CHANGE THE BOARD RULES NOW? I WAS JUST CURIOUS, SINCE YOU ARE 
          SO GOOD AT THIS. >> WELL, AGAIN, YOU HAVE HEARD YOUR COUNTY ATTORNEY TELL YOU WHAT FLORIDA LAW IS. I AM JUST ASKING YOU TO PLEASE COMPLY WITH THAT LAW. 
          >> OKAY. >> THANK YOU. >> OKAY, NEXT. 
          >> MY NAME IS TREVOR MANZELLA, TWO POINT ROAD. OF COURSE, I WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THIS. 
          BUT I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THE FOUNDATION OF OUR GOVERNMENT IS PARTICIPATION. AND I BELIEVE IT IS IMPORTANT WHEN WE HAVE ELECTED OFFICIALS THAT ARE BROUGHT INTO OFFICE BY THOUSANDS, THOUSANDS, AND THOSANDS OF VOTERS, MANY OF WHICH CANNOT BE HERE BECAUSE THEY ARE WORKING A 9-TO-5 JOB, THAT WHEN THEIR REPRESENTATIVE DOES WHAT THEY CAN TO PARTICIPATE IN A GOVERNMENT, THAT RULES AND PROCEDURES ARE NOT THEN USED TO DENY PARTICIPATION . AND SO THIS IS A DEMOCRACY. WE HAVE GOT A COUNTY COMMISSIONER WHO IS DOING WHAT SHE CAN TO PARTICIPATE. AND I WOULD QUESTION WHETHER HER POLITICAL BELIEFS ARE BEING MEASURED ON WHETHER OR NOT SHE SHOULD BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE. IF YOU DON'T LIKE HER VOTE, THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT SHE SHOULD BE DENIED THE RIGHT TO VOTE. SO, AGAIN, I WOULD SAY 
          [00:25:20]
THAT THIS IS A DEMOCRACY. WE SHOULD NOT HAVE ONE PERSON TRYING TO DENY ANOTHER COMMISSIONER THE ABILITY TO SPEAK AND WEIGH IN. AND THAT COMMISIONER REPRESENTS THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY. SO I WOULD ECHO THE COMMENTS OF THE GENTLEMEN IN BLUE WHO SAYS, EXTEND SOME COURTESIES. LET'S HAVE A PARTICIPATIVE GOVERNMENT. ONE THAT EXTENDS THE COURTESIES TO OUR FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, AND ALLOWS THEM TO PARTICIPATE. 
          THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. YES MA'AM? >> JUST BREATHING. SOUTH JACKSONVILLE. I JUST WANT TO SAY, THERE IS A REASON THAT AT CHRISTMAS TIME, WE DO NOT HAVE THE VOTE, BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT FAMILIES NEED TO SPEND TIME TOGETHER AND GO ON VACATION. 
          SOME PEOPLE HAVE CHILDREN, SOME PEOPLE DON'T. I PERSONALLY HINK THAT THIS MEETING NOT HAVE BEEN HELD TODAY. I THINK THAT THIS MEETING SHOULD HAVE BEEN DELAYED, KNOWING THAT IT WAS SPRING BREAK. WE KNOW THAT SOME OF THE COMMISSIONERS, AND STAFF AS WELL HAVE CHILDREN, AND THEY ARE HAVING TO NOT GO ON VACATION WITH THEIR CHILDREN TO BE HERE? I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE TREATED IT JUST LIKE CHRISTMAS OR JUST LIKE NEW YEAR'S EVE, AND LET THESE PEOPLE BE WITH THEIR FAMILY. NOW, SOME PEOPLE DON'T HAVE YOUNG CHILDREN, MAYBE IT IS EASIER FOR THEM TO BE HERE, BUT THERE IS ALSO A REASON THAT WE HAVE A COUNTY ATTORNEY. OR LET ME SAY THE REASON THAT WE DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE A COUNTY ATTORNEY, THIS HATE AND DIVISIVENESS THAT CONSTANTLY GOES ON HERE IS SO UNPROFESSIONAL AND SO UNDIGNIFIED, AND SO UNNECESSARY. 
          >> BUT MA'AM, WHEN YOU ARE THE CHAIR -- >> EXCUSE ME, I AM IN MY THREE MINUTES NOW IF YOU DON'T MIND. WE WERE TOLD LEGALLY WHAT THE OPINION IS. AND YOU HAVE TO COUNT ON YOUR STAFF TO GET THEIR LEGAL OPINION, AND THEY HAVE GIVEN IT. SO I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY THERE ALWAYS ALL THIS BACK AND FORTH, JUST BECAUSE YOU DO NOT LIKE WHAT HE SAID DOES NOT 
          MAKE IT NOT TRUE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> GOOD MORNING, CHARLIE HUNT, MILL CREEK ESTATE. IF THERE IS ANY PROFESSIONAL HERE WHO IS IN IT FOR THEIR JOB TO DO WHAT THEY NEED TO DO, WHEN THAT TIME COMES AROUND, WHETHER THEY CAN MAKE THE APPOINTMENT OR NOT, THEY HAVE DEDICATED TO COME IN HERE TO DO THIS. BUT TO USE AN EXCUSE OF A TWO WEEK, EXCUSE ME, OF SPRING BREAK TO JUST UP AND AND FLY OUT, OKAY, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF ANYBODY BACK HERE, IF THEY CAN CLARIFY FOR ME, ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE VOLUNTEERS. ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE VOLUNTEERS. AND YOU VOLUNTEER TAKE IT UP, TAKE IT UP. 21 YEARS I SPENT VOLUNTEERING IN THE ARMY. NOW, WITH THIS ATTITUDE, WITH THIS MENTALITY OF FEELING BAD ABOUT THIS COMMISSIONER, THAT DOES SHOW, AS PREVIOUSLY SAID, POLITICAL STRESS ON THIS COMMISSION. IT DOES. I HAD TO MISS MY BOYS' BIRTHDAYS. THEY WERE PLANNED. BUT SINCE I VOLUNTEERED TO SERVE THIS NATION, NOT JUST A COUNTY, THAT IS WHAT IT IS . THAT IS HOW IT WORKS. YOU VOLUNTEER TO RUN, YOU VOLUNTEER TO DO THE JOB. DON'T SIT BACK AND JUST SAY, TO AN INTERIM ATTORNEY , OH, WELL, I DON'T KNOW. IT SHOULD NOT HAPPEN . AT LEAST THEY CAN CALL, OKAY? AT LEAST THEY CAN CALL. AT YOUR SALARY AND YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES AS PROFESSIONALS, WHO VOLUNTEERED TO BE ELECTED, STAND UP, DO THE RIGHT JOB. YOU SHOULD BE HERE, AND DO NOT USE YOUR CHILDREN AS AN EXCUSE OF NOT BEING HERE. THIS IS A PATHETIC, ABSOLUTELY PATHETIC ISSUE FOR THIS COUNTY. IF IT WAS AN EMERGENCY VACATION, PROVE IT, PLEASE. IF THE INTERIM ATTORNEY WANTS TO GO WITH THE SIDE THAT HE LIKES, DO IT. OKAY, PEOPLE GET UP, THEY SAY THEY ARE PROFESSIONAL , THEY WANT TO DO IT HERE, LIKE THIS, THIS DAY AND THIS DAY, THEY DO NOT EVER COME 
          [00:30:02]
ALL THESE OTHER TIMES, OKAY? YOU VOLUNTEERED TO BE ELECT DID, DO YOUR JOB. THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU, SIR. MA'AM? >> GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS. JACKIE LONG, POINT TERRACE. 
          PARTICIPATION, GOOD WORD . YOU HAVE TO BE HERE TO PARTICIPATE. I HAVE VIEWED MANY BOARDS, I HAVE LISTENED TO MANY BOARDS ON GO TV. ANYTIME PEOPLE CALL IN, IT IS A MESS. THESE PEOPLE DID NOT SHOW UP TO SEE EMPTY CHAIRS. WE SHOW UP TO SEE YOU, AND HEAR YOU, AND LOOK AT YOU. MAYBE IT SHOULD BE A BOARD POLICY , THAT IS FINE, THAT ESTABLISH THE POLICY. PERHAPS COMMISSIONER ARNOLD SHOULD HAVE LET US KNOW ABOUT THIS WAY AHEAD OF TIME. PROPER NOTICE WOULD HAVE BEEN A LOT MORE FAIR. FOR ALL INVOLVED. LIKE I SAID, WE COME HERE TO SEE YOU, TO TALK TO YOU, TO VIEW YOU, TO HEAR YOU, NOT TO SEE A BUNCH OF EMPTY SEAT . MAKE IT A BOARD POLICY IF NEED BE. IT SHOULD BE A BOARD POLICY, I THINK, THAT EVERYONE, IF YOU CANNOT ATTEND, YOU CANNOT VOTE. 
          I LISTENED TO JUST EVEN THE BOARD MOSQUITO CONTROL THE OTHER DAY. EXCUSE ME, CAN YOU SPEAK UP? I CANNOT HEAR YOU, I CANNOT HEAR YOU, WE HAVE A BAD CONNECTION. OH, SOMETHING IS GOING ON, SOMETHING IS IN THE BACKGROUND, IT WAS A MESS. AND IT WAS A WASTE OF TIME. IT WAS A WASTE OF TIME FOR ME AS A VOTER AND A TAXPAYER TO LISTEN TO THAT MESS. YOU KNOW? AND I DO NOT BELIEVE, PARTICIPATION IS A KEY WORD. AND I THINK YOU SHOULD SHOW UP. ABSOLUTELY. THERE ARE ALWAYS EMERGENCIES, ALWAYS, ABSOLUTELY, 100%. BUT YOU TOOK THE JOB , YOU COLLECT THE PAYCHECK, DO THE JOB, SHOW UP FOR IT. THAT IS THE TREND OF EVEN OUR NATIONAL, FEDERAL ISSUES NOW. EMPLOYEES ARE BEING TOLD, IT IS TIME TO SHOW UP. THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> GOOD MORNING. DORIS TAYLOR. 208, ELYRIA ROAD, SAINT AUGUSTINE. I WAS NOT HERE AT THE BEGINNING. I WAS NOT EXPECTING TO SPEAK ON THIS. I ACTUALLY DID READ THE RULES FOR RUNNING THESE MEETINGS A COUPLE YEARS AGO. IT HAS BEEN A WHILE, BUT I WOULD STRONGLY ENCOURAGE THE TEMPORARY ATTORNEY AND ALL OF YOU TO REVIEW. I THINK THAT THERE IS A POINT THERE TOWARD THE END, THERE IS A CLAUSE ABOUT PROXY VOTING, CALLING IN. AND IT WAS IN THEIR WERE PEOPLE HAVE TALKED ABOUT COVID. BUT THERE ARE RULES. IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, FOR ST. JOHNS COUNTY'S RULES. I DO NOT THINK WE SHOULD BE MAKING EXCEPTIONS FOR ANYONE, BECAUSE AS SOON AS YOU DO THAT, IT BRINGS UP THE QUESTION OF, WHAT THEIR POLITICS ARE AND WHY WE ARE MAKING THE EXCEPTION. THERE ARE RULES FOR A REASON. ESPECIALLY WHEN WE HAVE SUCH A CONTENTIOUS ENVIRONMENT THAT WE LIVE IN TODAY, IN THE WHOLE COUNTRY, AND VERY MUCH HERE IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. SO, PLEASE, KNOW THE RULES, FIND OUT SOMEBODY THAT ACTUALLY KNOWS WHAT THE RULE SAYS, AND DO IT, WHATEVER IT IS. NO EXCEPTIONS. THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? >> ALL RIGHT. 
          >> ANASTASIA ISLAND. FOLKS , I THINK THAT THIS IS AWESOME. BECAUSE IT IS LONG OVERDUE. THIS IS A CHALLENGE. AND I DO BELIEVE THAT MS. ARNOLD SHOULD BE ABLE TO BE HERE ON TV, BECAUSE IT IS 2025. WE ARE NOT IN THE DARK AGES ANYMORE. AND I BELIEVE THAT HER PARTICIPATION IS IMPORTANT, JUST AS MUCH AS I BELIEVE THAT IF THE NEXT MEETING, YOU DO NOT FEEL GOOD , DON'T, JUST LIKE I USUALLY TELL MY EMPLOYEES, DON'T COME TO WORK SICK, PLEASE. DON'T BREATHE ON ME. SO I THINK IT IS A GOOD CHALLENGE, I THINK IT SHOULD BE ENFORCED, I THINK COMMISSIONER ARNOLD'S INPUT IS VERY IMPORTANT ON EVERY ISSUE. AND IF YOU CANNOT MAKE IT TO BE HERE ON SCREEN, THAT IS AWESOME. I MEAN, JUST THINK. YOU COULD GET A CALL FROM TED CRUZ TO BE AT A MEETING IN CANCUN. I MEAN, HOW COULD YOU NOT APPRECIATE THAT? FOLKS, BUT, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES PEOPLE THINK THERE IS HATE AND ANGER GOING ON HERE. I JUST THINK IT IS A LITTLE, IT IS DEMOCRACY IN ACTION. I MEAN, I WOULD FIND IT KIND OF ODD IF EVERYONE WAS GETTING ALONG ALL THE TIME. AND 
          [00:35:04]
I KIND OF LOVE THE MIX THAT GOES ON. AND I LOVE THE INTELLIGENCE THAT EACH PERSON BRINGS. WHEN I AM NOT HERE, I AM LISTENING TO THE MEETINGS ON G TV. YOU KNOW, G TV, AS YOU GUYS KNOW, IS AWESOME. I WISH THAT BRIGHT LIGHT DID NOT SHOW THE BALD SPOT IN THE BACK OF MY HEAD, BUT I 
          STILL LOVE G TV . >> THANK YOU FOR ENDING ON THAT. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> ONE MORE AND THEN WE WILL CLOSE THIS. >> GOOD, I AM GLAD I AM ONE MORE. DJ CLAY, SAINT AUGUSTINE. THESE MEETINGS ARE SO INTERESTING. YOU KNOW, I KNOW YOU ARE DISAPPOINTED WHENEVER I CANNOT STAY AFTER 12:00, BECAUSE I HAVE OTHER MEETINGS TO GO TO, AND I HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION, SO I CANNOT LISTEN TO EVERYTHING THAT IS GOING ON. I WANT TO ENFORCE WHAT SOME PEOPLE HAVE SAID AND NOT WHAT OTHER PEOPLE HAVE SAID. I THINK MOST OF YOU CAN REALLY PROBABLY READ MY MIND, BUT HERE WE GO. I HAVE 30 SECONDS. WE HAVE, THIS IS BEEN A PROBLEM, I WILL KEEP SAYING THIS, WE WILL FIX IT, BUT WE HAVE HOW MANY A YEAR OR SO TO GET THIS THING FIXED AND IT IS STILL NOT FIXED. WE DO NOT HAVE A COUNTY ATTORNEY. AND EVERYONE THAT HAS GOTTEN UP HERE AND SAID THAT IS WRONG. WE HAVE AN INTERIM COUNTY ATTORNEY. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY HE DID NOT GET AND MAKE IT PLAIN WITH THE CHAIR AND WITH OUR ADMINISTRATOR ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON WITH MS. ARNOLD TODAY. VACATION TIME? NO, NO, NO. HOW MANY PEOPLE, RAISE YOUR HANDS, HAVE YOUR CHILDREN AND YOU ARE STILL HERE? YOU HAD TO LEAVE THEM IN SUMMARY ELSE IS WATCHING THEM, HOPEFULLY? SO, TRANSPARENCY IS MISSING OUT. THIS IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF IT . AND FOR LAWYERS AND DEVELOPERS TO GET UP HERE BECAUSE THEY WANT TO GET THE VOTE, AND THEY KNOW, WE HAVE BEEN HERE A WHILE, WE KIND OF KNOW HOW YOU ARE GOING TO VOTE ON MOST OF THESE DEVELOPERS. AND THEY KNOW TOO. SO THEY ARE NOT FOOLING ANYBODY. AND GOING ON WHAT SOMEONE ELSE SAID , WE ARE IN 2025. I DO NOT HAVE ALL THE STUFF THAT YOU GUYS HAVE, COMPUTERS, I DON'T NEED THAT. PAPER AND PEN GET ME WHERE I NEED TO BE. SO I WILL SAY SOMETHING THAT ALL OF YOU KNOW EVERYTHING ABOUT. AND I AM KIND OF NOT IMPRESSED BY IT. BUT EVERYBODY IS IMPRESSED BECAUSE YOU GET ON THE PHONE, YOU HAVE TO WAIT THREE HOURS, YOU GET THREE HOURS, WE WILL GET BACK TO YOU. JUST HANG ON THERE. SO, THIS THING CALLED AI, ARTIFICIAL -- THE PHONE IS RINGING, WHO IS CALLING IN? OH MY GOODNESS. WHO IS CALLING IN? WHO? NO. 
          SECONDS. SO, AI, I KNOW YOU ALL CALL IT ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. I HAVE A NEW WORD. ARTIFICIAL GUESS. IT STARTS WITH AN EYE. IDIOTS. BUT I AM NOT CALLING ANYBODY IN IDIOTS. SHE CANNOT BE HERE, SHE CAN LISTEN, NO VOTE TODAY. INTERIM, WE HAVE OTHER LAWYERS THAT GIVE A DIFFERENT OPINION. WE DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT AND FINAL OPINION FROM THE ONE THAT IS AN INTERIM AND HAS 
          BEEN AN INTERIM , AI. >> THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? HEARING 
          ON, WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT. >> WHAT COMMISSIONER DEAN TOLD ME WHEN I HAD MY FIRST YEAR HERE IS THAT THIS IS A BUSINESS MEETING. I AM THE CHAIR OF THE BUSINESS MEETING, I HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE FOLLOW THE RULES. SO I WILL GO TO MR. COMMANDO, 
          AND WHATEVER HE SAYS GOES, AND THEN WE WILL GO TO ROLL CALL. >> WHAT IS YOUR QUESTION THIS TIME? MY OPINION IS THAT SHE CAN VOTE. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION THAT I REFERENCED FROM JANUARY OF 2021, IT MAKES REFERENCE TO THE QUORUM BEING ESTABLISHED BEING PHYSICALLY PRESENT. MR. MURPHY, YOU ASKED THE QUESTION, WHAT DOES PRESENT MEAN? YOU CAN BE VIRTUALLY PRESENT OR PHYSICALLY PRESENT. AS LONG AS THE QUORUM IS ESTABLISHED IN THE ROOM, I AM AWARE OF THAT WOULD PRECLUDE COMMISSIONER ARNOLD FROM VOTING. 
          >> ALL RIGHT, ROLL CALL, PLEASE. >> COMMISSIONER KRISTA JOSEPH? 
          >> PRESENT. >> COMMISSIONER CLAY MURPHY? >> PRESENT. 
          >> MISSION OR CHRISTIAN WHITEHURST? >> PRESENT. 
          >> COMMISSIONER ANN TAYLOR? >> PRESENT. >> ALL RIGHT, JASON HOLM, 
          HOPEFULLY YOU ARE STILL HERE FROM CHRISTCHURCH. >> YES. THANK YOU. LET'S PRAY. 
          [00:40:01]
HEAVENLY FATHER, WE JUST TAKE A BREATH FOR A MOMENT. AND WE JUST REMIND OURSELVES THAT NO MATTER WHAT WE SEE IN THIS WORLD, WHAT WE THINK OF OTHER PEOPLE, WE ARE REMINDED ABOUT YOUR WORDS, THAT WHAT YOU CREATED IS GOOD. AND WHAT YOU CREATED AND US IS VERY GOOD. AND SO I PRAY THAT WE WOULD JUST BE REMINDED TODAY OF YOUR WORDS, OUR WORTH AND R-VALUE OF WHO WE ARE. AND SO WE THANK YOU FOR DECLARING WHO WE ARE. I THINK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS INCREDIBLE COUNTY, THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE. THANK YOU FOR THE BUILDINGS FOR US TO RAISE FAMILIES, MAKE A LIVING, AND TO RETIRE, AND TO ENJOY THE BEAUTY OF THIS INCREDIBLE COUNTY. WE PRAY THAT WE WOULD STEWARD WHAT YOU DECLARED AS GOOD. BUT THANK YOU FOR THIS COUNTY COMMISSIONER, I PRAY FOR THEM AND FOR THEIR WISDOM. I THANK YOU FOR THEIR SERVICE, FOR THEIR HEARTS FOR THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTY. AND I PRAY THAT YOU WOULD JUST POUR YOUR WISDOM INTO THIS ROOM , POUR YOUR WISDOM INTO THEIR HEARTS, POUR YOUR WORDS INTO THEIR MOUTH. AS WE DO THE BUSINESS THAT WE ARE REQUIRED TO DO AS CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTY. I PRAY THAT AS WE JUST WRAP UP THIS MOMENT, WE PAUSE AND WE REMEMBER THE WORDS OF KING DAVID, WHO SAID, SEARCH YOUR HEARTS. HELP US TO KNOW WHAT MAKES US ANXIOUS, REMOVE THOSE THINGS IN US THAT MAY BE UNBECOMING AND GET US IN THE WAY OF WHAT IS YOUR RIGHTEOUSNESS. AND SO I PRAY THAT YOUR RIGHTEOUSNESS WOULD RAIN HERE TODAY. WE LOVE YOU AND WE DEFINITELY NEED YOU. IN YOUR NAME, WE PRAY. AMEN. 
          >> I AM HONORED TO PETTY OFFICER SECOND CLASS UNITED STATES NAVY, AMANDA MAREN TO DO THE PLEDGE OF 
          ALLEGIANCE. >> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF 
          [Proclamation Recognizing Government Finance Professionals Week]
AMERICA. AND TO THE REPUBLIC, FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION, UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH 
          LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. >> I WOULD LIKE TO CALL UP THE PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING GOVERNMENT FINANCE PROFESSIONALS WEEK. AND I'M GOING TO ASK ELLA ANDERSON AND WAYNE SCHROEDER TO COME UP, AND THE STAFF WOULD BE GREAT. AND I WILL MEET YOU DOWN THERE. 
          >> A PROCLAMATION BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ST. JOHNS COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS THE FLORIDA GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION, FGF AWAY, IS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FOUNDED IN 1937, AND SERVES MORE THAN 3300 PROFESSIONALS FROM STATE, COUNTY, AND CITY GOVERNMENTS , SCHOOL DISTRICTS, COLLEGES, AND UNIVERSITIES, SPECIAL DISTRICTS, AND PRIVATE FIRMS, AND WHEREAS IN THIS GOVERNMENT FINANCE PROFESSIONALS WEEK SPONSORED BY FGF OA, AND ALL OF ITS MEMBER GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS, IS A WEEK-LONG SERIES OF ACTIVITIES AIMED AT RECOGNIZING GOVERNMENT PROFESSIONALS AND THE VITAL CONTRIBUTION THEY PROVIDE TO OUR STATE AND OUR COMMUNITY. AND WHEREAS GOVERNMENT FINANCE PROFESSIONALS WEEK HIGHLIGHTS THE IMPORTANT WORK PERFORMED BY GOVERNMENT FINANCE PROFESSIONALS, WHO PLAY A CRITICAL ROLE IN TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND SOUND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR. AND WHEREAS THROUGHOUT THIS WEEK, GOVERNMENT FINANCE PROFESSIONALS IN ST. 
          JOHNS COUNTY WILL BE RECOGNIZED FOR THEIR EXPERTISE, DEDICATION, AND COMMITMENT TO PROTECTING THE PUBLIC'S TRUST WHILE SAFEGUARDING TAXPAYER DOLLARS AND PROMOTING FINANCIAL STABILITY. AND NOW, THEREFORE, BE PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. 
          JOHNS COUNTY, FLORIDA, THAT THE WEEK OF MARCH 17TH THROUGH THE 21ST, 2025, BE DESIGNATED AS GOVERNMENT FINANCE PROFESSIONALS WEEK. IT HAS BEEN ADOPTEDBY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF 
          ST. JOHNS COUNTY, FLORIDA, THIS 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025. >> GOOD MORNING, CHAIR KRISTA JOSEPH, AND THE REST OF THE BOARD. I WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT AND SPEAK ON BEHALF OF MY DEPARTMENT AND MY TEAM . WE WORKED VERY HARD DAY IN AND DAY OUT TO GET THE COOK COUNTY POSITIVE HIS FINANCES IN ORDER, MAKING SURE OUR BILLS ARE PAID, EVERYONE IS PAID TIMELY. PLEASE THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING THAT THEY DO. I AM NOTHING WITHOUT THE TEAM. THANK YOU ALL. 
          >> JUST TO FOLLOW-UP ON THE COMMENTS AGAIN , I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE OMB STAFF AS WELL, REALLY, BOTH SIDES AS WELL FOR ALL OF THEIR HARD WORK AND INTEGRITY OF FINANCIAL REPORTING AND ACCURACY. I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT ALSO, COLLECTIVELY BETWEEN BOTH AREAS, THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED AND BEEN RECOGNIZED BY THE G CALF -- GF OA, SO THANK YOU, STAFF. 
          [00:45:14]
          >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> GOOD MORNING, WE WILL INTERRUPT THE MEETING FOR A FEW MINUTES TO RECOGNIZE SOME OF OUR KEY GUYS OUT THERE DOING THE JOBS ON THE ROAD. ESPECIALLY PRICE, CHRIS, AND FREDDIE, GUYS, STEP RIGHT UP FRONT AND CENTER. TAKE IT FROM HERE. 
          >> GOOD MORNING, EVERYBODY. MY NAME IS GREG: WELL, I AM THE -- DIRECTOR. I'M HONORED TO BE SPEAKING IN FRONT OF YOU HERE TODAY. ON BEHALF OF PUBLIC WORKS, WE HAVE A COUPLE GENTLEMEN THAT PARTICIPATED IN THE NORTHEAST A PW A RODEO. IT OCCURRED LAST WEEK. THESE GENTLEMEN BEHIND US, OUT OF 61 PARTICIPANTS, WE HAD TWO PEOPLE THAT FINISHED IN THE TOP FIVE. 
          NUMBER TWO AND NUMBER FIVE IN THE NORTHEAST PART OF FLORIDA. THAT IS CHRIS INGRAM AND FREDDIE BADGER. AND WE ALSO HAVE BRACE DUKE, WHO CAME IN FIRST IN ONE OF THE SIX CATEGORIES, AND HE IS ONLY 22 YEARS OLD. SO, GUYS, GOOD JOB. SO, WHAT THIS MEANS IS THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF TALENT IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. EACH YEAR, WE USUALLY HAVE SOMEBODY THAT GOES ON THE STAGE, THAT IS WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN NOW. ALONG WITH FREDDIE, CHRIS, THEY WILL GO OUT THERE AND REPRESENT ST. JOHNS COUNTY IN THE STATE RODEO. WHAT THIS IS, IT IS ABOUT SIX DIFFERENT EVENTS WHERE THEY USE EXCAVATORS, BUGGIES, BOBCATS, ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT THINGS, TO SHOW THEIR SKILLS. AND THEY DO THAT ON, YOU KNOW, ONCE YOUR TRACY YEAR, IT IS GREAT FOR ST. JOHNS COUNTY. IT SHOWS THAT WE HAVE EFFORTS TO TRAIN THESE GENTLEMEN, AND WE SUPPORT THEM IN EVERYTHING THEY DO, BUT THEY ARE ALSO MAKING ST. JOHNS COUNTY LOOK GOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH TO THE COMMISSION FOR ALLOWING US TO BRING THIS TO THE PEOPLE, AS WELL AS THE ADMINISTRATION, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          >> WE DO HAVE A LITTLE VIDEO THAT WE WANT TO SHOW YOU REALLY QUICK. BUT WE DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THIS IS NOT JUST A SKILLS CHALLENGE. THIS IS HUMAN RESOURCES AND RISK MANAGEMENT LOVE THESE KINDS OF THINGS, BECASE THESE GUYS CAN PROVE THEIR SKILLS, THEY REDUCE WORKPLACE ACCIDENTS, AND IT IS A POSITIVE FOR EVERYBODY. SO, IF YOU WOULD, ROLE THAT BEAUTIFUL BEAM FOOTAGE. 
          [Acceptance of Proclamation ]
          [00:50:15]
          >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. I WOULD LIKE A VOTE OR MOTION FOR THE PROCLAMATIONS TO ACCEPT THEM 
          THIS MORNING. >> SO MOVED. >> FOR A SECOND? I WILL SECOND. 
          >> SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? I DID NOT HEAR SARAH. >> AYE . 
          [Deletions to Consent Agenda]
          >> THANK YOU. >> ANY OBJECTIONS? COMMISSIONER ARNOLD? COMMISSIONER MURPHY? 
          COMMISSIONER TAYLOR? >> I WANTED TO SAY MADAM, SORRY. 
          >> I HAVE NONE. >> SO, WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT THEN ON THE CONSENT AGENDA 
          ITEMS. >> OKAY. WE WILL NOW TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. 
          [Approval of Consent Agenda ]
SEEING NONE, WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. 
          >> A VOTE TO ACCEPT THE CONSENT AGENDA? >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION. 
          [Additions/Deletions to Regular Agenda]
          >> I WILL SECOND. >> ALL IN FAVOR? >> OKAY. ANY ADDITIONS OR 
          DELETIONS TO THE REGULAR AGENDA? COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST? >> I HAVE NONE. 
          [Approval of Regular Agenda]
          CALLED ] >> MOTION TO PROOF? >> SECOND. 
          [Public Comment]
          >> ONLY THERE IS CHANGES. WE JUST KEEP IT THE WAY IT IS, RIGHT? OKAY, PUBLIC COMMENT, 
          GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT. >> GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS. 
          >> I GUESS WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH ALL THE RULES. SO WHEN YOU ARE READY. 
          >> GOOD MORNING, Y'ALL. TED SLAVEN. CANDIDATE FOR ANASTASIA MOSQUITO CONTROL DISTRICT. 
          CONGRATULATIONS ON THE BLACK HISTORY MUSEUM. THAT IS PROGRESS. NOW LET'S REINSTATE MR. TREY ALEXANDER IS THE CULTURAL RESOURCES COORDINATOR WHO COURAGEOUSLY STOOD UP IN DEFENSE OF AFRICAN-AMERICAN HISTORY. SHOW US THAT Y'ALL ARE SINCERE ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS HERE . AND HAPPY ST. PATRICK'S DAY. OUR FIRST IRISH-AMERICAN PRESIDENT, JOHN FITZGERALD KENNEDY SAID, HERE ON EARTH, JOHN'S -- GOD'S WORK MUST TRULY BE INVOLVED. JFK SAID AT AMERICAN UNIVERSITY, OUR MOST BASIC COMMON LINK IS THAT WE ALL INHABIT THIS SMALL PLANET. WE ALL BREATHE THE SAME AIR, WE ALL CHERISH OUR CHILDREN'S FUTURE , AND WE ARE ALL MORTAL. 
          OVERDEVELOPMENT IS KILLING OUR TREES, KILLING OUR WILDLIFE, BREEDING MOSQUITOES, OVERCROWDING OUR ROADS, OVERCROWDING OUR SCHOOLS AND DESTROYING WHAT WE KNOW AND LOVE ABOUT THIS MAGICAL PLACE, WHICH WE CALL GOD'S COUNTRY. I'M PROUD TO HAVE MOVED HERE NOVEMBER 5TH OF 1999, MORE THAN 25 YEARS AGO. FOREIGN INVESTORS PURCHASE, INFLUENCE AND CUT ENTIRE FORESTS, LEADING LEAVING FLOODING IN SOME 33 COMMUNITIES. THE EXCESS OF OVERDEVELOPMENT DOES NOT GIVE A -- ABOUT PEOPLE LIKE US OR NATURE. PRESIDENT FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT SAID 90 YEARS AGO, WE KNOW NOW THAT GOVERNMENT BY ORGANIZED MONEY IS JUST AS DANGEROUS AS GOVERNMENT BY ORGANIZED MOBS. THIS IS OUR TIME AND OUR COUNTRY AND IN OUR COUNTY, AND WE CAN DO BETTER, WE MUST DO BETTER, WE WILL DO BETTER, WITH YOUR HELP. ST. JOHNS COUNTY VOTERS PROUDLY ELECTED THREE OF FIVE COMMISSIONERS, FOUR OF WHOM ARE SITTING HERE, ONE OF WHOM IS ON THE PHONE. BUT THREE OF THE FIVE COMMISSIONERS WERE ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE OF ST. JOHN COUNTY FOR A REASON. RIGHT? THEY WERE ELECTED BECAUSE THEY WERE UNTAINTED BY CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTORS THAT FUND CLEARCUTTING -- WE NEED A LOBBY DISCLOSURE LAW, THE COUNTY ETHICS COMMISSION AND INVESTIGATIONS OF THE POWER OF ORGANIZED MONEY HERE. NOW, ST. 
          JOHNS COUNTY NEEDS A STRONG FREE PROTECTION LAW LIKE THEY DO IN SAINT AUGUSTINE COULD YOU HAVE IT ON YOUR AGENDA, THAT IS ITEM ONE. THE FORMAL FORCES OF FORCED CLEARCUTTING ACTUALLY WANTED TO DELAY THAT VOTE UNTIL THE 25TH. THEY WILL DO ANYTHING FOR MONEY, DON'T LET THEM. WE NEED A STRONG TREE PROTECTION LAW, JUST LIKE OUR CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE, WHICH IS TREE CITY, 
          U.S. WAY SINCE 1963. THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. >> THANK YOU. NAME AND ADDRESS? 
          [00:55:06]
          >> I WILL PICK UP WHERE I LEFT OFF. I WAS PRETTY DISTURBED WITH THE COMMENTS FROM THE COUNTY ACTING INTERIM ATTORNEY KOMANDO AT THE END OF LAST WEEK'S OR TWO WEEKS AGO, THE BOARD MEETING , RELATING TO THE INVESTIGATION INTO THE RETALIATION AND HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT THAT WAS CREATED TOWARDS MY SPOUSE. THIS INVESTIGATION IS A COMPLETE SHAM. COMMISSIONER MURPHY, I BELIEVE YOU WERE FORMER LAW ENFORCEMENT, I DO NOT KNOW IF YOU HAVE CONDUCTED ANY INVESTIGATIONS. BUT I HAVE NEVER HEARD OF AN INVESTIGATION WHERE THE COMPLAINANT IS NOT ACTUALLY INTERVIEWED. IT IS KIND OF LIKE IF SOMEONE ROBS A BANK AND THE POLICE GO IN AND THEY INTERVIEW THE GETAWAY DRIVER AND THE TWO BANK ROBBERS, THEY DON'T REVIEW ANY OF THE FOOTAGE CONTAINED ON THE CCTV WAS IN THE BANK, AND THEY DO NOT INTERVIEW ANY OF THE EMPLOYEES AND VICTIMS OF THE ACTUAL CRIME. SO, IT IS A COMPLETE TRAVESTY. WE WERE ALSO TOLD THAT THIS WAS GOING TO BE AN INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION CONDUCTED BY AN INDEPENDENT LAW FIRM. I FILED A PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST AND I WILL REFER TO IT AS PRR, IF I REFER TO IT AGAIN. AND THIS SPECIFIC FIRM HAS BEEN USED, OR AT LEAST BUILD 110 TIMES TO THE COUNTY, TO THE TUNE OF $294,000. TO ME, THAT IS A CLEAR CONFLICT OF INTEREST. INVESTIGATIONS SHOULD BE HELD OR CONDUCTED BY INVESTIGATORS. NOT ATTORNEYS SERVICING A CLIENT. WE HAVE ALSO NOTICED THAT I HAVE BEEN STONEWALLED IN MY ATTEMPTS TO GET PUBLIC RECORDS. AS FOR PUBLIC RECORDS FOR ALL OUTSIDE LEGAL COUNSEL, I WAS GIVEN A GENERAL LEGAL, WHAT APPEARS TO BE A COUNTY LEDGER. IT HAS SUCH THINGS ON IT LIKE LEXIS-NEXIS, AND ALSO A HOLIDAY IN. THERE IS ALSO NO DATE, ANY TYPE OF SERVICE THAT THE FIRM WAS ACQUIRED FOR. I AM JUST BLOWN AWAY BY THIS ANCIENT DISREGARD -- BLATANT DISREGARD OF THE CHAIR'S ORDER FOR AN INDEPENDENT THIRD-PARTY PERSONAL INVESTIGATOR. I HAVE EMAILED ALL OF YOU AND I HAVE ONLY RECEIVED A RESPONSE FROM ONE. SO I AM MORE THAN HAPPY TO MEET WITH ALL OF YOU, INDIVIDUALLY, COLLECTIVELY, AND GO OVER WHAT IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING WITHIN 
          THIS COUNTY. >> THANK YOU. >> NICOLE CROSBY, 1165 NECK ROAD. I WOULD LIKE TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT COMMENT WE JUST HEARD, AND ANOTHER EARLIER COMMENT. THE ATTORNEY THAT WAS SELECTED TO DO THE SO-CALLED NEUTRAL OR INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION , MR. GARY WHEELER IS HIS NAME, I ACTUALLY LOOKED HIM UP ON THE NATIONAL WEBSITE. AND ON THAT WEBSITE, THEY LIST ALL THEIR ATTORNEYS BY THEIR SPECIALTIES. AND THERE IS ONE SPECIALTY CALLED WORKPLACE INVESTIGATION . SO IF YOU LOOK UP THE WORKPLACE INVESTIGATION ATTORNEYS, THERE IS QUITE A LENGTHY LIST. GARY WHEELER IS NOT ON THAT LIST. SO HE IS NOT EVEN A SPECIALIST IN WORKPLACE INVESTIGATIONS. AND WHILE TIME DOES NOT ALLOW ME TO GO INTO ALL THE THINGS THAT MADE IT SEEM THAT HE WAS REALLY NOT PRACTICING IN A NEUTRAL WAY ON THAT INVESTIGATION, SO, I AGREE WITH PREVIOUS COMMENTS. ALSO, I WANT TO FOLLOW UP ON TRAVIS'S EARLIER COMMENT WHERE HE SEEMED TO FEEL THAT COMMISSIONER ARNOLD SHOULD BE EXTENDED A COURTESY. YOU KNOW, I FIND IT SO INTERESTING WHEN PEOPLE LOVE TO BEND THE RULES TO SUIT THEM. MR. MINCH TALKS A LOT ABOUT PROPERTY RIGHTS AND FEELS THAT, YOU KNOW , TREE REGULATIONS ARE HURTING PROPERTY RIGHTS. BUT ACTUALLY, I WANT TO READ AN ACTUAL EXAMPLE OF HIS VERSION OF PROPERTY RIGHT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE WE LIVE. THIS IS FROM A NEIGHBOR TO A PROPERTY THAT HE WAS MANAGING. SHE SAID HE WAS VERY RUDE TO 
          [01:00:05]
BOTH GARY AND I, HE FIRST ASKED GARY IF THEY COULD PUT THE FENCE ABOUT 4 TO 5 FEET INTO OUR YARD AROUND A CLUMP OF TREES. GARY SAID HE WAS NOT INTERESTED. TRAVIS SAID, WELL, IF YOU WANT TO BE ESSENTIALLY A BAD NEIGHBOR. GARY SAID, YES, HE DID. TRAVIS CALLED ME AND THREATENED ME. SO, ISN'T IT INTERESTING HOW RULES CAN BE BENT TO SUIT WHAT SOME PEOPLE DEFINE AS PROPERTY RIGHTS? IN THIS CASE, PUTTING A FENCE INTO A NEIGHBORING PROPERTY AROUND A CLUMP OF TREES. SO, I REALLY CAUTIONED PEOPLE TO BE CAREFUL WHEN YOU HEAR PEOPLE THROWING THE TERM PROPERTY RIGHTS AROUND. I MEAN, I VALUE PROPERTY RIGHTS TOO. I LOVE THE FACT THAT THERE CANNOT BE A GAS STATION NEXT TO MY HOUSE. PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE CRITICAL TO ALL OF US. BUT FOR SOME PEOPLE, THERE IS A TENDENCY OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE FAVORED MORE DEVELOPMENT IN OUR COUNTY TO ACT LIKE PROPERTY RIGHTS BELONG TO THEM MORE THAN TO ANYBODY ELSE. THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU. NEXT? >> ALL RIGHT, HELLO. MY NAME IS JOHN TIERNEY, BASKIN ROAD, JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA. I AM IN DEUEL COUNTY. RIGHT NOW, I AM WEARING MY JAKE AT ST. JOHNS COUNTY SHIRT. AND LIKE A GOOD NEIGHBOR, ST. JOHNS COUNTY IS THERE. LET ME JUST REMIND EVERYBODY WHY I AM HERE. TWO YEARS AGO , TWO YEARS AGO, THE FIRST PLACE I WENT TO WAS THE NORTHEAST FLORIDA REGIONAL COUNCIL , SEVEN COUNTIES. AND THE ISSUE HAS TO DO WITH OUR PLACE, WHICH IS 2.5 ACRES, CATEGORY 1 WETLANDS. AND JUST FOUR MONTHS AGO, I HAVE TO GIVE PROPS TO THE PARKS DIRECTOR, DARRELL JOSEPH, BRIAN BERKLEY, AND OUR WATERWAYS COMMISSION. 
          BECAUSE THEY WERE DIRECTED TO LOOK AT OUR PLACE AS A CONSIDERATION FOR -- AS A LAND ACQUISITION POTENTIAL. AND SO IT HAPPENED. AND SO WHEN YOU HEAR OF, LIKE, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP, SO OUR POTENTIAL PARTNERS RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, JACKSON ELECTRIC AUTHORITY, JACKSON PORT AUTHORITY, JACKSONVILLE PORT AUTHORITY, NORTH EAST FLORIDA REGIONAL COUNCIL , FISH AND WILDLIFE COMMISSION, COUNCIL ON ELDER AFFAIRS, ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION BOARD, RESILIENCY, CITY COUNCIL, WORKS IN REHABILITATION, WHAT I WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE JUST HANDOUTS. BUT HERE IS, YOU KNOW, LAST NIGHT, I WENT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION BOARD, LAST NIGHT. AND APPROVAL OF THE JANUARY 21ST MINUTES . I WAS THE ONLY ONE THERE. HERE ARE COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC, JOHN UNI, SHARED, COMMENTS REGARDING ADVOCACY FOR A MULTI-RESILIENCY CENTER, AND ALSO APPLAUDED THE WATERWAY COMMISSION F IND SUBCOMMITTEE. HERE IS THE COMMISSION. JACKSONVILLE MEYER PROTECTION COMMITTEE UPDATE. AND THEN WATER WASTE. THE F IND SUBCOMMITTEE HAD THE -- ADDED TO THE LIST OF POTENTIAL PROJECTS. 
          AND LAST NIGHT, I ATTENDED THE MAYOR'S DISABILITY COUNSEL. AND WE HIT EVERY BUCKET THAT YOU CAN POSSIBLY THINK OF FOR A QUALITY OF LIFE IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. AND THAT IS WHY I AM HERE . THANK 
          YOU FOR LISTENING. >> THANK YOU. NEXT? >> MY NAME IS TERRENCE MAHONEY. 
          I RESIDE AT BUCKET COURT. MADAME CHAIRWOMAN, DISINTEREST MEMBERS OF THE SENTENCE COUNTY COMMISSION, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, PRIOR TO MOVING TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY A LITTLE OVER 10 YEARS AGO, I HAD THE HONOR, LIKE YOU, OF SERVING ON AN ELECTED BOARD. I UNDERSTAND THE HEAT OF DEBATE, AND I UNDERSTAND THE PASSION THAT COMES WITH IT. WHEN I WAS ELECTED, THEY GAVE ME THE TITLE OR DESIGNATION, WHICH ALL OF YOU SHARE, AS HONORABLE. I TOOK THAT DESIGNATION SERIOUSLY, AND SO SHOULD ALL OF YOU. I AM ASKING TODAY THAT ALL OF YOU MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO LIVE UP TO THAT DESIGNATION, AND TAKE A STEP BACK. INSTEAD OF JUDGING OTHERS, TAKE A MINUTE TO JUDGE YOURSELVES. ARE YOU PURSUING A PERSONAL AGENDA? OR ARE YOU PURSUING THE PEOPLE'S AGENDA? 
          [01:05:02]
ARE YOU TRYING TO BE FAIR TO EACH OTHER? OR ARE YOU TRYING TO TAKE SHOTS AT ONE ANOTHER ? I KNOW PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD DISAGREE. I THINK IT ACTUALLY IS A GOOD THING, BUT PLEASE DO SO RESPECTFULLY, AND CALL OF YOUR MINIONS FROM GETTING UP AND TAKING PERSONAL SHOTS, THEN FOLLOWING UP WITH A SOCIAL MEDIA MUD WAR. I HAVE RESPECT FOR EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU, BECAUSE YOU CHOSE TO SERVE OUR COMMUNITY, WHICH IS NOT AN EASY THING TO DO. WHEN I MOVED HERE, I BREATHED A SIGH OF RELIEF THAT I CAME TO A REPUBLICAN-LED COUNTY. WHICH INDICATED TO ME THAT WE WERE PROFESSIONALLY RUN AND IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE PEOPLE. IF YOU HAVE DISAGREEMENTS, SIT DOWN WITH EACH OTHER AT AN OPENWORK SESSION , AND WORK THEM OUT LIKE GROWN ADULT. I HAVE TO SAY THAT WHAT HAPPENED TO MR. WHITEHURST IN THE PAST FEW WEEKS WAS ABSOLUTELY APPALLING. HE WAS ACCUSED OF USING A DISPARAING WORD TO DESCRIBE A SPEAKER AT THIS PODIUM THAT IS CLEARLY AN ALLY OR MOUTHPIECE FOR THOSE ON THE COMMISSION WHO DISAGREE WITH HIM. SOCIAL MEDIA WAS USED TO PUT THEM ON TRIAL AND FIND HIM GUILTY, WITH ZERO PROOF. I SAW A VIDEO OF WHAT THE SPEAKER AT THE PODIUM SET IN A COUPLE OF PICTURES OF MEMBERS OF THIS COMMISSION LOOKING AT EACH OTHER, BUT I SAW NO PROOF THAT HE ACTUALLY ENTERED THOSE WORDS. 
          INSTEAD, MR. WHITEHURST WAS TOLD HE HAD TO PROVE HE DID NOT SAY THE DISPARAGING WORD. HOW DO YOU PROVE A NEGATIVE? THE PROOF IS ONLY THERE IF IT ACTUALLY HAPPENS. YOU CANNOT PROVE THAT SOMETHING DID NOT HAPPEN. THAT IS WHY ONE OF THE ROCKS OF OUR CONSTITUTION IS THAT YOU ARE INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. BUT TO SCORE -- HIS OPPONENTS DECLARED HIM GUILTY WITH NO PROOF. MR. WHITEHURST WAS THEN LABELED UNCHRISTIAN, CLEARLY A PLAY ON HIS FIRST NAME. BUT HOW DARE ANYONE CHRISTIAN ANYONE ELSE'S FATE. -- BETWEEN ANYONE I GOT. I SHARE MY DEEP DISAPPOINTMENT WITH THE BOARD AND ASK TO PLEASE, PLEASE RESTORE THE QUORUM. THANK YOU. 
          >> THINKING. NEXT. >> MY NAME IS TRAVIS MINCH, I LIVE AT 1230 NECK ROAD. I WILL NOT RESPOND TO THE ACCUSATIONS ON THE OTHER AND WASTE MY TIME. BUT I AM HAPPY TO DISCUSS IT DIRECTLY WITH HER IF SHE WOULD BE SO WILLING. I AM HERE TO INFORM YOU THAT YOUR ENVIRONMENTAL DIVISION STAFF IS VIOLATING LOCAL, STATE, AND U.S. CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS. THEY ARE NOT FOLLOWING ST. JOHNS COUNTY LOCAL CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES. THEY ARE NOT FOLLOWING STATE LAWS REGARDING LOCAL CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES, MORE SPECIFICALLY, CHAPTERS 125 AND 162 OF FLORIDA STATUTES THAT PREVENT ANONYMOUS CODE COMPLAINT FROM BEING INVESTIGATED. THEY ARE USING THE ANONYMOUS CODE COMPLAINTS, EVEN IF UNSUBSTANTIATED TO THEN COERCE UNSUSPECTING LAND OWNERS INTO ACCEPTING DEALS FOR ACCEPTING MORE REGULATORY OVERSIGHT. BUT BY THEIR PERSONAL DESIGN SIDE. IF THIS IS UNSUCCESSFUL, THEY TACK ON THE EQUIVALENT OF CODE ENFORCEMENT FINES ONTO DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APLICATIONS. WITHOUT STILL ISSUING A CITATION OF RECORD. THIS PREVENTS THE LANDOWNER FROM HAVING THE OPPORTUNITY TO APPEAL TO THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD, VIOLATING IMPORTANT PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS RIGHTS GUARANTEED BY THE 14TH AMENDMENT TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION. THIS IS NOT ONE ROGUE EMPLOYEE, IT IS INTENTIONAL AND IT IS A CULTURE OF ABUSE OF AUTHORITY WITHIN THAT DIVISION. ON TOP OF ALL THIS, AND PERHAPS EVEN WORSE, THE ENVIRONMENTAL DIVISION MANAGER WAS CAUGHT IN AN OUTRIGHT LIE LAST WEEK REGARDING THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF AN UNANNOUNCED VISIT TO A CITIZEN'S VACANT PRIVATE PROPERTY. HE CLAIMED HIS VISIT WAS PART OF A ROUTINE PERMITTING CHECK. HOWEVER, DOCUMENTS OBTAINED IN A PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST PROVE THIS TO BE UNTRUE. 
          VIOLATING THE PUBLIC TRUST . WHEN CONFRONTED WITH THIS INFORMATION, HE CLAMMED UP, QUICKLY CONCLUDED THE MEETING, AND SUGGESTED THAT ANY MORE INFORMATION ON THE MATTER WOULD HAVE TO BE OBTAINED THROUGH FURTHER PUBLIC REQUEST, AND HE WOULD NOT SAY ANYTHING FURTHER. 
          IN ALL ATTEMPTS TO RESOLVE THIS MATTER, STAFF HAS BECOME UNRESPONSIVE. AND THE CODE ENFORCEMENT FINES STILL REMAIN ON THE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION, DESPITE NO CITATION BEING ISSUED. GOVERNMENT OVERREACH, DISHONESTY , LAWBREAKING AT EVERY LEVEL. I BELIEVE THAT YOU CAN AND SHOULD STOP THIS. PLEASE INVESTIGATE YOUR ENVIRONMENTAL DIVISIONS 
          [01:10:01]
RECENT ACTIONS. HOLD ALL LEVELS OF YOUR STAFF ACCOUNTABLE HERE , AND PROTECT PROPERTY OWNERS FROM THIS TYPE OF HARASSMENT. I AM AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR SHARE MORE DETAILS. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? 
          >> WELL, GOOD MORNING. CHARLIE HUNT, MILL CREEK ESTATES. BACK IN NOVEMBER OF 2023, A COMMISSIONER WAS MAKING COMMENTS ABOUT GETTING OUT AND VOTING. AND ON ABRUPTLY, THERE WAS A BACKLASH FROM THE COMMISSIONERS, THE OTHER FOUR COMMISSIONERS, OF USING POLITICAL STATEMENTS AT YOUR SEATING DURING COUNTY COMMISSION MEETINGS. OKAY? YES, THE ATTORNEY WAS QUESTIONED , OBVIOUSLY. HIS WHITE FLAG WENT UP BECAUSE HE JUST DID NOT WANT TO BE A PART OF IT. AND WITHIN TWO WEEKS OF THE NEXT COUNTY COMMISSION, THERE WAS A 4-1 VOTE TO CENSOR THE COMMISSIONER WHO WAS MAKING THOSE COMMENTS . A 4-1 VOTE. LET'S GET EVERYTHING RIGHT NOW. DON'T JUST LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENED IN THE LAST TWO WEEKS OR WHATEVER ON FACEBOOK, OKAY? IF YOU ARE SITTING THERE BELIEVING ALL THAT, YOU NEED TO COME IN HERE AND BE IN THE ACTUAL EVENTS THAT HAPPEN. OKAY? YES, THAT COMMISSIONER, WHO WAS CENSORED , AND PROBABLY SOME THIRD, TOOK IT TO COURT, AND IT WENT UP, AND THE JUDGE PRETTY MUCH LEFT AT THAT. BECAUSE IT WAS IMPOSING ON THAT COMMISSIONER'S FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO MAKE THOSE STATEMENTS DURING HER SEATING. THE OTHER FOUR JUST LEFT IT AND WALKED AWAY. NOTHING AT A PROFESSIONAL LEVEL OF THEM COMING OUT AND ADMITTING, YES, WE WAS WRONG. THAT WAS TOO EASY TO PROVE. BECAUSE IT WAS RECORDED ON GOVERNMENT VIDEO HERE FOR THE COUNTY. THOSE FOUR DID NOT LIKE THAT ONE. THOSE FOUR, WITHIN TWO WEEKS CENSORED, AND PROBABLY SOME THIRD. AT THE SAME TIME, GOT THE INTERIM COUNTY COMMISSIONER AS A BUDDY . LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU JUST LOOK AT WHAT IS ON THERE, AND THEY ARE TRYING TO PROVE IT BY THIS, THAT, AND THE OTHER, GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE RECORDS. GO BACK AND LOOK AT THESE ISSUES THAT,. IF YOU WANT TO SIT AND COME UP HERE AND COMPLAIN ABOUT HOW THEY ARE TREATING ONE COMMISSIONER, YOU ARE NOT COMPLAINING ABOUT THEM ALL. IF YOU LOOK AT SOMETHING AS UNETHICAL AS THAT WAS, PLEASE DO IT. AND MAKE YOURSELF FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE DONE YOUR -- THANK YOU. 
          >> JACKIE LEBLANC, SAINT AUGUSTINE. I BELIEVE WITH MR. HUNT, I AGREE WITH HIM ON A LOT OF THINGS. I LOOK AT THE STRINGS ON SOCIAL MEDIA, AND THERE WAS A COMMISSIONER ON THERE THAT SAID, I HAVE PROOF, I HAVE PROOF, I HAVE PROOF, AND THEN HE DUCKED OUT. WHERE IS THE PROOF? A LOT OF PEOPLE ASKED, WHERE IS IT? WHERE IS IT? IF YOU ARE GOING TO MAKE A STATEMENT LIKE THAT, HOW ABOUT BACKING IT UP? AGAIN, REVISITING THE ISSUE ABOUT COMMISSIONERS BEING ABLE TO PHONE IN, I WOULD SUGGEST , IT IS SOMETHING THAT IS IMPORTANT TO ME. COMMISSIONERS GET TO PHONE INCONSISTENTLY, I WANT TO PHONE AND WITH PUBLIC COMMENT. RULES AND POLICIES OF THE ST. 
          JOHN COUNTIES BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SECTION 4.505 CLEARLY STATES THAT COMMISSIONERS NEED TO BE PRESENT IN ORDER TO VOTE . NOW, I JUST LOOKED IT UP ON RECORDS THAT I HAVE, THERE MAY HAVE BEEN REVISIONS, I WILL LEAVE IT UP TO OUR EXPERTS TO RESEARCH THAT. 
          BUT IT CLEARLY DOESN'T STATE IN THE RULES AND POLICIES, SECTION 4.505 THAT COMMISSIONERS MUST BE 
          PRESENT TO VOTE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> GOOD MORNING, SHERRY BADGER. 
          SOUTH COLLINS AVENUE. WOW. WELL, THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTY DID MAKE A STATEMENT WHEN THEY GOT RID OF SOME COMMISSIONERS THAT DID NOT LISTEN TO THEM. AND I WOULD LIKE TO INFORM ALL OF 
          [01:15:02]
Y'ALL, Y'ALL'S EMAILS ARE SUBJECT TO BE READ BY ANYBODY, FOR THOSE WHO DO NOT KNOW THAT LAW. YOU WORK FOR THE COUNTY, YOU WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT. YOUR EMAILS CAN BE READ. 
          ANOTHER, THIS, WE AS THE PEOPLE OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY TOOK OUR VOTING VERY SERIOUS THIS TIME. 
          THIS IS WHY WE PUT YOU ALL IN HERE. IS TO CONTROL THE OVERDEVELOPMENT . I HAVE BEEN IN HERE, THERE IS NO PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION. THERE IS OVERCROWDING ON THE STREETS. SIX TEAMS OF -- IT IS A NIGHTMARE. NOW IT WILL BE ALL THE WAY FROM PUBLIX . THREE COMMISSIONERS SINGLE-HANDEDLY OVERPOPULATED THIS COUNTY AND APPROVED EVERYTHING I CAN TO THE PIPE LENGTH. IF THERE IS MORE THAN 20 HOUSES ON AN ACRE, YOU DO NOT EVEN NEED TO BE VOTING ON IT, UNTIL YOU GET THIS INFRASTRUCTURE STRAIGHTENED OUT. BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE, LIKE THE CITY, ARE GETTING SICK OF BEING INUNDATED BY WAITING AN HOUR IN TRAFFIC. AND THIS IS ALL Y'ALL'S RESPONSIBILITY. TWO OF THOSE OTHER ONES THAT WE CAN HOLD ACCOUNTABLE ARE STILL HERE FOR OVER POPULATING THIS COUNTY. SO, GET US SOME PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION. GET THIS TRAFFIC, STATE ROAD 16 IS NOT GOVERNED BY ST. JOHNS COUNTY. OKAY? THEY HAVE TO GET RED LIGHTS, THEY HAVE TO. IT IS A NIGHTMARE TO TRY TO GET ACROSS FRANCIS ROAD AND STATE ROAD 16. 
          OH, BUT THAT IS NOT -- AND AS FAR AS YOUR STAFF, I HAVE BEEN TELLING YOU FOR OVER SEVEN YEARS, BUT IT FELL ON DEAF EARS, BECAUSE OF WHO WE HAVE HAD UP HERE, THAT Y'ALL KNEW, Y'ALL REALLY NEED TO DO SOME SERIOUS INVESTIGATION ON YOUR EMPLOYEES RUBBERSTAMPING FALSE DATES, SIGNING STUFF, THIS IS LIKE THE AUTO SIGN AT THE WHITE HOUSE. BIDEN WAS NOT EVEN THERE AND HIS AUTO SIGN WAS BEING USED. Y'ALL REALLY NEED IT TO GET TOGETHER, AND YOU NEED TO REINSTATE MR. TRESSLER, BECAUSE THIS COUNTY HAS A WHOLE BIG PROBLEM. AND IF YOU GO BACK AND LOOK AT HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE BEEN DISGRUNTLED IN THE LAST YEAR AT THIS COUNTY. GOD BLESS, HAVE A GREAT DAY. 
          >> THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. >> HELLO AGAIN. DORIS TAYLOR, 208 LAVALLEY ROAD. I HAVE A PICTURE FOR YOU. SOME OF YOU HAVE SEEN THIS BRIEFLY MANY TIMES. CAN YOU ZOOM IN ON THAT, PLEASE? THIS IS HOW YOU POST THE VOTES WHEN YOU VOTE HERE. IT USED TO BE POSTED WITH THE NAMES OF THE COMMISSIONERS, NICE AND BOLD SO THAT YOU COULD READ THEM. AND A MARK, YES OR NO, HOW THEY VOTED. AND IT USED TO BE POSTED EVERY TIME, FOR AT LEAST THREE OR FOUR SECONDS SO PEOPLE HERE COULD LOOK AND SEE IT. AND IF YOU ARE WATCHING IT ON GO TV, YOU COULD STOP THE VIDEO AND CAPTURE IT. BECAUSE YOU HAD A COUPLE OF SECONDS. THIS IS GETTING POSTED NOW. YOU CAN BARELY READ THE NAMES, AND FREQUENTLY, IT IS ONLY POSTED FOR LITERALLY ONE SECOND. THE REQUEST HAS BEEN MADE TO STAFF TO FIX THIS. I AM HERE TODAY ASKING YOU, AS A BOARD, TO PLEASE GIVE CLEAR GUIDANCE TO THE STAFF THAT IT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED. THE NAMES OF THE COMMISSIONERS NEED TO BE BIG ENOUGH TO READ, AND WHETHER THEY ARE VOTING YES OR NO NEEDS TO BE BIG ENOUGH TO READ. WE DO NOT NEED A BIG GRAPHIC, WE ARE NOT STUPID. AND IT NEEDS TO BE UP THERE FOR AT LEAST FOUR OR FIVE SECONDS EVERY SINGLE TIME. WE VOTED BASED ON VOTING RECORDS, OF WHAT YOU COMMISSIONERS DID . AND WE WANT TO HAVE THE DATA TO MAKE GOOD DECISIONS NEXT TIME. 
          WE WILL HAVE IT ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, BUT YOU SHOULD BE GIVING IT TO US EVERY TIME. HE SHOULD BE PROUD OF HOW YOU VOTE INSTEAD OF HIDING IT. I DO NOT KNOW WHO IS BEHIND THIS, BUT IT IS WRONG AND IT IS INFURIATING. SO, PLEASE, I AM ASKING YOU, GIVE CLEAR DIRECTION TO THE 
          STAFF RIGHT HERE IN FRONT OF EVERYBODY TO FIX IT. THANK YOU. >> I THINK WE COULD GIVE CLEAR DIRECTION TO THE STAFF RIGHT NOW TO FIX THAT. I KNOW YOU ARE LISTENING BACK THERE IN THE BACK 
          ROOM. THANK YOU. >> YES, MA'AM. >> THANK YOU AGAIN. 415 CHELSEA MESSER COURT. THIS IS , I AM IGNORANT TO EVERYTHING GOING ON HERE. AND IGNORANCE SIMPLY MEANS 
          [01:20:12]
I DO NOT KNOW. RIGHT? SOMETIMES WE USE THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND A VERY POOR MANNER . AND I ADMIT, I AM IGNORANT TO EVERYTHING GOING ON IN THIS BODY RIGHT NOW. THANK YOU, MR. LAWYER, FOR BEING HERE. APPARENTLY YOU ARE NOT REALLY THE LAWYER, BUT I THINK YOU ARE A LAWYER, I HAVE WORKED WITH LAWYERS, LAWYERS ARE AWESOME. THANK YOU. I WAS, ACTUALLY, EVERY PERSON IN THIS COUNTY WAS INVITED TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY 101 CITIZEN ACADEMY. IS ANYONE FAMILIAR? IT IS ACTUALLY A PRETTY NEAT LITTLE -- THANK YOU, MR. MURPHY. IT IS A PRETTY NEAT LITTLE, KIND OF, IN-SERVICE, AS A DCFS, CPI PEOPLE USED TO CALL IT. WE WERE INVITED TO GO TO THESE, THIS WEEK IT IS, YOU WILL TALK ABOUT SUPPORT SERVICES. BUT THE WHOLE IDEA IS TO HAVE INDIVIDUALS THAT LIVE IN THE COUNTY TO BE INVOLVED IN THIS ENVIRONMENT. I HAVE TO SAY , THE SNARKINESS THAT HAS BEEN GOING ON, BEYOND WHERE I SPEAK , I AM SHAKING RIGHT NOW. MY HEART IS POUNDING. AND I AM HAVING A LITTLE ANXIETY. BECAUSE WHEN YOU GO UP TO SOMEONE'S HOME, AND YOU KNOCK ON THE DOOR, AND YOU SAY TO THEM, THERE HAS BEEN A CALL OVER THE HOTLINE, IT IS A CONCERN FOR THE SAFETY AND WELL-BEING OF YOUR CHILDREN. I MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE SPOKEN TO THE CHILDREN YET, BUT MORE THAN LIKELY I HAVE. ALSO, TEACHERS, NEIGHBORS, GRANDMA, GRANDPA. 
          THERE IS ZERO STONES LEFT UNTURNED. BUT I CERTAINLY DO NOT TREAT THE INDIVIDUALS I AM TRYING TO CREATE A SAFETY NET FOR. I DO NOT TREAT THEM ANY DIFFERENTLY THAN I TREAT MY OWN CAT, OR THE BIRD THAT IS COMING IN TO GET AT MY FEEDER. I DO NOT DO THAT. IT IS APPALLING THE WAY THAT PEOPLE ARE TREATED APPEAR. I AM APPALLED. THIS IS NOT RIGHT. IF YOU ARE A CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY, THEN THE ATTITUDES, BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT. AND I DO NOT KNOW IF I WANT TO GO BACK TO THIS . YES, I WOULD LOVE TO GET INVOLVED, BUT IF I HAVE TO BE INVOLVED IN THIS, MY BRAIN DOES 
          NOT WORK THIS WAY. >> THANK YOU, MA'AM. >> IT DOES NOT, AND THANK YOU. 
          NEITHER SHOULD YOURS. >> ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? THANK YOU, GOOD 
          MORNING. >> PJ PALLET HE , SAINT AUGUSTINE. THE GOLF TOURNAMENT IS LOCATED IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. HOWEVER, THE MEDIA NEVER STATES THIS FACT. QUESTION, WHAT FINANCIAL BENEFIT TO TAXPAYERS IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY RECEIVE? THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY -- WEBSITE WHICH INFORMS AND PROTECTS THE PUBLIC, IS STILL NOT FUNCTIONING. AT THE END OF MARCH, 2025, WHICH RAN RIGHT NOW, IT WILL BE FOUR MONTHS WITHOUT A NEW ONLINE INMATE SEARCH FUNCTION. THIS IS A DISSERVICE TO THE TAXPAYERS. HISTORY IS INTERESTING. IT CONTINUES TO AMAZE ME THAT THE OWNER / DEVELOPER OF THE HOTEL AT 32 AVENUE MENENDEZ, WHICH IS THE LOCATION OF THE MONSON HOTEL DURING THE CIVIL RIGHTS EVENTS AT THE POOL, STILL HAS HIDDEN THE PLAQUE EXPLAINING THE EVENT BEHIND THE WALL, INSTEAD OF PLACING IT ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE WALL SO THOSE ON THE SIDEWALK CAN SEE WHAT HAPPENED. THANK YOU FOR MAKING PUBLIC COMMENT. NO, NO. THANK YOU FOR MOVING PUBLIC COMMENT. THAT WAS JUST A TEST. I ALMOST FAILED THAT ONE. AND LISTEN TO 90.5 FM. WE NEED TO CHANGE OUR LIVES AND LIVE AS CHRISTIANS. I AM NOT JUDGING ANYBODY, BUT WE ALL ONE DAY WILL ENTER WITH JESUS CHRIST. YOU KNOW THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TODAY IS TRANSPARENCY BY ALL MEMBERS OF THIS COUNTY AND STAFF. AND WE CAN SEE IF BOARD 
          [01:25:01]
MEMBERS ARE HERE, THE BODY LANGUAGE, EVEN THOUGH YOU DON'T SAY ANYTHING TO US, WE KNOW EXACTLY HOW YOU FEEL. AND I CAN ALMOST GUARANTEE THAT -- SOME MONEY BECAUSE IT IS MONEY VERSUS QUALITY OF LIFE, HOW ALL THESE DIFFERENT PEOPLE THAT WOULD BE APPEAR IN THEIR DEVELOPMENT IN AND OUT, OR DISCUSSING DIFFERENT THINGS ON THE AGENDA, I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO TELL YOU HOW TO VOTE BECAUSE I KNOW HOW YOU ARE GOING TO VOTE. I'M NOT TELLING YOU HOW TO VOTE. BUT TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW THAT THEY MAY NOT HAVE BEEN HERE AND VISITED THIS SANCTUARY THAT MUCH, AND ARE SURPRISED AT WHAT HAPPENED TODAY, I AM NOT. I VISITED A LOT, AND I WILL CONTINUE TO VISIT. AND SOMETIMES SOMETHING WILL BE DONE, BUT I HATE TO TELL YOU FOLKS, MOST OF THE TIME, IF YOU ARE NOT IN THE 3-2 VOTE, YOUR THINGS ARE NOT GETTING DONE COULD YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BE AN ACADEMY, YOU CAN SHOW UP. AND IT IS DISCOURAGING, BUT YOU HAVE TO KEEP ON KEEPING ON, JUST LIKE OUR COMMISSIONERS HAVE TO KEEP ON KEEPING ON, AND WE WILL GET THE VOTE AGAIN. WE WILL GET THE VOTE AGAIN, REMEMBER THAT. BUT THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS TRANSPARENCY. DO NOT GIVE UP, 
          FOLKS. WE PAY THEM. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? 
          >> AND GO INTO ONE OF OUR FIVE ZILLION VAPE SHOPS. OKAY? IT IS OUT OF CONTROL, IT IS A DISGRACE, I AM DISGUSTED WITH IT. I HOPE YOU ARE TOO. NOW, THESE PARTICULAR BATCH OF VAPES, THESE ARE WEED PENS. AND I WAS VERY FORTUNATE THAT SOMEBODY I KNOW HAS GOT ONE OF THOSE VAPE MEDICAL MARIJUANA PRESCRIPTIONS. AND THIS IS A WEED COLLECTIONS OF PENS THAT THIS INDIVIDUAL HAS. NOW, MY QUESTION IS, WHAT DO THEY DO WHEN THEY ARE DONE WITH THAT? IT HAS A BATTERY IN IT. IN THE TRASH? OKAY, I CANNOT TAKE MY CAR BATTERY OUT AND THROW IT IN THE TRASH. IF YOU DO NOT DO THE CAR BATTERY EXCHANGE TO THE STORE, YOU PAY MORE. I THINK THAT WE NEED AN ORDINANCE, AND WE NEED A $10 HAZMAT FEE FOR EVERY PEN, AND THE NICOTINE ONE IS SO OUT OF CONTROL, THAT VAPE THING. REMEMBER, IT IS NOT ANYTHING AGAINST THE CHINESE, BECAUSE I LOVE A GOOD CHINESE BUFFET. BUT THEY ARE THE ONES THAT ARE BRINGING ALL THE CIGARETTE VAPES OUT. HE NEEDS TO GO IN, WHAT HAVE WE GOT? 2000 OR 3000 A DAY GOING INTO THE TRASH HERE IN THE COUNTY? WE ARE SO OVERLOADED WITH VAPE SHOPS AND MARIJUANA SHOPS, I AM DECIDING MYSELF ON THAT ISSUE TWO, RIDE-SHARE'S , YOU KNOW, RIDE-SHARE SURGES, THAT IS NOT SUPPLY AND DEMAND, THAT IS CHEATING PEOPLE. I DO NOT WANT TO CHEAT RESIDENTS, TOURISTS, I DO NOT WANT TO CHEAT ANYBODY. I THINK WE NEED AN ORDINANCE ON THAT. THERE IS SOME KIND OF CRAZY STORY AROUND SOMEONE NAMED DAVID AND GOLIATH. WELL, ELIAS IS TALLAHASSEE, YOU ARE DAVID. I THINK YOU HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO STOP THE RIDE-SHARE SURGES. BECAUSE WE DO NOT WANT PEOPLE TO GET CHEATED. ALSO, TOO, THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE IS RUINING THE BRAND, THOSE SILLY, STUPID STAPLES THEY HAVE MADE ON TV, I AM MIND BLOWN BY IT. THAT IS THE ENGINE ROOM. YOU KNOW, COMING FROM THESE FOLKS, I AM REALLY DISAPPOINTED. THEY ARE NOT GETTING IT. I WANT TO THANK THE CHAIR FOR HER PARTICIPATION AND NOT WANTING TO THROW MONEY AT SOME PROBLEM THEY CREATE. FULL, SOMETIMES YOU REALLY DO HAVE TO SPEAK UP. AND YOU CAN SPEAK UP IN YOUR INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY, AND I BELIEVE IT TODAY WITH THE TOWARDS THE VILLAGE COUNCIL AND THE ECB IS WAY UNDER REPRESENTED FOR SINGLE STANDALONE 
          RESTAURANTS. YOU NEED MORE REPRESENTATION. >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE FOR 
          [1. Board Discussion of Land Development Code Article IV (Tree Ordinance). Presentation to seek Board guidance on possible updates to the Land Development Code with regards to Article IV protections for Trees and land clearing.]
          PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE, WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT. >> ALL RIGHT, GREAT. WE ARE BACK TO THE BOARD. FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS A RIGHT, THANK YOU FOR COMING UP AND TELLING US WHAT YOU ARE THINKING. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE. I THINK MR. GOT SEE OR MIKE ROBERSON. 
          >> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I AM THE DIRECTOR OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT. THIS ITEM WAS, WE WERE GIVEN DIRECTIONS TO COME BACK FROM THIS THAT INITIALLY STARTED WITH MANAGER AND THE 
          [01:30:07]
STAFF IN 2023. IT HAD ABOUT 14 ITEMS THAT WE SET DOWN AND PROVIDED SOME EXPERTISE ON THAT. 
          IT CAME BEFORE THE BOARD, THERE WAS DIRECTION GIVEN TO TAKE IT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, FROM THE CONFERENCE OF PLAN, AND RECENTLY IN DECEMBER, WE WERE GIVEN MORE DIRECTION TO COME BACK WITH THIS. WHAT WE ARE LOOKING FOR HERE IS DIRECTION, EITHER ON ALL, SOME, NONE, OR EVEN NEW ONES. THIS IS NOT NECESSARILY TO GO OVER IT IN DEPTH, BUT THESE ARE THE PROPOSALS WITH THE STAFF'S HELP TO GO OVER EACH OF THEM AND THEN GET DIRECTION AT THE END OF THIS MEETING OF WHAT YOU ALL WOULD LIKE TO DO. AND THEN FROM THERE, WHETHER OR NOT THERE ARE SOME CHANGES. WITH THAT, MICHAEL, LIKE I SAID, HE IS OUR TOLD MANAGER. HE WILL GO THROUGH EACH 
          OF THESE ITEMS. THANK YOU. >> MICHAEL, MANAGEMENT DIVISION. LET ME GET THIS RIGHT. IT WAS REALLY INTERESTING TO HEAR THIS CONVERSATION BEFORE I GOT HERE, AND I'LL I CAN BRING IT FORWARD AND GET YOUR DIRECTION. IT IS AN HONOR, THANK YOU. THESE ARE A FEW OF THE DATE THAT YOU GUYS HAVE AS A BOARD. WE HAVE DISCUSSED THESE IDEAS FOR THE TREES, INCLUDING IN 2023 -- MR. ROBERSON MENTIONED, GIVEN GUIDANCE TO GO BACK. WE HAD MEETINGS TWICE IN DECEMBER TO BUILD THIS PRESENTATION TO SOME EXTENT. I AM LOOKING AT IT IN TWO PARTS. THE REVIEW AND DISCUSSION, WE WILL GO .5 POINT IN EACH OF THESE DISCUSSION ITEMS . AND THEN AT THE END, I WILL ASK YOU FOR YOUR GUIDANCE. HOWEVER, IF YOU GUYS WANT TO TAKE IT FROM THERE, WE WILL GET RIGHT INTO IT. ONE WAY TO VIEW THESE SLIDES, DISCUSSION ITEM ONE, KIND OF WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY STATED WAY BACK IN 2023. IN BLUE, SO THAT WOULD BE A SUGGESTION FOR A CHANGE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP A COUPLE WEEKS BACK. AND THEN THE BLUE IS KIND OF MY SUMMATION OF, MY DISCUSSIONS WITH CHAIR JOSEPH ABOUT IDEAS UP TO THIS POINT THAT SHE HAD. SO, PROPOSAL TO PREVENT REMOVAL OF ALL TREES A MUSLIM ONE ACRE. THIS ONE AND NUMBER TWO, I WILL JUMP TO IT, PROVIDE -- AND/OR OUR COASTAL HABITAT LOT. THESE WERE BROUGHT UP IN DISCUSSION WITH CHAIR JOSEPH. IT LOOKED AS IF THE IDEAS THAT YOU WOULD DO, AS FAR AS MAY BE INCREASING THE NUMBER OF TREE INCHES THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED ON SINGLE LOT, IT MAY BE PROHIBITIVE. AND SO HER GUIDANCE WAS TO CONSIDER ILLUMINATION OF THESE CHANGES. FOR DISCUSSION ITEM ONE AND DISCUSSION ITEM TWO. 
          >> OKAY. SO I THINK HE WILL DISCUSS EACH ONE. I WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE IT AS IS AND NOT MAKE ANY CHANGES INTO THE CURRENT TREE ORDINANCE. ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? SARAH? 
          COMMISSIONER ARNOLD? >> THAT AT THIS TIME. >> OKAY. COMMISSIONER MURPHY? 
          >> I AGREE WITH THE DISCUSSION ITEMS FOR NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER TWO. IT MAY BE TOO STRINGENT IT 
          FOR SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. I AGREE WITH THAT. >> DO WE HAVE CONSENSUS ON THAT? 
          CONSENSUS? CONSENSUS, CHAIR, COMMISSIONER ARNOLD. >> AGAIN, I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE WHOLE PUBLIC -- PROJECT BEFORE WE VOTE ON IT. 
          >> WE ARE DOING ONE AT A TIME. WE WILL DO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE END. WE ARE JUST TRYING TO FIND CONSENSUS. CONSENSUS FROM EVERYONE ELSE UP HERE. YOU HAVE CONSENSUS? 
          >> YES, THAT IS FINE. >> PARDON? >> YES, MA'AM. THAT IS FINE. 
          >> ALL RIGHT. LET'S MOVE ON. >> THE COMMENT WAS TO PROTECT IRREPRESSIBLE TREES. A LOT OF THE DISCUSSION NEEDS TO BE AROUND THE IDEA OF SPECIMEN TREES. IN OUR DISCUSSIONS MOST RECENTLY AND PREVIOUSLY, THERE WAS -- WHAT IT MIGHT BE. FOR INSTANCE, IF I GO OUT NOW AND LOOK AT A TREE AS A SPECIMEN, I WOULD TAKE SIX MEASUREMENTS. I WOULD CREATE AN AVERAGE ALKYLATION OF THOSE MEASUREMENTS AND COMPARE IT TO THE CHAMPION TREE IN FORT APPEAR TO TAKE A 
          [01:35:03]
LITTLE BIT OF TIME. WHEN THAT IS DONE BY AN APPLICANT, FOR INSTANCE, THERE IS SOME UNCERTAINTY. THERE IS SOME UNCERTAINTY BASED ON WHAT WE SEE. SO, THERE IS THE KIND OF SUGGESTION, THE GRADIENTS OF GREATER THAN 50 INCH FOR A SPECIMEN TREE, IT COULD BE 55, IT COULD BE 45. GREATER THAN AN 18 INCH LIVE OAK, GREATER THAN AN 18 INCH RED CEDAR. AROUND 4 1/2 FEET WITH THE DIAMETER OF THAT TREE WILL DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS A SPECIMEN BASED ON THOSE RECOMMENDED MEASUREMENTS. AND THEN ALL OTHER PROTECTED TREES WILL BE GREATER THAN 30 INCHES. SO THAT MIGHT BE SOME OTHER TYPE OF HARDWOOD THAT IS ALREADY CONSIDERED A PROTECTED TREE WITH A 30 INCH DIAMETER WOULD ALSO BE CONSIDERED A SPECIMEN TREE. 
          >> COMMENTS ON THAT? COMMISSIONER MURPHY? >> ARE WE ADDING COSTS TO AN INDIVIDUAL WHEN WE ARE LOOKING AT THIS? HELP ME OUT. IF YOU WOULD GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE OF HOW THE SPECIMEN TREES WOULD BE TREATED. LET'S SAY I BUY AN ACRE AND I WANT TO BUILD A HOUSE. UNDER THIS DISCUSSION ITEM THREE, HOW DOES THIS AFFECT ME? 
          >> I CAN SAY CURRENTLY, SPECIMEN TREES ARE PROTECTED. YOU HAVE TO PRETTY MUCH PROTECT EVERYTHING FROM THE -- CANOPY, SO THAT IS PROTECTING THE ROOT ZONE AS WELL. THERE ARE THINGS YOU CAN GET A CERTIFIED ARBORIST TO IMPACT, IF THEY MEET TREE CARE STANDARDS AND THAT SORT OF THING, TO SOME EXTENT, HOW THIS MAY CHANGE. I WOULD THINK, IF YOU YOURSELF AS A ONE ACRE, AS PRESENTED, IT WOULD GIVE YOU CERTAINTY TO SAY OH, THIS 52 INCH LIVE OAK TREE IS CERTAINLY A SPECIMEN TREE, IT WOULD PREVENT YOU FROM HAVING TO HIRE AN ARBORIST, FOR INSTANCE. BUT IF YOU HAVE OTHER TREES THAT ARE GREATER THAN 30 INCHES, THIS MAY CHANGE AND CREATE MORE PROTECTED 
          TREES ON THAT LOT. >> OKAY, YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THE ROOT ZONE WOULD BE THE WIDTH 
          OF THE CANOPY. >> THINK AS ABOVE, SO BELOW. THE CANOPY IN THE ROOT ZONE. 
          >> OKAY. >> OKAY, FOR ME, JUST THINKING THIS FORWARD PRACTICALLY, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN TO ME? IF I WANT TO DO SOMETHING IN MY OWN YARD , AND I HAVE, FOR INSTANCE, LET'S SAY I WANT TO BUILD A HOUSE. AND I AM REQUIRED BY RULE TO ELEVATE MY HOUSE A CERTAIN HEIGHT, AND THEN CAPTURE WHATEVER, MAKE SURE THAT MY DRAINAGE IS NOT GOING SOMEWHERE ELSE, WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THE ROOT ZONE, DOES THAT MEAN THAT I HAVE TO MOVE MY HOUSE OUT OF THE ROOT ZONE IN 
          ORDER TO BE ABLE TO QUIT A HOUSE ON THE LOT? >> CASE-BY-CASE, BUT PROBABLY NOT. THERE ARE WAYS THAT YOU CAN IMPACT SPECIMEN TREES, LIKE A PROTECTION ZONE. IF YOU GET AN ARBORIST WHO UNDERSTANDS HOW TO PROTECT A TREE, THEY CAN RECOMMEND AND PROVIDE MEDIATION MEASURES FOR THAT. CASE-BY-CASE THOUGH , I MIGHT SUGGEST THAT IF THERE ARE FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE AND THE BOARD DECIDED THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO HEAR ABOUT IT , I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE SOME SCENARIOS AND BRING THEM BACK TO AT A LATER DATE. I DO NOT KNOW THAT WE COULD ANSWER ALL OF THEM, BUT I'M GLAD TO CONTINUE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. I JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT IN 
          THERE. >> HOW DOES THAT AFFECT -- SORRY, ARE YOU FINISHED? I WAS 
          JUST WONDERING HOW IT AFFECTED CLEARING. >> YES, THAT WAS MY NEXT QUESTION. THAT IS A FAIR QUESTION. IF YOU DO NOT MIND, ALLOW ME. LET'S SAY I HAVE FIVE ACRES AND I WANT TO PUT FIVE HOMES ON MY FIVE ACRES. AND I AM REQUIRED TO DO CERTAIN ELEVATIONS BECAUSE OF THE WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT. WOULD I HAVE TO THEN PLOT MY HOMES OR 
          WHATEVER AROUND SPECIALTY TREES? >> THAT IS CORRECT. 
          >> AND IF I HAVE TO RAISE THE LEVEL OF, HOW DO I PROTECT, DO I HAVE TO PROTECT THE WILL CANOPY? 
          OR CAN I JUST PROTECT THE TREE? >> THERE IS MITIGATION POSSIBLE. 
          >> I THINK THERE IS GOING TO BE A DISCUSSION LATER ON ABOUT CLEAR COATING AND WHAT IT MEANS 
          [01:40:02]
FOR A DEVELOPER WHO IS BUILDING HOUSES. ARE THEY GOING TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO PROTECT THESE SPECIMEN TREES AND STILL BUILD A DEVELOPMENT? LOOK, I GOT HAMMERED BY DEVELOPERS IN THE ELECTION, I'M NOT IN BED WITH DEVELOPERS. ONE THING I DO NOT WANT TO DO IS, YOU KNOW, THE COST OF A HOME IS ALREADY EXORBITANT IN THIS COUNTY. I DO NOT WANT TO UNNECESSARILY ADD TO IT. SO, MY QUESTIONS ARE, YOU KNOW, HOW DO WE, THE QUESTION IS ALWAYS, ESPECIALLY ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL, HOW DO WE REDUCE THE COST OF HOUSING IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY? AND ARE WE DOING SOMETHING THAT WILL ADD TO THAT? I AM NOT SAYING ANYTHING OTHER THAN IT, I'M JUST ASKING THE QUESTION. I'M JUST TRYING TO GET THE INFORMATION RIGHT NOW. SO DO NOT TAKE ANYTHING BY MY 
          QUESTION. >> IF I MAY , MADAM CHAIR, TO MR. MURPHY'S COMMENT, POINT WELL TAKEN. JUST TO BE CLEAR, THIS IS JUST A STANDARD, A CHANGING OF A STANDARD MEASUREMENT OF SPECIMEN TREES. WE HAVE A STANDARD OF RESTRICTIONS ON SPECIMEN TREES. 
          SO THAT EXISTS AS IT IS. THIS IS JUST A MEASURE FOR THEM IN A DIFFERENT MANNER. AT THE END OF THE DAY, TO GO TO THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, I THINK WE HAVE HAD ONE SO FAR. I THINK THE -- 
          BACK IN 2010 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >> THE BIG PERMITTING PROCESS -- 
          >> THERE IS A PROCESS TO GO THROUGH, BUT IT IS VERY RARE THAT ANYONE WILL TOUCHDOWN ON THE SPECIMEN TREE BECAUSE IT IS CUMBERSOME AND EXPENSIVE. SO, JUST TO BE CLEAR, I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD WHAT 
          >> COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST? >> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THESE MEASUREMENTS COMMIT THE 50 INCH LIVE OAK, 50 INCH RED CEDAR. WERE THESE SIZES SUGGESTIONS BY YOU? WERE THESE MEASUREMENTS A SUGGESTION BY COMMISSIONER JOSEPH, BY STAFF, OR SOME COMBINATION? 
          >> I BELIEVE A COMBINATION. THEY EXISTED EVEN BEFORE MY TENURE HERE BY THE PREVIOUS PRESENTATION. IN DISCUSSION, JUST FOR EXAMPLE, A LIVE OAK, A 50 INCH LIVE OAK IS -- THE LIVE OAK IS MEASURED AND WE GET A PLAN SET, IT SAYS IT IS 45 TO 50, WE MAY SAY, HEY, LET'S LOOK TO SEE IF IT IS A SPECIMEN, THAT IS WHERE THE CUTOFF TENDS TO BE. ALTHOUGH YOU CAN GO ONE WAY A LITTLE HIGHER OR LOWER. THIS WAS JUST, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, A RECOMMENDATION TO PROVIDE YOU, AS AN APPLICANT AND -- WE DO NOT HAVE TO CHECK THAT IT IS 52, WE KNOW IT IS. AND THEY CAN SAY, OH, WE DON'T EVEN HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, IT WILL NOT PUT EXTRA EXPENSE OR TIME ON THE PROCESS 
          OF GETTING THE APPLICATION, FOR INSTANCE. >> THE METHODOLOGY BY WHICH THE TREE IS SPECIFIED, ARE THERE TREES ALREADY PROTECTED UNDER A TREE ORDINANCE? THIS WOULD JUST 
          MAKE IT SIMPLER? >> A LITTLE SIMPLER. >> OKAY. 
          >> I AM NOT AN ARBORIST, I DO NOT PLAY ONE ON TV. I DO NOT PRETEND TO SPEAK THE LANGUAGE OF THE ARBORISTS. COMMISSIONER JOSEPH, WHEN YOU'RE COMING UP WITH THESE MEASUREMENTS, DID YOU 
          CONSULT -- >> I SLEPT AT THE HOLIDAY INN. >> 
          ENTERTAINED, YOU WILL HAVE TO FORGIVE ME. >> I ACTUALLY MET WITH MANY, MANY PEOPLE. I MET WITH FD HORTON, BOB PORTER, THE STAFF , MIKE KNOWS THIS WHOLE THING. 
          ANYWAYS, THIS REALLY IS NOT CHANGING THAT MUCH. IT IS JUST THE WAY YOU MEASURE IT, SO IT MAKES IT EASIER. I AM TRYING TO FIND THE MIDDLE GROUND BETWEEN EVERYBODY. SO THAT IS KIND OF 
          WHAT THIS IS. >> OKAY. I THINK ON SOME OF THESE POINTS MOVING FORWARD, IT 
          WOULD HELP TO KNOW WHO THE AUTHOR IS. >> BOB PORTER AND JANET LOCKARD? 
          >> AT THE TIME, WE MET WITH SOMEONE ELSE. WAS THAT BEV FRAZIER? YES. AND THEN SOMEONE 
          ELSE, KAREN? >> I THINK IN ORDER, JUST FOR THE BENEFIT OF MY COLLEAGUES HERE ON THE BOARD, I THINK FOR ME TOO, YOU KNOW, IT SOUNDS PRETTY INNOCUOUS AMENDMENT TO A TREE ORDINANCE, I WOULD WANT TO CONSULT SOME ARBORISTS AND SOME FOLKS WHO ARE IN DEVELOPMENTS, LAND OWNERS THAT THIS COULD EFFECT, BUT THIS SEEMS PRETTY INNOCUOUS. BUT FOR ME TO MOVE FORWARD WITH VOTER SUPPORT, I THINK I WOULD HAVE TO HAVE SOME CONVERSATIONS WITH SOME INDUSTRY 
          EXPERTS. >> COMMISSIONER ARNOLD, I CANNOT TELL WHETHER YOU WANT TO TALK OR 
          NOT. >> NO, I WILL WAIT UNTIL THE PRESENTATION IS OVER AND WE HAVE 
          PUBLIC COMMENT. THANK YOU. >> I WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER A VOTE ON THAT GOING FORWARD. SO 
          [01:45:03]
DO I DO THAT NOW OR AFTER? I GUESS I DO IT AFTER. OKAY, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. NUMBER FOUR? 
          >> SO THIS PROPOSAL WAS GREATER CONSERVATION OF TREES FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS. THE DISCUSSION LED TO THE SUGGESTION TO INCREASE TO 20% THE REQUIRED CONSERVATION OF NATURAL VEGETATION WITHIN A PUD. THAT WOULD BE NOT INCLUSIVE OF SIGNIFICANT COMMUNITIES HABITATS, WHICH IS PROTECTED UNDER SEPARATE SECTIONS OF CODE. AND THERE ARE OTHER CONSERVATION AREAS. SO, JUST FOR A BACKGROUND, CURRENTLY, THE REQUIREMENT IS 5% CONSERVATION OF NATURAL VEGETATION FOR A PUD . SO THERE IS AN INCREASE ON THAT. 
          >> WHAT WOULD BE, I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY, THAT MIGHT BE TOO HIGH. WHAT WOULD BE A GOOD 
          NUMBER FOR THAT? >> I WOULD NOT WANT TO NECESSARILY PROPOSE A NUMBER. 
          LOOKING AT OCTOBER, THERE WERE PROPOSALS FOR A MIDDLE GROUND, SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE. 
          >> COMMISSIONER MURPHY? >> YES. SO, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT 20% OF THE UPLAND NATURAL VEGETATION. FOR INSTANCE, IF I AM BUYING A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT IS HAVE WETLANDS AND HAVE UPLAND, I WOULD THEN HAVE TO PRESERVE AN ADDITIONAL 20% OF THE UPLAND'S. NOW LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION. I KNOW WE'VE GOT A COUPLE OF THESE DISCUSSION ITEMS GOING FORWARD THAT WOULD ALSO ADD OR TALK ABOUT ADDITIONAL OFFERS. WOULD THAT THEN BE ADDED TO THE ADDITIONAL 
          BUFFERS? >> AND THIS IS STATED, THIS IS 20% AND THEN THE BUFFERS WOULD 
          BE SEPARATE? >> WE ARE HERE TO DISCUSS. WE CAN MAKE IT A TWO-PRONGED THING 
          IF YOU WANT. >> LET ME JUST TELL YOU MY CHALLENGE ON THIS AS A CONSERVATIVE, SOMEONE WHO REALLY BELIEVES IN PROPERTY RIGHTS, TO CHALLENGE THAT , JUST LIKE PROPERTY TAXES, I MEAN, WE DO NOT REALLY ON OUR PROPERTY ANYMORE, WE ACTUALLY ARE JUST LEASING IT FROM THE COUNTY FOR OUR PROPERTY TAXES. I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR THAT, BUT THIS SEEMS LIKE WHAT WE ARE DOING NOW, WE ARE NOW TAKING LAND FROM PEOPLE WHO OWN LAND, BECAUSE WE WANT TO TRY TO , IT SEEMS LIKE A LAND GRAB TO ME. MAYBE I JUST DO NOT UNDERSTAND IT. SO THAT IS, IF WE CAN, IF YOU CAN HELP ME WITH THAT, MAYBE, MIKE, YOU CAN HELP ME. 
          >> THIS IS DEFINITELY THE CLEARCUTTING. THIS IS HOW MUCH YOU CAN CLEAR. SO, YOU CAN CLEAR 95% OF THE LOT. SO, IF YOU MADE THAT MAYBE 10%, JUST TO ADD A LITTLE MORE TO KEEP THE 
          CLEARCUTTING. >> I WOULD FEEL BETTER WITH THAT, JUST FOR THE SIMPLE FACT THAT IF YOU LOOK FURTHER DOWN WITH SOME OF THE GOALS, LIKE ALL NINE OR 10, WE ARE JUST ALLOWING RAISING THE GREAT 50 FEET OF THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY TO PRESERVE. SO IN ADDITION TO THE 90% OR THE 10% THAT WE ARE TRYING TO, OR WOULD IT BE THE SAME? COULD YOU USE THE 50% FOR THE NEXT ONE, AS 
          YOUR 10% BUFFER? I AM GETTING A LITTLE, THERE IS JUST -- >> THERE ARE A LOT OF MOVING 
          PARTS, FOR SURE. >> YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO HELP ME WITH THIS ONE. 
          >> FIRST OFF, I WANT TO CORRECT SOMETHING. I WAS JUST CORRECTED. THE -- MENTIONED ON THE SLIDE, FOR EXAMPLE, A BUFFER CAN COUNT AS BOTH. 
          WILL CALL IT PRESERVED AREA. REGARDING THE FURTHER SLATS WITH THE REMOVAL OF, YOU KNOW, WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS A BUFFER OR NOT , I KIND OF, JUST FOR MY OWN PERSPECTIVE, I SEE THAT AS PART OF THIS LARGER CONVERSATION, I'M GLAD TO TAKE GUIDANCE ON HOW EVER YOU SEE IT. 
          THERE ARE SOME OVERLAPS, HOW THIS IS STATED IN THE BLUE AREA, INCREASED TO 20%, BUT NOT INCLUSIVE OF THESE OTHERS, IT JUST TELLS ME THAT IT IS, IT IS JUST POINTING OUT, MORE PRESERVATION. WHETHER THAT 20% IS THE NUMBER YOU GUYS DECIDE, IF ANY, THAT IS WHAT I AM 
          LOOKING FOR. >> WHAT DO THE OTHER COUNTIES HAVE? EVEN THE CITY OF SAINT 
          AUGUSTINE, DO FALL, DO THEY -- >> I DO NOT KNOW THE PACIFIC'S -- SPECIFICS. 
          >> COMMISSIONER TAYLOR? >> I DID HAVE A COMMENT. I KNOW WHEN I WAS RUNNING FOR OFFICE, I 
          [01:50:01]
QUALIFIED BY CANDIDATE PETITIONS AND I MET A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THAT PROCESS. I DID NOT JUST PAY A LOT OF MONEY TO GET ON THE BALLOT. AND IN DOING SO, I GATHERED WELL OVER 2000 OF THESE PETITIONS TO GET ON THE BALLOT. AND I MET SO MANY PEOPLE IN OUR COUNTY, AND I HEARD AND LISTENED. AND BY FAR, ONE OF THE TOP THINGS THAT I HEARD FROM OUR RESIDENTS OF THIS COUNTY IS THAT THEY ARE SO TIRED OF THE CLEARCUTTING. I CANNOT STRESS THAT ENOUGH. SO, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS SO IMPORTANT TO OUR RESIDENTS. I KNOW WHEN THE COUNTY DID THE SURVEY TIED TO THE COMPANY AND THE PLAN, IT WAS ONE OF THE VERY TOP THINGS. IT WAS OUR TRAFFIC AND PRESERVATION AND CONSERVATION OF OUR TREES. AS I SIT APPEAR, I AM NOT HERE FOR ME. I AM REPRESENTING A NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTY, AND IT IS NOTHING SHORT OF A MIRACLE THAT I AM EVEN SITTING APPEAR UNABLE TO REPRESENT THEM. AND SO THAT IS WHAT I WANT TO ADD. WE CANNOT CONTINUE ON THE PATH OF CLEARCUTTING LIKE WE HAVE BEEN DOING. THAT IS NOT WHAT OUR RESIDENTS WANT. I NOT THINK IT IS NOT WHAT OTHERS WANT, BUT LIKE I SAID, WE ARE LISTENING TO 
          SO MANY RESIDENTS, THAT IS NOT WHAT THEY WANT. >> COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST? 
          >> CAN YOU CONFIRM FOR ME THAT NICOLE CROSBY WAS ONE OF THE PEOPLE WHO AUTHORED THE 
          SUGGESTION? >> NO, I CANNOT. OKAY. I HAVE AN EMAIL WHICH CAME TO YOUR COUNTY EMAIL FROM NICOLE CROSBY. THIS IS ONE OF THE SUGGESTIONS FROM 2023 WHERE SHE HAS LISTED 16 POINTS. I MEAN, DOES THAT REFRESH YOUR MEMORY? THIS IS FROM NICOLE CROSBY TO YOU. 
          >> NO. IT IS ON RECORD, ACTUALLY, I WAS DEPOSED OF THIS ENTRY ACTUALLY TYPED IT UP TO I GAVE HER A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT THINGS. HONESTLY, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT WE ARE 
          TALKING ABOUT. >> IT DOES. WE ARE BEING ASKED TO CONSIDER SUGGESTIONS BY SOME 
          WHO IS NOT A PUBLIC EXPERT. >> ACTUALLY, NO. MR. ROBERSON, CAN YOU CONFIRM WHO WE WORKED 
          WITH AGAIN ON THESE -- >> THIS SPECIFIC SUGGESTION? >> ALL OF IT. ALL OF IT. I DO NOT KNOW THESE KIND OF DETAILS. MIKE, THE STAFF, KAREN, I MEAN, KAREN IS A GENIUS, SHE IS NOT HERE TODAY, RIGHT? OH, THERE SHE IS. I LOVE HER. SO, MIKE, COULD YOU REITERATE TO COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST THAT THE ROAD HE IS GOING DOWN IS A WASTE OF TIME FOR THIS COMMUNITY? 
          >> MADAM CHAIR, WHAT I WILL SAY IS THAT THIS IS JUST A STAFF MEMBER TALKING TO THE CHAIR. 
          STAFF MET WITH YOU, MADAM CHAIR, TO GO OVER SOME POINTS AND GIVE TECHNICAL EXPERTISE. 
          >> YES PURCHASE FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE RECORD AND THE INTEREST OF TRANSPARENCY, I WANT TO READ PART OF THIS EMAIL. IT SAYS, I HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO DISCUSS THIS WITH MY TEAM SINCE I THAT WE HAD ANOTHER WEEK. THESE EMPHASIZE THIS AS A STARTING PLACE. MORE ANALYSIS IS NEEDED. 
          THIS IS A BIG TASK, WE DO NOT WANT TO RULE ANYTHING OUT EARLY. WE COULD IS A SMALLER LOOPHOLE THAT WILL WOULD ALLOW DEVELOPERS TO GET TO THE COMMISSION. WE DO NOT NEED TO RUSH. THAT IS FROM 
          NICOLE CROSBY TO KRISTA JOSEPH. >> BUT SHE DOES NOT WRITE IT. 
          SHE JUST GIVES ME -- >> EXCUSE ME. WHY DO YOU KEEP CUTTING ME OFF? EXCUSE ME. THEN SHE GOES ON TO LIST 16 POINTS. NUMBER THREE ON THAT LIST IS 20% OF TREE CANOPIES CAN BE PRESERVED REGARDLESS OF SPECIES, AND THIS WOULD NOT INCLUDE BUFFER AREAS. JUST TO REFRESH EVERYBODY'S MEMORY, THAT IS FROM NICOLE CROSBY. MAYBE NICOLE CROSBY WAS IN TOUCH WITH OTHER PEOPLE WHO ARE INDUSTRY EXPERTS. BUT THIS IS ONE OF THE MORE ALARMING SUGGESTIONS TO EVEN DISCUSS. 20% OF UPLAND, I MEAN, THAT IS A LAND TAKING. THAT IS GOVERNMENT TELLING PEOPLE WHAT THEY CAN DO WITH THEIR LAND . I AM VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO IT. THIS WOULD INCREASE THE COST OF HOUSING. I DO NOT THINK ANYONE ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL SAID, PLEASE MAKE THE COST OF HOUSING GO UP IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. NOBODY SAID, PLEASE, WE NEED MORE GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION ON MY PRIVATE PROPERTY. NOBODY SAID THAT TO ANY COMMISSIONER THAT RUN -- THAT RAN FOR THIS OFFICE. 
          THIS IS A BAD POLICY SUGGESTION, THIS IS BIG GOVERNMENT. I WILL BE OPPOSED TO THIS. BUT I DO NOT THINK THAT WE SHOULD HAVE SOMEBODY WHOSE BACKGROUND IS IN MARKETING MAKING POLICY 
          SUGGESTIONS TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. >> I DON'T KNOW. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. BECAUSE I JUST SAID, HOW ABOUT IF WE DO 10%? OF COURSE, YOU HAVE ALWAYS BEEN FAVORABLE OF CLEARCUTTING, THAT IS EXACTLY WHY YOU ARE HERE. ON THE OTHER PART OF THE BOARD WAS TO SLOW THE GROWTH. SO, WE HAVE DIFFRENCES OF OPINION, IT IS NOT LIKE WE ARE YELLING AT EACH OTHER. I'M JUST TRYING TO HAVE A DISCUSSION. AND IT JUST DOES NOT MATTER. BECAUSE THESE ARE THE POINTS THAT WERE CONFIRMED BY OUR TEAM BY MULTIPLE PEOPLE ON OUR TEAM. SO LET'S MOVE ON THERE. UNLESS COMMISSIONER ARNOLD HAS MORE TO SAY? 
          >> IF I MAY? >> YES, COMMISSIONER MURPHY. >> MAYBE THIS IS NOT A QUESTION FOR YOU, MAYBE IT IS A QUESTION FOR MIKE. WHEN A DEVELOPER COMES IN AND CLEARCUTS THE LAND, WHY 
          [01:55:10]
DO THEY DO THAT? IS IT JUST TO SAVE MONEY? OR IS THERE ANOTHER REASON WHY THEY DO THAT NEXT 
          >> I THINK THROUGH THE CHAIR, THAT IS -- TO A DEVELOPER. BUT IN GENERAL, CLEARING THE ENTIRE PIECE OF LAND IS PROBABLY MORE ECONOMICAL, AS OPPOSED TO CUTTING AROUND TREES. 
          UNDERSTANDABLY SO. AND WHEN YOU COME IN AND YOU MOBILIZE ALL OF THAT MACHINERY , AGAIN, GOING BACK TO THE COST, IF YOU HAVE TO DO A PIECEMEAL, THAT IS OBVIOUSLY A LOT MORE EXTENSIVE 
          TO DO. >> IS THERE ANY OTHER REASON WHY A DEVELOPER, MAYBE WE HAVE A 
          DEVELOPER HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ANSWER THE QUESTION? >> COMMISSIONER MURPHY, NOT YET, 
          PLEASE. >> OKAY, I WILL SAVE THAT FOR LATER. 
          >> I HAVE ANOTHER COMMENT. >> YOU ARE NOT RECOGNIZED, HE IS STILL -- OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO DO SOMETHING FIRST. TYLER, I HAVE A SERIES OF SLIDES FROM CLEARCUTTING. THIS WAS IN 2022. 
          207 DEERFIELD PRESERVED. AND IT WAS CLEAR CUT IN 2023 . IT IS STILL CLEAR CUT IN 2024. AND IT IS STILL SITTING THERE , FEBRUARY 7TH, 2025. SO, IT IS JUST SITTING THERE, IT COULD HAVE HAD TREES ON IT, NO ONE IS BUILT ON IT, THERE IS NO PLAN FOR IT. AND I THINK THE PEOPLE OF SAINT ON COUNTY ARE PRETTY SICK OF THIS. GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST. 
          >> AND KEEP HER JUST AS A REMINDER, FOR THOSE WHO ARE UNAWARE, THE PUD IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY REQUIRES 25% OPEN SPACE. SO THERE IS ALREADY A REQUIREMENT WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF A PUD THAT REQUIRES THE DEVELOPER TO LEAVE 25% OF IT OPEN. THERE IS ALREADY A 5% REQUIREMENT TO LEAVE THE UPLANDS UNTOUCHED. SO, 5% OF THE LAND THAT THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT IS SAYING YOU CANNOT TOUCH ON YOUR PROPERTY. SO, WE ALREADY HAVE SOME PRETTY STRICT REQUIREMENTS OF DEVELOPERS. A COMMENT WAS MADE OF CLEARCUTTING, I HAVE NEVER MADE A STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF CLEARCUTTING. JUST FOR THE RECORD. I DO NOT SUPPORT CLEARCUTTING. I HAVE LISTENED TO ENGINEERS TELL ME WHY THAT IS SOMETIMES NECESSARY. AND I JUST EXPRESS THAT IT IS SOMETIMES NECESSARY, BUT I AM NOT IN SUPPORT OF CLEARCUTTING. 
          >> MADAM CHAIR, IF I MAY? >> COMMISSIONER MURPHY? >> YES. I DRIVE BY THIS PLACE THAT YOU JUST SHOWED. IF YOU LOOK DOWN ON NUMBER SEVEN, IT PREVENTS LAND CLEARING TOO FAR IN ADVANCE. I WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO TALK ABOUT LANGUAGE THAT WOULD ENCOMPASS THAT. THAT IS TRUE . THEY BUY LAND, THEY GET IT REZONED, AND CLEAR CUT IT FOR YEARS. IF THERE IS SOMETHING WE CAN DO TO KEEP THE TREES THERE WHILE THEY MAKE UP THEIR MIND WHAT THEY WANT TO DO WITH IT, I WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO SUPPORT SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 
          >> THANK YOU, SIR. ALL RIGHT. >> NUMBER FIVE. MORE DISCOURAGED NON-PERMITTED TREE REMOVAL. IT ADDRESSES THE IDEA OF CLEARING WITHOUT A PERMIT. THERE IS A PROCESS IN THE COUNTY COURT OF DOING THAT CLEARING, WHATEVER STYLET IS, THAT MUST BE USED. CURRENTLY, THERE IS A $30,000 PER ACRE FUND FOR CLEARING WITHOUT A PERMIT. AND THIS DISCUSSION ITEM CONTEMPLATES RAISING THAT ABOUT THREE TIMES. AND ALSO, CONSIDERING AN EDUCATIONAL CAMPAIGN, FOR INSTANCE, IF THERE WAS GOING TO BE THIS CHANGE, HAVING THE EDUCATION GRANT TO ALERT CONTRACTORS -- 
          >> COMMISSIONER MURPHY? >> YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU SO MUCH. SO, MY QUESTION ABOUT THIS ONE . IF I DECIDE TO DEVELOP A PIECE OF PROPERTY, WILL I BE REQUIRED TO PAY FOR A PERMIT TO 
          CLEAR THE LAND ON THAT PROPERTY? >> CORRECT. 
          >> DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE FEE WOULD BE? >> NOT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. 
          >> OKAY. SO, THE REASON I AM ASKING IS THE REASON TO NOT GET A PERMIT TO CLEAR LAND, THAT IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. SO, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS A DIFFERENCE THAT WOULD ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO GET A PERMIT BY HAVING A MUCH LOWER FEE PER ACRE THAN WOULD BE IF SOMEONE 
          DOES IT WITHOUT A PERMIT. >> WITHOUT KNOWING THE COST, IT IS GENERALLY MUCH LOWER THAN 
          [02:00:03]
THAT AMOUNT. THAT AMOUNT SEEMS TO BE, THE ORIGINAL 30,000 SEEMS TO -- 
          >> NORMALLY THAT IS 30,000 PER ACRE. >> OH, HOW MANY TIMES HAS THAT 
          HAPPENED? >> IT HAS HAPPENED A HANDFUL OF TIMES. 
          >> MAYBE JUST LEAVE THAT ONE. DO I HAVE CONSENSUS FOR THAT? >> I WOULD GIVE CONSENSUS FOR 
          THAT, YES. >> COMMISSIONER TAYLOR? >> I JUST WANT CONFIRMATION THAT IT WOULD BE THE ENTIRE ACRE. BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENED NEAR ME IS THAT THEY TORE WAIT TOO MANY TREES AND IT WAS, WHIPS, THEY HAD A LITTLE SIGN. SO THIS IS ONLY PER ACRE? I JUST WANT 
          CLARIFICATION. >> IF THE FINE WILLOUGHBY FOR HALF AN ACRE, IT WOULD BE 50,000 IF IT WERE ONE ACRE, 30,000, THREE ACRES, 90,000. IT WOULD BE PRORATED BY THE ACREAGE. 
          >> SO A PORTION OF THE H ARE -- ACRE, LESS THAN EVEN HALF, HOW MUCH IS THAT? 
          >> IT GOES BY THAT PORTION. IF IT WAS .25 ACRES, IT WOULD BE 7500 DOLLARS. SO, FOR INSTANCE, WE TRY TO GET THE BEST VIEW OF WHAT WAS IMPACTED, YEAH, HOW THE IMPACT OCCURRED, WHAT THE AREA WAS, AND THE CALCULATION BASED ON THAT, WHICH IS $30,000. SO .1 ACRES WOULD BE $3000. 
          >> OKAY. COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST? >> ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT WE 
          LEAVE THIS ONE UNCHANGED? >> THAT IS WHAT I WAS SUGGESTING FOR CONSENSUS. 
          >> GREAT, I SUPPORT THAT. >> GOOD, ALL RIGHT, I WILL JUST LEAVE THIS UNCHANGED. 
          >> THE TREE FUND PAYMENTS CURRENT WITH INFLATION, THIS IS SUGGESTING TO RAISE THE TREE BANK FUND PAYMENT. IF YOU DEVELOP A PROPERTY AND YOU DO NOT, YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO OR YOU CHOOSE NOT TO REPLACE THE NUMBER OF INCHES REQUIRED BY THE CODE, AND YOU PAY $25,000 -- IF YOU TOOK OUT 100 INCHES AND YOU ARE REQUIRED TO PUT BACK 100 INCHES BUT YOU ONLY PUT BACK 50, THEN IT WOULD BE 50 INCHES TIMES -- WOULD BE YOUR PAYMENT. 
          BELIEVE THE LAST TIME THIS FEE WAS EXCHANGED WAS IN THE EARLY 2000'S. SO THE INFLATION IS 
          TRYING TO ADDRESS THAT, I GUESS. >> I WOULD OFFER MY CONSENSUS 
          FOR THIS. >> COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST? >> THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO DIRECT THE BOARD'S ATTENTION TO STATUTE 823.14, THE RIGHT TO FARM ACT. IN THE STATUTE, THERE IS SOMETHING THAT SAYS -- PROVIDE IN THE SECTION, IN 407 SUBSECTION TWO, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF LAW, RESTRICT REGULATE OR OTHERWISE LIMIT ACTIVITY OR BONA FIDE OPERATIONS, A LAND CLASSIFIED AS AGRICULTURAL LAND PURSUANT TO STATUTE 193.161, HE GOES ON. ALL HE WAS SAYING IS THAT IF SOMEONE HAS CIVIC CULTURE RIGHTS, WHICH IS FARMING OPERATIONS, WE CANNOT TELL THEM HOW FAR AND ADVANCE OF A DEVELOPING THAT THEY CAN CLEAR THEIR LAND. I THINK WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL AS WE ARE TRYING TO LEAD THE PROHIBITION CLEARCUTTING IN ADVANCE OF DEVELOPMENT, THAT WOULD NOT STEP ON SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN PREEMPTED. WE CANNOT INFRINGE ON FARMING RIGHTS OF ANY KIND. A LOT OF THESE PINETREE OPERATIONS, THESE FARMS BY STATUTE , I JUST THINK THAT WE NEED TO CAREFULLY HAVE AN ATTORNEY. THIS IS WHY I AM SO, I KEEP GOING BACK TO WHO CAME UP WITH THESE IDEAS, WHO HAS LOOKED AT THIS AND THAT'S IT. IF THERE IS AN ATTORNEY THAT IS PRACTICING IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA WHO HAS REVIEWED THIS, I 
          WILL HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THEM. >> THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO DO IF YOU AGREE WITH THAT SPIRIT WE CAN PUT IN THERE THE CIVIC CULTURAL PART AND WE CAN SEND IT TO THE ATTORNEY, AND THAT WILL INSPIRE THEIR ATTORNEYS TO IN THE REDLINE. RIGHT? MR. LEGASPI? SO, THE 
          ATTORNEY WILL SEE THAT. >> I CAN -- FINALLY STATE LAW AND THAT OUR ATTORNEYS AND ANY OTHER ATTORNEY WOULD CAREFULLY REVIEW WHAT THIS TURNS INTO AS A POLICY. 
          >> DO WE HAVE CONSENSUS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS ONE? >> I THINK IT NEEDS MORE 
          [02:05:02]
          ANALYSIS. ETIQUETTE NEEDS MORE ANALYSIS. >> THEN WE WILL VOTE ON IT 
          LATER. OKAY? ALL RIGHT. >> I THINK THE FACT THAT THIS HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED IN OVER 20 YEARS, THAT RIGHT THERE TELLS YOU THAT WE NEED AN ADJUSTMENT. I AGREE IT HAS TO BE LEGAL, BUT 
          CLEARLY THAT NEEDS TO BE ADJUSTED. >> COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST? OH, 
          OKAY. ALL RIGHT. KEEP GOING. >> WE HAD THE NUMBER SEVEN, THIS IS THE ONE THAT WE BROUGHT UP EARLIER. CLEARING TOO FAR IN ADVANCE OF DEVELOPMENT. IN DISCUSSION, CHAIR JOSEPH, THE CONCEPT TO ILLUMINATE THE CLEARING AND GRADING OF THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, THAT IS A PLAN THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE DETAILED DRAWINGS OR ENGINEERING PLANS. AND THERE IS AN EARLY LAND CLEARING THAT DOES EXIST THAT REQUIRES A CERTAIN LEVEL OF, I THINK WHAT WAS MENTIONED WAS SKIN IN THE GAME. SO THE IDEA HERE WAS TO LIMIT THE C GBG PERMIT TYPE. 
          >> COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST? >> MY COMMENTS ACTUALLY WERE ABOUT THIS ITEM. THE RIGHT TO FARM ACT IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA. WE REALLY ARE ABOUT THIS ITEM. SO, PARDON ME. THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL OF AS WE ARE DEVISING -- 
          AND PASTE MY COMMENTS FROM LAST NIGHT INTO THIS ITEM. >> IT WILL BE NOTED BECAUSE IT WILL GO FORWARD WITH INSPIRE. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR, COMMISSIONER MURPHY? 
          >> THANK YOU. SO NOW MY QUESTION HAS TO DO WITH THE DEFINITION OF PLANTS. SO, AS SOMEONE WHO HAS GONE THROUGH THE PLANNING PROCESS TO BUILD SOMETHING IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY , THE PLANNING PROCESS IS VERY EXPENSIVE. JUST TO GET PLANS DRAWN AND THE ENGINEERING DONE ON IT. SO WHAT WE ARE SAYING IS THAT UNTIL SOMEONE SPEND THAT KIND OF MONEY, WE WANT TO LIMIT THEIR 
          ABILITY TO CLEAR CUT THAT PROJECT. >> THAT IS THE PROPOSAL. 
          >> I HAVE A PIECE OF PROPERTY -- GAS STATION AND OFTEN HAS BEEN SITTING THERE FOR YEARS. THERE WAS NO PLAN BEFORE THEY GOT RID OF ALL THE TREES, IT COULD BE SITTING THERE WITH ANIMALS IN IT, AS WELL AS WATER AND SHADE, AND IT IS SAD. I THINK WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING. 
          >> SO, HERE AGAIN, THIS IS THE GATHERING OF INFORMATION. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM GOING FORWARD WITH THIS LANGUAGE WHEN IT COMES TO HAVING SKIN IN THE GAME, I GET IT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS NO RESIDUAL RESTRICTIONS. WHAT I MEAN BY THAT, IF SOMEONE COMES IN, THEY SPEND THE MONEY, THEY'VE GOT SKIN IN THE GAME, THEY SUBMIT THEIR PLANS, THEY CLEAR CUT, AND THEN FOR ECONOMIC REASONS, THEY DECIDE TO GO, THEY DO NOT GO FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT. THE ECONOMY, IF THE ECONOMY TANKS , THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO AFFORD TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS A PROTECTION FOR SOMEONE WHO FALLS UNDER THAT CATEGORY, AND IT NEEDS TO BE BROAD. BECAUSE MY ECONOMIC SITUATION MAY NOT NECESSARILY MATCH THE ECONOMIC SITUATION OF THE COUNTRY. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? AM I MAKING 
          SENSE? >> MIKE, I THINK YOU MENTIONED THIS BEFORE. THIS WILL HELP A 
          LITTLE BIT. I MEAN, THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN TO EVERYBODY. >> SO, I AM NOT CLEAR -- 
          >> THEY GET ALL THE PERMITS, THEY CLEAR CUT IT, THEY DON'T BUILD OUT BECAUSE THEY LOSE ALL 
          THEIR MONEY. DO THEY GET FIND OR ANYTHING BECAUSE OF THAT? >> NO. I MEAN, IF YOU HAVE, IDEALLY, YOU WOULD HAVE CONSTRUCTION PLANS, CIVIL CONSTRUCTION PLANS, WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, THE FIRST REVIEW, YOU ARE ALLOWED TO CLEAR IT THROUGH THE EARLY PART OF THE PROCESS. THERE IS NO GUARANTEES THAT THEY WILL BUILD AND IT WILL NOT SIT. SO, IN TERMS OF COMING BACK, WE CANNOT STOP CASES THAT COME IN WITH SAND AND DEBRIS, AND THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT IF THEY HAVE PLANS AND PERMITS TO DO THAT, THERE ARE ALSO DEVELOPERS THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO STABILIZE CLEARED PROPERTIES. WE HAVE INSPECTORS THAT GO BY AND GET THEM TO PLAN IF THEY WERE 
          [02:10:04]
          SITTING FOR A PERIOD OF TIME. >> I RAN DOWN THE PARKWAY, WAS IT ST. JOHN'S PARKWAY? DURING A WINDSTORM ABOUT SIX MONTHS AGO, IT WAS LIKE IT WAS IN THE DESERT. 
          >> WE DO ASK THEM TO BRING WATER IN TRUCK. >> YOU WOULD NOT HAVE TO DO THAT 
          IF THERE WERE TREES THERE. >> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> OKAY, NEXT ONE. 
          >> THE DISCUSSION IS TO PRESERVE BUFFERS, THEREBY PROTECTING NEIGHBORHOODS AND QUALITY-OF-LIFE IMPACTS. WE DO HAVE BUFFERS EXISTING, AND THE DISCUSSION ITEM WAS TO KEEP AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE TO BE UNDISTURBED BY NATURAL BUFFERS. AND TO PROVIDE OPTIONS FROM OTHER JURISDICTIONS, INCLUDING INCENTIVES FOR PRESERVING INCENTIVES. ALSO, IN OUR DISCUSSIONS, MORE STRINGENT AND SCENIC -- THAT IS REQUIRED IN THE NORTHWEST DISTRICT ACROSS THE ENTIRE DISTRICT. THE 35 FOOT EDGE FOR ALL PUD'S ACROSS THE COUNTY. 
          >> AND HERE I WAS TRYING TO FIND A MIDDLE GROUND WHERE WE INCENTIVIZE THE DEVELOPERS THAT 
          KEEP MORE OF A NATURAL BUFFER. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR? >> I LOVE THAT IT IS ALREADY IN THE NORTHWEST PART OF THE COUNTY. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND -- I WOULD LOVE FOR IT TO BE THE WHOLE COUNTY. WE ALL DESERVE WHAT THE NORTHWEST COUNTY HAS. NOT ALL OF US LIVE IN THE NORTHWEST COUNTY. WE SHOULD NOT BE PENALIZED. YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF THAT. BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I AM SO PASSIONATE ABOUT. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT, JUST AN EXAMPLE, IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, MY NEIGHBORS WOKE UP TO A BULLDOZER RIGHT OUTSIDE THEIR KITCHEN WINDOW. WE HAVE NO NOTICE COME AS PRESIDENT OF MY AGE AWAY, NO NOTICE AT ALL, AND A BULLDOZER, AND IN NO TIME, EVERY TREE WAS CLEAR-CUT. I LOOKED INTO IT, I THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, WHY CAN'T WE LEAVE A MATURE TREE BUFFER ? SO, WHAT WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL OF, THERE IS A BUFFER, THERE IS A FEW FEET, BUT THEY TEAR DOWN ALL THESE MATURE TREES AND THEY PLANT TREES NO BIGGER THAN I AM. SO NOW, WHEN MY NEIGHBORS LOOK OUT THEIR KITCHEN WINDOW, THEY HAVE A BEAUTIFUL VIEW OF A GIGANTIC STORAGE UNIT. THAT IS THE VIEW OUT THEIR KITCHEN WINDOW. THIS IS THE LOVELY, A WONDERFUL MILITARY FAMILY FOR THEY HAD TO MOVE THEIR SUNSET FROM THE BEGGAR TO THE FRONT YARD. THAT IS JUST WRONG. PEOPLE TALK ABOUT PROPERTY RIGHTS. WHAT ABOUT THEIR PROPERTY RATES? THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO ENJOY, THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO A HIGH QUALITY OF LIFE. THEY CANNOT EVEN ENJOY THEIR PROPERTY. AND IT IS RIGHT ON TOP. IT IS INSULTING. AND ALSO ALSO, WE LOOKED AT THE PUD AND IT STATED THAT MATURE TREES SHOULD BE LEFT. SO I REMEMBER CALLING OUR ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT AT THE TIME, I DO NOT KNOW IF IT WAS KAREN THAT I TALK TO. I REMEMBER SAYING, IT CLEARLY SAYS MATURE TREES. AND YOU KNOW WHAT SHE TOLD ME? IT WAS A SUGGESTION, NOT A REQUIREMENT. A SUGGESTION. WELL, I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, THEY ARE NOT TAKING THE SUGGESTION. SO THAT IS, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE ABSOLUTELY NEED TO LEAVE MATURE TREE BUFFERS FOR PEOPLE. THEY SHOULD NOT LOOK AT THEIR KITCHEN WINDOW AND HAVE A VIEW OF SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WITH ANY KIND OF COMMERCIAL PROPERTY OR ANYTHING. THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO SOME PRIVACY AND ENJOY THEIR PROPERTY. SORRY I AM GETTING SO WORKED UP. IT IS SO, I AM SO PASSIONATE ABOUT IT, AND I HEARD ABOUT IT SO OFTEN FROM SO MANY OTHER PEOPLE. AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT HAPPENED TO MY NEIGHBORS DOESN'T HAPPEN TO ANYBODY ELSE IN THIS COUNTY. THEY DO NOT DESERVE THAT. NOBODY DESERVES THAT. 
          >> COMMISSIONER MURPHY? I MEAN, THAT IS VALENCIA, I'D SEE IT WHEN I DRIVE BY IT EVERY DAY. IT 
          IS SAD. >> MY ONLY COMMENT HERE IS THAT, YOU KNOW, AS SOMEONE WHO HAS LIVED HERE PROBABLY LONGER THAN ANYBODY, I CAN TELL YOU THAT I HAVE SEEN IT A LOT. MY ONLY CHALLENGE IS THAT WE LOOK AT THESE INDIVIDUALLY AND THAT WE LOOK AT THE IMPACT OF THESE COLLECTIVELY AND WE MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE NOT ADDING BUFFER, ONTO BUFFER, ONTO BUFFER. 
          ESPECIALLY WHEN WE ARE JUST TALKING ABOUT A PLAN THAT WOULD BE UNDULY HARMFUL TO COMING IN AND BUILDING A HOME. THAT IS THE ONLY CHALLENGE. THAT WE MAKE SURE WE ARE NOT ADDING MORE AND 
          [02:15:01]
MORE. IT FEELS LIKE A LAND GRAB TO ME. I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND COMMISSIONER TAYLOR'S PASSION, BECAUSE I AGREE 100%. BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PENDULUM IS NOT GOING ALL THE WAY TO THE OTHER SIDE. -- WHERE WE LEAVE BUFFERS OR THEY ARE REQUIRED TO REPLACE BACK MATURE TREES OR WHATEVER WE NEED TO DO. OKAY, WE HAVE A 30 FOOT BUFFER. NOW WE HAVE 80% OR 90% USAGE FOR UPLANDS. THERE HAS TO BE A HAPPY MEDIUM HERE. AND THAT IS WHAT I WOULD GO AFTER. 
          >> COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST ? >> THANK YOU. AT THIS POINT, I THINK IT NEEDS ANALYSIS FROM INDUSTRY EXPERTS. I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR FEEDBACK. I HAVE THE SAME CONCERNS THAT YOU DO. IS THIS ANOTHER POTENTIAL LAND GRAB? WE HAVE -- HERE , THE SOLE PURPOSE IS TO TAKE LAND FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSERVATION, BUT THAT IS A WILLING SELLER PROGRAM. SOMEONE RECEIVES CASH IN EXCHANGE FOR THEIR LAND, BOTH PARTIES HAVE TO AGREE. AND PAST POLICIES LIKE THIS, POTENTIALLY, THE GOVERNMENT IS JUST TAKING LAND WITH NO COMPENSATION WHATSOEVER. SO THAT IS A CONCERN THAT I HAVE. SOMETHING ELSE TO REMEMBER IS THAT YOU HAVE PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS TO THE BORDER OF YOUR OWN PROPERTY. SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER. 
          >> GOING FORWARD, IF YOU READ THE COMMENTS, THIS WOULD GO TO INSPIRE LAWYERS ON STAFF TO DO THIS. TO ME, THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS, EVEN OVER AND ABOVE THE UP LENS. IF WE CAN DO THIS, JUST BY ITSELF, IT WOULD CREATE SO MUCH MORE FOR OUR COUNTY AND KEEP WHAT EVERYONE REALLY WANTS TO HAPPEN THAT I HAVE SPOKE TO THAT HAS EMAILED ME, AS AND SAID, ON THE 
          TRAIL, BUT THAT IS ALL WE HEAR. THAT IS MY COMMENT. >> IF I MAY, MADAM CHAIR, I AGREE WITH YOU. I GOT A LOT OF COMMENTS ON THIS PEER BUT ONE THING THAT I HAVE TO DO IS, AS A COMMISSIONER, IS MAKE SURE THE DECISIONS BEING MADE ARE GOOD FOR THE PEOPLE OF THE COUNTY, NOT NECESSARILY GOOD FOR MY POLITICAL CAREER. SO, AS HARD AS A DECISION IS THIS IS, I WOULD FEEL BETTER , AND I COULD TAKE TIME OUT OF MY DAY, WHERE WE CAN HAVE A PUBLIC MEETING WHERE WE ONLY DISCUSS LIKE THIS AND WE ALLOWED THIS DISCUSSION TO GO FORWARD. BECAUSE I THINK THERE IS COMMON GROUND, I THINK THERE IS MIDDLE GROUND HERE. AND I THINK YOU REALLY NEED TO, I DON'T WANT TO PUT THIS OFF ANY FURTHER THAN WE HAVE, THAT IS NOT THE POINT. I REALLY WANT TO DO A GOOD JOB, THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT. AND I THINK THAT THESE POINTS ARE VERY IMPORTANT, AND WE NEED TO TAKE THE TIME TO REALLY GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO SIT AROUND THE TABLE, FOR US TO SIT AROUND THE TABLE, LOOK AT EACH OTHER AND -- THIS AT ANOTHER PUBLIC MEETING. 
          >> LET'S FINISH WHAT WE ARE DOING. GO AHEAD, SIR. >> MAY I COMMENT? 
          >> COMMISSIONER ARNOLD . >> THANK YOU FOR RECOGNIZING ME. COMMISSIONER MURPHY, I THINK YOU ARE SPOT ON. I THINK THAT THIS IS NOT NECESSARILY READY FOR PRIME TIME. I THINK THIS IS AN AGENDA ITEM THAT IS REALLY BEING CONDUCTED LIKE A WORKSHOP. MY PREFERENCE, JUST LIKE YOU SUGGESTED, WOULD BE TO SCHEDULE A WORKSHOP WHERE WE CAN HAVE ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS COME TO THE TABLE. I MEAN, SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS, CERTIFIED ARBORISTS, UTILITY COMPANIES, SUCH AS FDL, THEY ALL WANT, I THINK, AN INVITATION TO THE TABLE. THEY ALL WANT TO COME TO A 
          COMPROMISE. SO I WOULD FULLY SUPPORT THAT. >> COMMISSIONER TAYLOR? 
          >> YES, I WOULD LIKE CLARIFICATION. WE TALKED ABOUT THE FIRST PART ABOUT THE NATURAL BUFFERS? OR WHAT ABOUT HAVING THE WHOLE COUNTY DO IT LIKE THE NORTHWEST COUNTY? IS THAT A DISCUSSION? DOES ANYONE NOT AGREE WITH OUR ENTIRE COUNTY BEING TREATED THE SAME AS THE NORTHWEST COUNTY? I MEAN, I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY IT IS JUST THE NORTHWEST PORTION OF HER 
          COUNTY. >> CAN SOMETHING LIKE THAT BE ON THE BALLOT? ARE WE ALLOWED TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT? CAN WE PUT IT ON A SOLID FOR US TO VOTE ON? IN TWO YEARS? 
          >> I MEAN, YOU CAN DO WHAT IS CONSIDERED A STRONG BALLOT. IT PUTS IT ON AND GIVES YOU AN INDICATION AS TO WHAT YOU WANT TO SEE. BUT FROM EVERYTHING YOU ARE SAYING, FROM YOUR CAMPAIGN TRAIL, SOMETHING YOU'VE ALREADY DONE THAT -- 
          >> GOING TO A WORKSHOP, THIS HAS BEEN WORKSHOP TO DEATH FOR YEARS. I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF THAT. I AM IN FAVOR OF SETTING -- TWO INSPIRE, WHICH WE JUST PAID A BUNCH OF MONEY TO DO. AND TO BRING SOME OF THESE COMMENTS BACK INTO A REDLINE OF SOME KIND COMING BACK AFTER A DISCUSSION 
          [02:20:02]
          ON THIS. >> I JUST WANT CLARIFICATION. WHAT HAPPENED IN THE NORTHWEST PORTION. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND. WHO MADE THAT DECISION FOR IT TO BE JUST IN THE NORTHWEST SECTION 
          OF THE COUNTY? >> THE CHAIR ASKED IF WE COULD HAVE A REFERENDUM AND WE WERE 
          RESPONDING TO HER QUESTION. >> OKAY. >> DON'T GO ANYWHERE, MIKE, WHERE ARE YOU GOING? I WOULD LIKE AN ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION, IF YOU DON'T MIND. 
          >> TO THE CHAIR, YOU WERE ASKING ABOUT THE HISTORY OF HOW THIS CAME ABOUT? 
          >> YES. >> OKAY. SO IN OUR COUNTRY HAS A PLAN, WE HAVE A NORTHWEST SECTOR OVERLAY SESSION. WITHIN THAT SECTION, OF COURSE, IT REQUIRES THIS, AMONG OTHER THINGS INAUDIBLE - LOW VOLUME ] WAS A HERE BUT I DID HAVE OTHER CONVERSATIONS WITH MISS TERESA BISHOP AND SHE INDICATED THAT COMMUNITY HAD GOTTEN TOGETHER AT THE TIME. THAT WAS WHEN THE PLAN WAS NEW AS WELL, THEY GOT TOGETHER AND THEY DECIDEDIN THAT AREA, FROM I-95 WEST WORD AND THEN SOUTHWARD TO 208, THAT SECTOR, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE THESE INCREASED BUFFER 
          REQUIREMENTS. RIGHT AROUND 2000. >> OKAY. THIS DISCUSSION WAS NOT 
          ON THE BALLOT, THEY DO NOT VOTE? >> I'M NOT AWARE THAT IT WAS ON THE BALLOT. AS A COMPANY HAS A PLAN, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN VOTED ON THE COMMISSION AT THE TIME. 
          >> SO IF THEY EXPANDED JUST OUTSIDE OF THE NORTHWEST, THAT IS HOW THEY CAN DECIDE? IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING? OKAY, THAT IS WHAT I WANT CLARIFICATION ON. I JUST THINK WE SHOULD HAVE AN 
          OPTION FOR THAT. >> ALL RIGHT. 9 AND 10. COMMISSIONER ARNOLD? 
          >> YES. WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, COMMISSIONER JOSEPH, WHEN WAS THIS WORKSHOP TO DEATH? WITH ALL 
          THE INVOLVED STAKEHOLDERS? >> I'M SURE -- I'M NOT SURE, IT WAS BEFORE I CAME OF THE BOARD. IT WAS A DISASTER, I HEARD . EVERYONE WAS FIGHTING COULD WE MADE PROGRESS SINCE 2023, AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE PROGRESS. RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE THE CONFERENCE OF PLAN, WE HAVE INSPIRE THAT WE ARE PAYING THE REDLINE TO DO THIS. AND WE HAVE THEM FOR 7 MORE MEETINGS AND THAT IS IT. LET'S GET THIS GOING, LET'S PUSH IT FORWARD, AND THEY CAN MAKE A PRESENTATION ON THE THINGS WE HAVE ALL DISCUSSED. BECAUSE WHAT COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST SAID, AS WELL AS WHAT YOU AND OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE SAID, BUT WE CANNOT STOP ON THIS. IT IS BEYOND, I MEAN, WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IT FOR TWO YEARS NOW. 
          >> WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW IT HAS BEEN WORKSHOP IF ALL OF THE STAKEHOLDERS IN THE COMMUNITY WHO MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, I JUST, AGAIN, I WOULD REITERATE. I THINK WE NEED TO WORKSHOP THIS WITH ALL PARTIES INVOLVED. THAT WOULD BE MY SUGGESTION. BUT MR. TAYLOR, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO PUT CONSERVATION ON THE BALLOT AT 
          ANY TIME . IF THIS BOARD WAS TO VOTE FOR A REFERENDUM. >> REGARDING THE WORKSHOP, WE HAD HOW MANY TIMES THAT INSPIRED MET WITH THE PEOPLE? AND THEY MET, THEY ALSO MET WITH DEVELOPERS, AND NETF A. SO THEY HAVE DONE ALL THAT RESEARCH. I THINK WE ARE BEYOND THAT, AT 
          THIS POINT. >> AGAIN, I WOULD RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE. I THINK THEY MET FOR THE CONFERENCE OF PLAN. I WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE THE BOARD CONSIDERING A WORKSHOP SO THAT OUR COMMUNITY CAN BE INVOLVED, STAKEHOLDERS CAN BE INVOLVED . THAT IS JUST MY SUGGESTION. 
          >> MS. ANDREWS, I THINK YOU TALKED TO THEM ABOUT THE TREE ORDINANCE IN JANUARY. I THINK I 
          SAW AN EMAIL REGARDING THAT. >> ABSOLUTELY. BASED ON THE BOARDS DIRECTION PREVIOUSLY, WE ASKED THE INSPIRE TO BE INVOLVED WITH COMPANIES THAT PLANNED AND PROVIDED A CHANGE ORDER FOR INSPIRE TO PROTECT -- CONDUCT A FULL ANALYSIS. THIS IS THE FIRST STEP OF THAT ANALYSIS. STAFF AND KEPT THE INSPIRE CANAL MOVE FORWARD WITH THE ANALYSIS. WELL, THE BOARD IS GIVING QUITE A BIT 
          OF DIRECTION RIGHT NOW. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. NINE AND 10, PLEASE. 
          >> NINE AND 10 ARE A PACKAGE DEAL TOO. I CAN GO THROUGH THEM BOTH IF YOU WOULD LIKE. NOT A PACKAGE DEAL, BUT THEY REFLECT EACH OTHER IN SOME WAYS. THIS ALLOWS A RAISING GRADE TO PRESERVE BUFFER TREE ROOTS. IN DISCUSSION, CHAIR JOSEPH SUGGESTED THAT SHE WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE SUGGESTING THIS AS ONE OF THE DISCUSSION ITEMS. AND IN CONSTRUCTION DOES NOT LEAVE THE -- IN PUTTING PRESERVE AREAS, INCLUDING INTO THE DIVE OFF AND DRAINAGE AREAS. AGAIN, THESE ARE KIND OF IN THE ORIGINAL DISCUSSION POINTS, AND THEY WERE MADE. AND SO I WILL 
          STOP BACK AND TAKE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS. >> WE DO HAVE AN EXEMPTION IN 
          HERE. >> YES, SORRY ABOUT THAT. NO CHANGE WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ALLOWING SENT ON COUNTY TECHNICAL ENGINEERING STAFF TO EXEMPT THE REQUIREMENT. SO, THE IDEA BEING THERE THAT IF THERE IS A NEED FOR IMPACTING THAT 15 FEET OF PROPERTY BOUNDARY, OR 
          [02:25:10]
FOR, YOU KNOW, A DRAINAGE CONCERN, THAT THERE WOULD BE A WAY, A PATH FOR STAFF TO PROVIDE 
          AN EXTENSION. >> COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST. >> I THINK THIS IS ONE THAT WE NEED FEEDBACK FROM INDUSTRY EXPERTS. THIS IS A CHALLENGE, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD NEED TO HEAR DETAILED FEEDBACK FROM ENGINEERS ABOUT HOW THIS COULD IMPACT THE DEVELOPMENT OF 
          ANY PROPERTY. >> ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE? COMMISSIONER MURPHY? 
          >> YES, MA'AM. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO REPEAT THE CHALLENGE THAT I HAVE, THAT WE ARE ADDING BOUNDARY, AFTER BOUNDARY, AFTER BOUNDARY, AND WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE NOT OVERLAPPING, OR THAT IT DOES OVERLAP AND IT IS NOT CONCURRENT. 
          >> YES. I AGREE WITH THAT. >> THESE ARE MY CONCERNS ABOUT IT. 
          >> WHEN WE SEND IT FORWARD TO INSPIRE, WE CAN PRINT THAT WERE THE OVERLAP IS, AND THEY CAN BRING IT BACK TO US TO SHOW FOR THE SAME GOALS THAT WE WERE DISCUSSING. DO YOU LIKE THAT 
          IDEA? >> I LIKE THAT A WHOLE LOT BETTER THAN THE WAY THAT IT LOOKS ON PAPER. BECAUSE IT IS IMPORTANT TO ME THAT WE DO NOT, YOU KNOW, I JUST GO BACK TO THE PROPERTIES IN ST. JOHN'S COUNTY, A MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTY IN SAINT JOHN'S COUNTY IS -- SO WE ARE ALREADY ELIMINATING THE AMOUNT OF PROPERTY THAT CAN BE HELD ON. 
          AND NOW WE ARE GOING TO SAY, NOT ONLY CAN YOU NOT BUILD ON THAT, BUT NOW YOU WILL HAVE TO CUT DOWN TO 80, 90, OR 95, PLUS THE 15 FOOT, PLUS THE TREE CANOPIES. YOU KNOW, I AM NOT SAYING THAT I COULD NOT SUPPORT THESE THINGS WITH A VOTE, I'M JUST SAYING THAT I DO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THAT. AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO SIT DOWN AND TALK ABOUT. 
          >> WELL, WHAT I LIKE, THESE ARE ALL POINTS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP SEPARATELY WITH THE COMMUNITY. SO, WE ARE GETTING THEM ALL OUT, WE ARE DISCUSSING THOSE ISSUES, INSPIRE WILL TAKE THIS, WE ARE PAYING THEM TO BRING THIS ALL TOGETHER, AND I HAVE A HUGE, YOU KNOW, OLD, I REALLY THINK THEY WILL BRING BACK SOMETHING THAT IS, THAT WE CAN DISCUSS AND VOTE ON. 
          >> CHAIR, MAY I ASK A QUICK QUESTION FOR CLARIFICATION? THERE WERE THIS AND OTHER POINTS WE HAD A SIMILAR COMMENT, COMMISSIONER MURPHY, HE RETURNED TO FIGURE OUT HOW HE COULD POTENTIALLY ORDERLIES HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT ENHANCING CONSERVATION THAT IS SOFT THROUGH THIS WITH BALANCING IMPACT ON PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS IN A REASONABLE WAY . 
          >> IS MY WAY OF SOLIDIFYING, YES. >> PERFECT, THANK YOU. 
          >> PRESERVE MORE TREES IN COMMERCIAL SETTINGS. THAT IS THE HEADING HERE. DELETE THE COMMERCIAL APPLICATION EXEMPTION FOR PAYMENT INTO THE TREE BANK FUND. THAT IS A BIG SET UP, AND APPLY THE $100 -- THAT WAS APPLIED EARLIER FOR LOST INCHES. SO, CURRENTLY, RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS REQUIRE PAYMENT INTO THE TREE FUND PROJECT. THE COMMERCIAL PROJECTS ARE EXEMPT ONCE THEY MEET THEIR EIGHT INCHES OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT WOULD BE OTHER PRESERVATION OR PLANTING. AND THEN THERE IS NO FURTHER FEE. I BELIEVE THIS CAME UP IN 2008 OR NINE AM A KIND OF 
          AS A BUSINESS ENCOURAGEMENT . ALL RIGHT. THAT IS ALL IT GOT. >> COMMISSIONER MURPHY? 
          >> YES MA'AM, CHAIR. THANK YOU SO MUCH. MY QUESTION TO YOU NOW, THEY ARE REQUIRED TO PUT BACK ON COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LIKE, 80 INCHES PER ACRE. ALL RIGHT. IF THEY REMOVE, IF THEY HAVE A DENSE PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT THEY ARE REMOVING, WOULD THIS BE AN UNDUE BURDEN? OR WOULD THIS 
          BE SOMETHING THAT IT IS, IT IS A WASH? >> I WOULD NOT SAY UNDUE BURDEN. 
          YOU WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THEM ABOUT THAT. THERE WOULD BE A HIGHER FEE FOR THEM TO DEVELOP A PROPERTY IF THE EXTENSION WAS REMOVED. DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR 
          QUESTION? >> YES, THANK YOU. IT MEANS THAT IF I WANT TO GO FORWARD WITH COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS ALREADY CLEARED? OKAY. SORRY. THIS IS 
          ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT I DID NOT HAVE A BIG STAKE IN. >> ALL RIGHT. LET'S MOVE ON TO 
          12. >> SO, ENSURE THE DISBURSEMENT OF TRENDS FROM THE TREE BANK GOES 100% FOR THE PROVISION -- PURCHASING AND INSTALLATION OF TREES. AND IT'S DISCUSSION REVOLVED AROUND, WELL, WE KIND OF LOOKED INTO AND FOUND THAT A MAJORITY OF THE FUNDS DO GO TOWARDS COUNTY PROJECTS, BUT THIS WAS KIND OF SPECIFICALLY LIMITS, IT WOULD ALLOW THE TREE 
          [02:30:02]
          FUNDS ONLY ON COUNTY PROJECT . >> I MEAN, I THINK THAT IS THE POINT OF COLLECTING FEES, IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE KEEP BEAUTIFYING OUR COUNTY. COMMISSIONER MURPHY? 
          >> YES, MA'AM. WE KNOW HOW MUCH IS IN THE FUND RIGHT NOW? DO WE HAVE AN AMOUNT? 
          >> I SHOULD'VE LOOKED IT UP, I DON'T HAVE IT. I CAN GET THAT TO YOU. I APOLOGIZE, I DO NOT 
          HAVE IT AT THE MOMENT. YEAH. >> COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST? >> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. MR. LUGOSI, WHAT OTHER THINGS CAN BE DONE CURRENTLY WITH THE TREE BANK FUND? 
          >> ALL RIGHT. SO I HAVE THE ORDINANCE, 2009-2. AND SECTION 3 IS WHERE WE TALK ABOUT THAT . 
          AND JUST AS A, JUST SO I DO NOT HAVE TO REMEMBER, I WILL KIND OF GIVE YOU THE HEADLINES. COUNTY CONSTRUCTION LIMITED TO THE COST OF TREES, EQUIPMENT, AND LANDSCAPING INSTALLATION, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ARE LIMITED TO THE COST OF TREES, EQUIPMENT, LANDSCAPING, AND INSTALLATION. BEAUTIFICATION IS ADDED TO THE COST OF TREES, EQUIPMENT, AND SKIPPING, AND INSTALLATION. WHEN PROJECT THAT ABOVE TREES, LANDSCAPE, ET CETERA, AND THE CONSERVATION OF NATURAL PRESERVE AREA PRODUCTION ENHANCEMENT, TO MAKE NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENT EFFECTS OF TREE REMOVAL AND WILDLIFE DISPLACEMENT, ET CETERA. MULTIFAMILY OR SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS FOR HOUSING QUALIFYING UNDER STATE AND FEDERAL AFFORDABLE HEALTH PROGRAMS. SO I BELIEVE THAT IS LIKE -- IT IS CONSTANTLY DEVELOPING SINGLE FAMILY LOTS FOR, I DON'T KNOW, AFFORDABLE AND WORK-FAMILY HOUSING. SO THAT IS KIND OF THE OVERVIEW. 
          >> THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION, THANK YOU SO MUCH. I DO THINK THAT WE NEED TO PARE THAT DOWN, THE USES FOR THE TREE BANK FUND. BUT I ALSO THINK THAT WE DO NOT ILLUMINATE FUNDING TO MAINTAIN THE TREES THAT ARE PLANTED. I MEAN, WILL BE PLANT THE TREES, WE NEED THEM TO SURVIVE AND THRIVE. I SEE TREES PLANTED FROM THE TREE BANK FUND HAVE A GOOD CHANCE TO LIVE, GROW, AND BE MAINTAINED. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DO NOT ELIMINATE ALL OF THE CURRENT USES TO JUST FINDING THE SEED AND PLANTING THE SEED, THAT WE ALSO ALLOW SOME FUNDING FOR MAINTAINING 
          THOSE TREES. >> SO I HAVE CONSENSUS FROM YOU FOR THAT? 
          >> AS LONG AS IT INCLUDES OTHER USES, YES. >> SO COUNTY PROJECTS CAN 
          INCLUDE OUR PARKS, CORRECT? THAT WOULD BE A COUNTY PROJECT? >> ONE THAT IS NOT MENTIONED HERE IS FOR THE MAINTENANCE, FOR THE REMOTE MANAGEMENT, THE MITIGATION PROJECT THAT WE HAVE 
          ACROSS THE COUNTY. >> AND WE HAVE CONSENSUS FOR THAT? 
          >> 1.19 IS IN RESERVES. >> THANK YOU. >> EXCUSE ME, FOR THE CHAIR, FOR CONSENSUS, COMMISSIONER ARNOLD, COMMISSIONER ARNOLD, CONSENSUS? 
          >> ABSOLUTELY. >> 13. >> NUMBER 13. SO, KEEP PINES AS IMPORTANT AND KEEP WEEDS OFF THE NOXIOUS LIST. THEY ARE ON A NOXIOUS WEED LIST NOW. AND THAT IS HOW THAT ONE WAS WORDED. BUT THE IDEA HERE WAS TO RECOGNIZE PINES AS AN IMPORTANT TREE AND POTENTIALLY ADD THESE PINES AS A PROTECTED TREE IN THE CATEGORY. 
          >> THIS IS NOT SLASH PINE , THIS IS SILVER LEAF PINE. >> IS THIS TREE STILL BEING 
          PLANTED AND HARVESTED? >> IT IS, BUT NOT AS COMMERCIALLY VIABLE AS SLASH AND LOVELY, FOR EXAMPLE. IT CAN BECOME A FOR SURE. IT IS A SLOWER GROWER. 
          >> WILL THERE BE LANGUAGE PROTECTING AGRICULTURAL USE? >> I THINK THERE IS ALREADY LINKAGE THAT EXISTS THAT WAY. I WOULD ASSUME THAT WE COULD MAKE THAT HAPPEN, FOR SURE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF SOMEONE IS FORMING TREES FOR PULP OR WHATEVER, THAT WE WILL 
          NOT UNDULY BURDEN THEM. >> UNDERSTOOD. >> COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST? 
          >> THAT IS MY CONCERN. I THINK WE ARE PREEMPTED FROM PASSING ALONG SOMETHING LIKE THIS. I'M 
          NOT SURE HOW WE WOULD ENFORCE -- >> AND OF THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE, THEY BOTH PROTECT THE LONGLEAF PINE. AND WHEN YOU SEE THE NESTS FOR THE BIRDS, EAGLE, THIS IS THE TREE THAT THEY ARE IN. SO, IT IS COOL IF WE CAN SOMEHOW BRING THIS FORWARD. 
          >> AS LONG AS WE ARE EXEMPTING THE AGRICULTURAL -- 
          THIS ONE. >> WAIT, YOU ARE OPPOSED? >> I AM OPPOSED TO THIS. I UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS A CROP. SO I DO NOT THINK THAT WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO IT. AND I WILL NOT 
          [02:35:04]
          SUPPORT THAT. >> ALL RIGHT, LAST ONE. >> NOTIFICATION WITHIN CLEARING BEFORE THE CLEARING TAKES PLACE. IN DISCUSSION AND FROM A PAST ANALYSIS, THERE WAS A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT COST ASSOCIATED WITH THIS, AND TALKING ABOUT THAT, CHAIR JOSEPH HURT RECOMMENDATION WAS TO BE -- DUE TO THE HIGH COST AND LOW BENEFIT. ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THAT THERE ARE PERMITS PUT ON PROPERTIES WHEN CLEARING WILL HAPPEN. SO, NEIGHBORS IS IN THAT AREA CAN 
          USUALLY SEE IT. AND I WILL STEP BACK. >> ON THE ORANGE SIGNS, WOULD YOU PUT WHEN CONSTRUCTION WILL START? WHAT SIGNS DO YOU PUT UP THERE ? CAN THEY ADD WHEN IT IS 
          STARTING CONSTRUCTION? >> THE REQUIREMENT IS USUALLY POSTING, LIKE, IF YOU WILL HAVE A CLEAR PROPERTY FOR A DEVELOPING, YOU WOULD POST A PERMIT BOX, THAT WOULD HAPPEN FOR ALL THE INFORMATION THAT YOU WOULD NEED AS A CITIZEN TO SAY, OH, HERE IS EVERYTHING HAPPENING 
          ON THIS PROPERTY. >> THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY BY MY NEIGHBORHOOD, WE WERE NOT GIVEN ANY NOTICE AT ALL. AND WHEN I ASKED ABOUT IT, I WAS TOLD THAT THEY DID NOT HAVE TO. THAT IT IS JUST FOR THE RE-ZONE WHEN THOSE ORANGE SIGNS COME UP. SO THAT IS NOT HAPPENING. WE DID HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD TILT AND IT DID NOT COME UP WITH THAT. THEY DO NEED TO BE CHANGES BECAUSE PEOPLE DO NEED TO KNOW AHEAD OF TIME BEFORE A BULLDOZER IS RIGHT OUTSIDE THEIR KITCHEN WINDOW. 
          SO, THAT IS NOT HAPPENING. >> CAN WE MAYBE HAVE INSPIRON EXPLORE A CREATIVE METHOD? MAYBE 
          THEY HAVE A DIFFERENT IDEA, I DON'T KNOW. >> COMMISSIONER MURPHY? 
          >> WE GET A NEW BILL OF RIGHTS NOTICE WHENEVER A NEW PROJECT IS ABOUT TO START. IS THAT IS SOMETHING, MAYBE THAT IS A QUESTION FOR WAYNE. IS THAT SOMETHING WE CAN PUT ON OUR WEBSITE AND SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS SO THAT PEOPLE ARE INFORMED? THAT IS WHAT I DO, WHEN I GET THEM IN MY DISTRICT, I PUT THEM OUT. IS THERE SOMETHING WE CAN DO? 
          >> THEY ARE NOT ALWAYS CONSIDERED ANDY ARE, THAT IS THE ISSUE. IN THE SITUATION, THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY NEAR MY NEIGHBORHOOD, IT WAS NOT A NVR. MY POINT IS, NOT EVERYTHING 
          FALLS UNDER THE NVR. >> THAT IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. WE HAVE THOUSANDS OF LOW VOLUME ] THE COST FOR NOTIFICATION, RIGHT . THEY BELIEVE SOMEONE IS BUILDING A HOME WHERE THEY HAD A -- IN COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION, WHATEVER IT IS. SO, THAT WAS A LITTLE BIT OF A BACKGROUND THERE. WE CAN LOOK INTO IT FROM INSPIRE, THEY HAVE A LOT OF 
          EXPERIENCE. >> AND THEY ARE MARKETING PEOPLE. SO, YOU KNOW. YES OR NO? 
          >> I WOULD GO WITH YOUR ORIGINAL SUGGESTION OF STRIKING THIS ONE. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN 
          LOOK AT, BUT I -- THE CHALLENGE OF DOING THIS GOING FORWARD IS >> COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST? 
          >> THANK YOU. WHEN WE SAW IT WOULD COST TEXT PAYERS $7 MILLION A YEAR, VERY PLEASED WE ARE NOT MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT SUGGESTION. THE CHALLENGE OF NOT HAVING MBR NOTIFICATIONS IS SOMETHING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE ADDRESSED. I THINK WE WILL ALSO CONSIDER OF POLICYMAKERS THE STRAIN THAT PUTS ON STAFF. IT IS DEVELOPABLE BY RIGHT. THEY HAVE A RIGHT. AND IT IS GOING TO BRING PEOPLE OUT TO SPEAK OUT AGAINST SOMETHING THAT CANNOT BE STOPPED. AND SO I THINK THAT PUTS STRAIN ON NOT ONLY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, BUT ALSO STAFF TO TRY TO EXPLAIN THAT TO EVERY INDIVIDUAL WHO REACHES OUT. SO, I AM PRO ANYTHING THAT IS MORE TRANSPARENT GOVERNMENT. ANYTHING THAT LETS PEOPLE KNOW THAT IT WILL GO INTO THEIR BACKYARD WITHOUT PUTTING AN UNDUE BURDEN ON THEIR STAFF, OR THE COMMISSIONERS TO HAVE TO EXPLAIN ONE AT A TIME THAT THIS WAS A ZONE IN 1995 AND THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO BUILD OUT THERE. 
          >> COMMISSIONER TAYLOR? >> NONE. >> OKAY. I WAS THINKING WHAT WE COULD DO, UNLESS THERE ARE OTHER COMMENTS, SO, WE HAVE SEVERAL THAT, GOALS THAT NEED A VOTE. 
          BUT WHAT I AM WONDERING IS IF WE CAN FORWARD THIS TO INSPIRE, AND THE ONES THAT NEED A VOTE, GO THREE, BEFORE, GO SEVEN, GO SIX, WE HAVE SUPPORT FOR 8. GOAL NINE, 10, 11, AND 13, AND 14, CAN THEY GO AHEAD AND JUST WRITE UP AS IF IT HAS BEEN APPROVED, AND THEN WHAT WE WILL DO IS 
          [02:40:08]
ADDRESS EACH ONE AT THE NEXT MEETING TO SAY YAY OR NAY IN THE PROGRAM. 
          >> ARE YOU ASKING TO WRITE UP SAMPLE CODE LANGUAGE THAT WOULD ADDRESS THESE AS WE UNDERSTAND 
          YOUR INTENT NOW? >> AFTERMATH. >> WE WILL DISCUSS THAT. I THINK SOME OF THESE REQUIRE FURTHER ANALYSIS. AND SO WE DO NOT REALLY KNOW WHAT THAT IMAGE WITH 
          LOOK LIKE AT THIS POINT. >> I TALKED TO CHRIS DOHERTY YESTERDAY. AND HE WAS OKAY WITH GETTING THIS TO HIM. AND HE HAS AN ATTORNEY, WE ALSO HAVE ENVIRONMENTALIST ATTORNEYS ALL OVER THE PLACE. BUT IF WE CAN AT LEAST GET SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, WRITTEN UP SO THAT EVERYONE CAN COME AND MAKE CHANGES ON THAT, I THINK THAT WOULD BE BETTER THAN WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW. HE SEEMED VERY OPEN TO THAT. I THINK WE ARE PAYING HIM FOR THAT. SO, TO ME, THAT WOULD BE 
          THE NEXT STEP. >> SURE. AND IT DOVETAILS PERFECTLY INTO THE SECOND SECTION OF THE SLIDE WHERE I ASK FOR YOUR GUYS GUIDANCE. IS AT ÚTHE GUIDANCE THAT I AM PICKING UP? THANK YOU. MADAM CHAIR, LOOKING AT CLEAR DIRECTION, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF YOU COULD GIVE US FROM EACH ITEM. THERE APPEARS TO BE, WHEN WE GET CLEAR DIRECTION FROM THE BOARD, YES, 
          MA'AM. >> DO YOU WANT ME TO VOTE ON EACH ONE? OR JUST SEND IT AND 
          THEN VOTE ON THAT LATER, EACH ONE? >> SO THE DIRECTION NEEDS TO COME FROM THE BOARD COLLECTVELY. AND SO HOWEVER YOU CHOOSE TO DO THAT. BUT, IT DOES REQUIRE BOARD ACTION TO GET THE DIRECTION. SO I THINK YOU WOULD HAVE CONSENSUS ON THREE OF THE ITEMS, AND ANY OTHER ONES, YOU HAD STATED YOU VOTE. SO HOWEVER YOU CHOOSE TO DO THAT, YOU CAN CHOOSE TO VOTE COLLECTIVELY OR ITEM BY ITEM, THE CHOICE IS YOURS. 
          >> THE THING IS, I WANTED MORE INFORMATION ON THOSE WHO. I THINK COMMISSIONER MURPHY TULSA WANTED MORE INFORMATION ON SOME OF THEM. AND I DO THINK INSPIRE IS THE BEST PERSON TO BRING THAT 
          BACK. >> YES. BUT THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO GET A DIRECTION -- 
          INAUDIBLE - LOW VOLUME ] >> CAN I GET CONSENSUS FOR THAT? >> MANAGER, WOULD YOU MIND 
          SLOWING DOWN AND REPEATING THE NUMBER OF THE ITEMS? >> 3, 4, 5 -- JUST TO POINT OUT, 5 WAS ACTUALLY, COMMISSIONER DEAN WAS GOING TO APPROVE THAT BEFORE. 
          >> BY RECOLLECTION OF 5 IS THAT WE SHOULD LEAVE IT THE WAY THAT IT WAS. 
          >> OH, OH, THANK YOU, YOU ARE RIGHT. 7, DID YOU GET 6? WE GOT 6, RIGHT? 
          >> YOU DID NOT SAY SIX, BUT I HAVE IT WRITTEN DOWN. >> SIX REQUIRES A VOTE. 3, 4, 5, 
          6, 7. >> AND 8, WE HAD SUPPORT. GOAL NINE AND 10, WE WOULD GET MORE INFORMATION. WE DID NOT MAKE A DECISION. GOAL 11 , NO, THERE WAS NO COMMENT ON THAT. SO WE CAN MOVE THAT FORWARD, I GUESS. WE WILL LOOK AT IT AT THE FINAL FORUM. 12, WE ALL SEEM TO AGREE ON THAT. AND 13, WE NEED A VOTE ON THE LONGLEAF PINE. AND A VOTE ON THE NOTIFICATION. 
          COMMISSIONER TAYLOR IS AGAINST THAT. SO, DO WE SEND THAT FORWARD AND VOTE ON IT LATER? OR DO WE DO THAT NOW? I THINK WE NEEDED MORE INFORMATION ON MOST OF IT. 
          >> CORRECT. >> ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WILL HAVE TO COME FROM THE BOARD. I THINK AS YOU ORIGINALLY STATED, MOVING FORWARD ON WHICH ONES -- THE ONES TO MOVE 
          FORWARD? >> I THINK I JUST STATED THAT. CAN THAT BE A MOTION? 
          >> GOING TO VOTE ON EACH ITEM, BUT NOW WE ARE GOING TO COLLECT, COLLECTIVELY VOTE NUMBER OF 
          ITEMS? >> WE WANT TO INSPIRE BRINGING IT BACK TOGETHER IN A PROFESSIONAL MANNER. THEY HAVE AN ENVIRONMENTAL LEGAL LAWYER AND WE ARE ACTUALLY PAYING, I 
          THINK, $3000 FOR THEM TO DO THAT. >> AS LONG AS REDIRECTION IS 
          [02:45:01]
          CLEAR. >> WELL, THE MOTION IS ON THE TABLE. DO I HAVE A SECOND ? 
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
          >> IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT MIGHT BE IMPOSSIBLE. >> IT SEEMS LIKE IT. IF YOU WANTED TO CHANGE YOUR THOUGHT. OKAY. WE WILL NOT INCLUDE 14. MY MOTION IS TO FORWARD ALL OF THAT 
          TO INSPIRE. DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> I WILL SECOND. 
          >> OKAY. A MOTION ON THE TABLE, WE WILL OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          >> OKAY. WE WILL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE. WOULD IT BE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE? OR SOMETHING MORE SPECIFIC? THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, SIR. 
          >> GOOD MORNING. JOE MACKEY, RED BARRY LANE. I WAS CONCERNED WHEN I READ THAT YOU ONLY HAD 1 1/2 PAGES ATTACHED TO YOUR AGENDA TODAY. SO HAPPY THAT ENVIRONMENTAL HAS STOOD AND PROVIDED MORE DETAIL. I CAN TELL YOU THAT ON OCTOBER 17TH, 2023, THE COUNTY WAS ACTUALLY PROVIDED WITH A 51 PAGE BACKUP AND STAFF HAD DONE AN EXTENSIVE AMOUNT OF RESEARCH, TALKED TO OTHER COUNTIES, HAD POLICIES FROM OTHER COUNTIES. BUT BY A 3-2 VOTE, AT THAT TIME, HAD DECIDED I CAN TO CONTINUE THAT DISCUSSION. REALLY, I DID NOT HEAR ANYTHING WITH RESPECT TO THE NORTHWEST OVERLAY, THAT THERE WAS ANY TAKING OF 35 FOOT BUFFERS THAT WERE ESTABLISHED AT THAT TIME . WHY SHOULDN'T THAT BE COUNTY-WIDE? I DO NOT SEE HOW WE CAN DO IT FOR THE NORTHWEST OVERLAY, BUT SUDDENLY IT IS A LAND TAKING IF WE TRY TO DO IT ELSEWHERE IN THE COUNTY. I CAN TELL YOU, ALREADY IN ORLANDO, LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 4.06, OUR STAFF HAS LATITUDE TO SET BUFFERS FOR ALL PROJECTS. THERE IS LIQUID IN THERE THAT SAYS, WHAT IS IN THIS TABLE IS MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS. MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS. AND STAFF HAS DISCRETION TO APPLY BUFFERS FOR EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES. SO, THERE IS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ON BUFFERS, OUR STAFF CAN DO A LOT RIGHT NOW. I CAN TELL YOU THAT TWO OF THE COMMISSIONERS WHO VOTEDNO FOR NO MORE DISCUSSION IN 2023 ARE ON THE COMMISSION TODAY.AND WHILE THERE MAY BE SOME MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES THAT THE DISCUSSION BE HELD BACK FOR THE LAND OF ELEMENT CODE, SUDDENLY WE ARE ALL ABOUT DISCUSSION TODAY THAT WE WERE NOT ABOUT IN 2023. I RECEIVED A MESSAGE, AND I WILL HERE, I WILL VOICE IT LATER. THAT TWO WEEKS AGO, WHEN WE ASKED THAT THE POPULATION PROJECTION BE MEDIUM, THAT IT WOULD REQUIRE CHANGE ORDERS, A TWO-MONTH EXTENSION, A TWO-MONTH EXTENSION TO -- AND WE WILL MISS THE AUGUST DEADLINE. WHAT I'M HEARING ABOUT TODAY, I AM GREATLY CONCERNED THAT WE WILL MISS THE AUGUST DEADLINE. I BELIEVE WE ARE HERE TODAY TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. LET'S REVISE THIS. RATHER THAN DESCENDED TO INSPIRE, LET'S SEND IT TO STAFF. THESE ARE LAND OF ELEMENT CODE ISSUES. WE ALREADY HAVE LANGUAGE IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT TALKS ABOUT PRESERVING THE ENVIRONMENT. THAT GIVES US ENOUGH LEVERAGE AND LATITUDE TO 
          CHANGE THE LAND. >> THANK YOU, SIR. GOOD MORNING, SHERRY BADGER, 7072 SOUTH COLLINS AVENUE. IF YOU HAVE LIVED IN THIS COUNTY FOR ANY AMOUNT OF TIME, YOU KNOW WHEN THE DEVELOPERS ARE DENIED A LIEN CLEARING DEVELOPMENT? WHOOPS, THEY WILL HAVE A FIRE AND THE 
          [02:50:08]
EAGLES NEST TREE WILL BE BURNT DOWN, AND THEN THEY DON'T HAVE TO WORK AROUND THE EAGLES NEST. 
          THAT HAS BEEN THE M.O. OF THIS COUNTY FOR SOME TIME. AND JUST TO LET A COUPLE OF Y'ALL COMMISSIONERS KNOW, WITH THAT PICTURE OF THE LONGLEAF PINE AND THAT YOU ARE SHOWING, DID YOU SEE THEM CONES UNDERNEATH? PROBABLY NONE OF THAT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO HER ATTENTION. THOSE SOFT PALMS ARE AN ENDANGERED AND EXPLOITED SPECIES. YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PERMIT. SO WHY ISN'T YOUR COUNTY STAFF KEEPING YOU UP ON THESE LAWS? IF YOU LOOK IT UP, TO EVEN REMOVE A SOFT PALM FROM YOUR TREE OR TO CUT SOFT PALMS, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A LICENSE FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA! THIS IS RIDICULOUS THAT YOUR STAFF HAS NOT EVEN WRITE THIS UP TO HER ATTENTION, OR THAT YOU DO NOT EVEN KNOW THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ! YOU'LL HAVE GOT A STICKY WICKET GOING ON HERE. AND SOMEBODY NEEDS TO FIGURE IT OUT. BECAUSE A COUPLE COMMISSIONERS DO NOT CARE ABOUT 
          THIS COUNTY. THANK YOU, GOD BLESS. >> THANK YOU, NEXT. 
          >> EXCUSE ME, I'M GETTING OVER A COLD. AUSTIN NICHOLAS. SOUTHPOINT PARKWAY, JACKSONVILLE, REPRESENTING THE EAST VILLAGE ASSOCIATION. I WOULD LIKE TO START UP I THINK THAT THE NORTHEAST BUILDERS ASSOCIATION HAS NOT BEEN CONSULTED WITH INSPIRE ON THESE TREE ORDINANCES. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT. WE HAVE NOT HAD A CONVERSATION ON THAT. 
          BUT, AS ALWAYS, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO PROVIDE INPUT ON THESE PROPOSED TREE ORDINANCE CHANGES. I WILL START OFF BY SAYING THAT --, THE LAST TIME THAT THESE WILL GOALS CAME UP COMING EVENTS TAKE ARCHITECTS, ENGINEER AND DEVELOPER, BUT -- WILLING TO WORK IN GOOD FAITH IN THE COUNTY THAT ALL STAKEHOLDERS GOING TO THE POINT THAT WE HAVE THE MOST CONCERNS ABOUT. GOAL THREE CREATES NEW REQUIREMENTS ON WHAT ARE CONSIDERED SPECIMEN TREES. THIS WILL REQUIRE MORE ARBORIST SERVICES WITH INCREASED COSTS. AND THEY ARE NOT EXEMPT LIKE LIVE OAKS, WHICH SEEMS LIKE A LARGE OVERSIGHT. THIS WILL AFFECT COUNTLESS ST. JOHNS COUNTY RESIDENTS WHO HAVE THESE TREES IN THEIR YARDS AND ARE ALREADY LIVING THERE. WHEN SPEEDS -- TREES GET TO SPECIMEN TREES SIDE, THEY GET IN POOR HEALTH. THIS WOULD ESPECIALLY BE TRUE SINCE THE COUNTY STAFF OFTEN, OH, SINCE THE COUNTY DOES NOT HAVE A CERTIFIED ARBORIST ON STAFF WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY REJECTING OR CERTIFIED ARBORIST REPORTS. IF A TREE IS DYING, AND ARBORIST SHOULD BE ABLE TO CERTIFY THIS SO THAT IT DOES NOT COUNT. WORLD GOLF VILLAGE IS TREES ARE AN EXAMPLE. THOSE WERE REPLANTED BY A DEVELOPER, AND WE CONSIDER THAT TO BE A GOOD DEVELOPMENT. ALL FOUR WOULD REQUIRE 20% CONVERSATION OF PUD'S AND WOULD INTENTIONALLY DRIVE BEHAVIOR TO FILL WETLANDS AND LEAVE THE UPLANDS. THIS CHANGE WILL FORCE DEVELOPMENT TO SPREAD OUT HOUNDS EVEN FURTHER, HURTING CONSERVATION AND EATING UP MORE LAND, WHICH I THINK IS THE OPPOSITE OF THE INTENTION. THIS CHANGE WILL ALSO FORCE DEVELOPERS TO CRAM TREES INTO THE CORNERS OF PROPERTIES. WHICH IS NOT HOW YOU GET A TREE TO GRW OR LOOK AESTHETICALLY. -- AS A PROTECTED TREE, WHICH WOULD HAVE THE LARGEST IMPACT. AS WITH MANY OF THESE POINTS, WE NEED MORE DETAIL, LIKE WHAT SIZE WILL BE CONSIDERED A PROTECTED TREE. ACCORDING TO THE USDA, THE LONGLEAF PINE CAN BE USED FOR SUMMER POULTRY THERE BY MAKING IT A CROP. IT'S IN THE COUNTY IS ALREADY -- FOR THE CULTURE. HAS ANYONE CONSIDERED THE EFFECT THAT THESE WILL HAVE ON GOVERNMENTAL PROJECTS LIKE SCHOOLS AND PARKS? WHEN THE COUNTY IS ALREADY HAVING TROUBLE PAYING FOR PROJECTS. OR ARE THESE WILLS THAT ONLY APPLY TO CITIZENS AND NOT THE GOVERNMENT? IF THAT IS THE CASE, THIS AMOUNTS TO GOVERNMENT OVERREACH BY TELLING CITIZENS WHAT THEY CAN AND CANNOT DO WITH THEIR PROPERTY WHERE THEY LIVE. WE NEED MORE DETAIL BEFORE ANY 
          SERIOUS DECISIONS CAN BE MADE. >> THANK YOU. >> 1368 BIRMINGHAM ROAD, SOUTH JACKSONVILLE. I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR AS A MEMBER OF THE DEVELOPED COMMUNITY , NO ONE WANTS CLEARCUTTING. DEVELOPERS DO NOT LIKE IT EITHER. WE HAVE TO ABIDE BY THE RULES THAT ARE IN PLACE. IT IS NOT JUST COUNTY RULES THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER. THE STATE PASSED A LAW LAST YEAR THAT GOES INTO EFFECT JANUARY 1ST OF 2026, THAT WE WILL HAVE TO ADD SO MUCH PHIL TO OUR SITES IN ORDER TO CLEAN THE WATER BEFORE IT GOES INTO THE WATERWAYS. SO WE NEED WORKSHOPS, WE DESPERATELY NEED WORKSHOPS TO INCORPORATE THE NEW ROLES THAT THE STATE HAS PUT IN PLACE TO CLEAN THE WATERWAYS AS WE LOOK AT THESE THINGS. AND I WAS IN ALL THE PREVIOUS WORKSHOPS THAT 
          [02:55:04]
WE DISCUSSED. THEY WERE HELD VERY POLITELY, EVERYONE WAS KIND TO EACH OTHER. EVEN WENT WITH THE TREE PEOPLE AFTER AND HAVE MULTIPLE LUNCHES. THIS IDEA THAT IT IS A DISASTER IS COMPLETELY UNTRUE FOR SOMEONE WHO WAS ACTUALLY THERE. THAT BEING SAID, THIS ALLOWS RAISING THE GRADE WITHIN 15 FEET OF THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY AND GOAL 10, THAT IS RELATED TO NINE, I CAN TELL YOU FOR PERSONAL PROJECT, WE DID THAT, IT TURNED OUT TO BE TWO INCHES OF WATER THAT SAT AND IT CAUSED ALL THE TREES TO DIE AND IT BECAME A DANGER. AGAIN, ANOTHER REASON FOR A WORKSHOP , WE ARE ALL ABOUT PRESERVING THE TREES, BUT WE HAVE TO DO IT IN SUCH A WAY, WE HAVE STORM WATER TO WORRY ABOUT, RESILIENCY TO WORRY ABOUT, WE HAVE TO TAKE ALL OF THESE THINGS INTO ACCOUNT AND NOT JUST PUT A RULE IN BECAUSE WE HAVE A VISION THAT THIS IS GOING TO WORK, YOU HAVE TO SEE EVERYTHING THAT COMES OUT IN FRONT. THAT BEING SAID, IT IS ALSO WORTH NOTING THAT THE ST. 
          JOHNS COUNTY DEVELOPMENT CODE ALLOWS 2 TO 3 INCHES OF PHIL ON THE SITE WHEN ONLY SIX INCHES OF PHIL KILLS TREES. HERE WE ARE, THE DEVELOPER HAMMERED FOR KILLING ALL THE OR CUTTING ALL THE TREES, BUT THE COUNTY'S OWN CODE IS WHAT REQUIRES US TO DO THAT. SO WE DO NOT TAKE IT LIGHTLY WHEN WE DO IT, WE ARE FORCED TO DO IT BY THE RULES. I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO SEE GOALS NINE AND 10 INCLUDE ONE ACRE LOTS, BECAUSE THAT IS A 26 PERCENT REDUCTION. I DO NOT KNOW IF THOSE GOALS INCLUDE A ONE ACRE LOT, THAT IS A 26% REDUCTION IN AREA. 30 INCHES IS TOO SMALL TO BE A SPECIMEN TREE, I THINK FOR SOME TREES IT MAY WORK. SO IT JUST CANNOT BE A VERY BROAD THING, WE NEED TO HAVE A MORE BROAD DISCUSSION ON THAT. LET'S REMEMBER THAT TREES ARE A RENEWABLE RESOURCE, AS AUSTIN MENTIONED, I DID MARBELLA, ALL OF THOSE TREES ARE BEAUTIFUL AND MATURE NOW, EVERYONE LOVES THEM. JUST BECAUSE WE ARE CUTTING A TREE DOES NOT MEAN IT IS THE END OF THE WORLD. THE COUNTY HAS PLANS IN PLACE FOR US TO REPLANT AND WE HAVE -- EXAMPLES FOR HOW BEAUTIFUL IT DOES BECOME. LET ME BE CLEAR, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THESE BUFFERS, WE DO NOT WANT CLEAR TO 20 FEET HEREIN 20 FEET THERE, SOMETIMES THOSE ARE VERY UGLY. AND THAT NEEDS TO BE BEAUTIFIED IN LINE WITH THE REST OF THE PROJECT. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS SUSANNA PEBBLE. I LIVE IN SAINT AUGUSTINE. I HAVE BEEN A RESIDENT OF SANTOS COUNTY SINCE 2000. AND I AM IN FAVOR OF PROTECTING TREES WHEREVER WE CAN. I HAVE SEEN RAPID AND INDISCRIMINATE TREE DESTRUCTION ALL OVER THE COUNTY. IT USED TO BE REALLY GREEN, AND IT IS JUST NOT TODAY. I THINK CLEARCUTTING LAND SHOULD NOT BE CLEARED JUST TO MAKE IT MORE MARKETABLE TO DEVELOPERS. IF CLEARCUTTING IS GOING TO HAPPEN FOR A PROJECT, IT NEEDS TO WAIT UNTIL THE DEVELOPMENT ACTUALLY DOES START, LIKE WAS DISCUSSED IN THE MEETING. AN EXAMPLE IS BY MY HOUSE, I LIVE OVER OFF OF HICKMAN LANE. THERE IS A LOT ON U.S. ONE ACROSS FROM 'S WINGS, IT HAS BEEN CLEAR FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS, I DO NOT KNOW HOW LONG IT HAS BEEN CLEARED, AND IT IS JUST SITTING THERE. FURTHERMORE, I HAVE SEEN TREES PLANTED IN RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES THAT WEREN'T CLEAR CUT IT. THEY ARE PLANTED IN POTS JUST BEFORE THE INSPECTORS COME, THEN THEY ARE TAKEN OUT. THAT HAS GOT TO STOP. I DO NOT KNOW HOW COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CAN HANDLE THAT. THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE FOLLOW-UP TO ENSURE THAT PEOPLE AND BUSINESSES ARE COMPLYING. A BIG QUESTION IS A SEEING EASEMENT CORRIDORS FROM DEVELOPMENTS. BECAUSE IF WE COULD HAVE SOME CORE DOORS, WE WOULD HAVE LESS DEER GETTING HIT BY CARS AND IT WOULD ALSO JUST REALLY HELP THE COMMUNITY IN GENERAL. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COULD LOOK INTO FOR THE FUTURE. AND I WOULD BE MOST GRATEFUL. ANOTHER, AND THIS IS A LITTLE CRAZY, PERHAPS COMMISSIONERS COULD CONSIDER MAKING A FUND FOR HOMEOWNERS TO MOVE BIG TREES. I HAVE SEEN BIG TREES GET MOVED. I KNOW IT IS ABSOLUTELY POSSIBLE, SO MAYBE IF THERE IS SOME SORT OF FUND FOR RESIDENTIAL OWNERS WHO CANNOT AFFORD TO MOVE A BIG TREE ON THE PROPERTY, IT COULD BE MOVED TO ANOTHER LOCATION. WE CERTAINLY HAVE THE EQUIPMENT AND THE EXPERTISE IN OUR COUNTY TO ACTUALLY DO THIS. AND THEN ON COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, I LIVED IN HAWAII FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I ALWAYS SAW IS THAT IN HAWAII, THEY WORK AROUND BIG TREES, LIKE A BIG PARKING LOT. A BIG TREE OR A BIG AREA. AND THEN THEY DEVELOP AROUND IT. SO IT IS CERTAINLY POSSIBLE TO NOT HAVE TO CUT A TREE DOWN IN A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS. THANK YOU. 
          CAPTIONERS TRANSITIONING GOING KEEP DOING THE SAME THING. OVER AND OVER. BUT THAT WAS ABOUT THE 
          [03:00:17]
SCHOOL SUFFERING, UNDER OVERDEVELOPMENT. WHICH WE CAN NOW AGREE, WE CAN ALL SLIP FROM ONE. HINDSIGHT IS 20/20. WHAT I'M SAYING TO YOU AS A 10-YEAR RESIDENT IS THAT I'M -- I'M NOT HAPPY WITH THE DIRECTION THAT THE COUNTY IS GOING. AND THAT'S WHY I VOTED FOR CHANGE. I'M NOT SAYING THAT EVERYTHING THAT WAS LAID OUT TODAY MAKES 100% SENSE, BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS TIME IS MONEY. I DON'T WANT THE LOW-HANGING FRUIT THAT EVERYONE CAN AGREE ON. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THINGS THAT ARE MOVED FORWARD THAT PRESERVE THE BEAUTY OF OUR COUNTY. WE KNOW THAT DEVELOPMENTS ARE MOVING SOUTH. NORTH IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE 17 IN CLAY COUNTY, OR BLANDING, WIFE YOU KNOW IT. DO YOU WANT THAT TO HAPPEN TO THE SOUTH? I DON'T. I'M JUST ASKING THAT, YOU KNOW, TALK, WORKSHOPS, RUNNING OUT OF TIME WITH INSPIRE. THESE ARE ALL MOVING THINGS FURTHER OUT OF WHAT WE VOTED FOR. AND WHAT WE VOTED FOR IS TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE IT SO THAT ST. JOHN'S COUNTY DOES NOT BECOME A CITY COUNTY THAT LOOKS LIKE IT'S JUST STRIP MALL, STRIP MALL, STRIP MALL. WE CAN HAVE BUFFERS. I MEAN, I DRIVE TO SOUTH DAYTONA HILTON HEAD IS A PERFECT AREA. JUPITER. PARTS OF FORT MYERS, AND YOU GO, YOU DON'T KNOW THERE IS A WALMART EXCEPT A SIGN. THOSE ARE GORGEOUS BUFFERS. AND THOSE ARE HABITATS FOR ANIMALS. AND IT JUST HELPS WITH SHADE, HELPS WITH THE COST OF -- OF -- OF THINGS. WITH HEATING. PEOPLE WALKING. I LIKE TO WALK IN THE SHADE. PLEASE, PLEASE, MOVE THINGS FORWARD. I DON'T WANT TO KEEP TALKING ABOUT THINGS. THANK YOU. 
          >> DANNY, GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA. MY FAMILY HAS BEEN HERE SINCE 1981. AND I WORK AS A PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING ARBORIST. I'M THE ONE PEOPLE CALL TO FIGURE OUT WHAT SIZE THESE ARE. JUST TO GIVE AN EXAMPLE, I WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT THIS IMAGE THIS IS OF A JOB THAT WE ARE DOING. THIS IS RIVERTOWN, SOME YEARS AGO. THE CODE THIS COUNTY USES, NO ONE ELSE IN THE STATE USES THIS CODE TO -- TO -- TO DETERMINE SPECIMEN TREES. 
          EVERYONE USES TRUNK DIAMENTER AND/OR SPECIES. THE METHOD WE USE, I THINK, WAS ESTABLISHED OFF THE STATE OF FLORIDA'S CHAMPION TREE GUIDE. WHY IT WAS USED HERE, I DO NOT KNOW. BUT IT WAS OVERLY COME WER SOM. CUMBERSOME. AND IT DOES NOT APPLY TO EVERYDAY USES. AND IT ABSOLUTELY TAKES TOO MUCH TIME OUT OF PERSONNEL STAFF TO GO OUT AND CALCULATE THESE THINGS. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE IT CHANGED TO JUST TRUNK DIAMETER. THAT'S MY FATHER UNDERNEATH IT TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA. SO THIS TREE DID NOT MEET SPECIMEN TREE REQUIREMENTS BASED ON OUR PREVIOUS CODE. 
          UNFORTUNATELY, THE NEW METHOD, STILL WOULD PRECLUDE THIS TREE. 
          BECAUSE A 50-INCH DIAMETER TREE IS MASSIVE. AND THERE ARE VERY FEW LEFT. THAT IS A 45-INCH DIAMETER TREE. SO WHILE WE ARE MAKING A GOOD STEP FORWARD, WE STILL WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO REDUCE THAT TREE. THAT WOULD BE 45, NOT 50. 50 SEEMS LIKE A GOOD NUMBER. BUT IT DOES NOT WORK. AND IT DOES NOT PROTECT ENOUGH LIVE OAK TREES. WITH REGARD TO PINE TREES. THEY USE SLASH PINE, SPRUCE PINE. THE OTHER SPECIES OF PINES, LAWN LEAF, NOT USED IN CIVIL CULTURE. THE IDEA THAT IT WOULD UNDULY BURDEN, I DON'T KNOW OF ANYONE THAT IS PLANTING AND GROWING. THEY GROW TOO SLOWLY TO BE USED FOR TIMBER, TOO SLOWLY TO BE USED FOR MULCH AND OTHER GRINDING USES. SO THEY JUST USE SLASH PINE AND LAW VALLEY PINE, NOT LEAF PINE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS VICKI PEP RELY. I'M HERE PURPOSES TO SERVE BLACK AND 
          [03:05:01]
UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES. LINKING WITH COMMUNITY NEEDS AS IDENTIFIED BY COMMUNITY LEADERS. YOU MIGHT BE WONDERING WHY A GROUP FOCUSED ON THIS WOULD WEIGH IN ON A TREE ORDINANCE. 
          STUDIES HAVE SHOWN THE TREE INEQUALITY HAVE MISSED. USING REMOTE SENSING AND IMAGE PROCESSING, THE NATURE CONSERVANCY HAS FOUND IT EXISTS EVERYWHERE. AND AS CONTINUES TO GROW. IT IS BECOMING LESS RURAL AND SUBURBAN. TREES HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO HAVE MANY ENVIRONMENTAL AND HUMAN HEALTH BENEFITS, INCLUDING REDUCING TEMPERATURES AND AIR QUALITY. TREES ARE GOOD FOR WERE. BUT THE FACT, LOWER INCOME AND MINORITY NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE U.S., GENERALLY HAVE BEEN FOUND TO HAVE FEWER TREES, PROSPECTS AN ISSUE OF FAIRNESS. WE'RE FORTUNATE IN OUR COUNTY, THAT HISTORICALLY, MOST BLACK NEIGHBORHOODS. TREE EQUITY TO REMAIN SENSITIVE TO, AS HOUSING DEVELOPMENT IN OUR COUNTY PROCEEDS. AS YOU KNOW, CARE STAUNCHLY ADVOCATES FOR MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. ESPECIALLY FOR THOSE BELOW 80% AND EVEN 50% AND 30% OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME. 
          ONE CHALLENGE OFTEN INCREASES BUILDER COSTS, WHICH THEN COULD IMPACT AFFORDABILITY. AFFORDABLE HOMES ARE LIKELY TO BE BUILT ON SMALLER LOTS. AFFECTS THEIR ROOT SYSTEM. BECAUSE TROS ARE GOOD IN SO MANY WAYS, WE DO URGE YOU TO INCREASE THEIR PROTECTION IN A REVISED ORDINANCE. PLEASE, IMPOSE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER FINES FOR FAILURE TO GET A PERSONALITY, WHEN BUILDERS REMOVE TREES. UNDER THE CURRENT ORDINANCE, FINES TO MOVE TREES IN CALLOUS DISREGARD OF COUNTY PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS. IN BENEFIT FOR THE COMMUNITY IS SIMPLY A COST OF DOING BUSINESS. 
          BUT ALSO PLEASE PERMIT FOR DEVELOPING OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. TAKES ON THE IMPACT OF THOSE BELOW AMI. PLEASE CONSULT A TRAINED ARBORIST IN COMPLEX CASES TO ASSIST THE COUNTY IN WEIGHING TRADEOFFS OF PRESERVATION. AND FINALLY, PLEASE CREATE A FUND THAT WILL ASSIST LOW-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS IN REMOVING TREES THEIR BUILDERS BUILT IN COMPLIANCE, WHEN A REMOVAL BECOMES NECESSARY FOR EITHER SAFETY OR INSURANCE REASONS. FOR EXAMPLE, INSURANCE COMPANIES MAY THREATEN TO DROP COVERAGE, IF HOMEOWNERS DON'T REDUCE THEIR TREES DUE TO HURRICANE RISK. DROPPING INSURANCE COVERAGE IS NOT LIKELY TO BE AN OPTION WITH MORTGAGE LENDERS AND HAVING TO PAY THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO REMOVE TREES COULD CAUSE LOW-INCOME 
          FAMILIES TO LOSE THEIR HOMES. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> GOOD MORNING. I'M CHUCK LIPPY, 243 SHAMROCK ROAD. I'VE BEEN HERE SINCE 1981. MY SON WAS JUST HERE. WE BOTH WORK AS CONSERVING ARBORISTS. THERE ARE ONLY 25 OF US AT THAT LEVEL IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA. I'M REALLY PROUD TO LIVE IN ST. AUGUSTINE. OKAY, THERE'S BEEN SOME COMMENT ABOUT, WE GOTTA FILL, REQUIRED BY LAW, BY STATUTE, SO THE TREES HAVE TO COME OUT. THERE'S NO WAY TO WORK AROUND THIS. WE DO WORK AROUND THAT, BECAUSE WE ENCOUNTER THIS A LOT. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THIS. I HAVE SEVERAL SITES, WHERE WE'VE DONE THIS. BUT UP HERE IN THIS CORNER, YOU CAN SEE A -- A ROLLER, RIGHT NEXT TO THE TREES, WHICH WOULD NORMALLY CRUSH THE ROOTS AND COMPACT THE SOIL AND MAKE IT SO IT'S NOT VIABLE. BUT WE USE A GEO GRID STONE METHOD. AND WE ARE ABLE TO WORK WITH FILL SOIL. WE'D RATHER NOT HAVE TO DO THIS. BUT IN THIS CASE, THESE TREES OVER BY THE TOURIST CENTER, THEY HAVE A WATER WHEEL THERE, IT'S ACROSS FROM THE BRONX PIZZA THAT IS GOING IN. THIS HAS BEEN DONE SINCE 2013. 
          SO WE HAVE 12 YEARS. USUALLY, TREES SHOW DAMAGE FROM CONSTRUCTION IN THREE TO FIVE YEARS. SO THESE TREES ARE GOING WELL. WE HAVE MANY OTHER SITES -- LET'S SEE HERE. THIS IS THE MARRIOTT ON THE ISLAND THAT WAS PUT IN TO SAVE A TREE. THEY HAD TO BUILD UP THE SOIL. YOU CAN SEE HERE. ALMOST THREE FEET. 
          NOW, THERE ARE DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS, TOO. BUT WE CAN PROTECT ROOTS. WE HAVE A TECHNOLOGY. IT'S NOT EXPENSIVE. 
          IT'S A MATTER OF LAYING OUT A GEO GRID OF MATERIAL THAT IS A PLASTIC GRID. AND THEN YOU PUT THE CLEAN '57 STONE ON TOP OF 
          [03:10:06]
IT. AND THEN A GEO GLOSS ON TOP OF THAT, TO KEEP FINES FROM SIFTING IN AND PLUGGING THE AIR HOLES. SO THE ROOTS ARE ABLE TO SURVIVE. AND WE HAVE A DOZEN PROJECTS HERE IN THE AREA. AND THESE TREES HAVE BEEN GOING ON FOR A LONG TIME. THE COUNTY HAS A TRAFFIC CENTER OVER ON OLD MULTRY. WE HAD TO PUT A TREE IN. 
          THAT TREE IS FINE. THIS WAS 2009. WE PROTECTED IT. THE ROOTS ACTUALLY WENT UNDER THE ROAD. GEOGRID WAS USED TO PROTECT THE ROOTS. SO THIS CAN BE DONE. THE EXCUSE WE CAN'T DO IT, WE HAVE FILL, WE CAN WORK AROUND IT. WE ALWAYS LIKE TO KEEP THINGS AWAY FROM THE TREES, BUT WE CAN WORK AROUND THAT, TOO. THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> MY NAME IS WILLIAM SHAYER, JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA, 32216. I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME UP HERE AND SHARE SOME THOUGHTS AND GIVE A LITTLE FEEDBACK ON THIS. I REALLY ENJOYED A LOT OF THE DISCUSSION THAT WAS ONGOING. I THINK A LOT OF THE COMMISSIONERS. WELL, ALL THE COMMISSIONERS. THEY GET WHAT THEY NEED AND WHAT THEY WANT. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT I'D LIKE TO SHARE SOME OF MY THOUGHTS. I'M A CIVIL ENGINEER. 
          I OWN AN ENGINEERING COMPANY IN JACKSONVILLE. I DO A LOT OF WORK IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. I'VE BEEN DOING WORK, 30 YEARS I'VE BEEN DOING THE WORK IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. I'VE SEEN THE COUNTY GROW. I'VE SEEN THE REGULATIONS CHANGE AND ADD MORE RESTRICTIONS ON IT. SO I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THOSE REGULATIONS. BUT I ALWAYS THINK WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS THE RIPPLE EFFECT OF THE THINGS THAT WE PUT LEGISLATION ON, OR WE MAKE ORDINANCES ON. SO LET ME SHARE JUST A COUPLE OF THOUGHTS THAT I HAVE. I THINK THE ORDINANCE DOES NOT REALLY GIVE CLEAR DIRECTION. AND I THINK THAT'S ONE THING WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE FROM STAFF AND PRANCE YOUR CONSULTANT AS WELL. FOR EXAMPLE, THE ORDINANCE STATES IT WANTS TO PREVENT LANE CLEARING TOO FAR IN ADVANCE OF DEVELOPMENT. WELL, HOW FAR IS TOO FAR? HOW FAR IS NOT TOO FAR? JUST A LITTLE MORE UNDERSTANDING ON THAT. TYPICALLY, MY CLIENTS DON'T CLEAR THE LAND, UNLESS IT'S FULLY PERMITTED. BECAUSE IT'S A COST THEY DON'T WANT TO PAY FOR UNTIL IT'S READY. WHEN IT COMES TO CLEARING LAND, THERE ARE REASONS TO CLEAR LAND IN ADVANCE. WE PHASE PROJECTS. THE COUNTY REQUIRES US TO PHASE PROJECTS FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS. ONE OF THEM IS SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE A DUMP TRUCK DRIVE IN FRONT OF A RESIDENTIAL HOME, AFTER THE RESIDENTIAL HOME HAS BEEN BUILT. SO WE HAVE TO PHASE OUR PROJECTS, AND WE HAVE TO FACE THEM DIFFERENT THAN WE WOULD WANT TO DO THEM OTHERWISE. SO ONE OF THE OTHER REQUIREMENTS IS, STORM WATER PONDS ARE INTERCONNECTED. SO WE HAD TO BUILD A LOT OF THE STORMWATER SYSTEM. IN ORDER TO BUILD THE STORMWATER SYSTEM, WE HAD TO BUILD THE PHASES. WE HAVE TO PLACE IT SOMEWHERE. THERE IS A NEED, AND THERE IS AN ENGINEERING REASON FOR THAT. I'D BE WILLING TO WORK WITH DICK DESOSA AND THE ENGINEERING STAFF TO DID GO THROUGH A LOT OF THOSE. BUT I'M PRETTY SURE THEY KNOW THOSE ALREADY. DISCUSSION ITEM NUMBER 8. NEEDS THE BETTER SCREENING EDGES. I THINK THAT CAME UP. ARE THEY ADDITIVE? WE HAVE 35 FEET, WE HAVE 30 FEET, WE HAVE 75 FEET. WE HAVE 15 FEET WE CAN'T FILL. JUST CLARITY ON THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. AND THE REASON IS, I'M THE ONE THAT PUTS TOGETHER THE EMPTY PIECE. I'M THE ONE THAT DOES THOSE AND LAYS THEM OUT. THE CLEARER IT IS AND EASIER IT IS FOR ME. I ALSO WOULD SAY ON A 10-ACRE PARCEL. THE DEVELOPMENT EDGE. THAT'S 2.73 ACRES. THAT'S 27% OF THE PROJECT OF THE PLAN, GOES JUST 
          TO THE DEVELOPMENT EDGES -- >> THANK YOU. 
          >> -- NOT CONSIDERING ALL THE OTHER STUFF.  THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> MARK ENZIER. 
          >> CAN YOU SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE? THANK YOU. 
          >> IT'S FUNNY. MY MOTHER-IN-LAW INSISTED ONUL CAKING ME MIKE FOR MUCH OF OUR MARRIAGE. IT'S MARK. SORRY. 
          >> MARK. I FEEL A CONNECTION ALREADY. 
          >> GREAT. I -- I JUST WANTED TO SAY BEFORE I STARTED, ON THE ISSUE OF WORKSHOPS, A PREVIOUS COMMISSION VOTED 5-0 TO ASK STAFF TO PROVIDE IDEAS FOR PRESERVING THE TREE CANOPY IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. MY WIFE AND I WERE A PART OF A GROUP THAT 
          [03:15:03]
ATTENDED THOSE WORKSHOPS AS PART OF THE TREE PRESERVATION GROUP. 
          THEY WERE CIVIL MEETINGS. UNFORTUNATELY, THERE WERE ABOUT 20 DEVELOPERS, LAWYERS, BUILDERS, ET CETERA. AND A SMALL GROUP OF US. AT THE END OF THOSE SERIES OF MEETINGS, THERE WAS NOT A SINGLE IDEA THAT WOULD HAVE PRESERVED TREES. I URGE YOU TO MOVE FORWARD QUICKLY, AS HAS BEEN SAID BEFORE ON THESE ISSUES. THIS IS -- THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT HAS BEEN LANGUISHING FOR OVER 20 YEARS IN THIS COUNTY. UH, I DID WANT TO SAY, QUICKLY, I WAS A LITTLE DISAPPOINTED IN -- THAT GOAL ONE AND TWO WERE DROPPED OFF THE AGENDA. I LIVE IN VELANO BEACH. 
          YOU HAVE A PROBLEM IN VELANO BEACH, WITH OVERDEVELOPMENT, AND SHORT-TERM RENTALS. ONE IN TWO WAYS TO DEAL WITH BOTH OF THOSE. 
          RIGHT NOW, WHAT'S HAPPENING IS PEOPLE ARE COMING IN AND BUYING UP OLD LOTS. THEY'RE SUBDIVIDING THEM, THEY'RE CLEARCUTTING THEM, THEY THROWING IN SMALL THREE-TWOS, AND INSTANTLY GOING ON THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL MARKET. THE LATEST STATISTIC I'VE SEEN IS WE'RE ABOUT 30 PRTD % SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD NOW. WE REALLY DON'T HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD ANYMORE. WE'RE A COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD AT THIS POINT. I DID WANT TO SAY ON -- ON YOUR LIST, THAT THE ITEMS RELATING TO THE DIFFERENT SETBACKS, AND THE DIFFERENT BUFFER ZONES, IT'S NECESSARY, I BELIEVE, TO SET SOME MINIMUM STANDARDS, SO THAT AS WE DEVELOP THE REST OF THE COUNTY, RERETAIN SOME OF THE TREE CANOPY THAT EXISTS RIGHT NOW. MY WIFE AND I WERE INTERESTED IN THIS ISSUE BECAUSE WE WERE PRACTICING VETERINARIANS IN THE COUNTY, FOR 30 YEARS. ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS WE DID WHEN WE CAME TO THE COUNTY IS WE BEGAN TO SERVE THE LOCAL WILDLIFE GROUPS, AS THEIR VETERINARIANS. PEOPLE WOULD DROP BIRDS -- WILDLIFE OFF WITH US EVERY DAY. AND WHAT WE SAW OVER THE YEARS IS AN ACCELERATION OF THE NUMBERS OF THOSE ANIMALS AS DEVELOPMENT OVERCAME THE COUNTY. 
          MOST OF US EITHER LIVE HERE OR MOVED HERE BECAUSE OF THE NATURAL RESOURCES WE HAVE. I URGE YOU TO STAY WITH THIS AND PROTECT MORE OF WHAT'S LEFT. THANKS VERY MUCH. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> COLE CROSBY, 1169 NECKLINE ROAD. MARK IS A LITTLE MODEST, ACTUALLY, WHO JUST SPOKE. HE AND HIS WIFE HEAD A GROUP CALLED CITIZENS FOR TREES. THIS IS THE BEST WAY TO DESCRIBE THE WORK. GINNY, HIS WIFE, TOLD US, AFTER THEY WENT THROUGH ALL OF THOSE WORKS WITH THE DEVELOPERS, THAT ONE OF THE DEVELOPERS CAME UP TO HER AFTERWARDS AND SAID, GINNY, I FEEL REALLY BAD, YOU GUYS DIDN'T GET ANYTHING. OKAY? THAT'S KIND OF HOW WE FEEL ABOUT WORKSHOPS RIGHT NOW. AND YOU KNOW, THIS OPPRESSIVE DEVELOPER FIST ON US. I KNOW I'M SOUNDING A LITTLE DRAMATIC. BUT WHAT I JUST HEARD TODAY, I ALMOST HAD TO LEAVE, I WAS SO UPSET. I ALMOST HAD TO LEAVE. 
          COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST READ A LETTER, A DEPOSITION, FROM A LAWSUIT, THAT WAS FILED BY HIS SOCIAL MEDIA MANAGER AGAINST ME. 
          THAT'S WHERE THAT LETTER CAME FROM, AND YOU KNOW IT. THAT LETTER I WROTE TO COMMISSIONER JOSEPH WAS A PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE, DECENT LETTER, IN WHICH I ENUMERATED THESE THINGS, THESE DIFFERENT POINTS, THAT WERE TRYING TO BE ACHIEVED. I DID NOT WRITE ONE FREAKING POINT ON THAT LIST. AND I KNOW THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO UNDERMINE THAT LIST BY SAYING, AH, THAT MARKETING LADY WROTE THAT STUFF. NO, I DIDN'T. I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW WHAT A LOT OF RECORD WAS. I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT A TREE INCH WAS. I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT DBH MEANT. I DIDN'T KNOW ANY OF THAT. MARK AND GINNY WALKED ME THROUGH A LOT OF THAT STUFF. JEN LOMBERT SAID I WROTE THIS, STOP SAYING I WROTE THIS. JUST STOP. 
          I WANT TO SAY HOW FAR THE DEVELOPERS GO TO DESTROY WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE. THE SOCIAL MEDIA MANAGER OF HIS, WHO FILED THE LAWSUIT AGAINST ME, FILED A MERITLESS LAWSUIT THAT COST ME $52,000 OF MY HARD-EARNED MONEY. $52,000. THAT LAWSUIT WAS COMPLETELY DROPPED. THER E WAS NOTHING TO IT. IT WAS DROPPED. IT WAS DROPPED AFTER SHE WAS D DEPOSED. IT WAS DROPPEDDA EVER SHE WAS DEPOSED. AND IT WAS DROPPED AFTER AMBER 
          [03:20:05]
EMERY DEPOSED. THIS WAS ALL TO HARASS ME, TRY AND MAKE ME GO AWAY. AND IT WAS ALSO TO GAIN INTELLIGENCE ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING IN THE GRASS ROOTS MOVEMENT. SO THAT LETTER IS A PIECE OF INTELLIGENCE THAT WAS GAINED THAT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE LIBEL LAWSUIT. NOTHING. NOTHING. I DON'T -- I'M KIND OF -- WELL, OBVIOUSLY, I'M NOT SPEECHLESS, BECAUSE I JUST RANTED FOR THREE MINUTES. BUT I'M HORRIFIED. THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> IT'S AN E-MAIL THAT IS A 
          MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD -- >> I'M SORRY, YOU HAVEN'T BEEN RECOGNIZED, MR. WHITEHURST -- COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST, -- 
          EXCUSE ME -- >> OUTRAGEOUS. E-MAILS ARE 
          PUBLIC RECORD. >> YES, SIR. MAY I? THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. ED SLAVEN, BOX 304. A LINDA JOHNSON WOULD SAY, COME, LET US REASON TOGETHER. WE HAVE THREE COMMISSIONERS WHO ARE COMMITTED TO APPLYING THE LAW OF THE FACTS. YOU JUST HEARD TWO OF THE 12 WITNESSES ARE BOARD-CERTIFIED MASTER ARBORISTS WHO LIVE IN THIS COMMUNITY THEIR ENTIRE LIFE. TONY LIPPY AND HIS SON -- CHUCK LIPPY AND HIS SON. CLEAR CUTTING COSTS US MONEY. 
          WHEN YOU PAY YOUR FPL BILL, THE COST IS HIGHER IF THERE ARE NO TREES. THAT'S A FACT. IT COST US WILDLIFE. ONLY ONE OF THE 12 WITNESSES EACH TALKED ABOUT WILDLIFE. WHAT ARE WE GOING TO 
          DO ABOUT THE CRITTER. >> WHAT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY? AND WHAT ABOUT THE SEVEN-GENERATION TEST? CHUCK LIPPY AND HIS SON NAILED IT. WE NEED TO CONSULT ARBORISTS. I DISAGREE WITH THE INDUSTRY EXPERT. I BELIEVE IN MIRACLES AND ONE OF THEM WAS WHEN WE SAVED FISH ISLAND. AND MAYOR SNODGRASS CAME AND TESTIFIED BEFORE THE 15 PEOPLE WHO TESTIFIED AGAINST BE THE DEVELOPMENT. AND IT TURNED OUT, AFTER THAT DEVELOPMENT WAS DENIED, ELLEN AVERY-SMITH AND HER CLIENTS REPORTED. AND MAINTAINED TO MAKE FISH ISLAND A PARK. THERE WAS NO ECONOMIC TESTIMONY PRESENTED BY THE DEVELOPERS TODAY. NONE. THE STAFF DIDN'T DO THEIR HOMEWORK, DIDN'T DO THEIR JOB, THEY NEVER DO. I WOULD COMMEND YOUR ATTENTION WHAT JERRY DIXON AND CARL BLOW WOULD DO. THEY WOULD DO MORAL REASON AND TALK WITH PROPERTY OWNERS AND SAY, HOW ARE YOU WITH PRESERVE STUFF? CALLING YOUR ATTENTION TO UNITED STATES VERSUS DOTTERWEICH. NEEDS TO BE MORE THAN JUST A MEANINGFUL COLLECTION OF WORDS. WE HAD A LOBBYIST TESTIFY AND DIDN'T IDENTIFY HIMSELF AS SUCH. HE'S NOT AN EXPERT IN ANYTHING, NOT EVEN AN ECONOMIST. ROBERT KENNEDY, U.S. SENATOR SAID, IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO DISSENT. WE MUSTY DID MAND. FROM THAT TREES GROUP. I ATTENDED ONE OF THEIR MEETINGS AND THEY ABOLISHED THEMSELVES AND GAVE THE MONEY TO THE COUNTY, BECAUSE NOTHING WAS HAPPENING. WE NEED TO CONSULT EXPERT ARBORISTS LIKE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA EXPERTS. AND $75,000 HAS BEEN SPENT, I THINK THAT'S WASTE, FRAUD AND ABUSE, ON THIS INSPIRE GROUP AND THEY HAVE NOT RESPONDED TO MY QUESTIONS AND NEITHER HAS THE COUNTY. BUT TO BE CONTINUED. YOU'RE DOING A GOOD JOB. I BELIEVE IN MIRACLES, AND I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ONE TODAY. 
          >> DORIS TAYLOR? 208 LABILLY ROAD. TO FOLLOW THE COMMENTS OF MS. CROSBY, I SYMPATHIZE BECAUSE I ALSO HAVE SUFFERED LAWFARE HERE IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. I WAS ARRESTED ON FALSE CHARGES FOR THE PURPOSES OF HARASSING ME. AND WE NEED TO FIND A WAY TO STOP THIS. ST. JOHNS COUNTY IS OUT OF CONTROL IN THAT REGARD. 
          IT COST ME THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS, AND COST MY FAMILY SERIOUS DISTRESS. SO IT'S NOT FUNNY -- THE NOT MINOR, IT'S HUGE. AND IT'S A BIG PROBLEM HERE. NOW, IN REGARDS TO THIS TREE ORDINANCE ISSUE, THIS IMAGE -- CAN I SEE THE IMAGE? THERE'S AN IMAGE ON THE BOARD, PLEASE. IN ANY CASE, IT'S AN EXCELLENT EXAMPLE OF WHAT HAPPENED TO THIS PERSON'S BACKYARD. THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE BEFORE. THIS IS WHAT IT 
          [03:25:06]
LOOKED LIKE WHEN THEIR NEIGHBORS CLEAR-CUT WITHOUT NOTICE. 
          ELIMINATION OF A NATURAL TREE BUFFER HAPPENED TO 26 FAMILIES IN PONTE VEDRA, IT WAS NEEDLESS AND HAD A DEVASTATING IMPACT THERE QUALITY OF LIFE. NEVER AGAIN SHOULD THIS HAPPEN. PLEASE ENSURE THAT IT DOESN'T. AND APPROVE GOAL NUMBER 8, TO REQUIRE NATURAL BUFFERS. AND WE MUST ADD, IN THAT CASE, GOAL NUMBER 9, TO PROTECT THEIR ROOTS FROM ADDED FILL, OR SOMETHING THAT WILL ACCOMPLISH THAT. I APPRECIATE THAT YOU ALL ARE TALKING ABOUT THE ISSUES IN HOW TO GET FROM HERE TO THERE. AND I ALSO AGREE THAT IT MAKES NO SENSE TO SEND THIS BACK TO ANOTHER WORKSHOP. I AM THRILLED TO SEE REAL PROGRESS GOING ON. I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE STILL ADDITIONAL STEPS THAT NEED BE TO TAKEN TO REVISE THIS. BUT I'M -- I'M VERY HAPPY TO SEE, MOVING FORWARD HERE. IN ADDITION, ON NUMBER 10, A FEW YEARS AGO, RESIDENTS IN NOCATEE LIVED A FLIGHT MARE. WHEN THE BEAUTIFUL LANDS BEHIND THEIR HOMES, CAME CRASHING DOWN TO THE GROUND. THEY LOST A MAJOR ASSET TO THEIR HOMES, AND IT WAS ALSO LIFE-THREATENING TO THEM AND THEIR FAMILIES. A SECOND DEVELOPMENT IN NOCATEE, DELL WEBB MADE SIMILAR REPORTS. IN ONE CASE, IT WAS EXPLAINED AS AN ENGINEERING ERROR IN THE DRAINAGE. IN ANOTHER CASE, IT WAS THOUGHT TO BE THE RAISED GRADE CAUSED MORE WATER TO ACCUMULATE IN THE NONRAISED GRADE SO THE TREE ROOTS WERE LITERALLY DROWNING. THIS IS SIGNIFICANT STUFF. AND I -- I -- I REALLY UNDERSTAND AND RESPECT THE FACT THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO PROTECT PROPERTY RIGHTS. I ALSO THINK THAT'S AN ESSENTIAL THING. AND THERE'S A BALANCING ACT HERE. BUT ALLOWING SOMEBODY TO DO SOMETHING ON THEIR PROPERTY THAT IS GOING TO NEGATIVELY IMPACT YOUR PROPERTY, HAS ALWAYS BEEN SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN -- WE'VE TRIED TO CONTROL AND PREVENT. AND PROTECTING THE ROOTS SO THAT A BIG TREE ISN'T GOING TO FALL DOWN IN SOMEBODY'S YARD. THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE TO ME. THERE'S GOT TO BE A WAY. UM, ANYWAY, USED UP MY TIME. BUT THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> AND WE HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO 
          STOP THIS LAWFARE. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS TRAVIS MINCH, NECK ROAD. I WISH I HAD MORE TIME. I CAME WITH PREPARED REMARKS BUT THERE'S A FEW THINGS I WANTED TO SAY BEFORE I BEGIN. COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST, I LIVE ON THE SAME ROW AS MS. NICOLE CROSBY. HER AND I HAVE A LOVE-HATE RELATIONSHIP. I LOVE TREES LIKE SHE DOES, BUT OUR APPROACH IS VERY DIFFERENT. I CAN ALSO CONFIRM YOUR BELIEF BECAUSE I WAS IN CONVERSATIONS WITH NICOLE ABOUT HER DIRECT INVOLVEMENT IN A DRAFTING OF TREE REGULATIONS AND HOW THAT WAS BEING CIRCULATED UP DIRECTLY TO A COMMISSIONER. NOW, I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THAT. I THINK THAT IS A CITIZEN'S RIGHT TO DO SO, AND I APPLAUD HER EFFORT TO PRESSURE OUR TREES. NICOLE HAS A LOT OF GREAT IDEAS, AT THE SAME TIME, SHE'S GOT SOME IDEAS THAT ARE NOT SO GOOD. 
          HER BACKGROUND IS IN MARKETING, AND SHE'S VERY GOOD AT BRINGING OUT A CROWD. PERSONALLY, MY BACKGROUND IS -- I'M SORRY -- 
          >> TREES? >> TREES. YES. MY BACKGROUND IS IN LAND PLANNING. AND I'M A BIG PROPONENT OF TREES. IF I CAN, I'D LIKE TO START BY MAKING SURE EVERYONE IN THIS ROOM IS AWARE THAT THE PROPOSED STRENGTHENING OF ARTICLE 4, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, INVOLVING TREE PROTECTIONS WILL BE THE ENVIRONMENTAL DIVISION. THIS IS THE VERY SAME DIVISION I SPOKE ABOUT EARLIER, THAT IS ACTIVELY VIOLATING LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS, AND ABUSING EXISTING AUTHORITY TO DENY A LAND OWNER'S PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS. I AM ALL FOR TREES IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. BUT VERY MUCH OPPOSED TO GRANTING THE ENVIRONMENTAL DIVISION MORE LAND DEVELOPMENT ON MY PROPERTY. I SAY THIS AS A PROPERTY OWNER WHO DEEPLY CARES ABOUT THE PROPERTY AND ENVIRONMENT. WHO HAS VOLUNTARILY PLANTED OVER 30 TREES ON MY OWN HORM SITE. OVER 150 CALIPER INCHES OF TREES PER ACRE, MORE THAN 10 TIMES WHAT IS REQUIRED. NOT INCLUDING SHRUBS,S PLANTS, GRASSES, AND OVER 60 POTTED SAPLINGS THAT I'VE STARTED MYSELF, FROM SEEDS OR CUTTINGS, AS A PERSONAL HOBBY. 
          INSTEAD OF MORE RULES AND REGULATIONS, I'D LIKE THE COUNTY TO REWARD PROPERTY OWNERS LIKE MYSELF, FOR PLANTING. MAYBE 
          [03:30:02]
OFFER LOCAL TAX BREAKS FOR VOLUNTARILY MAINTAINING THE LARGEST TREES. RONALD REAGAN SAID IT BEST. SUBSIDIZE WHAT YOU WANT MORE OF, TAX WHAT YOU WANT LESS OF, PENALIZING PEOPLE WHO LET THEIR TREES GO LARGE IS A SURE WAY TO GET FEWER OF THEM. 
          I'VE GOT MANY LARGE TREES. OVER 35 INCHES. AND YOU KNOW WHAT? IF THE COUNTY WANTS TO PUT ITS THUMB ON PLY PROPERTY, MAYBE I SHOULD CONSIDER NOT HAVING THAT TREE ON MY PROPERTY ANYMORE. 
          THAT'S ALL I'LL SAY. THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> JUSTIN DUDLEY, 1 TWO 74 GRAND, MADAM CHAIR. I WOULD SAY, CAREFUL WHEN YOU SAY "SET A TRAP" LEST YOU FALL INTO IT YOURSELF. THE COUNTY HAD SEVERAL TRY ORDINANCES THAT ARE FOLLOWED TODAY. AND PEOPLE LIKE MYSELF HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING LONG BEFORE THIS LIST WAS THOUGHT OF. IN THE PAST, I HAVE COMPLIED WITH ORDINANCES BY SHRINKING AND RESHAPING PONDS FOR THE DRIP LINE. I HAVE DEEP UNDERGROUND TO, AVOID OAKS THAT MUST BE KEPT. AT FACE VALUE, WHO WOULD ARGUE? MAKE SURE THE BUFFERS SURVIVE. I DON'T THINK BE ANYONE WOULD DISAGREE WITH THESE RULES. THEY SOUND AS IF THEY WOULD BENEFIT EVERYONE. BUT THE REALITY IS, THE ORDERS ARE WRITTEN TO BE PUNITIVE, NOT WRITTEN BY SOMEONE WITH A LICENSE, DEGREE, OR ADVANCE IN HORTICULTURE. THEY DO NOT MAKE A CLEAR DISTINCTION. THEY REFER TO NO STRATEGIES THAT MAKE MORE EFFICIENT USE OF OUR LAND OR MAXIMUM WATER RESOURCES AND COHABITATIONS OF BUILDING, PEOPLE. INSTEAD, THEY LACK CREATIVITY, BY DECLARING MORE OF A MONO CULTURE OF OUR OLD PINE TREE WOOD FARMS RATHER THAN DESTROYING THOSE THAT EXISTED. 
          THESE DO NOT CONSIDER BLENDING NATURE BACK INTO OUR COMMUNITIES. THEY ARE A PLOY TO LIMIT FUTURE GROWTH. BUT WHAT ABOUT THE COUNTY'S ABILITY TO COMPLY? WHAT IS THE COUNTY'S BACKLOG OF PROJECTS? HOW IS THE IMPROVEMENTS FOR SCHOOLS, PARKS AND RECREATION. WILL THE COUNTY ITSELF, HAVE PROBLEMS COMPLYING. 
          UPON NOW BECOMING 240 FEET FROM 60. IF WE APPLY 30-FOOT SCREENING EDGE AND 35-DEVELOPMENT. AND HOLD BACK. 
          AS CURRENTLY WRITTEN. THIS IS RULE-STACKING. WE WILL BE REMOVING A SOCCER FIELD? OR BASEBALL FIELD? OR SEPARATING CAFETERIA FROM CLASSROOMS, RATHER THAN RESTORING TOTAL INCHES THAT CAN TRIPLE IN SIZE UNDER NORMAL GROWTH RATES. I THINK THIS WAS WRITTEN TO BE PUNITIVE TO RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, RESIDENTIAL WILL HAVE THE EASIEST DEVELOPMENT PERIOD. AFTER ALL, A SOCCER FIELD IS OVER 80,000 SQUARE FEET. AND A TYPICAL HIGH SCHOOL IS 180,000 SQUARE FEET UNDER ROOF. THE COUNTY'S PLANS WILL BE MORE IMPACTED, SHOULD IT CHOOSE TO ADOPT THE NEW ORDINANCES AS THEY ARE. AND THE COUNTY FALLS INTO A TRAP. PLEASE GIVE THEM THEIR PROPER REVIEW, WITH EXPERTS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> JACKIE LEBLANC, FAIL POINT AUGUSTINE. WE'RE STILL ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE. OH, BOY. 
          I REALLY -- I DON'T THINK THE TREE ORDINANCE GOES FAR ENOUGH. 
          IC IT'S TIME. THEY TALK ABOUT LOOK HOW BEAUTIFUL WORLD GOLF IS. WORLD GOLF, THEY PLANTED THOSE TREES 22 YEARS AGO. SO WE'RE GOING TO RECUT EVERYTHING AND REPLANT A SAPLING AND WAIT 22 YEARS BEFORE IT LOOKS BEAUTIFUL? IT'S -- AND I UNDERSTAND IT. I UNDERSTAND PROPERTY RIGHTS, I TOTALLY DO. I OWN PROPERTY, AND I HAVE ALL MY LIFE. BUT IT IS TIME FOR ST. 
          JOHNS COUNTY TO DO THIS. IT IS TIME. IT'S -- WE'VE -- WE'VE GOT SO MUCH DEVELOPMENT. THE MARKET IS GOING TO CHANGE. 
          YOU'RE GOING TO SEE EMPTY COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE APARTMENT BUILDINGS FOR RENT. YOU'RE GOING TO SEE STORAGE LOWER THEIR PRICES. BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. 
          THE MARKET IS GOING TO TURN. LET'S DO WHAT IS IMPORTANT. AND AS CARRIE SAID, SHE BROUGHT UP AN EXCELLENT POINT THAT WAS ABSOLUTELY ON MY MIND. LOOK AT HAWAII. LOOK AT JUPITER. UH, THEY HAVE HAD ORDINANCES, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH STRONGER THAN THIS, IN FORCE FOR A VERY LONG TIME. RAISING PRICES FOR HOUSES. MAYBE IT'S JUST GOING TO HAPPEN. SORRY. DO NOT BUILD, AND THEY WILL NOT COME. HOW MANY MORE DO WE WANT TO COME HERE? WE CAN TAKE CARE OF OUR PEOPLE THAT ARE SERVICE PEOPLE AND NEED AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WE'RE ALREADY WORKING ON THAT. BUT THIS -- THIS -- THIS EXPLOSION OF POPULATION, I'M NOT EVEN SURE IT'S REAL. IN THE FUTURE. ABSOLUTELY, IT'S REAL IN THE 
          [03:35:02]
PAST. THERE'S NO DOUBT. BUT HOW MUCH MORE DO WE WANT? REALLY? HOW MUCH MORE? AND THESE -- THESE MEETINGS WITH ALL THE DEVELOPERS. YOU WALK IN THERE, AND THERE'S 25 DEVELOPERS, AND 10 CITIZENS. WHAT'S THE USE IN THAT? IT'S USELESS. I'VE BEEN TO THEM. UM -- I JUST SAY, I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING FAR ENOUGH. 
          SO HERE TO IT. DO IT. UM -- DO NOT BUILD, AND THEY WILL NOT COME. IF THEY CAN'T AFFORD TO COME, THEN WHY -- WHY DO THEY WANT TO COME? LET'S WORK ON OUR SCHOOLS. LET'S WORK WITH WHAT WE HAVE ALREADY AND IMPROVE IT AND LOOK AT JUPITER. LOOK AT HAWAII. THEY HAVE HAD ORDINANCE WAY STRONGER THAN THIS IN FOREVER. AND MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE DONE THIS FROM THE BEGINNING, AND THIS WOULDN'T BE SO TOUGH. THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> TERENCE MAHONEY, 410 BUCKET COURT. I ENJOY THIS DISCUSSION AS WELL. AND I'M REMINDED IN THE MUNICIPALITY THAT I WAS ELECTED TO BEFORE, WE WERE DESIGNATED A TREE CITY. SO I LOVE TREES. I REALLY DO. I LOVE NATURE. I THINK WE OUGHT TO WORK AS HARD AS POSSIBLE TO, YOU KNOW, BRING BOTH SIDES TOGETHER, IN ORDER TO PROVIDE FOR A BEAUTIFUL ST. JOHNS COUNTY. BUT LET'S BE TRANSPARENT HERE. AND I'VE HEARD A NUMBER OF TIMES TONIGHT, WE NEED TRANSPARENCY. I BELIEVE ALL OF YOU ARE SINCERE. I DO. BUT I ALSO BELIEVE THIS IS NOT ABOUT TREES. THIS IS -- TREES ARE JUST A TOOL IN A LARGER ARGUMENT. AND THAT ARGUMENT WAS PLAYED OUT IN THE LAST ELECTION. SO I'M NOT CRITICIZING ANYONE. BUT THE ISSUE HERE IS THAT DEVELOPERS, OR OWNERS OF LARGER PROPERTIES ARE PUBLIC ENEMY NUMBER ONE. WE WANT TO STOP THE DEVELOPMENT. 
          PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS, THOUGH, ARE ENTITLED TO DEVELOP THEIR LAND. WE HAD DEVELOPMENT IN THAT MUNICIPALITY, BUT WE RENAMED IT TREE CITY BECAUSE WE WORKED WITH THEM. AND THEY WERE ALL NEW YORK DEVELOPERS THAT ALL READ THE DEAL. SO WE PUT UP THE GUARDRAILS, BUT IF GUARDRAILS ARE DESIGNED TO TAKE AWAY A PROPERTY OWNER'S RIGHT, TO DEVELOP THAT LAND, ALL THAT HAPPENS IS MANY, MANY YEARS OF LITIGATION. THE OWNER -- BY THE OWNER, BECAUSE OF ONEROUS RULES. ENDLESS LITIGATION WILL INEVITABLY LEAD TO HIGHER TAXES. INCREASED TAX ON FUTURE GENERATION IS BECOMING BURDENSOME TO THE WORKING CLASS IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. I'VE SEEN IT IN DEMOCRAT-RUN NEW YORK. 
          PLUS YOU END UP WITH DISGRUNTLED DEVELOPERS WHO REALLY DON'T CARE WHAT THEIR DEVELOPMENT LOOKS LIKE, SINCE YOU WEREN'T WILLING TO WORK WITH THEM. LET'S STOP FIGHTING WITH EACH OTHER. LET'S ALL SIT DOWN IN A ROOM, I'M NOT NECESSARILY TALKING ABOUT THE PUBLIC, BUT THEY NEED TO SEE WHAT IS GOING ON. BUT WHAT IS WRONG WITH SITTING DOWN SAYING, THIS IS A CONCERN. HOW DO WE ADDRESS IT? OKAY? WORKSTOWARDS A SOLUTION. AND THAT'S THE SAME, YOU KNOW, ULTIMATE ADVICE I GAVE EARLIER. NOW, I KNOW I'M GOING TO BE ATTACKED AS PRO DEVELOPMENT, WHICH WOULD BE A TOTAL MADISON AVENUE MARKETING SPIN BY A SLICK MOUTHPIECE. I'M PRO ST. JOHNS COUNTY. I WANT TOWER BETTER ANGELS TO FIND PEACE HERE. WE ARE ALL ADULTS, AND WE ALL SHOULD BE SITTING DOWN IN A ROOM AND DISCUSSING WHAT WILL MAKE ST. JOHNS COUNTY BEAUTIFUL. THESE AMENDMENTS TARGET THE DEVELOPERS WHO WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS GROWTH, AND THE SHOTGUN APPROACH IS NOT CONDUCIVE TO GOOD FAITH NEGOTIATION, WHICH IS NECESSARY. 
          THEY SHOULDN'T BE AN ENEMY'S LIST. THIS APPROACH, IF PASSED, EFFECTIVELY WEAPONIZES OUR COUNTY GOVERNMENT THROUGH THE TREE GOALS IN OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND I THOUGHT WE WERE AGAINST THE WEAPONIZATION OF GOVERNMENT. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> -- JUST MY TWO CENTS. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, CHARLIE HUNT. 
          WILL CREEK ESTATES. I CAN SEE AND UNDERSTAND IF THESE POLICY CHANGES AFFECT WHAT IS GOING ON NOW, IT'S TO AFFECT THE FUTURE. 
          MUCH LIKE HUDSON HIGHWAY --ER ON 2209, AS S COMES DOWN, MAKES THE JUMP OVER STATE ROAD 16. AND WHAT THAT'S GOING TO IMPEL THERE BETWEEN 208. AND EVEN WORSE, WHEN IT COMETS TO 208, AND IT OPENS UP THE DOORS, AND -- WHERE IS IT GOING TO GO? BECAUSE A LOT OF THAT LAND OUT THERE IS FARM, WHETHER IT'S TIMBERLAND OR AGRICULTURE, IT'S FARMING. SO HOW WILL THEY SAY, YES AND NO, THAT WE WANT THIS BIG ROAD TO COME THROUGH OUR 
          [03:40:06]
FARMS? OKAY? SO IT'S TO LOOK AT ALL OF THAT. BUT ALSO, THERE'S THE SAME ONES THAT -- DEVELOPMENTS THAT GOT APPROVED, EASILY, LIKE HONEY -- HONEY BRANCH FARMS. EASILY, THERE WAS NO REALLY BIG OPINION TO THAT. BECAUSE WHY? THEY PUT THEM ON THE FARMS. THEY PUT THEM ON THE ACTIVE FARMS THAT THEY'RE USING AROUND IT. SO THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO CLEAR ANY TREES. THEY REMEMBER GREAT WITH THAT. THERE'S WATER LILY THAT'S COMING UP. OKAY? 650ACRES. THEY DON'T HAVE TO CLEAR ANY TREES. 
          SO EASY WILL THAT BE TO GET ACROSS? OKAY? THEY WON'T HAVE ANY TREE POLICIES OUT THERE, OKAY? ALSO, WE GOT THE ONE COMING UP, THAT'S BEEN IN FIVE YEARS, MAYBE A LITTLE MORE IN THE WORKS, IS PERISH FARMS. ALL RIGHT? 207, 206. THAT'S GOING TO HAVE AN EFFECT, PROBABLY WHAT THIS BOARD IS GOING TO DO. 
          BECAUSE IT'S IN THE FUTURE. AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE IS DONE PROPERLY. UM -- TALKING ABOUT SOME OF THE ASPECTS OF TREE SIZE, YES. THEY NEED TO BE REVISED, TO MAKE THEM MORE REASONABLE. IF -- IF THERE'S AN OAK TREE THAT IS 50 INCHES IN DIAMETER, THAT -- THAT'S MASSIVE. THAT'S A HISTORIC SITE. IF THEY CAN BE THAT MUCH. OKAY? I'VE GOT SOME PINES ON MY PROPERTY THAT ARE, WELL, 30 TO 35 INCHES IN DIAMETER. WHICH IS A VERY STRANGE SITE TO SEE. OKAY? THE PINES THAT ARE FORESTED, THEY'RE THERE FOR THEIR FORCE AND PURPOSE. THEY RUN THROUGH THE PULP MILLS. SO LET'S FIGURE OUT WHICH ONE IS THAT? DOES THAT -- DO THEY NEED TO BE SAVED? BECAUSE IT'S FARMLAND? AND THEY WANT TO KEEP FARMING? OR DO WE NEED TO SAVE THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE PART OF THE ENVIRONMENT? OR WE NEED TO GIVE THEM UP BECAUSE OF DEVELOPMENT 
          IN THE PROCESS? THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SIR. 
          >> GOOD AFTERNOON, EVENING. JUDY SPIEGEL, 101 WILLOW LANE. I WILL BE BRIEF. I KNOW EVERYBODY IS TIRED AND HUNGRY. BUT THIS HAS BEEN AN INFORMATIVE DISCUSSION. I DON'T KNOW HOW THE VOTE IS GOING TO GO. I'M NOT GOING TO LOSE SLEEP OVER IT. THERE IS A PROVERB THAT SAYS EVERYONE IS IN LOVE WITH THEIR OWN OPINION, CONVINCED THEY ARE RIGHT, BUT IS THE LORD THAT IS BEHIND. I AGREE, THIS SHOULD BE DONE. THIS SHOULD BE DONE NOW. BUT I ALSO AGREE, WE NEED TO HAVE MORE INPUT IN THIS. THERE'S A LOT OF WISDOM THAT WILL REALLY MAKE THINGS BETTER, AS MY HUSBAND ALWAYS SAYS, DONE WITH THE VERY BEST OF -- BEST OF INTENTIONS, WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG? SO WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL. THERE'S LITIGATION, PROPERTY RIGHTS THINGS. BUT THERE'S ALSO OUR BEAUTIFUL COUNTY, WHICH ONCE IT'S GONE, IT'S GONE. I WANTED TO THANK THE LIBBYS FOR COMING. THEY'RE LIKE MY HEREY ONS. WHAT A GREAT BED OF KNOWLEDGE THEY HAVE TO OFFER US. THERE'S SO MANY -- THE DEVELOPER THAT CAME ASK SPOKE WITH YOU, SAY, WE'RE WILLING TO WORK WITH YOU, DO THIS, DO THAT. I REALLY UNDERSTAND, THE MOMENTUM IS HERE. WE HAVE CHANGES HAPPENING ALL OVER OUR COUNTRY, AND WE WANT TO JUST GET STUFF DONE, AND I TOTALLY HONOR THAT. I THINK THAT'S WONDERFUL. COMMISSIONER JOSEPH, YOU'VE BEEN SO PLIANT, SAYING, I'M NOT ANTI-DEVELOPMENT. I JUST WANT SOMETHING THAT MAKES SENSE, I WANT TO GET IT MOVING AM I THINK THAT'S GREAT. I'M GOING TO ADVOCATE FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL DEPARTMENT TO GET ANOTHER -- DONE. A LOT OF THIS IS OVERSIGHT. THEY DON'T HAVE THE STAFF TO BE ABLE TO GO OUT AND FOLLOW THROUGH ON THESE THINGS. 
          AND THESE THINGS WILL HAVE A LODGE-RANGING EFFECT, AND THE PRICE OF ONE FT E WILL BE A GOOD EFFECT FOR THE COUNTY. WE HAVE TREES IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WERE REPLACED THAT STILL HAVE THE ROPES AROUND THEM. THEY JUST GET THROWN IN THERE SLOPPILY, AND THEY'RE NOT THRIVING. ENFORCEABILITY. I LOVE THE IDEA OF A WORKSHOP. YOU ALL ARE MEETING HERE TUESDAY. I KNOW IT'S SHORT, BUT MAYBE A LITTLE CONVERSATION. MAYBE A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION. I LIKE THE IDEA OF INCLUDING INSPIRE." THEY HAVE A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT THEY CAN OFFER. LET'S GET EVERY BIT OF INFORMATION WE CAN TAKE AND BE REASONABLE. NONE OF US HAVE THE ANSWER. BUT THERE'S LITTLE PARTS THAT WE CAN APPLY 
          [03:45:01]
AND MAKE REALLY GOOD DECISIONS FOR THE BENEFIT AND BEAUTY OF OUR COUNTY. COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST, WE HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT THE OVERLAY, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU REMEMBER THIS, BUT YOU SAID, YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT. OVER THE COUNTY, WHERE WE HAVE JUST A LITTLE MORE PURPOSE IN PRESERVING THE BEAUTY. I DIDN'T MEAN TO TALK FOR THREE MINUTES. 
          GOD BLESS YOU. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> B.J. CLAY, ST. AUGUSTINE. IT'S ALMOST 1:00, FOLKS. BUT WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT THE CLOCK. YES, WE ARE. AS A TAXPAYER, AND A RESIDENT FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. I GET VERY CONCERNED, COMING IN HERE SOMETIMES AND LISTENING TO PEOPLE WANT TO HEAR FROM EXPERTS -- EXPARTS, EXPERTS, EXPERTS. VERSUS TAXPAYERS, RESIDENTS, AND THIS IS WHAT THIS IS GOING TO BE GOING ON FOREVER AND EVER ABOUT. 
          THAT'S WHAT WE BOIL DOWN TO. AND IT BOILS DOWN TO QUALITY OF LIFE, VERSUS THE ALMIGHTY DOLLAR. WE NEED NOT -- WE'RE HAVING TOO MANY WORKSHOPS. AND SOME PEOPLE CAN'T GO. BECAUSE THEY'VE GOT TO TAKE CARE OF THEIR CHILDREN, BECAUSE THEY'RE ON SPRING BREAK. SO HAVING ANOTHER WORKSHOP ABOUT THIS IS NOT GOING TO DO ANY GOOD. WE JUST NEED TO MOVE ON, DO THE BEST YOU CAN, TO GET THIS THING DONE, WITH A CONSULTANT THAT WE'RE PAYING $73,000 TO. AND JUST TO REMIND -- AND YES, I WILL SAY THIS. I'VE BEEN AROUND LONG ENOUGH. THAT LIPPIES HELPED US A LOT. AND THE CITY LIMITS OF ST. AUGUSTINE. AND YOU DON'T HEAR TOO MANY COMPLIMENTS FROM ME FOR ANYBODY. BUT THESE -- THIS FAMILY HAS SWEATED AND TREES ALL OVER THE PLACE. SO HE'S -- THE BOTH OF THEM -- AND I'M SURE THERE'S OTHERS, NEED TO REALLY TALK SOME MORE WITH YOU IF THEY WANT TO. SHOW SOME E-MAILS. I'M GLAD THEY SHOWED THE PICTURES. BUT THESE ARE THE KIND OF PEOPLE THAT ARE EXPERTS. AND THEY'RE NOT EXPERTS NECESSARILY FOR THE DEVELOPERS, THEY'RE NOT AGAINST THE DEVELOPERS. BUT THERE'S A RIGHT WAY TO DO THIS. AND TO REMIND PEOPLE, IN 1.2 SECONDS, I THINK I'LL SAY THIS A COUPLE OF TIMES, DID YOU KNOW, DOES EVERYBODY IN THIS ROOM AND IS LISTENING, PAY ATTENTION. THE CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE HAS BEEN DESIGNATED FOR YEARS AS A TREE CITY. YOU SEE THE SIGNS AS YOU'RE GOING DOWN KING STREET. RIGHT TO THE RIGHT, THERE'S A WINERY THERE. BUT THERE'S SIGNS ABOUT WHO WE, THE CITY LIMITS OF ST. AUGUSTINE, IS A TREE CITY. NOW, I DON'T WANT TO SAY OFF THE TOP OF MY TID, THE LIPPIES MAY KNOW. I THINK SO IT'S OVER 25 YEARS. TAKE ADVICE FROM THEM. GET THIS THING GOING. YOU KNOW PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT IT, MORE SO ABOUT THE QUALITY OF LIFE. IT'S A HARD BALANCE BUT YOU CAN DO IT. SO ARE WE GOING TO GO TO LUNCH NOW? IT'S ALMOST 1:00. 
          >> CHICK-FIL-A IS OUT THERE. >> WE NEED TO CANCEL THIS, THEN, AND HEAD OUT. SORRY, CHUCK. GO AHEAD. WELCOME. 
          >> CHUCK LABANOWSKI. WE HAVE BEEN TALKING. I LIKE THE IDEA GIVEN BY ONE OF THE SPEAKERS, ABOUT GIVING CREDITS FOR TREES. 
          I KIND OF LIKE THAT. WHY NOT A TAX CREDIT TO HOMEOWNERS THAT DECIDE TO PLANT A CERTAIN CALIBER TREE IN THEIR YARD. THAT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA. IT'S A WIN-WIN SITUATIO FOR THE HOMEOWNER AND THE ENVIRONMENT. I KNOW, IN MY COMMUNITY, IN MARIBELLA, IT TOOK 25 YEARS FOR A TREE TO GROW IN MY BACKYARD. 
          25 YEARS, TO WHERE IT'S NOW GIVING ME A LITTLE BIT OF SHADE. 
          MY NEIGHBOR BESIDE ME, THEIR TREE PLANTED A YEAR LATER, IS A LITTLE TALLER THAN I AM. SO WE NEED TO START DOING SOMETHING ABOUT THE TREES. WE CAN'T GO THROUGH -- IF I COULD HAVE A SCREEN PLEASE. WE CAN'T GO THROUGH AND CONTINUE TO CLEAR PROPERTY. AND ESPECIALLY, JUST CLEAR IT, AND LEAVE IT SET VACANT FOR FIVE TO SIX YEARS. YOU CAN GO DOWN 95, YOU'LL SEE IT. NOW, IF YOU WANT TO SEE A GOOD EXAMPLE OF CLEAR-CUTTING, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO FAR FROM THIS OFFICE. NOT FAR AT ALL. ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS GO DOWN 16. THERE'S THE OFFICE. 16 RIGHT NOW. I JUST WATCHEDMASSIVE OAK TREES BEING PULLED OUT FOR COMMERCIAL ON 16. MASSIVE. WE'VE GOT TO DO SOMETHING -- WE'VE GOT TO SAVE THOSE TREES, SOMEHOW. WILL IT BE ELSEWHERE? 
          [03:50:08]
HERE'S THE THING. REMOVING THE TREES, AS WE HAVE BEEN DOING, IS DOING EVERYTHING IS THINGS. IT'S HURTING OUR ENVIRONMENT, THE AIR WE BREATHE, THE WATER WE DRINK. SO WE'VE GOT TO DO SOMETHING. BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO END UP WITH. AT FOUR-MILE ROAD IN 16, RIGHT NOW, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE DOING. THEY'RE FILLING IN PONDS, RELOCATING PONDS, AND THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD ON IT. AND THE DRAINAGE -- THE WETLANDS THAT ARE THERE, BY THE TIME THEY GET DONE WITH THE BASE CONSTRUCTION, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE AROUND ANY MORE. BUT YOU KNOW WHAT? WHO CARES. LET'S JUST CLEAR EVERYTHING. GET RID OF EVERYTHING. LET'S GET JOBS CLEARING THE LAND. LET'S GET JOBS BUILDING THE THINGS. AND LET'S JUST LET OUR FUTURE WORRY ABOUT IT. LET OURFUTURE WORRY ABOUT IT. AND OUR NEXT GENERATIONS. OUR GRANDCHILDREN, OR GREAT GRANDCHILDREN, WHATEVER. LET'S JUST LET THEM WORRY ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT. 
          THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          >> WE'RE BACK TO THE BOARD. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE. 
          READY TO VOTE? MOTION IS TO PUSH FORWARD TO INSPIRE AS WELL AS GET SOMETHING GOING HERE. AND SOME RESEARCH -- 
          >> I'LL SECOND THAT -- >> WAS THAT THE MOTION. 
          >> -- SECOND, IT'S ALREADY ON THE TABLE. 
          >> CAN I PLEASE HAVE CLARIFICATION ON THE MOTION? I'M NOT SURE WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON. 
          >> KEELY, COULD YOU PLEASE READ IT BACK, THERE'S. 
          >> AS I UNDERSTAND, MOTION IS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH ITEMS THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT, NINE, 10, AND 11, TO MOVE THOSE ITEMS FORWARD TO INSPIRE FOR FURTHER RESEARCH -- 
          >> AND TO BRING BACK. >> AND -- AND TO BRING BACK THAT 
          RESEARCH OR INFORMATION. >> MOTION ON THE TABLE. IT'S A 
          VOICE VOTE -- >> POINT OF CLARIFICATION. IS THAT TO BE BROUGHT BACK FOR A WORKSHOP? OR JUST TO THE BOARD? 
          >> NO. MOVE FORWARD. THE WORKSHOPS HAVEN'T GOTTEN ANYWHERE IN THE PAST. SO WE'RE JUST GOING TO -- YES, MR. 
          ROBERSON. >> SORRY. TO CLARIFY THAT. WE COULD COME BACK A NUMBER OF WAYS, ONE WOULD BE A RED LINE COMING FORWARD WITH CHANGES. ANOTHER WOULD BE COMING BACK LIKE WE ARE TODAY, WITH WHAT WE FOUND. 
          >> I'D LOVE TO SEE A RED LINE, AND THEN WE CAN GO FROM THERE. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. THAT'S WHAT WE SAID ORIGINALLY, I THINK. ALL 
          RIGHT. COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST. >> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. QUICK COMMENT. I APPRECIATE EVERYONE WHO CAME TO SPEAK. OBVIOUSLY, ST. AUGUSTINE IS A DIVERSE COUNTY, COMPRISED OF MANY DIFFERENT PEOPLE, WITH MANY DIFFERENT BACKGROUNDS AND MANY DIFFERENT OPINIONS. AND AS A LIFELONG FLORIDIAN, SOMEBODY WHO PROPOSED TO HIS WIFE AT ONE STATE PARK AND GOT MARRIED AT ANOTHER STATE PARK AND PASSED THE ONLY LOCAL CONSERVANCY PROGRAM WE HAD IN MY OFFICE IN 2021, I HAVE DONE EVERYTHING WE CAN TO PROTECT TREES, WITHIN REASON. I THINK THAT JUST PHILOSOPHICALLY, I'M NOT ALIGNED WITH SOME OF THE PROPOSALS AND MANY OF THESE POLICIES. IC I WANTED MORE INFORMATION ON 3, 6, AND 12. BUT YOU KNOW, I THINK THE TREES ON PEOPLE'S PRIVATE PROPERTY BELONG TO THEM. THAT'S JUST PHILOSOPHICALLY WHERE I'M AT. I THINK I'M NOT FOR NO REGULATION. BUT UP IN MY OFFICE, WE'VE GOT A FIVE-POUND BOOK ON REGULATIONS ON THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. THAT'S JUST THE LOCAL REGULATIONS, THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE STATE BIERPD WHICH I'M SURE IS BIGGER, OR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S BINDER, WHICH REGULATES WHAT WE CAN DO ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. 
          AGAIN, I'M NOT FOR NO REGULATION. I'M FOR SMART REGULATION. THIS, TOY MOO, SEEMS LIKE GOVERNMENT OVERREGULATION. 
          SO I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT ALL OF THE OTHER POLICIES. BUT ON 3, 6, AND 12, I COULD SUPPORT THOSE. 
          >> THAT'S WHY -- WE'RE NOT DOING THE PRIVATE PROPERTIES, WHERE YOU HAVE A CLIPBOARD AND CHECK PRIVATE PROPERTIES, THAT'S TAKEN OFF THE TABLE. MOSTLY, THIS IS ADDRESSING CLEAR-CUTTING, COMMERCIAL, YOU KNOW, THINGS THAT ARE LOGICAL AND, OF COURSE, NOT EVERYONE AGREES ON THEM, BUT WHAT WE'LL DO IS GET MORE INFORMATION TO COME BACK SO THAT WE CAN, UH, VOTE, ON EACH OBJECT, OR EACH ITEM, AND AT LEAST WORK A LITTLE FARTHER DOWN THE RADIOED WITH OUR TREE CODE. WE ARE WAY BEHIND OTHER COUNTIES. OTHER COUNTIES HAVE IT A LOT HARDER THAN THIS, THEIR CODES. SO I DON'T THINK THIS IS AS BAD AS SOME PEOPLE ARE SAYING. SO IF WE COULD, UH -- READY TO VOTE? 
          [03:55:02]
          >> I JUST WANT TO MAKE A QUICK POINT IN RESPONSE TO WHAT YOU SAID. I'M NOT SURE THAT THE POINTS THAT WE'RE MOVING FORWARD FOR CONSIDERATION HAVE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION THE 20 20 CLEAN WATER ACT OR STATUTE 40.45, WHICH PROHIBITS TREE PRUNING OR REMOVAL ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. THAT'S A STATE STATUTE. OR STATUTE 823.14, WHICH IS FLORIDA'S RIGHT TO FARM ACT. I THINK THOSE WERE NOT CONSIDERED. YOU SAY THEY'RE LOGICAL BUT THOSE THINGS WERE NOT -- 
          >> I FEEL LIKE YOU'RE PANICKING THAT WE'RE GOING TO VOTE NOW. 
          CAN WE JUST HAVE THT ADDRESSED WITH INSPIRE $73,000. 
          >> I'M NOT MISUNDERSTANDING -- I'M JUST TRYING TO CLARIFY ON 
          THE RECORD -- >> I THINK YOU HAVE. 
          >> THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT ON SOCIAL MEDIA. I'M JUST CLARIFYING MY POSITION, COMMISSIONER. 
          >> GREAT. ANYTHING ELSE, COMMISSIONER ARNOLD? 
          >> THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR. I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT SOME OF THE OVERREACHING POLICIES. PARTICULARLY TO THE MIDDLE CLASS. THIS PROPOSAL SEEMS TO BE TO BE SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME PROPOSAL THAT WAS VOTED DOWN LAST YEAR, 17 MONTHS AGO. I WOULD FULLY SUPPORT THAT BRINGS TOGETHER ALL OF THE PARTIES, STATE ARBORISTS, UTILITY COMPANIES. I HAVE SPOKEN BE TO SOME OF THESE GROUPS AND SOME SPOKE TO YOU TODAY, THEY WANT TO COME TO THE TABLE. AND I UNDERSTAND YOU, COMMISSIONER TAYLOR, BEING UPSET ABOUT TREES BEING CUT DOWN. BUT MY VIEW IS, THEY AREN'T YOUR TREES. WE HAVE A RIGHT TO PRIVACY, BUT LANDOWNERS HAVE A RIGHT TO THEIR PROPERTY. AND THOSE TREES BELONG TO THAT PROPERTY OWNER. AND TO ADDRESS THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM, THERE IS AN ONUS ON THE RESIDENT TO DO DUE DILIGENCE. 
          REALTIME INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE AT YOUR FINGERTIPS. 
          COMMISSIONER, I AGREE WITH YOU. SO MUCH OF THIS FEELS LIKE A LAND GRAB. AND THE STATE OF FLORIDA IS VERY PRO-PROPERTY RIGHTS. MY PERSONAL BELIEF, IS I HAVE NO RIGHT TO TELL MY NEIGHBORS WHAT TO DO WITH THEIR PROPERTY. PLAIN AND SIMPLE. I HAVE NO CLAIM TO THEIR PROPERTY. I HAVE NO CLAIM TO THEIR TREES. 
          FURTHERMORE, WHEN DO I OWN MY TREES? I HAVE COUNTLESS BEAUTIFUL TREES ON MY PROPERTY. SOME, WE HAVE SADLY HAD TO CUT DOWN DUE TO DISEASE OR FOR THE SAFETY OF OUR HOME, AND SOME TO LET THE SPECIMEN THRIVE. BUT WHEN DO I OWN MY OWN TREES? BECAUSE TO PASS ALL OF THESE POINTS, COMMISSIONER, TO YOUR POINT. I SUPPOSE I NO LONGER OWN MY LAND, AND NO LONGER OWN MY TREES. YOU'RE SPOT ON. I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS ITEM. MR. LABANOWSKI. YOU SAID -- YOUR HOME WAS A POTATO FARM FOR GENERATIONS BEFORE IT WAS A NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE WERE NO TREES TO SAVE. COMMISSIONER JOSEPH, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, I DIDN'T FEEL THIS WAS READY TO BE ENACTED LAST YEAR, UNTIL CONVERSATION IS HAD. I BELIEVE THIS TO BE A CONSENSUS APPROACH, WHERE WE COME TO A COMPROMISE. AGAIN, A COMPROMISE ON A HANDFUL OF REASON. FOR THAT, I AM ABSOLUTELY SUPPORT. I WILL REPEAT MYSELF FOR THE TENTH TIME, I WOULD SUGGEST A WORKSHOP. MR. MAHONEY, YOU WERE ALSO SPOT ON AND ACCURATE. THIS, MUCH LIKE, IS POLITICAL THEATER. I WOULD FULLY SUPPORT A WORKSHOP, BUT AT THIS POINT, I AM VOTING NO. THANK YOU. 
          >> ALL RIGHT. ARE WE READY? AND COMMISSIONER TAYLOR, YOUR VOTE? 
          OR DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT? >> I HAVE A COMMENT AFTER COMMISSIONER ARNOLD TALKING ABOUT MY NEIGHBORS NOT DOING DUE DILIGENCE. I FIND THAT EXTREMELY INSULTING. BECAUSE A NUMBER OF US DID DO DUE DILIGENCE. AND ON THAT PROPERTY, IT WAS ALLOWED TO HAVE 95 -- THERE COULD BE A COMMERCIAL BUILDING UP TO 9500 SQUARE FEET -- 9500 SQUARE FEET. THEY CONSIDERED A MINOR VARIANCE, 10 TIMES THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE. BECAUSE IT DID NOT HAVE AS MUCH OF AN IMPACT ON OUR TRAFFIC. SO WE DID DO DUE DILIGENCE, BUT YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT KIND OF VARIANCES ARE GOING TO BE ALLOWED LATER ON. SO I FIND THAT EXTREMELY INSULTING. 
          AND THAT WASN'T THE CASE AT ALL, BECAUSE WE DID DO -- WE DID DO -- MY NEIGHBORS DID DO THEIR DUE DILIGENCE IN THAT. BUT ALSO, I JUST JUDGE -- I JUST WANT TO GO BACK TO -- I LOVE HEARING FROM THESE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THE NORTHWEST AREA. THEY'RE FORTUNATE THAT THEY LIVE IN THE NORTHWEST AREA. I -- I DON'T 
          [04:00:04]
LIVE IN THE NORTHWEST AREA. BUT I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THAT OVERLAY EXPAND INTO OUR COUNTY. WE ALL -- THE ENTIRE COUNTY 
          DESERVES THAT. >> AND I MEAN, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE POLITICS ARE. IT'S THE BEAUTY OF OUR COUNTY. IT'S NOT REALLY ANYTHING WITH POLITICS, EXCEPT THAT'S ACTUALLY THE NUMBER ONE INSPIRE THINGS THAT CAME BACK WITH, ON THEIR QUESTIONNAIRE. SO ANYWAY, COMMISSIONER MURPHY, BEFORE WE VOTE, DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER COMMENT? 
          >> YES. >> CAN I ADD ONE THING? 
          >> I YIELD. >> THE ENTIRE REASON I'M SITTING IN THIS SEAT TODAY IS BECAUSE OUR COUNTY WANTED CHANGE. IT IS NOTHING SHORT OF A MIRACLE THAT I AM UP HERE RIGHT NOW. AND I MET WITH A LOT OF PEOPLE IN OUR COUNTY, AND THEY TOLD ME TIME AND TIME AGAIN, ANN, WE REPORT YOU, WE WANT CHANGE IN THIS COUNTY. WE DO NOT LIKE THE DIRECTION IT'S GOING. 
          AND WE WANT CHANGE. IT'S VERY UNFORTUNATE THAT THE ELECTION DID GO THE WAY IT IS, FOR SOME PEOPLE. UM -- I -- I THINK ABOUT THAT ALL THE TIME. BUT OUR COUNTY, OUR RESIDENTS, VOTED FOR 
          CHANGE. >> COMMISSIONER MURPHY. 
          >> THANK YOU, MA'AM. UM, THIS IS A -- INTERESTING SUBJECT. TO SAY THE LEAST. SO LET ME JUST GO FORWARD AND I'LL BE REALLY BRIEF. THERE ARE STILL SOME THINGS IN HERE THAT I AM UNCOMFORTABLE WITH. I THINK THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE USING PLAIN LANGUAGE WHEN IT COMES TO WHAT IS STACKING AND WHAT IS NOT. AND THERE'S A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS THAT I HAVE CONCERN WITH. BUT WHAT I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH, IS MOVING FORWARD TODAY ON THIS VOTE. I THINK THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF COMMENT COMING UP IN THE FUTURE, BEFORE WE -- BEFORE THIS BECOMES LAW OR PART OF THE LAND-USE PLAN THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO WORK ON. BUT I -- I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS, TODAY. SO I'LL BE VOTING FOR IT. 
          >> ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR? YOUR VOTE ON HERE? 
          >> YES. TO MOVE FORWARD. >> COMMISSIONER MURPHY?  . 
          >> YES, MA'AM. >> I AM A YES. COMMISSIONER 
          ARNOLD? >> NO. 
          >> COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST. >> NO. 
          >> ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE CHICK-FIL-A OUT THERE. LET'S CO 
          [2. Residential Entitlements Data Update. At the regular BCC meeting on February 18, 2025, the Board requested that staff provide an update on residential entitlements at the BCC meeting scheduled on March 18, 2025, to clarify county data and information provided by the North East Florida Builders Association.]
          >> I HAVE TIME, RIGHT? >> WE'RE BACK. 
          >> AGENDA ITEM 2. WHOO! WE GOTTA GET THE TEAM TO TALLAHASSEE. 
          >> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. JACOB SMITH WITH THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT. TO PRESENT ITEM NUMBER 2. THIS IS OUR RESIDENTIAL ENTITLEMENTS DATA UPDATE, AS REQUESTED BY THE BOARD. I WAS GOING TO TALK ABOUT A FEW THINGS TODAY. THE FIRST TO GET CLARIFICATION OF WHAT ENTITLEMENTS ARE, SOME OF THE REGULATIONS THAT DIVE OUR ENTITLEMENTS AND DEFINITIONS, AND THEN GO OVER THE DATA BY ST. JOHNS COUNTY AND THE FLORIDA 
          BUILDERS ASSOCIATION. >>> FLORIDA COUNT THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS FOR PROJECT DEVELOPMENT. IT'S THAT SIMPLE. THAT'S MY DEFINITION FOR IT. WE DON'T CODIFY IT IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT SCOAD, BUT I HOPE THAT'S EASY TO UNDERSTAND. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THESE DWELLING UNITS OR THESE RESIDENTIAL ENTITLEMENTS, WE DO DEFINE A DWELLING UNIT. AND OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, BASICALLY SAYS THAT A DWELLING UNIT IS A PLACE WHERE YOU LIVE THAT ALSO HAS A FULL KITCHEN. SO I PROVIDED THAT LANGUAGE UP ON THE SCREEN THERE. A DWELLING UNIT CAN BE IN A LOT OF DIFFERENT FORM FACTORS. MOST COMMONLY, OF COURSE, THE SINGLE-FAMILY HOME, BUT APARTMENTS, DUPLEXES, MOBILE HOME, AND MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS CAN ALL BE CONSIDERED A DWELLING UNIT. DWELLING UNITS ARE TYPICALLY APPROVED THROUGH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS OR DEVELOPMENTS OF REGIONAL IMPACT. WHEN WE HAVE A DWELLING UNIT APPROVED AS PART OF A P.U.D. OR DRI. IT IS PART OF THE ORDINANCE, AND A SERIES OF STANDARDS AND TIME LINES ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPMENT. SO WHEN AN ORDINANCE IS CREATED, THAT MAKES A PUD. IT LAYS OUT THE NUMBER OF UNITS AND HOW LONG THE DEVELOPER HAS TO BUILD THOSE UNITS. ALONG WITH, UH, THOSE DEFINITIONS, I WANTED TO BRING UP THAT OUR PROPERTY PLAN HAS A COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT. 
          [04:05:07]
BROADLY SPEAKING. THIS SECTION OF I-12. SHOULD BE DEVELOPED IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE STATUTE. NOTHING SHOULD BE TO LIMIT THE RIGHTS OF THE FOLLOWING. SO THIS IS STRAIGHT OUT OF OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND IT ESSENTIALLY SAYS THAT DEVELOPMENTS OF REGIONAL IMPACT MAY NOT BE LIMITED OR MODIFIED AND PERSONS WHO COMPLETE A DEVELOPMENT, WHICH HAS PROPERLY BEEN ISSUED, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT ORDER, MAY ALSO NOT. SO IN OTHER WORDS, THE COUNTY DOESN'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO LIMIT OR MOVE THE RIGHTS VESTED WITHIN THE RIGHTS OF A PROPERTY. NOW THE PART EVERYBODY REALLY WANTS TO KNOW ABOUT IS THE DATA. SO THE COUNTY PROVIDES A SEMI ANNUAL REPORTING FOR -- 
          >> COULD YOU, PLEASE, UM, BRING MORTAR BACK? 
          >> TRACKS PUD ON UNBUILT RESIDENTIAL UNITS. THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS, AS A SIDE NOTE, RESIDENTIAL UNITS MADE PART OF PLATTED LOTS OF RECORD, OR HYPOTHETICAL LOTS, CONSISTENT OR ZONING USE, NOT INCLUDED IN OUR ENTITLEMENT DATA REPORT. THE MOST RECENT REPORT WE'VE RUN IS FROM FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR. AND AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE BOTTOM OF THIS SLIDE, ST. JOHNS COUNTY HAS APPROXIMATELY 49,000 ENTITLED RESIDENTIAL LOTS. THOSE LOTS BROADLY SPEAKING MAY ALSO INCLUDE TOWN HOMES. JUST WANTED TO SHOW A BRIEF VISUAL IMAGE. THIS IS OUR DRAFT REPORT. I WOULDN'T GET TOO HUNG UP ON THE NUMBERS OF IT. WHAT WE WERE DOING WAS TRYING TO INCLUDE THE NORTHEAST FLORIDA BUILDERS. SO WE COULD HAVE DATA ANALYSIS BY NEFA. AGAIN, IT'S A DRAFT. JUST WANTED TO SHOW WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. FOR THE WORRIED AND FOR THE AUDIENCE, WE CAN SEE ON THIS MAP HERE, WHERE THE MAJORITY OF THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS OCCUR WITHIN THE COUNTY. SO THE DARKER RED, OR THE BROWN COLOR ON THE SCREEN REPRESENTS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS WITH HIGHER LOT COUNTS. IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO SEE. BUT SOME OF THEM CAN BE UPWARDS OF 3,000-PLUS SINGLE-FAMILY UNITS. ALL RIGHT. SO A LOT OF THIS COMES DOWN TO PEOPLE ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW, THE COUNTY HAS DATA, NEFA SAYS THEY HAVE DATA, WHY ARE THERE TWO NUMBERS?" NEFA HAS PROVIDED SAINT JOHNS COUNTY STAFF. THEY ARE USING OR DATA. 
          IT'S NOTHING THEY MADE UP. AND THEY'RE FOCUSING ON PRACTICAL, BUILDABLE SINGLE LOTS WITHIN PUDS. THEIR FOCUS IS JUST ON THOSE LOTS. IT DOES INCLUDE MULTIFAMILY UNITS AND DOESN'T REALLY FOCUS ON UNITS THAT MAY HAVE EXCESS ENTITLEMENTS, AS WE'LL SEE ON THE NEXT SLIDE. SO THIS IS STRAIGHT FROM NEFBA THEY GAVE US THIS. I DIDN'T MAKE THIS UP. BUT IT'S VERY NICE TO LOOK OVER. THEY SHOW IN THE TOP LEFT, THERE'S APPROXIMATELY 49,000 TOTAL APPROVED LOTS. RIGHT BELOW THAT, AND AS DEPICTED IN THE GREEN PORTION OF THE PIE CHART. THEY SAY THERE IS APPROXIMATELY 45,000 AVAILABLE UNBUILT LOTS. THAT NEEDS A LITTLE DISCLAIMER. PREDOMINANTLY, THOSE ARE GOING TO BE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS. BUT OTHERS WILL BE INCLUDED IN THAT GREEN SLICE OR SLICES OF IT. THE OTHER HALF OF THE PIE CHART HAS A FEW THINGS GOING ON WITH IT. IN THE ORANGE, THIS IS REALLY WHAT A LOT OF THIS COMES DOWN TO IS THAT IT IS SHOWING MAR LANDING AND PLAYERS CLUB ASK SAWGRASS, AND OTHER PUDS THAT DON'T HAVE ROOM FOR BUILDOUT. SO WHAT WE'RE SAYING HERE IS THAT WHEN THE COUNTY APPROVED THESE PUDS OR DRIS THAT THEY WERE ENTITLED WITH. WE'LL LOOK AT THAT. MARSHLANDING, PLAYERS CLUB. WERE ENTITLED TO 9,000 EXCESS UNITS TO WHAT THEY ACTUALLY BUILT. THOSE UNITS ARE STILL PART OF THEIR PUD, BUT THEY ARE UNLIKELY TO BE BUILT ANY TIME SOON. BECAUSE OF THE PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS ON THE GROUND. SO I'LL MOVE FORWARD A SLIDE, JUST SO WE CAN SEE THIS. THIS IS ACTUALLY A CLIP FROM OUR DEVELOPMENT TRACKER. AND IT FOCUSES ON SAWGRASS. THE NOTE ON TOP IS ACTUALLY NEFBA'S BUT IT SHOWS IT IS THE SECOND LARGEST. 
          [04:10:04]
SO SAWGRASS PUD HAS TOTAL UNITS APPROVED OF ALMOST 7,000. BUT THEY ONLY BUILT 1200. IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA, YOU CAN PROBABLY RECOGNIZE THAT THERE'S NOT A LOT OF EXTRA LAND ARE IF THEM TO PUT ANOTHER 7,000 HOMES. AND THE PUD DEVELOPMENT TRACKER SHOWS THAT, THAT IT'S ONLY 17.4% BUILT OUT. OBVIOUSLY, SAWGRASS ISN'T THE ONLY ONE. THERE IS CERTAINLY A LOT OF THE PUDS UP IN THE PONTE VEDRA AREA THAT MAKE UP THAT. AND NEFBA SHOWS, ANOTHER 3,000. COMBINED, YOU MIGHT HAVE ANOTHER 12,000 UNITS THAT DON'T HAVE LAND TO BUILD ON. TO WRAP ALL OF THAT UP INTIELINGSED RESIDENTIAL UNITS ARE ENTITLED TO STATE LAW IN LAND. COUNTY HAS APPROXIMTELY 45,000 UNITS. PRACTICAL BUILDABLE LOTS ARE ONLY ABOUT 25 AND A HALF THOUSAND. I WILL SAY, THEY DON'T CONSIDER APPROXIMATELY 6,000 MULTIFAMILY UNITS . ASK WE JUST WENT OVER MARSHLAND AND SAWGRASS HAVE 
          SOME. >> THE DATA SETS ARE CONSISTENT IN THEIR COUNTS. THERE'S NO SURPRISE THERE. AND NEFBA IS DOING THE WORK IN SUBSTANTIAL SITE FOR DATA ANALYSIS, FOR DETERMINING THOSE UNITS. THEY'VE GONE OVER WITH IT ME. I FIND, BROADLY SPEAKING, THAT WHAT THEY'RE SHOWING IS REASONABLE AND CORECT. ST. JOHNS COUNTY HAS A LEGAL OBLIGATION TO MAINTAIN THAT 49,000 UNITS. SO YOU'LL PROBABLY SEE THAT NUMBER COME UP AGAIN IN A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THAT BEING SAID, TRYING TO BE SHORT AND TO THE POINT F. YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR ME, THROUGH THE CHAIR, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER. 
          >> THANK YOU. VERY NICE PRESENTATION. COMMISSIONER 
          MURPHY. >> I THINK YOU MIGHT HAVE ANSWERED MY QUESTION. IF NEFBA SAYS THERE'S 25, 5, THE QUESTION IS, DO WE HAVE ENTITLEMENTS. I THINK YOU SAID 
          6,000? >> YES, SIR. YOU CAN TAKE THAT 25,5 AND ADD APPROXIMATELY 6,000 ON THIS PIE CHART. SO CLOSER TO 
          30,000. >> 31,5? 
          >> YES, SIR. >> OKAY. TU -- YOU -- YOU MADE A PHRASE THAT CAUGHT MY EAR. YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE -- THE -- THE ENTITLEMENTS THAT -- IN SAWGRASS. YOU SAID THAT THEY WOULDN'T BE BUILT ON ANY TIME SOON. YOU KIND OF SAID THAT WITH A LITTLE BIT OF -- A LITTLE BIT OF SWAGGER. SO -- SOY MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, WHEN YOU SAY ANY TIME SOON, YOU MEAN -- UNLESS THEY CLOSE THE GOLF COURSES AND PUT THEM IN THE GOLF COURSE? I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING. 
          >> THROUGH THE CHAIR. AND TO ANSWER COMMISSIONER MURPHY'S QUESTION. SO THERE'S POSSIBILITIES OUT THERE TO DEVELOP WITH THESE UNITS. IT DOES -- I HAVE IT ON THE BOTTOM NOTE HERE, WHERE I WROTE, THAT WOULD REQUIRE SUBSTANTIAL LAND-PLANNING MODIFICATIONS TO UTILIZE. SO ONE OPTION MIGHT BE TO BUILD ON THE GOLF COURSES. ONE OPTION MIGHT BE TO TEAR DOWN SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES AND BUILD MULTIFAMILY HIGH-RISES. ANOTHER OPPOSITION MIGHT BE TO TRY TO SELL THOSE UNITS TO ANOTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY SO THAT THEY CAN DEVELOP. ALL OF THOSE THINGS ARE VERY COMPLICATED, AND CERTAINLY WOULD TAKE A LOT OF 
          TIME. NOTHING NEAR TERM. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> BUT IT IS POSSIBLE, CORRECT IS THIS. 
          >> THE POTENTIAL IS THERE. >> AND I SAW THAT MARSHLANDING. 
          THEY'RE BUILDING ON A GOLF COURSE, ALL OF A SUDDEN. SO -- 
          >> THERE IS AT LEAST ONE DEVELOPMENT -- 
          >> THREE. >> -- AT THE BOTTOM OF THE AREA THAT HAS BUILD OUT. OH, YEAH. OAK BRIDGE, TOO. THEY SHUT DOWN 
          HALF AND PLTD BUILT ON IT. >> IF THEY WANTED TO BUILD ON THE GOLF COURSE, WOULD THEY HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE BOARD OF 
          COUNTY COMMISSIONERS? >> YES. 
          >> THESE NEW ENTITLEMENTS WOULD GO THROUGH THE WHOLE APPLICATION PROCESS AND ULTIMATELY END UPA A DECISION IN FRONT OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS? ? THAT IS CORRECT. THE WAY THAT THE 
          [04:15:05]
PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS THAT HAVE THESE EXCESS UNITS, THEY DON'T CONTEMPLATE WHERE THEY WOULD GO. SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH 
          THAT FULL PROCESS. >> THANK YOU. ALSO A QUESTION ON THE 6,000 MULTIFAMILY UNITS THAT NEFBA IS CLAIMING ARE NOT PART OF THE REMAINING HALF ENTITLEMENTS. COULD THOSE 6,000 UNITS -- COULDN'T IT BE COMMERCIAL ALSO? OR IS IT STRICTLY FAMILY? THOSE CURRENT ZONING? 
          >> IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF AN AD HOC SITUATION, FOR EACH PUD HOW THEY DESCRIBE MULTIFAMILY, WHAT IT MAY BE USED FOR. THEY MAY HAVE ENTITLEMENTS THROUGH LIVE LOCAL. THEY MAY HAVE -- THEY MAY HAVE THE ABILITY THROUGH DRI, TO CHANGE THOSE UNITS TO OTHER THINGS, THROUGH CONVERSION. IT'S HARD TO SAY. I WOULD 
          DEFINITELY SAY IT DEPENDS. >> I THINK IT'S SMART TO CONSIDER THEM 6,000 MULTIFAMILY UNITS, FOR THIS CONVERSATION. SO 
          [3. 2050 Comprehensive Plan Update: Data and Analysis. St. Johns County is in the process of developing an updated Comprehensive Plan. At the regular BCC meeting on February 18, 2025, the County's consultant, Inspire Placemaking Collective, provided an update to the Board on the project history, timeline, and next steps. The Board requested that the consultant return to the regular BCC meeting scheduled on March 18, 2025, to provide clarification on specific data within the supporting Data and Analysis documents.]
31,000, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT. 
          >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. THAT WAS PRESENTATION ITEM ONLY. LET'S MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM 3, UNLESS COMMISSIONER ARNOLD HAS QUESTION. IT'S PRESENTATION ONLY. 
          >> NO, MADAM CHAIR. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> EXCUSE ME? WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO INSPIRE. WE REALLY NEED TO SET THE INSPIRE -- WE HAVE TO GET THIS GOING. WE ONLY HAVE SEVEN MEETINGS LEFT TO GET THIS FINISHED. 
          >> YES, MA'AM. IT'S GOT TO GO TO TRANSMITTAL, BEFORE SEVEN OR 
          SEVEN MEETINGS. >> RIGHT. WE DON'T HAVE LONG. 
          >> THIS IS SO IMPORTANT. WE HAVE GOT TO GET ON THIS RIGHT NOW. 
          >> YES, MA'AM. >> SO NOT LONG AGO. THE BOARD HEARD THE BRIEFING FROM CHRIS DOUGHERTY FROM INSPIRE, WHO IS OUR CONSULTANT, WHO KIND OF TOLD US WHERE WE'RE AT, RIGHT? WHEN THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDTE PROCESS. AND BASICALLY, WE'RE AT THE POINT WHERE WE'VE GOT A LOT OF PUBLIC INPUT, FROM A LOT OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE AND ENTITIES. AND WE'RE TO THE POINT NOW, WHERE WE'RE LOOKING FOR DIRECTION TO GO FORWARD WITH A RED LINE TO BRING BACK TO YOU AS A COMP PLAN, AND THEN ULTIMATELY, TAKE IT TO, UM, THROUGH THE STATE. GET COMMENTS AND COME BACK AND GET APPROVAL. AND WE DO HAVE THAT DEADLINE AT THE END OF AUGUST. IN ORDER FOR US TO TRANSMIT THAT COMP PLAN AMENDMENT. SO WITH THAT, WE WERE GIVEN A LITTLE BIT OF DIRECTION TO COME BACK AND TALK -- OR COME BACK WITH THE SAME PRESENTATION. 
          WE WANTED TO CLARIFY A COUPLE OF THINGS. THAT WAS THE DATA FROM PARKS ASK RECREATION. EAVE DONE THAT. MR. DAVID HENNING IS HERE. 
          HE'LL GIVE US A BRIEF PRESENTATION. AND THEN HE'S GOING TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE POPULATION BASED OFF OF MEDIAN AND MEDIAN HIGH PROJECTION AND SOME OF THOSE 
          NUMBERS. >> CAN I ASK A QUESTION? 
          >> YES, MA'AM. >> WHAT IS THE DROP DOWN DATE? I 
          HEARD END OF JULY. >> SURE. IT'S ONE YEAR FROM WHEN WE SUBMIT THE LETTER. I CAN'T REMEMBER IF IT WAS THE END OF AUGUST WE SUBMITTED THERE -- DAVID? 
          >> I'D HAVE TO CHECK. >> WE'D HAVE ONE MORE MEETING 
          IF IT WAS END OF AUGUST. >> WE'LL GET YOU A DEFINITIVE ANSWER ON THAT. BUT WITH THAT, I'LL MR. HENNING COME UP AND 
          GIVE A DATA PRESENTATION. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU. I THANK THE CHAIR AND THE COMMISSION FOR HAVING US HERE TODAY. AND SO I'D LIKE TO GO THROUGH, AS MIKE SAID, THE KIND OF UPDATE OF -- OF ITEMS FROM THE LAST TIME THAT INSPIRE WAS HERE AT A MEETING. THAT INCLUDES LOOKING AT THOSE NUMBERS AT TEN-YEAR OUTLOOK. AND DIFFERENT LEVELS. IT IS ZIPPING ALONG. I THINK IT'S ON A TIMER. AS WELL AS THE DATA ON OPEN SPACE, AND THE CHANGES WE'VE MADE WITH THAT, WITH RESPECT. 
          FIRST, THE TEN-YEAR OUTLOOK. THIS IS WHAT WE LOOKED AT THE LAST TIME. WHAT IS CALLED THE MEDIAN HIGH PROJECTIVE. AND WHAT IS ON YOUR RIGHT IS THE MEDIAN, USING THE LOWER NUMBER FROM THAT BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH. THE ENTITY THAT ALL COMP PLANS USES FOR DATA SOURCE FOR THESE PROJECTIONS. THE STATE IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT THE KIND OF NET GAIN EXPECTED IN THE MEDIAN HIGH PROJECTION WAS 111,000 RESIDENTS. ULTIMATELY, NEEDING 39,000 HOUSING UNITS BY 2035. AND THAT, ACCORDING TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, USING THOSE NUMBERS THAT WE WERE BEGINNING WITH, THAT WERE 61,556 AVAILABLE UNITS. THAT -- THAT CALCULATION WAS BASED SPECIFICALLY ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, AS IS REQUIRED AS PART OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IT WAS NOT BASED ON EITHER -- ON THE 
          [04:20:03]
GROUND, KIND OF INSPECTION OR ON THE ZONING. IT COMES THROUGH THE FUTURE LAND USE. WHEN WE LOOK AT COMPARING THAT TO WHAT THE MEDIAN PROJECTION IS, THE NET GAIN ESTIMATE OF RESIDENTS GOES DOWN TO 79,000. SO ABOUT A 30,000 DROP IN POTENTIAL FUTURE RESIDENTS BEING CONSIDERED. AND THE OVERALL NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITS NEEDED BY 2035 REDUCES DOWN TO 28,482. THIS IS THE 10-YEAR OUTLOOK, ONLY, LOOKING AT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MEDIAN HIGH PROJECTION, AND THE MEDIUM PROJECTION. USING THE STATE MANDATED SOURCES. THE OTHER PIECE OF CHANGE THAT WE'RE BRINGING FORWARD TO YOU IS TO -- SORRY. LOOKING AT THE LEVEL. AS REPRESENTED, THE LEVEL OF SERVICE HAS BEEN IN THE DRAFTDZ AS WELL. A LOOK AT DIFFERENT KIND OF PARK TYPES, BASED ON THE SURVEY. THAT LED TO THE ULTIMATE REQUIREMENTS PER THOUSAND PERSONS. WHETHER THEY BE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS, COMMUNITY PARKS, DISTRICT PARKS. THOSE ARE DIFFERENCES IN KIND OF WHAT THE OVERALL KIND OF CATCHMAN AREA IS FOR THE PARK, IF YOU WILL. WHAT IS PROPOSED IS -- THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOUR PARKS DEPARTMENT COULD NOT CONSIDER THINGS IN TERMS OF NEIGHBORHOOD, COMMUNITY AND DISTRICT, AND REGIONAL PARKS. IT JUST MEANS THAT AS FAR AS WITH THE KIND OF MANDATED LEVEL OF SERVICE. IT WOULD BE BASED INSTEAD ON WHAT THE KIND OF USE IN THE PARK IS. JUST THE SIMPLE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN ACTIVE PARK, WHETHER IT BE A SPORTS FIELD OR A PLAYGROUND OR OTHER ACTIVE USES. AND PASSIVE PARKS THAT ARE KIND OF MORE NATURAL BUT DON'T HAVE THAT KIND OF, YOU KNOW, ACTIVE USE COMPONENT TO THEM. ALSO, IN LOOKING AT THE PROPOSED LEVEL OF SERVICE TO SIMPLIFY THE THINGS THAT THE COUNTY HAS CONTROL OVER. WE'RE LOOKING AT ONLY COUNTY-OWNED PARK LANDS, NOT TO LARGER REGIONAL ENTITIES THAT MIGHT BE THERE. LOOKING AT HOW THAT ACTUALLY APPLIES OUT. AND WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE. AND ACREAGE OVER TIMES IN. AND DEFICIT, THAT WOULD BE TEEING UP, AS NEEDING TO PLAN FOR. THIS DOES STILL USE THAT -- THAT BEAVER MEDIUM HIGH PROJECTION. 
          SO YOU CAN EXPECT THE DEFICIT THERE, BEFORE I TALK YOU THROUGH MORE OF THE TABLE. WOULD BE REDUCED IF WE WERE TO SWITCH TO THE MEDIUM PROJECTION AGAIN. BUT YOU CAN SEE THE DEFICIT THAT COMES THROUGH IS ENTIRELY WITHIN THE ACTIVE PARK CATEGORY. 
          THERE'S A CURRENT ACREAGE OF JUST OVER 1400 ACRES OF ACTIVE PARK. AND A, YOU KNOW, ANTICIPATED DEMAND, BASED ON LEVEL OF SERVICE, OF OVER 1600, THE DEFICIT OF 250. AND AS YOU ALLOW THE POPULATION PROJECTION TO PROGRESS, LOOKING UP TOWARD 20 50, THAT INCREASES TO A DEFICIT OF JUST OVER 1300 ACRES. 
          ON THE OTHER HAND, ON YOUR PASSIVE PARKS, YOU CURRENTLY HAVE ENOUGH TO COVER NOT JUST THE CURRENT DEMAND, WHICH, AGAIN, BY REQUIRING THE SAME AMOUNT, IT'S SIMPLE TO SEE. 
          IT'S THE SAME OVERALL DEMAND FOR PASSIVE PARKS. BUT YOU HAVE MORE ALREADY. YOU'VE GOT NEARLY 4700 ACRES. BY CALCULATION, YOU HAVE A SURPLUS OFS THIS LANDS, ALREADY BY POPULATION. AND AS YOU PROGRESS, EVEN IN THIS MEDIUM-HIGH CONDITION, YOU CONTINUE TO HAVE A SURPLUS IN THE ACREAGE. IN OTHER WORDS, YOU'VE GOT ENOUGH PASSIVE PARKS TO MEET THE MINIMUM SERVICE LEVEL REQUIREMENT FOR THAT POPULATION IN THE HIGHER PROJECTION. AND SO KIND OF MOVING FORWARD, YOU KNOW, THESE WERE SHOWN TO YOU, I BELIEVE, THE LAST MEETING AS WELL. THE DATA ANALYSIS, LARGELY HAPPENED DURING THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY. 
          AND THAT WE'RE WORKING THROUGH THE KIND OF IMPLEMENTATION ITEMS OF IT. FOR IN OUR DRAFTS LOOKING THROUGH SPRING AS WELL AS TOWARDS THAT TRANSMITTAL AREA. AND LOOKING FORWARD TO SUMMER OF THIS YEAR, TO ACTUALLY GET THIS WRAPPED UP FOR YOU ALL. HAPPY TO 
          TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. >> COMMISSIONER MURPHY? 
          >> I YIELD TO YOU, SIR. SAID MADAM CHAIR. I WANTED TO ADD THAT WE WERE GIVEN DIRECTION BY THE BOARD TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE MEDIUM PROJECTION, IN ADDITION TO THE MEDIUM-HIGH PROJECTION. SO WE ARE GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS TO DO THAT. 
          THAT WILL TAKE ROUGHLY INSPIRE ABOUT A MONTH TO COMPLETE THAT ANALYSIS, AS WELL AS THE TEN-YEAR. BUT MOSTLY, IT'S THE 
          [04:25:03]
MEDIUM PROTECTION PROJECTION THAT TAKES THE TIME. AND $35,000, THAT WILL COME TO YOU ON CONSENT AGENDA. SO THAT IS PART OF THE PROCESS. I WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW. 
          >> ALSO I TALKED TO CHRIS DOUGHERTY. HE SAID HE COULD DO THE MEDIUM AND RED LINE DONE BY MAY. 
          >> YES, MA'AM. >> IS THAT GOING TO WORK FOR 
          YOU? >> YES, MA'AM. WHENEVER THEY GET TO US, WE'LL TURN IT OUT QUICK. I HAVE TO GET THAT BACK 
          OUT TO THE DEPARTMENTS. >> HE THOUGHT HE COULD DO IT BY 
          THEN. >> I'LL RELY ON CHRIS TO SAY WHAT HE CAN GET DONE FOR HIS COMPANY. 
          >> AND WHILE I HAVE YOU HERE. SO WE HAVE TO DO PZA. AND WE DO AN ADOPT -- TRANSMITTAL, AND THE ADOPTION IS THREE MONTHS LATER OR SIX MONTHS LATER, WHICH WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT. 
          >> IT WILL COME BACK FOR US. IT WILL COME BACK BEFORE YOU. IT 
          WILL HAVE TO BE, TO BE ADOPTED. >> BUT THAT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE 
          IN THE AUGUST TIME FRAME? >> YOU WILL NEED TO BRING THAT BACK AS WELL. IT GOES TO THE STATE. CAN THEY NEED 60 DAYS TO REVIEW IT AND GIVE US BACK ANY COMMENTS. 
          >> I'M TRYING TO GO BACKWARDS ON WHEN WE SHOULD BE HAVING AT THE PCA, AS WELL AS TRANSMITTAL, WHAT MONTH. BECAUSE WE'RE -- WE 
          ONLY HAVE FOUR MONTHS. >> I THINK THE KEY THERE IS JUST 
          -- >> AND ONLY ONE MEETING IN JULY. 
          >> YES, MA'AM. I THINK THE KEY IS JUST TO HUSTLE. WE'VE GOT OUR DIRECTION. WE WILL MOVE FORWARD AS FAST AS POSSIBLE. AND MOVE FORWARD TO THE PCA AND BCC AS QUICK AS POSSIBLE. 
          >> MS. ANDREWS, DOES THAT LOOK LIKE WE CAN GET THIS DONE AND YOU CAN GET IT SCHEDULED TO WRAP UP BY JULY OR FIRST WEEK IN 
          AUGUST? >> SOUNDS LIKE YOU HAD CONVERSATION FROM OUR CONSULTANT. SEEMS LIKE THERE WAS SOME PROMISE ON THE TIME LINE THAT WILL FIT OUR NEEDS. 
          >> YOU'LL BE ABLE TO DO THAT? >> YES. 
          >> COMMISSIONER MURPHY IS THIS. >> YES. THANK YOU. ON A MEDIUM PROJECTION WITH 31,500 HOMES ENTITLED BUILDABLE. WE HAVE ABOUT A TEN-YEAR SUPPLY. HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE TO GO FROM CONCEPTS TO ROOFTOPS, IN THE EVENT WE RUN OUT OF HOME. 
          >> RUN OUT OF ENTITLEMENTS? OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS. 
          >> HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE TO -- >> FROM CONCEPT TO ROOF TOPS. 
          >> TO CONSTRUCT HOMES WITHIN THE COMMUNITY? 
          >> YEAH. >> I MEAN, I DEFER TO YOUR STAFF, ON HOW LONG IT KIND OF TAKES TO KIND OF GO THROUGH THE APPLICATION PROCESS ON ANY -- ANY KIND OF LARGE DEVELOPMENT. 
          >> IT DEPENDS. I'LL START, COMMISSIONER. IF YOU'RE STARTING OUT WITH ZONING AND LAND USE, RIGHT? THAT CAN TAKE -- LET'S -- LET'S SAY SIX MONTHS. I KNOW IT DEPENDS. 
          SOMETIMES IT'S LONGER. SOMETIMES A LITTLE LESS. BUT LET'S SAY, SIX TO NINE MONTHS THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE PROCESS. 
          AND THAT DEPENDS ON WHETHER THE DEVELOPER IS DOING ENGINEERING CONCURRENTLY, RIGHT? THAT TAKES A LITTLE BIT OF SOME TIME AS WELL. THAT'S GOING THROUGH STAFF REVIEW. THEN ONCE THAT'S APPROVED, INFRASTRUCTURE. I'LL GO THROUGH, AND GIVE YOU A ROUGH 
          ESTIMATE. >> ALL I NEED IS A ROUGH 
          ESTIMATE. >> YEAH. AND THEN THEY NEED TO, YOU KNOW -- INSTALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE. CLEAR THE PIPES. 
          AND BUILDERS WILL COME IN AND START BUILDING. SO YOU'RE TALKING YEARS, YOU KNOW. FOR SURE, A COUPLE OF YEARS JUST TO GET STARTED, PROBABLY. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THEY DON'T BUILD THEM ALL AT ONCE, RIGHT? THEY'LL BUILD IN PHASES, AS YOU'VE 
          HEARD. >> OKAY KNOWLEDGE. 
          >> SO IT'S YEARS. >> WHEN YOU SAY "YEARS." YOU 
          MEAN THREE? >> YEAH -- 
          >> FOUR? >> AGAIN, I WOULD SAY PROBABLY THREE TO FOUR, AND ANY OF THE BUILDERS CAN CORRECT ME. BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW. THAT'S ON THEIR TIME LINE. 
          >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> WITH THE NEW MEDIUM NUMBERS. 
          LOOKS LIKE WE WON'T HAVE TO WOULD OUT THE TIME LINE. BUT I WAS ALSO TOLD AT MR. DOUGHERTY, AT SEVEN YEARS, YOU REEVALUATE. 
          SO IF YOU NEED TO MOVE IT AT THAT POINT, YOU CAN LOOK AT IT THEN? IF WE LOOKED AT NOT DOING IT FOR THE FIRST TEN YEARS AND THEN GO AHEAD AND PROJECT THE 20? CAN WE DO THAT? 
          >> THE DIRECTION OF THE BOARD IS WHICHEVER WAY YOU'RE GOING -- 
          >> I DON'T KNOW. I'M JUST ASKING FOR ME. 
          >> THAT SEVEN YEARS IS JUST WHAT THE STATE MANDATES. YOU AS COMMISSIONERS, YOU CAN DIRECT STAFF AT ANY TIME TO LOOK AT IT. 
          YOU CAN LOOK AT IT ANNUALLY, IF YOU WANTED TO. I DON'T RECOMMEND THAT. BUT YOU COULD. LET'S SAY YOU PUT THIS A POLICY THAT JUST WASN'T WORKING. AND YOU COULD SAY, I COME BACK. AND YOU COULD DIRECT US TO BRING THAT POLICY BACK UP AND MODIFY 
          [04:30:01]
IT. THIS IS NOT THE END-ALL. BUT IT IS A BIG LOOK. AND WE HAVEN'T LOOKED AT IT FOR A WHILE. AND I THINK IT'S THE PROPER THING TO DO, IS ANALYZE -- 
          >> COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST. >> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. 
          COMMISSIONER MURPHY SPARKED A THOUGHT. I THINK WHAT THE LAST PRESENTATION SHOWED US, PER THE NEFBA SLIDE. 650 OF THOSE HOMES ARE IN WOULDOUTS. SO THE MAJORITY IS CONTAINED IN THREE PUDS. WE HAVE SUPPLY. WE'RE MOVING TOWARDLESS ALMOST A MONOPOLY OF HOUSING, CONTAINED WITHIN THESE THREE PUDS. THE REST OF THE HOUSING OPTION, YOU KNOW, WILL BE GONE. IN ABOUT FIVE YEARS, GIVE OR TAKE, IN MY OPINION. 
          >> WHAT ANY THE DENSITY? THE INFILL? 
          >> YEAH. I THINK THAT INCLUDES DENSITY AND INFILL. I THINK WHAT IS CURRENTLY BEEN ENTITLED IS ABOUT 31,000 HOMES. THAT'S WHAT'S BUILDABLE. THAT'S WHAT IS LEFT. AND BETWEEN SILVER LAKE AND LANDING. WE HAVE ABOUT 651,000 ENTITLEMENTS LEFT. 
          EVERYTHING BEYOND THAT IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE BUILT OUT. 
          IN ROUGHLY, GIVE OR TAKE, ABOUT FIVE YEARS IN MY OPINION. 
          >> MADAM CHAIR, IF I THEY. THAT'S A REALLY GOOD POINT. IT WOULD BE A HUGE ADVANTAGE TO PARTICULAR BUILDERS, IF WE -- IF WE LIMITED. BUT UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. SOMETIMES STUFF HAPPENS. ALL WE CAN DO IS OUR BEST, RIGHT? 
          >> DO I HAVE A MOTION TO MAYBE MOVE THIS FORWARD TO RED LINE, 
          WITH INSPIRE? >> AS SOON AS I PUT THE MOTION ON THE TABLE. YEAH. BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE TIME. WE HAVE SEVEN 
          MEETINGS LEFT. >> SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MURPHY. ALL RIGHT. SO PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          >> WE'LL NOW HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 3. 
          >> CHANGE ORDER FOR INSPIRE PLACEMAKING COLLECTIVE, INC. CAN SOMEBODY PLEASE ASK, THROUGH THE CHAIR, FOR INSPIRE TO ADDRESS THE WORK THEY HAVE DONE. AND PLEASE ASK THE COUNTY TO EXPLAIN IN INTERIM, WHY I HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY DOCUMENTS ON THAT 
          CONTRACT -- NOTHING AT ALL. >> CAN YOU HEAR ME IS THIS. 
          >> NOW I CAN. >> NOW YOU CAN? CAN WE RESTART THE CLOCK, PLEASE. CALLING YOUR ATTENTION TO THE $73,352 INSPIRE PLACEMAKING COLLECTIVE. CHANGE ORDER. THAT THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR APPROVED WITHOUT CHECKING WITH THE COUNTY COMMISSION. COULD YOU PLEASE CROSS-EXAMINE THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND INSPIRE, MAKING THE COUNTY ATTORNEY ABOUT THAT. AND WHY THAT CHANGE ORDER WAS DONE? AND WHY THAT CHANGE ORDER WAS NOT COMPETITIVELY BID FOR OTHER PEOPLE, LIKE ARBORISTS, WITH ACTUAL EXPERTISE ON TREES TO DO? BECAUSE WE BLEW $73,752, AS AN ATTEMPT BY THE ADMINISTRATION TO DELAY THE VOTE YOU TOOK THIS MORNING ON PROTECTING TREES. THAT IS WRONG. 
          IT'S A SENATE CRIME AND A TORTE. THAT CHANGE ORDER SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ISSUED. SHOULD NEVER BEEN ISSUED. AND INSPIRE PLACEMAKING COLLECTIVE, WHICH I REQUIRED UNDER STATUTE, AND THE PROVISION THAT APPLIES TO GOVERNMENT CONTRACTORS, THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE TO US, THE RECORDS REQUESTED. AND NONE HAVE BEEN PROVIDED. SO CAN SOMEONE PLEASE ASK THEM ABOUT THAT WHEN I'M DONE? AND AS FAR AS INSPIRE PLACEMAKING, AND THIS ENTIRE COMPREHENSIVE PROSPECT, I AM NOT IMPRESSED WITH THE QUALITY OF THEIR WORK OR THE STAFF, OR THE WAY IN WHICH THIS IS PRESENTED. 
          THEY ARE TRYING TO PRECLUDE OPTIONS. AND THE FIRST TIME I EVER HEARD FORMER TEXAS AGRICULTURAL COMMISSIONER HIGHTOWER SPEAK IN TENNESSEE, BACK IN THE '70S. HE SAID, "THEY'RE STEALING THE ALTERNATIVES, FOLKS." AND THAT'S WHAT THEY DO. BUT WHAT EXPERTISE DOES INSPIRE HAVE, WITH TREES? AND WHY ARE THEY INVOLVED? AND WHY WITHOUT ADVISING IMFORT COUNTY COMMISSIONERS? DO I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, THAT IT CAME AS A SURPRISE TO YOU ALL? THAT IS 
          [04:35:03]
WRONG. THAT IS ABSOLUTELY WRONG. WE NEED TO BE TALKING TO ACTUAL ARBOR FIRSTS AND PEOPLE WITH EXPERT CEASE, LIKE THE TWO FATHER AND SON LIPPY THIS MORNING. AND NOT GO WITH THE BELTWAY BANDITS WHO ARE CHARGING US WHAT? HALF A MILLION DOLLARS? FOR WHAT EXACTLY? LOCKING AND COPYING ORLANDO. WE DON'T WANT TO BE ORLANDO, PLEASE. THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. I LOOK FORWARD TO ANSWERS TO THE REQUESTS I FILED UNDER FLORIDA 
          STATUTE 119. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> JOE MCINERNEY. 1005 BLACKBERRY LANE. IF WE WOULD LEAVE THAT SLIDE UP. I SENT AN E-MAIL TO JACOB SMITH. DID GET AN ANSWER. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER JOSEPH, FOR THE UPDATE. MY QUESTION IS, ARE WE GOING TO MAKE IT? WE'VE GOT AN AUGUST DEADLINE HERE. ARE WE GOING TO MAKE IT? THIS IS MR. SIGHTED'S ANSWER. JOE, THE BOARD JUST DIRECTED INSPIRE TO FOCUS ON MEDIUM BIEBER, INSTEAD OF MEDIUM HIGH. THIS INCLUDES A CHANGE ORDER FROM THEIR WORK, AND WILL ADD APPROXIMATELY TWO MONTHS TO THE PROCESS. THERE IS NO CURRENT SCHEDULED TIME FRAME FOR THIS. BUT I DO NOT ASSUME IT WILL BE POSSIBLE TO FINISH BEFORE AUGUST. NOW, MAYBE YOU'VE HEARD DIFFERENT INFORMATION. BUT WE'RE RUNNING HOT HERE. WE'RE RUNNING SCARED. WE'VE GOT TO MAKE THIS. WE CAN'T DEFER THIS TO THE STATE'S DECISION ON WHAT ST. JOHNS COUNTY SHOULD DO. LET ME JUST POINT OUT WITH THIS SLIDE, THE WAY I TAKE IT. THE 61,556 THAT IS UP THERE. INSPIRE CALCULATED THE NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITS, SLIGHTLY DIFFERENTLY. 
          THEY LOOKED AT THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. THEY LOOKED AT THE VACANT PARCELS WITHIN. EACH OF THOSE FUTURE LAND USE AREAS, AND APPLIED THE MAXIMUM DENSITY THAT COULD BE PERMITTED. AND THEY CAME UP WITH 61,556 HOUSING UNITS, DWELLING UNITS. BASED ON THE MEDIUM PROJECTION, WE NEED 28,4. IT APPEARS WE DON'T HAVE TO -- APPEARS TO BE WE HAVE PLENTY OF CAPACITY WITHIN 10 YEARS. I DON'T SEE THE 20-YEAR OUTLOOK. BUT IF WE FOLLOW A SIMILAR LINE. I'M READING THESE NUMBERS AND SCRATCHING MY HEAD AND SAYING, GEE, DO WE HAVE THE ENTIRE AREA WE NEED FOR 20 YEARS? I DON'T KNOW. I DIDN'T HEAR THAT ANSWER. I ALSO ASKED MR. SMITH WHAT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WILL LOOK LIKE? WHAT DOES A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LOOKS LIKE, WHEN THE STATE REQUIRES THAT IT BE -- THAT IT CONTAIN TWO PLANNING PHASES, A 10-YEAR, AND A 20-YEAR. AND WE'VE MADE THAT 20-YEAR, '25. WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE? DO WE HAVE A HOUSING ELEMENT FOR A 10 YEAR, AND 20 YEAR. TRANSPORTATION, FOR 10, FOR 20? RECREATION FOR 10, FOR 20? TWO FUTURE USE? I DIDN'T GET THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION. 
          BUT I THINK THAT'S A WORTHWHILE QUESTION TO ASK OF INSPIRE OR ANYONE ELSE WHO MIGHT HAVE AN ANSWER. I'M JUST COMPLETELY CONFUSED, I MUST SAY, BY THE STATE'S REQUIREMENT THAT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HAVE TWO 10-YEAR PLANNING PHASES. THANK 
          YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WITH PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE COME FORWARD? GOOD AFTERNOON. PLEASE 
          STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS SUSAN GINESS. I LIVE AT 4280 COASTAL HIGHWAY. I'M HERE REPRESENTING MYSELF AND C.A.R.E., COMMUNITY ADVOCATES FOR RACIAL EQUITY. AS WE SAID, WHEN INSPIRE PLACEMAKING LAST REPORTED ON ITS RESEARCH AND FINDINGS OF SJC'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, C.A.R.E. SAW MUCH THAT ACCOUNTED FOR OUR NEEDS FOR THE FUTURE. ESPECIALLY WITH RESPECT TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING. BUT THIS REPORT IS NOT A PLAN. IT IS ONLY A TOOL THAT CAN BE USED TO WRITE A PLAN. SO FIRST, CARE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW, EXACTLY HOW IS THE COUNTY USES THIS SUBSTANTIVE REPORT TO UPDATE OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN? SECONDLY, WE ARE BECOMING INCREASINGLY CONCERNED THAT THE PUBLIC STILL HAS NOT SEEN A DRAFT OF SJC'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IT IS ALREADY MID-MARCH. AND AS WE KNOW, A REPORT IS DUE TO STATE BY MID-AUGUST. AND THERE MAY BE A FINAL ADOPTION PHASE IN THE PROCESS. THE CURRENT PLAN IS NEARLY 300 PAGES, AND SETS FORTH GOALS, POLICIES IN NINE BROAD SUBSTANTIVE POLICIES. WE UNDERSTAND THE REDRAFT MAY ADD AT LEAST ONE CATEGORY AND THE REDRAFT COULD BE EVEN LONGER. 
          FOLLOW-UP REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF A DRAFT IS GOING TO TAKE MUCH MORE THAN A WEEK OR TWO. SO IF YOU'RE 
          [04:40:01]
SERIOUS ABOUT WANTING MEANINGFUL PUBLIC INPUT IN THE REVISION UPDATING THE SJC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THEN YOU REALLY NEED TO MAKE THE DRAFT AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW. SO WE'RE JUST WONDERING WHEN WE MIGHT GET TO SEE THAT. SO WE HAVE TIME TO MAKE EDUCATED INFORMED DECISIONS ON OUR RECOMMENDATIONS. THANK 
          YOU. >> THANK YOU, MA'AM. 
          >> HI. BETH BREEDING, BIRMINGHAM, JACKSONVILLE. THE LAST TIME ADDED CHANGES TO THEIR MAP WAS IN 2000. 25 YEARS AGO. 
          THAT HAS CREATED THE CLUSTEROF TODAY THAT EVERYONE IS UNHAPPY WITH. IFFY WE FAIL TO PLAN, THEN WE ARE PLANNING TO FAIL AGAIN. 
          LACK OF PLANNING AGAIN HAS PUT US INTO POSITION. NOT EVERY ONE IS WILLING TO. SHOULD BE COUNTED TOWARD THE RESIDENTIAL LOT COUNT. NOT ONLY WILL THOSE BE RESIDENTIAL. THE ONES THAT ARE AVAILABLE MAY BE DEVELOPED AS COMMERCIAL. SO IF WE'RE COUNTING EVERY LITTLE BIT THAT WE HAVE NOW, ONLY TOWARD RESIDENTIAL. WE DO NOT HAVE A 10-YEAR SUPPLY. WE HAVE TO DO BETTER. WE HAVE TO THINK. -- THAT LEAVES ROOM FOR COMMERCIAL TO BE COMMERCIAL. AND INSTEAD OF UNITS THAT WILL BE TO COMMERCIAL. AND GIVES PEOPLE THAT DON'T WANT OPPORTUNITY TO SELL TO KEEP LAND EXACTLY WHERE IT IS. JUST BECAUSE THEY HAVE RESB, -- WE HAVE TO ACCOUNT FOR THAT AND NOT COUNT EVERY SINGLE ACRE IS GOING TO BE A RESIDENTIAL UNIT. JUST BECAUSE THEY HAVE A LAND USE THAT WOULD ALLOW IT. THANK YOU. 
          >> MY NAME IS JUDY SPIEGEL. AS YOU KNOW, ANOTHER UPDATE. I THINK THERE ARE A FEW SMALL CHANGES TO POINT OUT, EVEN THOUGH I DO UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS THAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH RIGHT NOW. SEVERAL OF THE ITEMS THAT WERE BROUGHT AS IMPORTANT TO THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE FOR ATTAINABLE HOUSING. I THINK WE ARE AT A UNIQUE PLACE, WHERE WE CAN ACTUALLY REDEFINE SINGLE FAMILY TO INCLUDE DUPLEX, TRIPLEX, AND QUADRIPLEX. IN OUR COMP PLAN AND DOWN THROUGH OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. THIS IS ADDRESSED AS THE MISSING MIDDLE. THE PEOPLE THAT CAN'T AFFORD ON THE EXPENSIVE HOUSES HERE AND DON'T WANT TO LIVE IN 
          APARTMENTS. >> I LIKE THE COUNTY WIDE OVERLAY DISTRICTS. I BELIEVE THIS WILL INCREASE THE BENEFIT OF INCREASING THE SCENIC EDGE, INCREASING THE BUFFERS, PLANNING THE ROADWAYS. WHEN INCLUDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND ALL APPROVED PUDS, EVEN IF JUST A SMALL NUMBER. EVEN IF JUST 10%. 
          THEN WE'LL HAVE AN ANSWER TO SOME OF THE PROBLEMS WE'RE HAVING WITH INCREASING THE LAMP IMPACT, FUNDING OPTIONS, I THINK WE CAN LOOK AT VOLUNTEER DONATIONS. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT. THE UTILITY BILL, SOME WAY, PEOPLE CAN ADD JUST $10 A MONTH TO THEIR UTILITY BILL. AND THAT NUMBER WOULD ADD UP, AND WE WOULD BE ABLE TO BUY MORE LAND AND PRESERVE IT. LOOKING INTO GRANTS, WE ARE DOING THAT, AND GRANTS AND CONSERVATION. 
          COMMUNITY EDUCATION IS HUGE. THERE'S SO MANY THINGS THAT PEOPLE BELIEVE THAT ARE TRUE THAT ARE JUST NOT TRUE. AND I THINK COMMUNICATION IS KEY WORKSHOPS. ET CETERA. AND INCREASING OUR BUDGET MORE TOWARDS FUNDING LAMP. I ALSO LIKE THE IDEA OF SCHEDULING MEETINGS. I THINK WE HAVE ONE JOINT MEETING SINCE I HAVE BEEN PART OF THIS AUGUST BOARD, GROUP. AND I THINK IT WOULD BE LOVELY TO SEE THAT, AT LEAST TWICE A YEAR. IF NOT FOUR TIMES A YEAR. A SET TIME SCHEDULE THAT WOULD BE PREDICTABLE AND MUTUALLY AGREEABLE. I BELIEVE THIS WOULD BE A GREAT EDUCATIONAL AND COLLABORATIVE OPPORTUNITY FOR EACH BOARD. ASK WOULD BE OPPORTUNITY TO EDUCATE THE COMMUNITY AND GET PUBLIC COMMENT. AND THE TREE ORDINANCE CHANGES, WHICH WE JUST TALKED ABOUT. WE NEED TO ELEVATE THE VALUE OF OUR NATURAL RESOURCES. THE FACT THAT THEY ARE REPRODUCIBLE, DOES NOT MEAN IT'S OKAY TO JUST CUT THEM ALL DOWN. I GET THE TREES ARE BACK. BUT WE HAVE A COUNTY THAT WE NEED TO KEEP SUSTAINABLE. AND IN PARTNERING WITH DIFFERENT 
          [04:45:02]
SEGMENTS OF THE COMMUNITY, LET THEM KNOW HOW IMPORTANT THIS IS. 
          SO THOSE ARE JUST A FEW THINGS, I THOUGHT A LITTLE CHECKLIST OF ITEMS TO FOCUS ON. BUT I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING, IN THE SPRING, WHICH WE DID HEAR THAT INSPIRE IS GOING TO BE PUBLISHING THEIR FINDINGS. THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> NICOLE CROSBY, 1169 NECK ROAD. WE CAN DEBATE BACK AND FORTH ABOUT WE HAVE ENOUGH, WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH, WE HAVE ENOUGH ENTITLED RESIDENTIAL UNITS, WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH. BUT I THINK SO THAT OVERRIDING ALL OF THAT IS A VERY GOOD POINT THAT I THINK IT WAS MR. ROBERSON MADE. IN SEVEN YEARS, IT CAN BE REVISITED. IN FACT, IT CAN BE REVISITED EARLIER THAN THAT AT ANY TIME. WHY WOULD WE WANT TO PUSH OUR DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARIES NOW? THERE'S NO REASON TO DO THAT. BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT WE CAN REVISIT THIS ISSUE AT A LATER DATE, NOT HAVE TO WAIT 10 OR 20 YEARS TO DO SO. LET'S TAKE THE MORE CAUTIOUS APPROACH NOW. THE OTHER THING I WANT TO MENTION IS FOLLOWING UP SOMETHING THAT MR. SLAVIN SAID. 
          I THOUGHT HE MADE A VERY GOOD POINT ABOUT, WHY ARE WE SPENDING $73,000 ON TAX MONEY, ON HAVING -- TOWARDS, UM, INSPIRE, WRITING THE TREE ORDINANCE -- IT SEEMS LIKE OUR STAFF IS MORE THAN CABLE OF DOING THAT. WE NEVER HEARD A REASON WHY THEY WERE BROUGHT IN. I WOULD LOVE TO AT LEAST ARE HAD A REASON WHY. 
          BECAUSE THEY'RE BEING STRETCHED VERY THIN NOW. WE KEEP HEARING WE'RE UNDER THE GUN ON THIS DEADLINE WITH THE COMP PLAN. WHY ARE WE STRETCHING THEM EVEN THINNER WITH THIS COMP PROJECT? I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE -- I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW LEGALLY, WHAT OUR OBLIGATIONS ARE. BUT I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT $73,000 GO BACK INTO OUR COFFERS. HAVE VERY CAPABLE AND ABLE STAFF DO WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE ON THE TREE ORDINANCE. AND LET INSPIRE FOCUS ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. 
          TRANSITIONING ] THE COMP PLAN HAS TO ADDRESS AT LEAST A POLICY DIRECTION OF WHAT TO DO WITH MISSING HOUSING AND HOW WE INCORPORATE THAT INTO OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODES. THE SAME UNIT COULD BE LIFTED UP ON TO THE SECOND FLOOR AND NOW YOU HAVE A QUAD AND YOU COULD HOUSE FOUR FAMILIES KNOW. IT'S CONSIDERED ATTAINMENT. 
          BUT AT LEAST ATTAINABLE. ALL THE WAY UP TO SOMEONE WANTED TO BUILD A LUXURY UNIT THAT IS DEKD OUT TO THE MAX. 
          SO IT DOES GIVE US SOME OPPORTUNITIES TO PROVIDE MORE LIVING UNITS ON WHAT IS CONSIDERED A SINGLE-FAMILY LOT. 
          THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> I'M A FAN OF YOUR DESIGN, BY THE WAY. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> MADAME CHAIR, I COME ON MY OWN BEING BORN AND RAISED IN NORTH FLORIDA AND AS A RESIDENT OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY. I WANT TO CAUTION YOU ABOUT NOT PLANNING FOR OUR FUTURE AGAINST YOUR IDEA THAT BY DOING NOTHING, NOTHING WILL HAPPEN. IN OCTOBER 2010, THE BOARD ADOPTED OUR CURRENT COMP PLAN AND THEY HAD THE SAME IDEA TO DO NOTHING. THEY KEPT THE DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY FROM 2005. 24 DAYS LATER, THE FIRST COMP 
          [04:50:03]
PLAN AMENDMENT WAS APPROVED. FROM THAT DAY, WE THE COUNTY APPROVED MORE THAN 145 AMENDMENTS TO OUR COMP PLAN. 
          THAT'S A CHANGE EVERY 36 DAYS. EVERYONE HERE DESERVES TO BE UPSET ABOUT THAT, FOR WE ALL PROBABLY POUGT WITH WHAT LOOKED LIKE THE LAST HOME IN THE COUNTY ONLY TO HAVE AN APARTMENT OR SELF-STORAGE SHOW UP IN OUR BACKYARD. 
          WHO CAN KEEP UP WITH A MAP THAT CHANGES EVERY 36 DAYS? I KNOW SCHOOLS CANNOT. PARKS CANNOT. 
          ROADS CANNOT. THE CURRENT BOARD HAS STATED THEIR NUMBER ONE ROAD PRIORITY IS THE INTERSECTION OF STATE ROAD 16 AND IGP. WE HEARD LOOPED ARGUMENTS SINCE 2016 WHEN THE COUNTY SAID THE ROAD WASN'T FULLY ENGINEERED BECAUSE IT WASN'T FULLY FUNDED. IT WASN'T FULLY FUNDED BECAUSE I WASN'T FULLY ENGINEERED. BOTH OF THESE ARE RED HERRINGS. 
          THAT INTERSECTION HAS BEEN ON PAUSE FOR A DECADE BECAUSE THE COUNTY HASN'T HAD A LOCATION FOR A STORM WATER POND. 
          THEY FAILED TO PLAN ASSUMING THEY DO NOTHING, NOTHING WOULD HAPPEN. MADAME CHAIR, IS THIS TO BE THE FUTURE FATE OF OUR COUNTY ROAD? WILL THEY OLYMPIAN AHEAD FOR STORM WATER, FOR WIDENING, FOR TURN LANES? THIS PLAYED OUT BEAUTIFULLY IN ROADWAY FUNDS FOR THE HERKS LO REZONING THEY ALREADY FINISHED THE ROAD WIDENING BECAUSE THE PLAN WAS IN PLACE. IF WE PLAN AHEAD, THERE'S NO LACK OF LAND AROUND 2209 FOR STORM WATER. 
          FOR THE COUNTY'S 2025 BUDGET, THERE'S MORE THAN $233 MILLION IN OUR TRANSPORTATION TRUST FUND AND $193 MILLION IN OUR IMPACT FEED FUND. IN 2016, WE CARRIED FORWARD $15 MILLION IN COLLECTED IMPACT FEES. 
          IN 2019 THAT GREW TO $26 MILLION IN CARRY FORWARD IMPACT FEES. 
          THEN IT GREW TO $76 MILLION IN UNSPENT IMPACT FEES BY 2022. 
          THOSE IMPACT FEES ARE NOW ACCOUNTED FOR SOMEWHERE IN SOMEONE'S MORTGAGE PAYMENT. ARE WE GOING TO KEEP COLLECTING FEES WITHOUT A PLAN TO USE THEM? PLEASE CONSIDER ADOPTING A LAND USE MAP MAP IS NOT THE SAME AS 2005 TO CARRY US TO POTENTIALLY 2050. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. 
          >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          >> WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE. 
          DOES EVERYONE REMEMBER IT? >> DID WE CHANGE THAT? 
          >> WE WANT TO AMEND THAT TO THE MEDIUM GROWTH AS WE GO FORWARD TO INSPIRE. AS WE PASS THIS TO INSPIRE. 
          ANY COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER ARNOLD? 
          >> NO COMMENTS, MADAME CHAIR. >> WE'LL GO AHEAD AND VOTE. 
          COMMISSIONER TAYLOR? >> YES. 
          >> MURPHY? >> YES. 
          >> I'M YES. COMMISSIONER ARNOLD? 
          [4. World Golf Village Hall of Fame Discussion. On January 21, 2025, County staff provided an overview of the history of the World Golf Village campus and an update on the property disposition and status of the IMAX operations. The Board of County Commissioners also heard from St. Johns County Cultural Events, Inc (SJCCE), a presentation for consideration of an opportunity to provide community and cultural activities within the WGV-area. The Commission asked for options for the Hall of Fame, known costs considerations for each option, and a financial review, with County staff, on the SJCCE opportunity.]
          >> YES. >> ALL RIGHT. 
          THERE WE GO. ON TO AGENDA ITEM 4. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR COMING ALL THE WAY. 
          >> GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR JOSEPH, COMMISSIONERS, DEPUTY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND THIS AFTERNOON WE'RE GOING TO BE HAVING A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE WORLD GOLF VILLAGE HALL OF FAME. 
          I'LL GET RIGHT INTO THE PRESENTATION. 
          THIS IS A FOLLOW-UP TO THE JANUARY 21ST DISCUSSION THAT WASSEN PRESENTED BY SARA MAXWELL FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. 
          SHE IS NOT AVAILABLE TODAY. I'M GOING TO PRESENT THAT INFORMATION. WE THOUGHT IT WAS TIMELY TO CONTINUE. WE HAVE HAD SOME PROPOSALS ON THAT HAVE BEEN PROVIDED, AND THE COMMISSION ASKED FOR FOLLOW-UP INFORMATION, SO I'M GOING TO PROVIDE A BRIEF TIMELINE TODAY GOING BACK REALLY TO THE NEAR FUTURE OF 2023. 
          I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE OPTIONS, BECAUSE THE COMMISSION HAD DIRECTED STAFF TO NARROW DOWN AND FOCUS ON WHAT THE OPTIONS ARE FOR THE COMMISSION MOVING FORWARD, AS WELL AS THE COSTS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH EACH OF THOSE. 
          I'LL BE TALKING ABOUT A PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP. 
          THAT'S ONE OF THE OPTIONS ON THE TABLE TODAY AS WELL AS THERE WAS A FOLLOW-UP QUESTION ON THE IMAX AND WHAT IT WOULD COST TO PUT AN IMAX IN THERE. THEY HAD PRESENTED AA OPTION PROPOSAL FOR WHAT COULD BE PUT INTO THE A HALL OF FAME, SO THE COMMISSION HAD ALSO ASKED US TO FURTHER VET THOSE NUMBERS AND BRING BACK WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE. 
          WE'RE SEEKING BOARD DIRECTION. LAST NO MOTION, BUT WE'RE 
          [04:55:02]
SEEKING DIRECTION FROM THE COMMISSION. 
          SO A BRIEF TIMELINE CERTAINLY GOING BACK A WHOLE LONG TIME AGO. 1998 WAS THE GRAND OPENING OF WORLD GOLF VILLAGE, BUT IT WASN'T UNTIL 2023 THAT THE COMMISSION WAS NOTIFIED THAT THE WORLD PGA FOUNDATION WAS DEPARTING, THE HALL OF FAME WAS GOING TO BE DEPARTING AND THAT THE HALL OF FAME FACILITY WOULD REVERT BACK TO THE BCC. 
          SHORTLY THEREAFTER IN SEPTEMBER OF 2023, THE BCC DIRECTED STAFF TO NEGOTIATE A PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT. 
          THIS WAS RELATED TO SINCE THEN WE HAD THE HALL OF FAME, THE CONSIDERATION OF THE PRODUCTION BUILDING THAT IS ADJACENT TO THE HALL OF FAME FACILITY. IN APRIL OF 2024, STAFF BROUGHT BACK THAT PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT FOR THE PRODUCTION BUILDING, IN WHICH THERE WAS 120-DAY DUE DILIGENCE PERIOD THAT ALLOWED STAFF AND THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO GO THROUGH AND UNDERSTAND THE CONTRACTUAL TERMS THAT WEREWERE THAT WORLD GOLF VILLAGE AGREEMENT INITIALLY. 
          AND IT WASN'T UNTIL REALLY STAFF AND OCA, I'M SORRY, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE GOT INTO IT THAT WE REALIZED THERE WAS A USE RESTRICTION. I'LL SHOW THAT IN A SECOND, RELATED TO NOT ONLY THE PRODUCTION BUILDING, BUT THE HALL OF FAME FACILITY AS WELL. SO NOT MOVING FORWARD WITH AA PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT, THOSE NEGOTIATIONS FOR THE PRODUCTION BUILDING KIND OF SELF-TERMINATED IN DECEMBER. 
          AT THAT SAME TIME, THE FOUNDATION DISCONTINUED. 
          SO THEY HAD AGREED EARLIER ON TO CONTINUE I MAX SERVICES AND THEY DISCONTINUED IN DECEMBER. SO HERE'S THE LANGUAGE. 
          YOU CAN SEE IN THE BOTTOM THIS IS FROM 1996. 
          DURING THE 120-DAY DUE DILIGENCE, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT NOT ONLY ON THE HALL OF FAME, BUT ON THE PRODUCTION BUILDING, THERE WAS A USE RESTRICTION. 
          KIND OF HIGHLIGHTED A COUPLE ITEMS HERE. 
          THE USE RESTRICTIONS WAS FOR 50 YEARS. 
          EXCLUSIVELY FOR WHAT WAS ALREADY CONSTRUCTED. 
          CONSTRUCTION DEVELOPMENT OF THE HALL OF FAME AND GOLF COURSE. 
          THE CLUBHOUSE IMPROVEMENTS, AND A PGA TOUR PRODUCTIONS FACILITY, MEDICINE FACILITY, IMAX THEATER, OR OTHER SIMILAR ENTERTAINMENT FACILITY AND ANCILLARY USES, AND FOR NO OTHER USE OR PURPOSE. 
          SO AT THAT POINT, THE CONSIDERATION WAS THERE WAS A USE ARE RESTRICTION THAT WAS OUT THERE THAT MAY AFFECT ULTIMATELY THE MARKETABILITY OF THAT PROPERTY. 
          AT THAT POINT, THAT NEGOTIATION FOR THE PRODUCTION FACILITY DISCONTINUED. BUT IT'S STILL ONE OF THE CONSIDERATIONS THAT THE COMMISSION HAS ON ITS EXISTING HALL OF FAME PROPERTY. GETTING INTO THE OPTIONS FOR THE HALL OF FAME, THERE'S THREE ITEMS UP HERE. 
          KEEP IT, SELL, AND THEN THERE'S THE THIRD, WHICH IS REALLY A P-3 OPTION, WHICH ALLOWS YOU TO KEEP IT AS WELL OR SELL IT. 
          BUT IT ALLOWS THE COMMISSION WITH SOME ONGOING OVERSIGHT AND OUTCOMES IF WE DO A P-3. WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT. HERE'S THE BASIC CONCEPTS. 
          KEEPING THE HALL OF FAME. WE TALKED ABOUT OR VARIOUS COMMISSIONS IN THE LAST FEW YEARS HAVE TALKED ABOUT KEEPING IT. THERE WAS DISCUSSIONS ABOUT PUTTING STAFF OUT THERE, A LIBRARY WAS CONSIDERED OUT THERE, I BELIEVE IT WAS THE MILL CREEK LIBRARY. 
          THE POTENTIAL OF PUTTING A LIBRARY OUT THERE WITH SOME OTHER COMMUNITY USE. CERTAINLY, WE HAVE TALKED TO SOME OF OUR CONSTITUTIONAL PARTNERS AS TO MAYBE SOME OCCUPANCY AT THE HALL OF FAME. IT'S IN A SOMEWHAT CENTRALIZED AREA WITHIN THE COUNTY. SO KEEPING IT ALLOWS US -- THERE'S BEEN THOSE OPTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN EXPLORED. 
          AND/OR THIS COULD BE LEASED TO ANOTHER AGENCY. 
          SELLING IT, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SELLING IT OUTRIGHT. 
          GETTING RID OF THAT PROPERTY, PUTTING IT BACK ON THE TAX ROLES, AND WITH SELLING IT, WE COULD HAVE SOME OR THE COMMISSION CAN HAVE SOME OVERSIGHT, BUT IT'S LIMITED. 
          WITH A P-3, THERE'S AB ONGOING OVERSIGHT THAT THOSE TERMS COULD BE PUT INTO AN AGREEMENT, WHETHER IT BE A SELL OR BE IT SOME SORT OF LEASE ARRANGE THE, BUT THERE COULD BE FUTURE OUTCOMES THAT ARE TIED TO THAT. SO THE FIRST THING THE 
          [05:00:01]
COMMISSION HAD ASKED FOR, WHAT ARE THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH IT. SINCE I HAVE CERTAINLY WALKED IN OMB FOR MANY YEARS, SO IT'S BEEN KIND OF EXCITING FOR ME TO BRING BACK THE NUMBERS ON THIS, IT TOOK US A LITTLE BIT TO GET THROUGH AND ESTABLISH ALL THESE NUMBERS I WORKED WITH. 
          . FACILITIES TO REALLY CAPTURE WHAT THE COSTS ARE ON THIS. CURRENTLY, IF WE CONTINUE TO LET'S SAY IF WE DID A STATUS QUO, WE DID NOTHING WITH THE HALL OF FAME RIGHT NOW, WE CONTINUE TO INCUR MONTHLY UTILITY MAINTENANCE COSTS. A AS WELL, WE MAINTAIN INSURANCE ON THAT HALL OF FAME. SO RIGHT NOW ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, AND WE'RE NOT AT AN ANNUAL BASIS YET, BUT WE'RE REQUIRED TO PICK UP COSTS. I HAVE OUTLINED THEM HERE. 
          YOU'RE GOING TO SEE SOME OF SLIDES.OSTS ON THE PROCEEDING - I BREAK THEM DOWN FOR YOU HERE. ST. JOHNS COUNTY ON AN ANNUAL BASIS HAS $369,000 IN UTILITY COSTS, INSURANCE AND SOME OF THE SMALLER MAINTENANCE. SO THAT'S A RECURRING COST. 
          TALKING TO FACILITIES MANAGEMENT IN THE NEAR FUTURE, WE TALKED ABOUT REPLACEMENT CHILLERS. WHERE THOSE ARE AND WHAT FOOTPRINT THEY ARE, BUT THEY ARE ABOUT $714,000. 
          AND IF WE WERE TO GET SOME OCCUPANCY IN THE NEAR FUTURE, AGAIN, IF WE WERE TO MAINTAIN THAT, THERE'S SOME PRESSURE WASHING AND SOME SMALLER PAINTING. 
          ABOUT 48,000. SO THERE'S AN INITIAL ONE-TIME COUNTY INVESTMENT OF ABOUT $762,000. 
          SO THERE'S YOUR TWO NUMBERS SO FAR. 
          $369 ANNUAL, $762 ONE TIME. THERE'S ANOTHER POTENTIAL ANNUAL COST. THOSE ARE REFERRED TO AS CAMS OR THE COMMON AREA MAINTENANCE FEES. 
          IF YOU LIVE WITHIN AN HOA AND YOU HAVE ANNUAL OR QUARTERLY HOA FEES, THESE ARE FEES THAT AN OCCUPYING ENTITY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PAY. HOWEVER, AT THIS TIME, THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OPINION IS THAT THERE'S NO OBLIGATION FOR ST. JOHN'S COUNTY TO PAY THAT UNDER THE CURRENT USE WHICH IS GOVERNMENT USE OF THE CURRENT FACILITY. 
          WE HAVE CERTAINLY HEARD, AND I HAVE BEEN AT SOME OF THE MEETINGS THAT THERE'S CERTAINLY A DESIRE FOR THE COMMISSION TO PAY INTO, TO PARTICIPATE WITH SOME OF THOSE CAM FEES. 
          BUT RIGHT NOW, THERE'S A COST THAT'S OUT THERE OF $372,000. 
          THOSE ARE RECURRING, AND IF ULTIMATELY THEY BECAME PART OF THIS, THAT $369 WOULD BE DOUBLED. 
          SO THREE TET SETS OF NUMBERS OUT THERE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IN THE NEXT COUPLE SLIDES. THE $369 ANNUAL, POTENTIALLY A $372 ADDED ON TO THAT, AND THEN THIS ONE-TIME, $762,000. 
          SO KEEPING IN MIND WITH THE THREE OPTIONS, WE'RE TALKING KEEPING THE HALL OF FAME OR SELLING THE HALL OF FAME OR AGAIN THE P-3. WITH THE KEEPING THE HALL OF FAME, AGAIN THEY GO KIND OF VERTICALLY HERE. 
          IF YOU KEEP THE HALL OF FAME WITH GOVERNMENT OCCUPANCY, A LIBRARY THAT'S IN THERE, PERHAPS A SHERIFFS OFFICE OUT THERE OR ANOTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OR OTHER STAFF, THE ANNUAL COST JUST TO BEGIN FROM THE GET GO WOULD BE ABOUT $369,000. 
          WITH AGAIN, SOME OF THAT ONE-TIME INVESTMENT IN THERE OF $762. IF AT SOME POINT WE DECIDED TO KEEP THE HALL OF FAME AND THEN LEASE THIS TO A SEPARATE ENTITY, THERE'S WHERE THE COMMON AREA FEES COME IN BECAUSE THEY WOULD NO LONGER BE UNDER GOVERNMENT OCCUPANCY, IT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT LEASE OCCUPANCY. NOW WE WOULD HAVE $741,000 IN ANNUAL COSTS. WITH THAT $762 ONE-TIME INVESTMENT. SELLING THE HALL OF FAME, CERTAINLY ELIMINATES THE ANNUAL COST ON THIS. 
          HOWEVER, UNTIL THAT PROPERTY IS SOLD, WE WOULD HAVE RESPONSIBILITY TO ABSORB THOSE COSTS. 
          ONE OF THE CONSIDERATIONS WITH SELL ING THE PROPERTY IS THE US RESTRICTION, AS WE SAW IN THAT EARLIER SLIDE. 
          THAT USE RESTRICTION ON THE HALL OF FAME PROPERTY MAY DECREASE THE VALUE OF THAT SALE. WHILE THAT USE RESTRICTION REMAINS, THERE'S THE POSSIBILITY THAT IT DECREASES WHAT THE MARKET WILL BE, THE SALES PRICE ON THAT FACILITY. 
          THE P-3 IS THE THIRD OPTION, IF YOU WILL. 
          IT COULD BE A HYBRID OF BOTHBOT KEEPING IT AND/OR THE SELLING 
          [05:05:01]
IT. AND THAT IS THAT THE COMMISSION CAN PURSUE A P-3. THE BENEFIT OF THE P-3 IS THAT IT ALLOWS THE COMMISSION TO MAINTAIN ONGOING OVERSIGHT AND INVOLVEMENT WITH THE HALL OF FAME PROPERTY. 
          IF THE COMMISSION HAS SOME LONG-TERM OUTCOMES THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO OR MAYBE NOT LIKE TO SEE OUT IN THE WORLD GOLF VILLAGE REGION, THEN THOSE CAN BE IMPLEMENTED INTO A P-3. 
          AGAIN, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A SALE. 
          IT CAN ALSO -- WE COULD KEEP THE HALL OF FAME AND FURTHERFURTHER THAT OUT WITHIN THE P-3. THE P-3 PARTNERSHIPS ARE PRIMARILY GOVERNED BY FLORIDA STATUTE. 
          WE DO HAVE DRAFT PROCEDURES. WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH A P-3 JUST IN RECENT YEARS WITH SJCCE. IN FACT, I WOULD SAY THE HALL OF FAME INITIALLY WAS A P3. WE HAVE HAD TWO MAJOR P3S AND BOTH AGENCIES ARE KIND OF COMBINED IN THAT DISCUSSION. 
          P3S MAY EITHER BE SOLICITED BY THE COUNTY. 
          NO DIFFERENT THAN WE DO OTHER PROCUREMENTS. 
          I HAVE JAMIE HERE FROM PURCHASING, IF THERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE P3 PROCESS. SO THE COMMISSION COULD PROVIDE DIRECTION WITH WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE, AND WE CAN PUT OUT A SOLICITATION AND WAIT TO SEE RESPONSES. 
          OR A P3 CAN BE DONE THROUGH AN UNSOLICITED PROPOSAL FROM AN ENTITY. CERTAINLY, WE HAVE SEEN THAT IN THE NEAR FUTURE WHERE AN -- OR IN THE FEAR PAST, RATHER, WHERE AN ENTITY PROVIDES A PROPOSAL TO US, AND IT'S EVALUATED THROUGH THE SAME REQUIREMENTS AS A SOLICITED THROUGH FLORIDA STATUTE. SO THERE'S TWO WAYS TO CERTAINLY DO THAT. THE COUNTY DID RECENTLY ADOPT A $15,000 APPLICATION FEE FOR UNSOLICITED P3 PROPOSALS, WHICH WOULD BE APPLIED TOWARDS THE COUNTY'S DUE DILIGENCE PROCESS. 
          SO FOLLOWING UP AGAIN, THREE OPTIONS. 
          WE WANTED TO ALSO COME BACK TO YOU WITH THE IMAX THEATER BECAUSE THAT WAS ORIGINALLY THERE WAS A SOLICITATION PUT OUT THERE. WE DID RECEIVE SOME INITIAL RESPONSES ON THAT. WE DID THE NOT MOVE FORWARD WITH THEM, PARTIALLY BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE COST REQUIREMENTS THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THAT RESPONSE. AND I HAVE THEM BROKEN DOWN HERE. IT'S ABOUT $165,000. 
          SO THEY ARE BETWEEN A TRADEMARK FEE AND A QUALITY ASSURANCE, THAT'S A MINIMUM TRADEMARK FEE IT'S ACTUALLY 5% OF REVENUE OR A MINIMUM OF $50,000. THE COUNTY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PAY THAT $90,000 TO IMAX, AS WELL AS COVER THE FULL COST OF STAFF. I HAVE PUT AN ESTIMATE IN THERE OF ABOUT $75,000, WHICH I THINK IS A CONSERVATIVE NUMBER, BUT CERTAINLY, LOOKING AT THIS, AGAIN, THIS WOULD BE AN ADDED ANNUAL COST TO THIS. SO WHEN THE INITIAL RESPONSE CAME BACK AND WE SAW THAT NOT ONLY WAS THE $90,000, WE WOULD BE PAYING THE FULL STAFF COST, WE DID NOT MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT RESPONSE. AS WELL TO THE $165,000, THAT'S NOT AN ADDITIONAL $560, IT SHOULD BE $1,560,000 THERE ARE RENOVATIONS TO THE THEATER AS WELL AS EQUIPMENT. 
          THEN THERE'S THE REPLACEMENTS OF THE THEATER SCREEN. 
          THAT'S PROBABLY THE TOUGHEST COST TO COME UP WITH. 
          THERE'S VARIOUS OPINIONS ON WHAT THAT COST IS, BUT SOME OF THE RESEARCH THAT I PERSONALLY DID FOUND THAT THAT COST COULD BE AS MUCH AS WHEN HAD THAT TIME COMES, MAYBE IT'S THIS YEAR, MAYBE IT'S TWO OR THESE YEARS, THAT'S ABOUT A MILLION-DOLLAR COST REQUIREMENT ON THE COUNTY SIDE. 
          SO IMAX COMES IN, THEY PROVIDE THE NAME, THE QUALITY ASSURANCE, THE TRADEMARK REQUIREMENTS. THE COUNTY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO BRING THE REST OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO THAT. 
          SO IN TOTAL, THE ANNUAL COST WOULD BE FOR THAT IMAX ABOUT $534,000 WITH AN INITIAL ONE-TIME INVESTMENT OF UP TO $2.3 MILLION, AND AGAIN, THAT'S KIND OF A BALLPARK. 
          NOT KNOWING WHAT THAT FULL STAFF COST IS. 
          SO THIS WAS PROBABLY THE MORE TOUGHER COST TO FULLY VET. 
          VERY COMFORTABLE LOOKING AT THIS NUMBER. 
          AND FINALLY, I JUST WANT TO GO BACK TO THIS. 
          THE IMAX HAS THE ELIGIBILITY OF TOURIST DEVELOPMENT TAXES. 
          I SHOULD SAY IF IT DOESN'T GO TOWARDS SOME LEVEL OF 
          [05:10:03]
TOURISM-RELATED PROJECT, IF WE WERE TO KEEP IT, THIS BECOMES A GENERAL FUND COST FOR THE COUNTY. 
          SO THE ANNUAL COST AND THE ONE-TIME INVESTMENT DOES BECOME, IF IF YOU WILL, GENERAL FUND REQUIREMENTS. 
          THE IMAX DOES ALLOW THE ELIGIBILITY FOR TOURIST DEVELOPMENT TAXES TO FUND BOTH THE RECURING AND ONE-TIME OPERATIONS. IF THOSE DOLLARS ARE AVAILABLE. 
          FOLLOWING UP WITH THE SJCCE PROPOSAL THAT WAS PRESENTED IN JANUARY, IT'S INTERESTING TO BRING UP THE POINT. 
          IT DOES NOT ADD ADDITIONAL ANNUAL COSTS. 
          THE ANNUAL OPERATIONS WERE SELF-CONTAINED. 
          THAT IS THE REVENUE GENERATED WE'RE PROJECTED TO COVER THE FULL EXPENSE OF THE OPERATION. THERE ARE SOME ONE-TIME INVESTMENTS OF $812,000, BOTH RENOVATIONS TO THE THEATER AS WELL AS PROJECTOR SCREEN AND EQUIPMENT, SIMILAR TO THE IMAX, EXCEPT WITHOUT THE IMAX SCREEN REPLACEMENT. 
          UP TO ABOUT $812,000, SO THE ANNUAL COST, AGAIN, $369,000, ONE-TIME INVESTMENT OF $1.5 MILLION. 
          SO THAT PROVIDES KIND OF AN OVERVIEW OF THE COSTS. 
          KIND OF PRESENTED ALL THOSE IN SUMMARY HERE. 
          CERTAINLY LOOKING AT KEEPING THE HALL OF FAME. 
          YOUR ANNUAL COSTS CAN BE ANYWHERE BETWEEN $369,000 A YEAR TO IF WE GET INTO LEASING IT OUT, IT GETS UP TO $741,000 BY JUST KEEPING IT. YOU CAN SEE THE IMAX AND SJCCE OPTIONS, AND THE SELL HALL OF FAME IN THE MIDDLE. 
          WE ALSO SHOW THE ONE-TIME INVESTMENT, AND THEN THE FUNDING OPTIONS FOR THEM. BUT WHAT WE STILL KIND OF CONSIDERATION WANT WANT TO LEAVE OUT THERE IS YOU DO HAVE THIS P3 OPTION, WHICH IS REALLY APPLICABLE TO EITHER WHETHER YOU WANT TO KEEP THAT FACILITY OR SELL THAT FACILITY. 
          SO THAT OPTION IS STILL OUT THERE. 
          SO TODAY, A LOT OF INFORMATION, A LOT OF NUMBERS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS, BUT IT DOES COME DOWN TO REALLY AGAIN THE THREE OPTIONS OR TWO BASIC OPTIONS AND A P3 CONSIDERATION. 
          THE COMMISSION'S DESIRE TO KEEP THE HALL OF FAME FOR EITHER GOVERNMENT OR COMMUNITY USE, IN WHICH CASE THE OPTION FOR THE COMMISSION IS DETERMINE THE USE OF THE HALL OF FAME UNDER ITS CURRENT OWNERSHIP. DOES THE COMMISSION SEEK TO SELL IT AND THAT WOULD BE SELL IT OUTRIGHT WITHOUT A P3? THERE'S SOME LIMITED OVERSIGHT. THERE IS THAT USE RESTRICTION THAT'S OUT THERE. AND THE OPTION FOR THE COMMISSION WOULD BE THE SOLICIT BUYERS THROUGH A BID PROCESS OR IF THEY CHOSE TO HIRE A COMMERCIAL BROKE TORE SELL THAT PROPERTY OUTRIGHT. AND THEN THE THIRD OPTION UP HERE IS THAT P3 OPTION, WHICH AGAIN, ALLOWS YOU TO EITHER KEEP IT OR SELL IT, BUT IT ALLOWS THAT ONGOING OVERSIGHT AND ALLOWS THE COMMISSION TO ESTABLISH OUTCOMES N WHICH CASE THE OPTION HERE WOULD BE TO INITIATE A TORT MALL P3 IS SOLICITATION, OR FOLLOW THE P3 PROCESS IF THE COMMISSION WERE TO RECEIVE AN UNSOLICITED PROPOSAL. 
          SO I'M GOING TO KIND OF HOLDHOL FOR ANY QUESTIONS. 
          AGAIN, I HAVE JAMIE FROM PURCHASING FOR ANY P3 QUESTIONS. 
          I HAVE DAN WHITCRAFT HERE FOR ANY COSTS. 
          AND ENI HAVE KORY BOWENS IF THERE'S ANY DISCUSSIONS ON THE OUTRIGHT SELL OF THE PROPERTY. WITH THAT, I'LL TURN THAT BACK 
          TO THE COMMISSION. >> THAT'S MY FIRST QUESTION. 
          IF WE SELL THE PROPERTY, ARE WE PUT IT UP FOR SALE, CAN WE DO THAT ON A SHORT-TERM BASIS TO SEE IF WE GET ANY BUYERS? IF THAT DOESN'T WORK, WE GO BACK TO A DIFFERENT LEASING ISSUE OR 
          SOMETHING LIKE THAT? >> GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAME CHAIR. 
          YES, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IS THE PORD WOULD DIRECT STAFF. 
          WE COME BACK WITH A RESOLUTION TO DECLARE THE PROPERTY SURPLUS. 
          THAT WOULD KIND OF TRIGGER US TO BE ABLE TO GET THE APPRAISAL TO DETERMINE MARKET VALUE. THEN USE THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS TO GO THROUGH THEIR PROCEDURES TO PUT IT OUT. 
          THEN WE'D SEE WHAT IT WOULD COME BACK WITH. 
          >> I KNOW OF ONE PERSON I DON'T KNOW IF THEY TALKED TO THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS, HAS AN INTENT TO BUY THE OTHER PROPERTY AND WANTED OUR BUILDING. BUT UNTIL THIS GOES OUT FOR SALE, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST TALK AND CHATTER. 
          COMMISSIONER TAYLOR? >> YES. 
          [05:15:02]
WHEN I THINK ABOUT THIS PROPERTY, I THINK CHA CHING CHA CHING. EVERY DAY IS COSTING OUR COUNTY MONEY. SO I REALLY THINK THAT WE NEED TO THINK GOOD AND HARD ABOUT THIS AND PROCEED AND MOVE ON. 
          WE CAN'T KEEP KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD. 
          I REALLY LIKE THE P3 OPTION. THAT DOES GIVE US AN OPPORTUNITY TO SELL IT ANDAND  HAVE SOME INPUT IN THAT. 
          THE FACT THAT WE COULD DO THAT PROCESS AND IT CAN GO OUT TO SOLICITATION WHEN WE -- I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GREAT OPTION. 
          BUT LIKE SAID, WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT EVERY DAY THIS IS COSTING 
          OUR COUNTY MONEY. >> COMMISSIONER MURPHY? 
          >> MAYBE THIS IS A DUMB QUESTION. 
          WHY DO I ALWAYS START MY QUESTIONS WITH THAT? THIS MIGHT BE A DUMB QUESTION. I DON'T THINK THE COUNTYCOUNTY TO BE IN THE LEASING OR REAL ESTATE BUSINESS. 
          I THINK WE NEED TO SELL THIS. MY QUESTION TO YOU IS IF WE GET A VALUATION ON IT AND PUT IT OUT FOR SALE AND WE DON'T GET OUR PRICE, WE'RE NOT OBLIGATED TO SELL IT, RIGHT? BUT IF SOMEONE DOES COME IN TO MEET OUR PRICE, WE WOULD BE LEGALLY ONLY GAITED IF WE SIGN A CONTRACT WITH THE SELLER, RIGHT? 
          >> THAT'S PARTIALLY CORRECT. IT'S STILL UP TO THE BOARD TO 
          DETERMINE THE APPROPRIATENESS. >> OKAY. 
          WE HAVE SOME GREAT IDEAS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS, IF WE DECIDE TO PUT IT ON THE MARKET. IN THE MEANTIME FOR THE NEXT YEAR OR TWO, SO INTERESTING DILEMMA WE FIND OURSELVES IN. 
          >> COMMISSIONER ARNOLD OR WHITEHURST? 
          >> YES, MADAME CHAIR. THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          I AM IN FAVOR OF LOOKING AT ALL THREE OF THESE OPTIONS. 
          . I REALLY APPRECIATE JESSE BEING SO COMPREHENSIVE IN HIS PRESENTATION. 
          BUT TO START, I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR EACH OF THE BOARD MEMBERS' THOUGHTS ON THE SJCCE PROPOSAL. MY UNDERSTANDING IS BASED ON THE COMMUNITY ENGAGE THE, ALL THE SURVEY RESULTS THAT WE AS A BOARD WENT OUT TO GATHER, A WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING SEEMS TO ALIGN WITH THAT. I WOULD JUST PERSONALLY LIKE TO HEAR WHAT EACH BOARD MEMBER THINKS ABOUT THE SJCCE PROPOSAL. 
          >> TO THAT QUESTION, I LOVE THE SJCCE PROPOSAL. 
          I THINK IT FILLS A NEED. THEY ARE COMING IN SORT OF DOING THE COUNTY A FAVOR. I THINK THE WAY THEY SUGGESTED PROGRAMMING, IT WOULD BE A WILD SUCCESS. 
          NOT ONLY DO I TRUST WHAT WE HAVE DONE WITH THE AMPHITHEATER AND THE CONCERT HALL, WHAT A UNIQUE CONCEPT FOR THE AVAILABLE SPACE AND OUR TIME OF NEED. I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD 
          WITH THIS. >> I'M A FAN OF SELLING IT. 
          AFTER TALKING TO THE PEOPLE THAT WAS INTERESTED IN BUYING IT, I FOUND OUT FROM DAN WHITCRAFT, THAT THE CHULERS AREN'T EVEN ON OUR PROPERTY. SOMEONE COULD SAY WE'RE SHUTTING THEM OFF. WE DON'T HAVE AIR-CONDITIONING. 
          SO THE CHILLERS, FOR SURE, WOULD HAVE TO BE REPLACED IF WE DO THE SJCCE AND HAS TO BE ON OUR PROPERTY. 
          SO THAT'S A HUGE EXPENSE. AND THE UTILITY COST, YOU HAVE TO RUN THE WHOLE BUILDING TO GET IT TO THE IMAX? 
          >> SO THE CHILLERS, THE TRIGGER IS OCCUPANCY. 
          WE HAVE IT AT A LACK OF A BETTER TERM, WE HAVE DUMBED DOWN THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS OF THE BUILDING. 
          IT'S EMPTY. SO WE ARE SAVING SOME MONEY OR MONTHLY WITH UTILITY COSTS BY DOING SO, BUT THE CHILLERS ARE AT THE END OF LIFE. AND ONCE WE PUT OCCUPANTS IN THERE, THEY WILL NEED TO BE REPLACED. 
          IT IS A REDUNDANCY SYSTEM, WHICH MEANS WE HAVE 100% REDUNDANCY, WHICH WE'LL WANT TO GO BACK WITH. 
          SO AS FAR AS YOUR QUESTIONING ABOUT CONDITIONING, YES. 
          BUT THERE ARE THE BUILDING IS ZONED. 
          WE ARE ABLE TO INDIVIDUALLY CONTROL THE TEMPERATURE OF THE DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE BUILDING. YES, THE CAFE IS ON ONE SIDE. 
          THE IMAX IS ON THE OTHER. I WILL POINT OUT THAT THE IMAX 
          [05:20:03]
IS SUB METERED. THERE IS ONLY ONE ELECTRIC METER ON THE BUILDING, BUT IT IS SUB METERED, SO IF WE WERE TO INDEPENDENTLY OPERATE THE IMAX, WE COULD BUILD THAT 
          INDEPENDENTLY AS WELL. >> I DON'T THINK IT'S ON OUR 
          PROPERTY. >> FROM WHAT I LOVE AT, YOU'RE CORRECT. FROM WHAT WE HAVE FOUND OUT, THE ORIGINAL BASIS OF DESIGN, THE CHILLERS WERE SUPPOSED TO BE LOCATED INSIDE THE HALL OF FAME BUILDING. 
          I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED BACK IN THE '90S. 
          THAT NECESSITATED THEY WANTED TO USE THAT SPACE FOR AN EXHIBIT, SUBSEQUENTLY, MOVE THE CHILLERS OUTSIDE. 
          I KNOW LAND MANAGEMENT IS LOOKING INTO THAT. 
          ON THE FOOTPRINT, THE CHULERS DO NOT APPEAR TO BE IN OUR 
          FOOTPRINT. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> BEFORE YOU GO, AND MAYBE WHY DON'T YOU HANG OUT HERE. 
          SO IF WE DECIDE AS A BOARD THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO PUT THIS ON THE MARKET, IS THAT SOMETHING WE CAN DO? FOLLOW ALONG WITH ME. IF WE DECIDE WE WANT TO GO WITH SJCCE, WHILE WE PUT THIS ON THE MARKET WOULD WE BE ABLE TO INCREASE THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY INCREASE IF WE REPLACED THE CHILLERS ENOUGH TO TRY TO GET OUR MONEY BACK ON A SALE. 
          WE WOULD HAVE TO REPLACE THEM. IF WE PUT SOMEBODY IN IT, THEY HAVE TO INCREASE THE VALUE TO GET OUR MONEY BACK WHEN WE SELL 
          IN TWO OR THREE YEARS? >> THERE'S A LOT OF VARIABLES. 
          IT WOULD BE WHAT THE INTENDED USE OF THE BUYER. 
          THEY MAY COME IN AND MAY KNOCK THE BUILDING DOWN. 
          THEREFORE, THE CHULERS, WE DID NOT GET OUR RETURN ON INVESTMENT. LET'S PUT IT THAT WAY. 
          IT WAS BUILT FOR ONE USE, AND THAT USE WAS A MUSEUM. 
          IT'S GOING TO BE A UNIQUE BUSINESS THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO COME IN THERE TO UTILIZE THAT SPACE THE WAY IT'S CURRENTLY 
          CONFIGURED. >> I WAS EXCITED ABOUT THE PROSPECT OF DOING SOMETHING SPECIAL WITH THE GROUP. 
          ONE OF THE THINGS I DON'T WANT TO DO IS THROW BAD MONEY FOR GOOD, OR WHATEVER. IT LOOKS LIKE, IN MY OPINION, UNLESS I'M WRONG, WE MIGHT BE DOING THAT IN OUR CASE. 
          IT MIGHT BE BETTER TO CUT OUR LOSSES AND SELL. 
          >> CAN I SAY SOMETHING? >> COMMISSIONER? 
          >> THANK YOU. >> YES. 
          I GREATLY APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THAT JERRY HAS DONE WITH HIS TEAM. HE HAD A BIG REQUEST. 
          HE CAME FORWARD. I WAS EXCITED ABOUT THAT, BUT THE MORE I THINK ABOUT THIS BUILDING, IF ANY OF YOU HAVE SEEN THE MOVIE "MONEY PIT", THAT IS WHAT COMES TO MIND. 
          THE LAST THING I WANT TO DO IS BE RESPONSIBLE FOR OUR COUNTY PUTTING LOTS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS INTO A MONEY PIT. 
          THE MORE I'M LEARNING ABOUT THIS BILLING, UNFORTUNATELY, IT'S GOING TO TAKE A LOT. IT'S GOING TO TAKE A LOT OF MONEY, A LOT OF OUROUR TAX MONEY. 
          THAT'S A HUGE CONCERN. >> I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING YOU'RE SAYING ON THIS. BELIEVE IT OR NOT. 
          I THINK THE PREMISE THAT A NONPROFIT THES TO GET MONEY AND FIGURE OUT HOW TO USE IT, IN THIS CASE, WE'RE IN A PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP ALREADY. 
          THE WORK WE HAVE DONE WITH THE STAFF HAS BEEN REALLY HELPFUL. 
          DAN, SARA, JOY, JESSE, WHAT REALLY I THINK PUT US A LITTLE BIT OVER THE EDGE WAS THE CHILLER. 
          UP UNTIL THE CHILLER, WE HAD SOMETHING THAT WAS REALLY GOING TO BE A WIN-WIN. BUT AS A STEWARD FOR COUNTY AND THE NONPROFIT, I CAN SEE WHERE YOU'RE HEADING THAT DIRECTION. 
          YOU COMBINE THAT WITH UNCERTAINTY OF THE PROPERTY AND THE INCREASED COST. IT MAKES THE PAYOFF LONG. 
          [05:25:05]
I CERTAINLY WOULD UNDERSTAND THAT. 
          WE ENJOYED THE WORK TO LEARN MORE ABOUT IT. 
          WE LEARNED MORE ABOUT WHAT THE COMMUNITY WANTS. 
          THAT'S HELPFUL FOR US ANY WAY. I FULLY UNDERSTAND THAT. 
          THANKS. >> COMMISSIONER ARNOLD, DID YOU 
          HAVE ANY FOLLOW-UP? >> YES, THANK YOU, MADAME CHAIR, I DO. I APPRECIATE MR. WILSON FOR COMING UP AND SPEAKING. I HAVE TO BE HONEST. 
          TO YOUR POINT, I BELIEVE THE USE RESTRICTION IS THE MAIN CONCERN REGARDING THE VALUATION OF THE BUILDING AND THOT THE CHILLERS. 
          I DO KNOW THAT THE FOUNDATION IS CURRENTLY ENGAGED IN LITIGATION TO LIFT THEIR USE RESTRICTION. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE ARE AT A POINT WHERE WE NEED TO DISCUSS JOINING THAT LITIGATION, BUT IT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD CONSIDER BECAUSE THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE WORTH ANYTHING UNLESS WE DO THAT IN TERMS OF SELLING. SO MY RECOMMENDATION, MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE ESPECIALLY BECAUSE THIS BOARD AND PREVIOUS BOARDS HAVE COMMITTED TO THE COMMUNITY. 
          IT'S NOT JUST DISTRICT TWO. IT'S ALSO DISTRICT FIVE. 
          IT'S TO ALL CONSTITUENTS COUNTY WIDE OF DOING RIGHT BY THIS. 
          OF DOING RIGHT BY OUR COMMUNITY. AND SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE EXPLORE ALL THE OPTIONS. KEEP IT, SELL IT, P3 IT, LOOK AT IF WE ARE GOING TO IS SELL IT, THE FOURTH OPTION, WHICH IS POTENTIALLY LOOKING AT JOINING THE LITIGATION TO MAKE SURE THAT IF WE HAVE TO SELL IT, WE GET THE HIGHEST VALUE POSSIBLE. 
          BUT AS MUCH AS WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE STEWARDS OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS, WE WANT TO BE STEWARDS OF WHAT OUR COMMUNITY WANTS. 
          SUR VARKS YOU NAME IT. THEY ARE INVESTED. 
          OUR COMMUNITY, OUR NEIGHBORS ARE INVESTED IN THIS PROPERTY. 
          FOR US TO JUST WASH OUR HANDS OF IT, AND THROW THEIR PROPERTY VALUES AND WHAT GOES IN THERE TO CHANCE, I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN SUPPORT THAT. SO AGAIN, I WOULD SUPPORT LOOKING AT ALL THREE OPTIONS. I THINK WE CAN LOOK AT ALL THREE OF THEM WHILE GOING OUT FOR RFP. THOSE ARE GENERALLY MY THOUGHTS. 
          I WOULD THROW IT TO LEGAL JUST TO KNOW WHAT OUR LIMITATIONS ARE 
          THERE. >> THANK YOU, MADAME CHAIR. 
          I THINK COMMISSIONER ARNOLD TOUCHED ON THE POINT THAT'S BEEN MY CONCERN. WE DID SEVERAL TOWN HALLS. 
          WHERE WE RECEIVED A LOT OF PASSIONATE COMMUNITY FEEDBACK. 
          WE PUT THIS ON THE OPEN MARKET, IT'S UP TO THE OPEN MARKET. 
          WHOEVER WANTS TO PAY IT, THEY HAVE THE CASH IN HAND. 
          SO CONSIDERING THE COST TO TAXPAYERS, I WANT US TO CONSIDER WHAT WOULD BE THE COST OF GETTING THIS WRONG. 
          WHAT IF A USE COMES IN AND IT FAILS AND WE'RE A RIGHT BACK IN THE SAME POSITION. IF WE GO TO A FORMAL SOLICITATION, THEN AT LEAST WE HAVE SOME CONTROL OVER WHO COMES IN. WE CAN START MAKING SURE THAT WE LIVE UP TO THE COMMUNITY EXPECTATIONS OF GETTING THIS RIGHT, SO IT FITS THE CHARACTER OF WHAT'S CURRENTLY THERE. 
          >> IF WE CAN SELL IT AND WE SEE WHO WANTS TO BUY IT AND WE CAN SAY IS IT GOING TO FIT THE AREA, WE CAN START THAT WAY. 
          IF THAT'S NOT GOING TO WORK, WE CAN LOOK AT AT P3. 
          I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A ROLLBACK IN OUR TAXES. 
          I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO BE A DOGE MOMENT AND DO SOMETHING BETTER IN HAD THAT AREA. I DO KNOW THAT THE OWNER OF THE LINCOLN IS LOOKING AT THAT AS AN INNOVATION CENTER. 
          I THINK THAT WOULD JUST BE TERRIFIC. 
          WE WON'T KNOW UNLESS WE PUT IT UP FOR SALE. 
          >> I LIKE THE P3 IDEA. IT GIVES US MORE OPTIONS. 
          WE CAN STILL SELL IT YET WE STILL HAVE A VOICE. 
          SO I THINK THE P3 IS A GREAT OPTION. 
          WE CAN DO P3 SELL. >> EXCEPT WE HAVE TO PAY. 
          WE PUT OUR OWN MONEY INTO IT. >> WAIT. 
          >> CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE P3 PLEASE? 
          >> WE PUT TAXPAYER MONEY INTO THAT. 
          >> THEY ARE VERY SIMILAR. IF WE PUT IT UP FOR -- 
          >> CAN YOU JUST TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN P3 AND 
          SELLING. >> THE SELLING IS A SOLICITATION. YOU HAVE LIMITED OVERSIGHT. 
          YOU CAN SAY ULTIMATELY WHAT YOU'D LIKE THE BUYER TO DO, BUT YOU HAVE LIMITED OVERSIGHT A FEW YEARS DOWN THE ROAD. 
          P3, YOU HAVE A LONGER-TERM, SOME CONTROLS IN THERE. 
          I HATE TO WORD THE USE CONTROLS, MAYBE OUTCOMES, SOME OVERSIGHT. 
          IN TERMS OF DOLLARS AND SPENDING, WHETHER YOU SELL IT OR YOU P3 WITH AN ULTIMATELY SELL, THE COUNTY IS ON THE HOOK FOR 
          [05:30:03]
SOME COST UNTIL WE SELL IT OR WE P3 AND SELL IT. 
          I DON'T SEE A DIFFERENCE IN THE COST TO THE COUNTY. 
          JUST ON THE OVERSIGHT, AND I HOPE THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. 
          WITH THAT SJCCE, SIMILAR TO IMAX, IT'S NOT TAXPAYER AS MUCH AS IT'S TOURISM LARCENY DOLLARS. I SHOULD HAVE HIGHLIGHTED THAT MORE. . 
          THOSE ARE ELIGIBLE FOR TOURISM DOLLARS, PEOPLE WHO COME INTO THE COMMUNITY AND SPEND MONEY HERE VERSUS THE TAXPAYER. 
          SO IN TERMS OF THE SALE, IT WOULD BE THE SAME COST. 
          WE'RE OBLIGATED TO COSTS UNTIL SUCH TIME THAT WE HAVE SEENED AN AGREEMENT TO P3 AND/OR SELL IT OUTRIGHT. 
          >> WE WOULD HAVE MUCH MORE OVERSIGHT WITH THE P3. 
          >> YES. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION 
          FOR THE P3 OPTION. >> MAY I MAKE A COMMENT BEFORE 
          WE DO THAT? >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ONE AS 
          WELL. >> COMMISSIONER MURPHY? 
          >> I REALLY WANT TO SUPPORT COMMISSIONER ARNOLD'S IDEAS. 
          I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA, BUT ONE OF THE CHALLENGES THAT I HAVE GOING FORWARD IS THAT IT'S A GOOD IDEA, BUT I WOULD RATHER SELL IT TO SOMEONE WHO WANTS TO -- SO THE CHALLENGES THAT WE FACE ARE THE SAME CHALLENGES THAT ULTIMATELY WAS THE DEMISE OF THE HALL OF FAME. ACCESS. 
          THERE'S SO MANY THINGS THAT WE DON'T -- ISSUES, TRAFFIC ISSUES THAT WE HAVEN'T SOLVED YET. SO IF WE'RE WILLING TO JUMP IN THERE AND SOLVE THE PROBLEMS OF ACCESS, BECAUSE WE HAVE TO GET PEOPLE THIS. THEY HAVE TO GET OUT. 
          WE ALREADY HAVE A BIG TRAFFIC ISSUE. 
          WE'RE REALLY ON A HAMSTER WHEEL WHEN IT COMES TO US FOR US. 
          TO ME, I WOULD LOVE TO SELL THIS TO SOMEONE WHO COULD COME IN WITH THE MONEY TO PUT THE CHANGES IN THAT NEED TO BE CHANGED TO MAKE IT SUCCESSFUL. I DON'T KNOW IF I'M WILLING TO COMMIT THE MONEYS WE NEED TO MAKE IT SUCCESSFUL, AND THE CHALLENGES THAT ARE THERE, IT'S A HUGE CHALLENGE, THIS WORLD GOLF VILLAGE IS A HUGE CHALLENGE. 
          I THINK WE'RE HOOKING THIS HORNET'S NEST WHEN IT COMES TO THE CHALLENGES THAT ARE OUT THERE. 
          I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU, BUT I WOULD RATHER BE IN TALLAHASSEE TO TRY TO GET MONEY TO FIX THE ROADS THAN WORRY ABOUT THIS. 
          BUT THAT'S JUST MY THOUGHTS. I WILL SUPPORT WHATEVER THE 
          BOARD WANTS TO DO. >> COMMISSIONER MURPHY, I WOULD SUPPORT THAT IF YOU MADE THE MOTION. 
          >> I DON'T WANT TO -- >> I WOULD LOVE TO COMMENT. 
          >> COMMISSIONER ARNOLD? >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          I THINK COMMISSIONER MURPHY THIS,  JOB IS ABOUT MAKING THE HARD DECISIONS, RIGHT? THE RIGHT DECISIONS ARE THE HARD DECISIONS. AND MY CONCERN IS WHILE IT MAY MAKE SENSE AND IT MAYBE A GREAT POINT TO GET THIS OFF OF OUR PLATE AND TO SELL IT TO SOMEONE, MY CONCERN IS THAT WE'RE WALKING RIGHT INTO A TRAP. THIS PROPERTY IS ELIGIBLE FOR THE LIV LOCAL ACT. I CAN'T BEGIN TO TELL YOU WHAT KIND OF -- WHAT SHOW OF ANGER AND FRUSTRATION OUR RESIDENTS ARE GOING TO COME THROUGH WITH WHEN WE SELL IT TO SOMEBODY WHO DOESN'T HAVE OUR BEST INTEREST AT HEART, WHO TURNS THIS INTO HIGH DENSITY AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I CAN TELL YOU THE CONSTITUENTS THERE, MY NEIGHBORS, MY FRIENDS ARE NOT GOING TO STANDSTAND  IT. 
          MY POSITION IS THAT BY US RETAINING SOME LEVEL OF CONTROL, BECAUSE NO ONE IS GOING TO COME IN AND JUST FIX THE INFRASTRUCTURE PROBLEMS THERE. IT'S NOT THAT SIMPLE. 
          MY CONCERN IS WE'RE GOING TO SELL IT TO THE LOWEST BIDDER, AND I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE OWNER OF THE LINK. 
          YOU MENTION EDED THAT, COMMISSIONER. 
          I'M CONCERNED HE'S BEEN CONFLICTED OUT BECAUSE YOU SPECIFICALLY REFERENCED HIM. BUT I'M JUST NOT COMFORTABLE PUTTING THIS TO THE OPEN MARKET AT THIS TIME. 
          I THINK WE NEED TO EXPLORE ALL OPTIONS IN ADDITION TO FIGURING OUT HOW TO POTENTIALLY LIFT OUR USE RESTRICTION. 
          >> CAN YOU ADDRESS THAT CONCERN? >> CAN THE COUNTY ATTORNEY? 
          >> SO THIS PROPERTY IS ZONED PUD, AND IT IS IN A DRI. 
          IT HAS COMMERCIAL USES, SO IT IS ELIGIBLE FOR LIVE LOCAL. 
          WHETHER THAT WILL MAKE FINANCIAL SENSE IS MORE OF A BUSINESS QUESTION. I KNOW THERE'S BEEN SOME 
          [05:35:02]
SPECULATION ON THE BOARD ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. 
          TECHNICALLY SPEAKING, THIS PROPERTY IS ELIGIBLE FOR LIVE 
          LOCAL. >> THANK YOU. 
          I CAN'T SUPPORT ANYTHING THAT'S GOING TO DO THIS TO MY CONSTITUENTS. I'M SORRY. 
          >> IF YOU DON'T MIND, I WOULD CERTAINLY DEFER TO COMMISSIONER TAYLOR AND THE P3 SALE OPTION WOULD BE SOMETHING I COULD 
          SUPPORT. >> CAN I SPEAK? BEFORE COMMISSIONER TAYLOR, MURPHY MAKING A MOTION, I WANTED TO MAKE ON THIS ONE PIECE OF INFORMATION VERY CLEAR BEFORE YOU MAKE ANY DECISIONS. THAT IS THAT COMMISSIONER TAYLOR ASKED A QUESTION ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE OR COMMISSIONER JOSEPH ASKED ABOUT A SALE OR P3 OPTION IN TERMS OF COST. 
          SALE, TO ME, IT IS A CLEAR TRANSACTION OF CONVEYANCE OF LAND AND OWNERSHIP. P3, FOR IT TO BE P3, IT HAS TO IDENTIFY A PUBLIC BENEFIT, WHICH MAY OR MAY NOTNOT  SOME LEVEL OF PUBLIC INVEST THE. PERFECT EXAMPLE IS SJC KRERKS. 
          THIS IS WHY THE GOVERNMENT EXISTS. 
          WE'R PROVIDING PUBLIC BENEFIT WITH PUBLIC INVESTMENT. 
          SO I DON'T WANT ANY COMMISSIONER TO MAKE A DECISION THINKING THAT P3 IS GOING TO COME AT THE SAME COST AS A SALE. 
          IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THE PROPOSAL MAYBE. 
          IT MAYBE A REQUEST FOR INVESTMENT OF FUNDS OR LAND OR COMPROMISE THE VALUE OF THAT TRANSACTION. 
          IT COULD BE ANYTHING. IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THE PROPOSAL MAYBE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IS CLEAR FOR ALL COMMISSIONERS. THANK YOU. 
          >> I JUST FEEL LIKE UNLESS WE PUT IT OUT THERE, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE HAVE THAT MIGHT BUY IT. LET'S SAY NO ONE, MAYBE IT'S TOO RISKY, WHOEVER THE BUYER WOULD BE FOR SOMETHING THAT COMMISSIONER ARNOLD WOULD AGREE, BUT WE'LL NEVER KNOW UNLESS WE GET IT OUT THERE. AT THAT POINT, IF IT'S NOT, MAYBE WE SWITCH IT TO A P3 AND DPO THERE FROM THERE. 
          I DON'T WANT TO MISSOMEBODY THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING GOOD. 
          THAT'S MY COMMENT. >> MADAME CHAIR? 
          >> PUT IT OUT FOR SALE, AND THAT WE LIKE -- 
          >> PUT IT UP FOR SALE UNDER P3. >> NO, AS P3. 
          >> IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? >> I'M NOT ADVOCATING FOR ANY OPTION. I WANT TO MAKE SURE ALL COMMISSIONERS UNDERSTAND THE COST THAT MAYBE ASSOCIATED WITH EACH OPTION. THERE MIGHT BE A COST ASSOCIATED WITH A P3 FOR A CLEARLY IDENTIFIED PUBLIC BENEFIT S WHAT I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE CLEAR ABOUT. 
          I'M NOT SUGGESTING ANY OPTIONS. >> IF I MAY, I THINK COMMISSIONER TAYLOR, WHAT I'M WILLING TO SUPPORT YOUR MOTION IS WE HAVE THE OPTION TO SELL IT UNDER THE P3. 
          WE'RE NOT -- ALTHOUGH IT COULD COME WITH COSTS ASSOCIATED, WE'RE NOT OBLIGATED TO ANY COSTS. 
          IT GIVES US FLEXIBILITY AND OVERSIGHT TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY. IF YOU WERE IN THE TOWN HALL, THERE'S A LOT OF PASSION. I KNOW HOW PASSIONATE EVERY ONE OF YOU ARE ABOUT SERVING THE PEOPLE, SO SELLING IT GIVES US LESS CONTROL. THE REASON WE GOT INTO THIS MESS TO BEGIN WITH WAS TO TRY TO MAKE THE FOLKS IN THAT COMMUNITY HAPPY AND TO NOT ADD TO THE MESS THAT ALREADY EXISTS AT THAT INTERCHANGE AND THOSE INTERSECTIONS ACROSS THE STREET. 
          IN MY OPINION, THIS GIVE US THE BEST WAY, FORMAL SOLICITATION GIVES US THE BEST WAY TO CONTROL IT. 
          IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT WE HAVE TO PAY ANY EXTRA MONEY. 
          >> I AGREE. I THINK IT'S THE BEST OF BOTH 
          WORLDS. >> DO YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION? 
          >> YES. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. 
          >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION WE GO FORWARD WITH THE P3 OPTION 
          FOR THIS BUILDING. >> SECOND. 
          >> FOR THE FORMAL SOLICITATION? >> YES, FOR THE FORMAL 
          SOLICITATION. >> I WILL SECOND THAT. 
          >> ALL RIGHT, SO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE, AND WE'LL 
          DO PUBLIC COMMENT. >> WE'LL NOW ACCEPT PUBLIC 
          COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 4. >> HI, EVERYONE. 
          GEORGE CLOOIER, WITH COMMERCIAL REALTOR. 
          WE'RE THE OWNERS OF THE SHOPS VILLAGE. 
          WE'RE REPRESENTING THE REVERB CHURCH, ONE OF THE OCCUPANTS IN THAT RING. IT'S INTERESTING BEING HERE EARLIER AND LISTENING ABOUT THE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT HOW THE NORTHWEST DISTRICT HAS BEEN UPGRADED TREES AND HOW NICE AND THE LANDSCAPE IS. THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THERE'S A COST ASSOCIATED WITH IT. 
          AND THE COMMON AREAS THAT ARE THERE AROUND THE VILLAGE ARE 
          [05:40:02]
BEAUTIFUL BECAUSE OF THE COSTS OF THE UPKEEP. 
          WHEN I SAW THE SCREEN TODAY, IT'S THE COUNTY'S OPINION THAT THEY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE UPKEEP. 
          THEY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CRAM ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPERTY. A THAT MEANS TO HAVE BASIC SERVICES OUT THERE, THOSE COSTS ARE GOING TO TRICKLE DOWN TO US AS PROPERTY OWNERS, THE RESIDENTS, THE HOTEL, THE CHURCH, OUR TENANTS. AT $372,000 A YEAR, THAT'S A PRETTY BITTER PILL TO SWALLOW. YOU GUYS TALK ABOUT IT NOW BEING OCCUPIED BY GOVERNMENT. IT'S NOT OCCUPIED. 
          IT HASN'T BEEN OCCUPIED IN THE YEARS I HAVE BEEN HERE. 
          EVEN THOUGH IT HAD A MUSEUM BEING USED, THE CONSTITUTES WERE BEING PAID. THE PROPERTY WAS BEING MAINTAINED, ALBEIT BELOW STANDARDS, BUT FOR THE COUNTY TO TAKE THE POSITION THEY AREN'T RESPONSIBLE FOR THOSE ONGOING COSTS WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD REALLY FIGHT AGAINST. 
          ALL THREE OF THE OPTIONS Y'ALL HAVE ON THE TABLE ARE GOING TO TAKE TIME. IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN OVERNIGHT, AS BEEN POINTED OUT. 
          JUST BE PREPARED THE OBLIGATION FOR MAINTENANCE FALLS BACK TO THE OTHER OCCUPANTS OF THE VILLAGE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO STAND UP AND STATE OUR POSITION. THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? 
          >> IF YOU COULD ZOOM IN CLOSER, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. 
          I CONSTANTLY HAVE TO REMIND MYSELF OF JUST WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT OUT HERE AT THIS PLACE. 
          THERE IT IS IN BLUE. THAT'S WHAT ST. JOHNS COUNTY OWNS. YOU A ALL KNOW THAT. 
          I HAVE TRIED AND TRIED AND TRIED SO MANY TIMES. 
          I CAN'T TELL YOU AS AN ARCHITECT TO GO FROM IGP DOWN PAST THE OLD PUBLIX AND PAST THESE BUILD TOGS GET A ROAD IN THERE, DRIVING THREE MILES ALL THE WAY AROUND TO GET TO SOMEWHERE, IT DEFINITELY IS A DESTINATION. SO I'M LEFT WITH THAT REALIZATION. IT YOU'RE GOING TO DRIVE THREE MILES, IT'S A DESTINATION AND YOU BETTER BE CERTAIN THAT'S WHERE YOU WANT TO END UP. I THOUGHT MANY TIMES OF THE VALUE, POSSIBLE VALUE TO THE MARRIOTT BECAUSE THAT IS A DESTINATION. AND TO WHAT EXTENT WOULD A FACILITY LIKE THIS, RIGHT THERE ON THAT LAKE AND WITH ACCESS, AS IT HAS ALSO SERVEDSERVED MARRIOTT'S BRAND AND IMAGE AS A DESTINATION, AND MAYBE JERRY COULD SPEAK TO THAT AND TELL US HOW SJC COMMUNITY EVENTS COULD DO THAT. 
          BUT I'M TELLING YOU, I HAVE TRIED MANY TIMES TO RUN A ROAD IN THERE. EVERY TIME ITIT  LIKE I'M ELIMINATING THE FIRST THREE HOLES AND STILL NOT PROVIDING ANY PARKING. IT'S A DESTINATION. 
          HOLY COW. SO THAT'S JUST MY THOUGHT. 
          PERHAPS JERRY OR OTHERS COULD TALK TO MARRIOTT AND SEE IF THERE'S SOME WAY TO MAKE GOOD. THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          >> GOOD AFTERNOON. MILL CREEK ESTATES. 
          I WENT TO MANY TOWN HALL MEETINGS AT THE STATE OF THE COUNTY. IF YOU LIVED UP IN THE NORTHERN PART, THERE WAS NO ASPECT OF WHAT WAS GOING ON WITH WORLD GOLF VILLAGE. IF YOU LIVED IN THE EAST, THERE'S NO CONCEPT, NO BIG THOUGHT OF IT. 
          IT'S NOT UNTIL YOU GO TO THE HOME GROUND, AND ASK QUESTIONS AND SAY WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE COUNTY, BUT YES, THERE'S PEOPLE THAT WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON RIGHT HERE AROUND US. 
          THE ASPECT OF FOCUSING IN AND IT WAS RIGHT INTO THAT IMAX THEATER. SO IT WAS AN EMBARRASSMENT OF HOW THE COUNTY CARRIED IT OUT BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T REALLY FOCUSED ON WHAT THE INITIAL COMMUNITY OF THAT AREA WAS LOOKING AT. IT WAS WHAT WAS GOING ON WITH THE WORLDWORLD  VILLAGE. IT'S VERY DEPRESSING TO SEE THAT. IT WAS A DEBACLE. 
          ALL THE WAY FROM THE PRESENTER DOWN TO THE EMERGENCY COMMISSIONER SPEAKER, WHO CAME IN TO CLEAN UP. 
          IF THEY WANT TO SAY WHAT'S BEEN GOING ON AND HOW DO WE THIS AND THAT, THE PEOPLE WOULD LIKE SOMETHING NEW, SOMETHING DIFFERENT, SOMETHING MORE FEASIBLE, BUT IT'S GOING TO TAKE 
          [05:45:05]
THAT. JUST KEEP DRAGGING IT ON OR GIVE IT UP AND MOVE ON. WILL THE PEOPLE HAVE A SAY OF WHAT'S GOING ONON THERE? THEY COULD. 
          BUT IT'S FEASIBLE. IT'S FEASIBLE TO JUST PICK IT UP, TAKE YOUR MONEY AND RUN. TO SAY THAT A LOT OF COMPASSION CAME OUT, THERE WAS A LOT OF COMPASSION BECAUSE THE COMMUNITY WASN'T BEING LISTENED TO. IT WAS MORE FOCUSED ON SPORTS FIELD FOR THETHE COUNTY. SO AFTER THAT DEBACLE, NOW THIS BIG PUSH ABOUT WHAT WE DO WITH IT, SO IT IS. 
          IT NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING. WHO WANTS TO JUST PAVE IT ALL DOWN AND PUT SOME PICKLE BALL COURTS ON IT. 
          AND THERE YOU GO. SELL IT OUT. 
          RIGHT THERE. THAT'S THE EASY WAY OF DOINGDOI. 
          I'M PRETTY SURE THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THAT ENVIRONMENT BACK THERE WILL BE OVER THERE GETTING THEIR YEARLY MEMBERSHIPS TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT. MEAN, MAYBE I SHOULD BUY THE THING FROM Y'ALL AND DO THE SAME THING WITH MY TRACTOR. 
          SO YEAH, THOSE TOWN HALL MEETINGS, THEY WERE FUNNY. 
          >> THAT'S SOMETHING I WOULD VOTE FOR. 
          >> I'M JERRY WILSON. I DO WANT TO TAKE A COUPLE MINUTES FIRST AND THANK THE COMMISSIONERS FOR TEN MEETINGS COMBINED INDIVIDUALLY THAT WE HAD TO DISCUSS WHAT TO THINK ABOUT RELEVANT TO THE WORLD GOLF VILLAGE. 
          SJCCE IS PROUD OF OUR PARTNERSHIP WITH ST. JOHNS COUNTY AND OUR GOVERNING BOARD, AND WE RESPECT THAT. 
          IT STRIKES HAD ME WITH TODAY'S OPEN DISCUSSION AMONGST YOU IS VERY HELPFUL BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE REAL INTENT IS. AND WHEN THINGS ARE UNCERTAIN, THAT'S THE WORST KIND OF SITUATION TO BE IN. 
          SO AFTER OUR LAST MEETING, WE SUBMITTED A LETTER OF INTENT TO AUS TO GET THE INFORMATION. GIVEN THE UNCERTAINTY AND THE DESIRE TO LOOK AT OTHER SELL OPTIONS, I THINK THAT THE INCREMENTAL COSTS, THE NUMBERS WHEN WE FIRST GOT THOSE BACK, LOOKED VERY DOABLE. WHEN YOU ADD ANOTHER 700, THE PAYOUT GETS SO MUCH LONGER. SO WHAT WE THINK MIGHT BE THE BEST THING TO DO IS TO PULL OUT THAT LETTER OF INTENT TO OPEN UP YOUR OPTIONS TO DO WHATEVER YOU THINK IS BEST. 
          IF AT THE END OF TLA, A YEAR FROM NOW OR TWO YEARS FROM NOW, AS YOU GO THROUGH IT, THIS IDEA IS OF INTEREST, IT WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO ENGAGE ON IT. WE WANT TO FACILITATE YOU DOING WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO. SO IN THAT CASE, I THOUGHT I 
          WOULD JUST MAKE THOSE COMMENTS. >> PICKLE BALL MIGHT BE 
          SUCCESSFUL. >> WAIT UNTIL YOU HEAR WHAT I HAVE TO SAY. 434, ST. AUGUSTINE. 
          I'M REALLY AFRAID OF THE SELL OPTION BECAUSE, A AS IT WAS STATED, THE LITTLE LOCAL COULD GET KICKED IN. 
          AS HIGH AS THAT TOWER IS, YOU COULD HAVE MULTIPLE BULDINGS OUT THERE THAT HIGH. I DON'T THINK ANYBODY WANTS THAT IN THAT NECK OF THE WOODS. THERE WAS A COMMENT MADE EARLIER IN THE MEETING TODAY ABOUT THE TREES. 
          I FIRST CAME TO THE WORLD GOLF VILLAGE IN 1999 RIGHT AFTER THEY OPENED. THOSE TREES HAVE BEEN THERE SINCE DAY ONE. THE SHELL OIL CORPORATION PUT THEM IN. WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, WAS APPROACHED TO DESIGN A PICKLE BALL FACILITY FOR THE SITE. 
          21 INDOOR COURTS, 20 COURTS, IT'S SITTING IN MY ARCHIVE FILES AT THE MOMENT. THE ONLY THING THAT I SAY WITH PICKLE BALL, AND BELIEVE ME I HAVE A COUSIN WHO OWNS A PRO PICKLE BALL TEAM. HE'S ONE OF THE BIG GURUS IN PICKLE BALL. ALL I CAN SAY IS ONE WORD. 
          RACKET BALL. WHERE'S RACKET BALL TODAY? 
          >> I MISS IT. >> I DO TOO. 
          MY OLD MAN KNEES NOW I COULDN'T PLAY IF I WANTED TO. 
          PICKLE BALL IS A FAD RIGHT NOW. HOPEFULLY IT STICKS AROUND FOR AWHOOL. I HAD A DEVELOPER APPROACH ME FOR DOING A LARGE PICKLE BALL FACILITY. 
          WE ACTUALLY HAD A CONSTRUCTION MANAGER MEET WITH ONE OF OUR FORMER COMMISSIONERS. THEY WERE VERY EXCITED ABOUT IT. 
          [05:50:05]
BUT I'M NOT THE SURE THAT'S THE BEST USE FOR THAT PROPERTY. 
          AN INNOVATION CENTER COULD POTENTIALLY BRING IN A LOT OF REVENUE TO OUR COUNTY. MAYBE A GOOD OPTION. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THE RIGHT ONE. 
          I'M JUST THINKING SOMEBODY MENTIONED THE INNOVATION CENTER. 
          WE COULD REALLY USE SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 
          MORE BRAINS WOULDN'T HURT. THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLICEN COMMENT? SPEAK NOW OR FOREVER HOLD YOUR 
          PEACE. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          COMMISSIONER JOSEPH WAS THE ONLY PERSON TO VOTE AGAINST BUYING THIS PROPERTY. I THINK GORDON GULF OF MEXICO COAT AND WALL STREET WOULD HAVE CALLED IT A DOG WITH FLEES. 
          THE VOTE WAS APRIL 16TH OF 2024. AND EVERY OTHER SITTING COMMISSIONER AT THE TIME VOTED NO. 
          I WANT TO THANK COMMISSIONER JOSEPH FORFOR  OUR PUBLIC FROM A TAX ON IT LIKE THIS. IT SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN PURCHASED. AND ALSO, COULD WE PLEASE HAVE A LEGAL AUD UT AND A ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS AS TO WHY WE BOUGHT THE DOG GONE THING. WE SPENT $5.5 MILLION AND THERE WAS THIS RESTRICTION IN SECTION 4.5 ON THE USE, AND HEARING ONE OF THE BUDGET DIRECTORDIRECTOR ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR JUSTICE SEE DUNN, HE SAID THERE WAS I THINK HE PUT IT A USE RESTRICTION OUT THERE. IT WASN'T OUT THERE. 
          IT WAS IN THE FILES OF THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AT ALL TIMES. AND IF WE HAD A COMPETENT COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND A COMPETENT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S OFFICE, THEY WOULD HAVE ISSUED A MEMO AND DISCUSSED WITH THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THIS USE RESTRICTION. 
          AND WE WOULDN'T BE IN THIS FIX RIGHT NOW. 
          SO BEFORE WE DO ANYTHING ELSE, COULD WE PLEASE DO THOSE THINGS? A LEGAL AUDIT, AND A ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS. 
          BY ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS, I MEAN A REAL ONE. 
          THERE WAS AN ISSUE IN THE CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE WHEN THEY DUMPED A LANDFILL IN A LAKE. THE THEN CITY MANAGER WHOWHO FOR A MEETING I THINK IT WAS IN 2010. 
          APRIL 8TH, I BELIEVE. HE SAID HE HAD DONE A ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS. I ASKED FOR A COPY OF IT. 
          HE SAID, HE DID IT IN HIS HEAD. WELL, ANYBODY THAT KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT ENGINEERING KNOWS YOU DON'T DO A ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS IN YOUR HEAD. THE FUNNIEST THING WAS FOR YEARS, PEOPLE WOULD GOOGLE ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS, AND THEY WOULD COME TO MY BLOG AND READ HOW THE CITY MANAGER OF THE CITY OF ST. 
          AUGUSTINE DID A ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS IN HIS HEAD. 
          COULD WE PLEASE HAVE SOME ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS? LOOK INGING AT THE MINUTES OF T MEETING FOR THAT DAY, AGAIN, IT WAS APRIL 16TH OF 2024, COMMISSIONER JOSEPH VOTED TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND TAXPAYERS' MONEY. 
          NOBODY ELSE DID ON THE BOARD AT THAT TIME. 
          NOBODY ELSE. SHE ASKED GOOD QUESTIONS. 
          I ALSO ASKED IF YOU LOOK AT THE MINUTES, PEOPLE WERE ASKING WAS THERE A WAIVER OF A RIGHT TO JURY TRIAL? BUT THE MINUTES ARE SO POOR THEN AND SINCE THAT WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHO SAID WHAT BECAUSE OUR CLERKS OFFICE ISN'T DOING A GOOD JOB WITH THE MINUTES AND THEY ARE STILL NOT. 
          THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IT'S OUR MONEY. 
          THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. 
          ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE 
          PUBLIC. >> I SEE OVER THERE DO YOU HAVE 
          ANYMORE TO SAY ABOUT THIS? >> I HAVE A POINT OF CLARIFICATION THROUGH THE CHAIR PLEASE? 
          >> EXCUSE ME? >> COULD I HAVE A POINT OF CLARIFICATION PLEASE THROUGH THE CHAIR TO THE ATTORNEY? 
          >> WE CAN'T HEAR YOU. CAN YOU SPEAK REALLY SLOW. 
          >> CAN I PLEASE HAVE A POINT OF CLARIFICATION THROUGH THE CHAIR 
          TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY? >> SURE. 
          >> MR. COMMANDO, DID WE PURCHASE THE PROPERTY AS IS BEING SAID IN PUBLIC COMMENT, OR DID WE INHERIT THE PROPERTY REVERTED BACK TO US WHEN THE FOUNDATION ESSENTIALLY TERMINATED THE 
          LEASE? >> THE SECOND, WE DID NOT 
          PURCHASE THE PROPERTY. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> JAMIE? >> GOOD AFTERNOON, JAMIE, PURR CHARSING DIRECTOR. WE CAN CERTAINLY DO A P3 SOLICITATION AND INCLUDE IN IT THINGS THAT WE WANT TO SEE OR THINGS THAT WE WOULD PREFER TO SEE AS FAR AS WHAT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THOSE PROPOSALS AS A TACTIC TO OPEN NEGOTIATIONS. 
          [05:55:02]
I WOULD RECOMMEND AGAINST HARD AND FAST MANDATED REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE IF THEY FAIL TO INCORPORATE THOSE IN THEIR PROPOSAL, THAT MEANS THEY ARE THROWN OUT OF CONSIDERATION. 
          WE CAN DEFINITELY PUT IT OUT THERE TO BRING IN PROPOSALS BASED ON WHAT WE WANT TO SEE, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR INCORPORATING ALL OF THE INPUT TO GET PROPOSALS, INCLUDING CONSIDERATION OR POINT OF NEGOTIATION FOR A SALE OPTION OVER A LONG-TERM LEASE OPTION, SO THE WHOLE PREMISE OF A P3 IS TO GET IDEAS FROM COMMUNITY MEMBERS THAT HAVE BETTER THOUGHTS AND IDEAS AND COMPREHENSIVE PLANS FOR A FACILITY LIKE THIS THAN WE DO. SO YOU WANT TO KEEP IT AS OPEN AS WE CAN TO A MAXIMIZE THE BENEFIT OF THOSE PROPOSALS. 
          >> WERE WE EVER GOING TO DO THAT BEFORE? 
          >> WHAT DO YOU MEAN? >> WE DIDN'T DO THAT BEFORE, 
          RIGHT? >> NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NO. 
          >> I THINK WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE. 
          READY TO VOTE? READY TO VOTE, COMMISSIONER 
          ARNOLD? >> YES. 
          >> WHITEHURST? >> YES. 
          >> COMMISSIONER TAYLOR? >> YES. 
          >> MURPHY? >> YES. 
          >> AND I'M A YES. OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. THAT WAS A GOOD DISCUSSION 
          [5. Public Hearing * VACROA 2024-02 Hastings Dunkin Donuts Road Vacation Petition - Public Hearing to vacate the unopened/unimproved right-of-way of unnamed Alley in Hastings, Florida. The applicant has requested the vacation of a portion of an unopened 16’-wide alley right-of-way in the platted subdivision known as Hastings Villa in Hastings, Florida. Based on staff's review thus far, no party will be unreasonably affected by the requested vacation.]
THOUGH. MAYBE WE ADVERTISED IT OUT THERE ON GTB. NUMBER FIVE, PICKLE BALL. 
          >> I DO THINK PICKLE BALL. THAT WOULD BE INDOOR. 
          INDOOR AND OUTDOOR. ARE YOU DOING NUMBER FIVE ALSO? 
          >> YES, MA'AM. >> GOOD. 
          >> YES. ELLEN AVERY-SMITH. 
          LET'S TALK ABOUT SOMETHING FUN AND HOPEFULLY EASY. 
          SO I AM HERE WITH JOHN GRIFY, THE FRANCHISEE FOR ALL DUNKIN' DONUTS IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. AND HE WANTS TO BUILD ANOTHER DUNKIN' DONUTS RESTAURANT, PARTICULARLY IN HASTINGS. 
          SO WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE FACT THAT I'LL GIVE YOU AN OVERVIEW OF WHAT THIS APPLICATION IS, BUT I WANT YOU TO SEE HIS VISION FOR THE RESTAURANT AND TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW HE'S BEEN WORKING WITH THE HASTINGS MAIN STREET FOLKS, WHO HAVE BEEN REALLY INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS AND THE ARCHITECTURE FOR THE BUILDING THAT JOHN AND HIS PARTNERS ARE GLOING TO BUILD. SO THE PROPERTY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY IS THIS IS STATE ROAD 207. 
          HERE'S SOUTH MAIN STREET IN HASTINGS. 
          I'LL GIVE YOU A BROADER VIEW IN JUST A MINUTE. 
          THE APPLICATION THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT OR THAT'S BEFORE YOU TODAY ISIS  ROAD VACATION. THERE'S AN UNOPENED RIGHT-OF-WAY IN THIS LOCATION. HERE'S THE SUBWAY. 
          IF YOU HAVE EVER GONE OUT TO HASTINGS, AND THEN THERE'S A VACANT LOT, WHERE PEOPLE PARK TO GO TO SUBWAY. 
          AND TRUCKS PARK AND PEOPLE PUT UP SIGNS, BUT THE LOT IS VACANT. 
          SO THE APPLICATION THAT'S BEFORE YOU TODAY IS SIMPLY TO VACATE THIS UNOPENED ALLEY, IF YOU WILL, IT IS AN OPENED ALLEY, AND THEN IF THAT OCCURS, THEN HALF OF THE UNOPENED ALLEY GOES TO OWNERSHIP OF THE PEOPLE TO THE EAST, AND HALF GOES TO OWNERSHIP TO THE PEOPLE TO THE WEST. AND BY THE WAY, THE JAMES H. 
          WRIGHT LIVING TRUST TRUSTEES HAVE SIGNED THE PETITION TO VACATE THIS ALLEY, SO THEY WOULD GET A PORTION OF THIS PROPERTY. 
          THEY HAVE AGREED TO THIS. WE HAVE GOTTEN ALL THE UTILITY PROVIDERS IN THE AREAS TO SAY THEY DON'T NEED THIS FOR ANY KIND OF UTILITY SERVICE. SO BIGGER OVERVIEW. 
          SO HERE'S CHURCH STREET, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS STATE ROAD 207. HERE'S MAIN STREET IN HASTINGS. 
          YOU HAVE THE GAS STATION THAT'S HERE. 
          THERE'S A PIZZA PLACE. AND YOU HAVE THE SUBWAY AND THE VACANT PARCEL. THEN HERE'S THE HASTINGS PARK AND WEST VIVIAN DRIVE, WHICH BY THE WAY SEPARATE THIS IS SITE FROM THIS PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH, WHICH IS RESIDENTIALLY ZONED. 
          THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION IS INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL. 
          THAT'S THE SAME FOR THE SUBWAY PROPERTY. 
          AND THEN THE ZONING IS COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE, SAME FOR THE SUBWAY PROPERTY. AND YOU CAN SEE THOSE. 
          AND SO HERE'S THE PROPERTY. WE'RE COMING TO YOUR BOARD TODAY FOR THE ROAD VASE KAGS, WHICH IS SUBJECT TO YOUR JURISDICTION LEGALLY. THEN WE GO TO PLANNING AND ZONING AGENCY ON THURSDAY, BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE PURVIEW TO ALLOW THAT AND REDUCED LANDSCAPING OR REDUCED BUFFER IN EXCHANGE FOR ENHANCED LAND SKAPING. 
          THOSE ARE IN A ZONING VARIANC APPLICATION THAT'S NEEDED FOR THIS RESTAURANT TO BECOME A REALITY. 
          THAT GOES TO PCA ON THURSDAY. . 
          [06:00:02]
JUST SO YOU'RE ALL AWARE OF THE MOVING PARTS. 
          SO HERE'S THE DUNKIN' DONUTS LAYOUT. 
          YOU COME IN FROM 207. YOU SEE THE PROPERTY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. YOU SEE THE RESTAURANT. 
          YOU HAVE TO COME IN AND GO AROUND THE BUILDING FOR THE DRIVE-THRU. HERE'S THE ORDER BOX. 
          AND THEN YOU SEE HOW THIS UNOPENED RIGHT-OF-WAY PLAYS INTO THE SITE PLAN. THIS IS A STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY THAT'S NEEDED FOR DRAINAGE PURPOSES. 
          SO AGAIN, YOU SEE THE SITE PLAN. THE ENGINEER AND THE PLANNERPLA THE PROJECT, THEY PUT TOGETHER THIS SITE PLAN. 
          THEN THE ARCHITECT, YOU CAN SEE THE BUILDING WILL INCLUDE RESTAURANT SPACE SO YOU CAN DINE IN AS WELL AS DRIVE THROUGH. 
          AND AGAIN, GOING SO THIS PROPERTY IS IN THE HASTINGS MAIN STREET OVERLAY. THE OVERLAY DISTRICT DOES NOT HAVE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW AUTHORITY BY LAW, BUT THEY HAVE SPENT A LOT OF TIME WITH THE OTHER FOLKS FROM THE HASTINGS MAIN STREET TO MAKE SURE THIS BUILDING IS ARCHITECTURALLY WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE, MEANING HAVING BRICK ON THE FACADE, HAVING SIDING INSTEAD OF STUCCO, I DON'T KNOW ALL THE DETAILS BECAUSE I HAVEN'T BEEN INVOLVED IN THOSE DISCUSSION, BUT I THINK THE DUNKIN' SIGN IS A CORPORATE LOGO. 
          HAVING THE ORANGE AWNINGS ARE A PART OF DUNKIN''S CORPORATE BRAND, SO YOU SEE THOSE ON THE BUILDING. 
          AND HERE'S THE SOUTH ELEVATION. THE WEST ELEVATION. 
          AND THEN THE EAST ELEVATION. SO YOU SEE ALL THE BRICK THAT'S BEEN ADDED. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THIS IS THE FIRST DUNKIN' WITH BRICK IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY AND MAYBE IN COUNTY FLORIDA. SO AGAIN, JUST GOING BACK TO THE PURVIEW OF YOUR BOARD, IF YOU COULD PLEASE VOTE TO VACATE THIS ALLEY SO HE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH HIS DUNK DONUTS PLANS, WE WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE IT. I'M HERE TO ABSENTEE ANY 
          QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. >> THROUGH THE CHAIR? 
          >> YES, MA'AM. >> IT IS A PUBLIC HEARING, IF WE COULD GET EX PARTE ON THE RECORD. 
          >> THEY TOLD ME NO EX PARTE. >> COMMISSIONER ARNOLD? 
          >> I KNOW THAT I HAVE MET WITH THE APPLICANT TO DISCUSS THIS. 
          I CAN GET THE DATE AND TIME. WE DISCUSSED THE VACATION OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. WE DISCUSSED THE ARCHITECTURAL RENDERINGS. WAS HOPING TO DO AND HOW HE WAS GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS WAS INTEGRAL TO THE COMMUNITY. 
          THAT'S ALL. >> COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST? 
          >> I HAD THE SAME MEETING, AND WE DISCUSSED THE SITE LOCATION, THE ARCHITECTURAL CHANGES MADE THROUGH THE FRANCHISE AND THE 
          VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY. >> COMMISSIONER TAYLOR? 
          >> I HAD THE SAME MEETING WITH ELLEN AND THE APPLICANT. 
          WE ADDRESSED ANY QUESTIONS. >> COMMISSIONER MURPHY? 
          >> I ALSO HAD THE SAME EX PARTE. I MET WITHWITH  AND MR. 
          >> I DID NOT HAVE ANY MEETINGS. CAN I ASK A QUESTION? WE'RE VOTING ON THE ALLEYWAY CORRECT? 
          >> I'M CURIOUS WHY WE SAW THE BUILDING. 
          >> WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THE BOARD SAW THE COMPLETE PICTURE AND KNEW HOW MUCH EFFORT HE AND THE HASTINGS MAIN STREET HAVE GONE THROUGH TO BRING THIS TO FRUITION. 
          THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME A FEW MORE MINUTES OF TIME. 
          >> SO TO THAT POINT, I DID WANT TO THANK HIM FOR TAKING THE EXTRA STEPS IN THE FRANCHISE. I KNOW IT COST SOME EXTRA MONEY. 
          AND BECAUSE THERE WAS NO OFFICIAL OVERLAY OR ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW, BUT JUST BEING A GOOD PARTNER IN THE GOOD WORK THEY ARE DOING THERE MEANS A LOT TO ME. 
          I'M GRATEFUL. THANK YOU, SIR. 
          >> DO WE WANT TO OPEN IT UP TO PUBLIC COMMENT? 
          >> ACCEPT PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEM NUMBER 5. 
          >> GOOD AFTERNOON. CHARLIE HUNT, WILL CREEK ESTATES. IT WOULD LOOK GREAT, BUT DID ANYBODY READ THE STORY OF THE HASTINGS COFFEE COMPANY THAT'S RIGHT THERE ON MAIN STREET? THE LOCALS WERE GIVEN A LEASE TO OPEN UP A COFFEE SHOP RIGHT THERE. 
          SO NOW IT WOULD BE NICE FOR THIS MEGA CORPORATION TO COME DOWN AND HELP OUT ON MAIN STREET. RIGHT THERE ON THE CORNER. 
          WHAT WILL THAT DO? IT WILL DIVERT TRAFFIC FROM THE THE LOCAL WHO IS OWN THE COFFEE SHOP RIGHT DOWN THERE. 
          LOOK AT THE NEWS. LOOK AT THE NEWS. 
          [06:05:01]
IT'S MAIN STREET. WE WANT TO PUT THIS CORPORATION RIGHT THERE ON THE CORNER SO THEY CAN TAKE IT. 
          THEY WILL TAKE IT. THIS LITTLE COFFEE SHOP THAT JUST OPENED EARLIER THIS YEAR, MY WIFE KNOWS THE OWNERS BECAUSE OUR BOYS WERE DOING 4-H TOGETHER GROWING UP. 
          SO TO HAVE A MEGA CORPORATION OF DUNKIN' DONUTS GO RIGHT DOWN ON THE CORNER, THAT IS A HIGH PRIORITY PLACE RIGHT THERE ON THE CORNER OF THAT MAIN ROAD. GOING THROUGH THERE. 
          WILL PEOPLE BE MORE FOOEZABLE TO STOP THERE THAN TO TAKE THAT RIGHT AND GO DOWN A LITTLE WAYS AND BUY FROM A COFFEE SHOP OR THE MEGA CORPORATION THERE ON THE CORNER? THAT'S WHERE IT IS. THAT'S HOW I FEEL ABOUT IT. 
          MAIN STREET AND TO HELP MAIN STREET AND TO BRING MORE BUSINESS TO MAIN STREET IS GOOD, BUT WHEN YOU BRING MEGA CORPORATIONS INTO MAIN STREET, WHERE'S EVERYBODY WANT TO GO? BECAUSE IT'S CHEAPER, IT'S QUICKER, IT'S A FASTER TURNOVER. 
          THEY MIGHT NOT LIKE THE RELAXED ATMOSPHERE OF GOING INTO A COFFEE SHOP AND ORDERING COFFEE. THINK OF IT LIKE THAT. 
          THINK OF IT LIKE THAT. LET'S HAVE SOME PRACTICAL SENSE OF THE MAIN STREET AND PROBABLY EVEN THE PEOPLE WHO WERE BEHIND THIS WHOLE MAIN STREET PUSH OF SAYING, YEAH, THAT WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE THIS MEGA CORPORATION TAKE A CORNER, WHICH IS A HIGHLY OPERATED AREA RIGHT THERE ON THE FOUR-WAY. 
          SO PEOPLE DON'T HAVE TO GO DOWN AND STOP AND GET OUT OF THEIR CAR AND GET COFFEE FROM A COFFEE SHOP. 
          ALL RIGHT. YES. 
          IT'S LIKE THAT. IF THIS IS RECONSTRUCTING THE MAIN STREET IN HASTINGS, THIS PUTTING THE MEGA CORPORATION ON THE CORNER WITH BRICKS, IF IT THAT'S THE SELLING POINT, COME ON, PEOPLE. NEVER MIND ABOUT THAT COFFEE SHOP THAT WAS IN THE NEWS BECAUSE A LITTLE COFFEE SHOP AND REBUILDING THE MAIN STREET OF HASTINGS. 
          >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? 
          >> WEST CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE. MAYBE MR. GRIFFIN CAN COME UP HERE AND LET YOU ALL KNOW THAT HE'S TALKED WITH THE COFFEE SHOP, AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT ANYTHING WHENEVER DUNKIN' DONUT COMES IN. I DON'T KNOW EVERYTHING. 
          THERE'S SO MUCH GOINGGOING  IN S COUNTY. 
          HASTINGS, ESPECIALLY, WE'RE TRYING TO HELP IT OUT. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF YOU OR MS. AERLD, IF SHE CAN HEAR THIS, KNEW THAT THIS WAS GOING ON AND HOW IT WOULD BE AFFECTING A SMALL, PROBABLY SMALL BUSINESS. IT'S ALL I'M WONDERING ABOUT. 
          I APPRECIATE WHENEVER THE PUBLIC SHARE INFORMATION THAT MAYBE NONE OF THE STAFF KNOW ANYTHING A ABOUT, OR HAVE EVEN HEARD FROM ANYBODY ABOUT. YOU CAN'T DO STUFF WHEN YOU HAVE MONEY COMPARED TO SOMEBODY THAT DOESN'T HAVE MUST BE. 
          WE'RE REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT SMALL BUSINESS PEOPLE HERE, AREN'T WE? I HEAR THAT A LOT. 
          IT'S ALMOST 4:00, GOSH, I'M SO GLAD I'M ABLE TO STAY THIS AFTERNOON. I'M JUST LEARNING, LEARNING, LEARNING. THE CITY DIDN'T HAVE ANOTHER MEETING THIS AFTERNOON, SO I REALLY APPRECIATE BEING IN HERE. 
          AND JUST FOR THE PEOPLE THAT MAYBE LISTENING, THERE'S NOBODY HERE EXCEPT A COUPLE PUBLIC PEOPLE, AND THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS. 
          WE CAN'T A ALWAYS STAY. THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SPEAK OFF ABOUT THE COFFEE SHOP. THANK YOU. 
          >> YES, MA'AM. ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          >> ARNOLD, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? >> YES, AND I'M STILL HERE. 
          FEAR NOT. MOTION TO ADOPTION RESOLUTION 2025 HCH 91 APPROVING VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY 2024-02, PETITION HASTINGS DUNKIN' DO NUTS OF UNNAMED ALLEY IN 
          HASTINGS, FLORIDA. >> SECOND. 
          >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. 
          COMMISSIONER TAYLOR? >> YES. 
          >> COMMISSIONER MURPHY? >> YES. 
          I'M A YES. >> COMMISSIONER ARNOLD? 
          [6. PLAT 2024-42 Rivertown Forest (Parcel 39) Phase 1. The subject of this Resolution is Final Plat approval for Rivertown Forest (Parcel 39) Phase 1. This project consists of 65.261 acres and the platting of 152 single family lots. The road rights of way designated as Appalachian Trail, Orangedale Circle, Holly Creek Drive, and Grand Lakes Drive are proposed to be dedicated to St. Johns County. Per the Rivertown PUD Ordinance 2006-113, portions of the interior roadway system may remain private, may be conveyed to a CDD, or may be proposed for dedication to St. Johns County. This plat is consistent with previous road dedications throughout portions of the Rivertown Development and has been found to be in compliance with the Rivertown Planned Unit Development. A Required Improvements Bond in the amount of $7,044,622.12, was previously filed with the Clerk’s office. A Required Improvements Bond for maintenance, in the amount of $1,836,096.17, will be required at time of as-built. Water and sewer will be provided by JEA.]
          [06:10:01]
          >> YES. >> OKAY. 
          THAT PASSES 5-0. WE'RE MOVING ON TO AGENDA ITEM 6. ARE YOU GOING TO DO 6 AND 7 
          TODAY? >> THEY CAN'T BE DONE TOGETHER. 
          THEY HAVE TO BE DONE INDIVIDUALLY. 
          >> THEY HAVE DIFFERENCES OF FACT. 
          >> OKAY, SO JUST A AS A MATTER OF SETTING THE STAGE BECAUSE WE'RE HERE TALKING ABOUT ONE PLAT WITHIN RIVERTOWN. 
          >> SO RIVERTOWN IS A DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT AND A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. THAT'S THE ZONING. 
          RIVERTOWN WAS APPROVED FOR 4,950 RESIDENCE SHL UNITS, AND IT'S ABOUT TWO-THIRDS OF THE WAY BUILT OUT AT THIS POINT. 
          SO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY IS A PLAT, WHICH IS CALLED THE PLAT OF RIVERTOWN FOREST. IT'S IN PARCEL 39, WHICH IS OVER IN THIS AREA RIGHT HERE. AND AS THEY PLAT THATTHAT LOTS AND ROADWAYS. AND AS SOME OF YOU MAY OR MAY NOT KNOW, A PLAT IS A WAY TO SUBDIVIDE PROPERTY. 
          SO YOU SUBDIVIDE IT INTO DIFFERENT USES LIKE STORM WATER, CONSERVATION EASEMENT, THAT KIND OF THING. 
          YOU CAN ALSO HAVE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT TRACTS OR WHATEVER. 
          IT IS A CREATURE OF FLORIDA STATUTES 177, SO AS LONG AS THE PLAT MEETS THE TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 177, THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT IS REQUIRED TO APPROVE THAT PLAT AS A MATTER OF LAW. SO I'M ASSUMING THAT THIS PLAT WAS PUT ON THE REGULAR AGENDA ITEM BECAUSE OF THE IDEA THAT SOME OF THE ROADS THAT ARE INTERNAL TO THIS PLAT ARE BEING PROPOSED TO BE DEDICATED TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY. 
          I HOPE THAT ASSUMPTION IS CORRECT, BUT IF IT'S NOT, LET ME KNOW. SO I WANTED TO PUT TOGETHER THE INFORMATION ABOUT RIVERTOWN BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT ALL OF RIVERTOWN, IF YOU LOOK AT THIS MAP CLOSELY, HERE'S LONG LEAF PARKWAY, YOU HAVE STATE ROAD 13, HERE'S GREEN BRIAR ROAD. 
          THEN YOU HAVE A ROAD THAT'S CALLED RIVERTOWN MAIN STREET, THAT WILL COME ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE COMMUNITY AND EVENTUALLY CONNECT UP TO GREEN BRIAR ROAD. 
          YOU SEE ON THIS MAP THE LINES THAT ARE IN BLUE. 
          THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN DEDICATED TO THE PUBLIC. 
          MEANING IN THE RIVERTOWN PUD, THE LANGUAGE IN THE PUD SAYS THAT THE ROADS WILL EITHER BE OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY POA, PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT OR DEDICATED TO THE COUNTY. THE ROADS THAT YOU SEE IN BLUE ON THIS MAP HAVE BEEN DEDICATED TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY ON VARIOUSV OF RIVERTOWN. THE ROADS THAT YOU SEE IN PINK ARE PRIVATELY OWNED ROADS WITHIN SEPARATE HOAS WHICH HAVE GATED AREAS. SO THE ACTIVE ADULT COMMUNITY IN RIVERTOWN IS GATED, AND THOSE ROADS THAT SHOW UP IN PINK ARE PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY THOSE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. 
          THAT'S TRUE FOR THIS AREA AND THIS AREA. 
          BUT YOU STILL SEE ALL OF THE NEW PARTS OF RIVERTOWN THAT HAVE BEEN PLATTED WHERE PEOPLE LIVE ARE MOSTLY ON THOSE BLUE ROADS. 
          WHAT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THERE ARE CODESCODES  RIVERS ED CDD AND 3 CDD. SO YOU SEE RIVERS EDGE, RIDGES EDGE 2, AND RIVERS EDGE 3. SO THOSE COMMUNITY DISTRICTS HAVE A LOCAL DREAMT THAT THE RESIDENTS WHO LIVE IN EACH DISTRICT HAVE TO PAY FOR I'LL CALL IT COMMON INFRASTRUCTURE, COMMON AMENITIES, ROADS, YOU NAME IT. 
          I'M NOT THEIR LAWYER, SO IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, YOU CAN FIND OUT THE ANSWERS TO THOSE. BUT I JUST POINT THIS OUT TO YOU THAT IF THE COUNTY DOES NOT ACCEPT DEDICATION OF THESE ROADS ON THIS PLAT AND PLATS THAT WILL COME FOR THIS AREA ALL THE WAY TO INCLUDING RIVERTOWN MAIN STREET, WHICH IS A PUBLICLY VIABLE CONNECTER ROAD, THEN THE COST OF MAINTAINING THOSETHOSE WILL FALL TO THE CDD EXISTING RESIDENTS, WHO ALREADY PAY TAXES 
          [06:15:09]
IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. SO THAT IS WHAT I WANTED TO POINT OUT TO YOU ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT FOR THE PLAT. 
          WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU APPROVE THE PLAT AS IT IS WRITTEN, MEANING WITH THE ROAD DEDICATION STAYING TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY AND DJ SMITH IS HERE WITH 
          ME. >> PUBLIC COMMENT? 
          >> I DO HAVEHAVE  QUESTION. >> WHEN YOU MENTION THEY PAY FOR ROADS, WHICH ROADS OUTSIDE OF THE GATED AREA PR THEY PAYING 
          FOR? >> I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER. 
          I SUPPOSE ON THIS, THE GREEN ON THE CDD ROADS. 
          THAT WOULD BE IN THIS AREA. >> SO THE CDD IS PAYING FOR 
          THOSE ROADS? >> CORRECT. 
          THOSE WERE THE PLATS THATTHAT APPROVED. 
          THIS IS A LOT OF HISTORY, BUT I'LL TELL YOU IN SUMMARY, THE ST. JOE COMPANY WAS THE ORIGINALAL DEVELOPER OF RIVERTOWN FROM 2002 THROUGH 2014. 
          WHEN THEY SOLD THE PROJECT, WHEN ST. JOHNS SOLD. 
          I STARTED REPRESENTING MADAME IN 2014, '15 TIMEFRAME WHEN THEY PURCHASED THE PROPERTY, AND EVER SINCE THAT TIME THAT I CAN RECALL, THE COUNTY HAS TAKEN OVERERSHIP OF THE ROADS. 
          SO I DON'T KNOW THE HISTORY OF WHY THESE ROADS ARE OWNED BY THE 
          CDD. >> OKAY. 
          MIKE HAS A LITTLE HISTORY ON THIS FROM -- I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT COMMISSIONER WALL RESIDENT AND SMITH CAME UP WITH HAVING THE CCDS TAKE THEIR ROADS THE REST OF THE COUNTY IS PAYING FOR THEM IN THE AREA? I DON'T KNOW. 
          YOU TOLD ME SOMETHING THAT WAS INTERESTING. 
          >> SURE. THROUGH THE CHAIR, DIRECTOR OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT. WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WHEN THE COMMISSION AT THE TIME STARTED TALKING ABOUT ACCEPTANCE OF ROADS I THINK BECAUSE BUDGET KSHS, WHATEVER IT WAS, THEY WANTED TO KNOW WHEN THE ROADS WERE BEING DEDICATED TO THE COUNTY AND THESE PLATS, SO STAFF WAS LETTING YOU KNOW. 
          THAT WAS RIGHT AROUND COMMISSIONER SMITH AND WHOEVER ELSE WAS ON THE BOARD AT THAT TIME. 
          SO FROM THAT POINT FORWARD, WE POINT OUT WHEN THERE'S A ROAD BEING DEDICATED, IT'S UP TO THE BOARD TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT 
          TO ACCEPT IT. >> ANY QUESTIONS? WE OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          >> PUBLIC COMMENT FOR AGENDA ITEM 6. 
          >> GOOD AFTERNOON, SCOTT MAYNARD, RIVERTOWN. 
          COMMISSIONER TAYLOR, I CAN QUICKLY ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. 
          THE ROADS THAT CURRENTLY ARE OUTSIDE THE GATED COMMUNITY WERE ORIGINALLY BUILT IN THE ST. JOE DEVELOPMENT STARTED. 
          A LOT OF THOSE ROADS ARE ALLEYWAYS. 
          THE ORIGINAL DESIGN WAS TO HAVE ENTRANCE INTO THE BACK, THE SMALL ALLEYWAYS WERE NOT BUILT A CODE FOR A REGULAR ROADWAY. 
          IT MAINTAINS ALL THE ALLEYWAYS AND SOME THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. BUT SINCE THAT TIME, ALL OF THE OTHER ROADS THAT ARE BUILT TO STANDARD CODE FOR THE COUNTY HAVE BEEN DEDICATED TO THE COUNTY. 
          >> I WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW I OPPOSE THAT THE COUNTY IS CNSIDERING NOT TAKING OWNERSHIP OF THOSE ROADS, AS HAS BEEN THE PRECEDENT THE LAST TEN YEARS. IT DOESN'T SEEM FAIR OR EFFECT QUITABLE THAT SOME NEIGHBORHOODS ARE EXEMPT FROM THAT AND OTHERS WOULD BE PICKED TO HAVE TO PAY FOR THEIR OWN ROADS. 
          RESIDENTS IN RIVERTOWN PURCHASE HOMES BASED ON THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE TIMTED CDD FEES AND WHAT THOSE EXPENSES WOULD ENTAIL. 
          IF WE HAD TO GO BACK NOW AND START PAYING FOR THE ROADS, IT WOULD CAUSE A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN THE FEES IN ORDER FOR US TO BRING UP THE RESERVES THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED. 
          IF THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHOOSES TO HAVE A GATED COMMUNITY, AS OURS DOES IN SOME AREAS, I'M PERFECTLY HAPPY WITH THEM PAYING FOR THEIR ROADS. THEY SHOULD. 
          THEY KNEW THAT UP FRONT, AND THEY CHOSE TO GO INTO A GATED COMMUNITY. BUT FOR RIVERTOWN TO CHANGE THE RULES AFTER TEN YEARS JUST DOESN'T SEEM RIGHT. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. 
          >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? 
          >> JOE, 1005 BLACK BERRY LANE. IF THIS REMAINED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, WE WOULD HAVE HEARD NOTHING ABOUT ANY OF THIS. 
          FROM MY STANDPOINT, I'M REALLY HAPPY THAT IT'S ON THE REGULAR 
          [06:20:02]
AGENDA. I DON'T KNOW A LOT OF THIS STUFF. AND IT'S BEEN VERY EDUCATIONAL FOR ME. SO I APPRECIATE THAT IT IS ON THE REGULAR AGENDA. I THINK THAT WAS THE PURPOSE WAS TO LET THE COMMUNITY, LET THE PUBLIC HEAR WHAT THESE ISSUES ARE, THIS IN SOME CASES, THE COUNTY IS UP FRONT SAYING YOU WILL OWN YOUR OWN ROADS. AND WHAT SCOTT HAS MENTIONED HERE IN TERMS OF PRECEDENT, I AGREE WITH HIM COMPLETELY. 
          I DON'T THINK IT WAS EVER THE INTENT, IT IF I WILL, OF OF DOING ANYTHING OTHER THAN THAN SCOTT WAS ADVOCATING. 
          THIS IS FOR EDUCATION. I WANT TO THANK THE COMMISSION FOR MOVE THIS TO THE JEBD. I'LL SAY THE SAME THING FOR THE NEXT ITEM AS WELL. I WON'T COME BACK UP AND SAY 
          THAT. >> THANK YOU, SIR. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> JUDY, 101. 
          JUST ONE COMMENT. I DON'T KNOW A LOT ABOUT THIS. 
          I LIKE THE IDEA OF A GATED COMMUNITY. 
          THE VIDEODISK FOR PUBLIC USE. IT'S IN ANOTHER COMMUNITY. 
          >> MILL CREEK ESTATE. HOW MUCH WILL IT COST THE COUNTY TO PROVIDE MAINTENANCE ON THESE ROADS. 
          JUST THOSE FEW ROADS RIGHT THERE. 
          NOT THE OLD ONES THAT WERE DEDICATED THAT IS NOT PART OF THE HISTORIC EVENT OR PLACES IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. 
          THEY ARE DEDICATED TO SHEER OFF THE COST. 
          THAT'S HOW IT GOES. HOW MUCH WILL THESE FEW ROADS IF THEY ARE DEDICATED TO THE COUNTY WILL COST THE COUNTY AND THE PEOPLE WHO DON'T LIVE TO USE THOSE PUBLIC ROADS BECAUSE IF THEY HAVE PEOPLE JUST DRIVING AROUND ON THEM, THEY ARE PROBABLY GETTING COPS CALLED ON THEM BECAUSE THEY HAVE PEOPLE JUST USING THEM AND THEY DON'T LIVE THERE. 
          HOW MUCH WILL IT COST IN MAINTENANCE? DID THEY HAVE THAT TIME? OR THEY JUST TAKE OUR WORD FOR IT. THANK YOU. 
          >> ANYONE ELSE? >> ST. AUGUSTINE. 
          WHEN YOU PASS THIS THING, MY CONCERN IN READING IS THIS STARTED BACK IN '06. THESE THINGS CHANGE, CHANGE, CHANGE. YOU COULD DO IT. 
          THERE'S A RIGHT WAY TO DO IT. I WAS CONCERNED WHENEVER YOU READ THE DESCRIPTION AND EVERYTHING OF WHAT THEY WANT TO DO, ROADWAY SYSTEM, THEY REMAIN PRIVATE. 
          MAYBE PROPOSED FOR DEDICATION, MAYBE, MAYBE, MAYBE. 
          AND THEN THE WATER IS GOING TO GO THROUGH JEA. 
          IF IT THAT GOES, IT GOES. THE THING IS WHEN YOU WH YOU PASS IT, PLEASE, FOR THE CITIZENS AND THE TAXPAYERS AND THE ONES LIVING AROUND THIS, AND THE ONES LIVING IN IT, WE WILL KNOW THIS IS THE ROAD THAT YOU TAKE CARE OF, AND THIS IS THE ROAD WE TAKE CARE OF IT. THAT NEEDS TO BE CLEAR. 
          MAYBE, MAYBE, MAYBE, NO, NO, NO. WE'RE HERE. 
          LET'S GET IT NAILED DOWN IN 2025 SO THAT IN FIVE YEARS, SOMEONE COMES BACK HERE AND THEY DIDN'T TAKE CARE OF THE ROADS, WELL, IT WAS YOUR ROAD. IT WAS YOUR ROAD. 
          YOU SHOULD HAVE TAKEN CARE OF IT. 
          PLEASE, AND I WILL BE BACK UP FOR THE NEXT ONE, HOW YOU WRITE THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT. IT TELLS US WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON. THE GENTLEMAN WHO DOESN'T WANT TO PAY, I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT EVERYTHING CHANGES. 
          YOU NEVER KNOW. SO PLEASE, FOR THE RESIDENTS TO KNOW AND THE PEOPLE THAT ARE LISTENING TO THIS TO UNDERSTAND, WE WILL BE SPECIFIC SO THAT THERE WON'T BE ANY QUESTIONS WHEN IT COMES BACK HERE, IF IT COMES BACK HERE. 
          THIS IS MY ONLY CONCERN ON THIS. I'VE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE 
          [06:25:03]
MAYBE, MAYBE, MAYBE. I COULDN'T SAY SOME OF THE OTHER TIMES. THAT CONCERNS ME A LOT. 
          THIS IS LEGAL MUM BO JUMBO. NOTHING PERSONAL. 
          DON'T TAKE IT PERSONAL. CLARIFICATION SHOULD BE FOR THOSE OF US WHO FORTUNATELY DIDN'T GO TO LAW SCHOOL. 
          BUT WE UNDERSTAND ENGLISH VERY PLAINLY. 
          IT'S A SIMPLE LANGUAGE. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          >> BACK TO THE BOARD. ANY QUESTIONS? 
          >> DO WE HAVE -- >> JUST ONE POINT OF CLARIFICATION. I'M SORRY. 
          I JUST WANTED TO MAKE TWO QUICK POINTS OF CLARIFICATION. 
          ONE IS THE RIVERTOWN PUD INCLUDES THE LANGUAGE ABOUT MAY REMAIN PRIVATE, MAYBE CONVEYED OR PROPOSED TO DEDICATION. 
          WE'RE NOT SEEKING TO MODIFY THE PUD. 
          AND I ALSO WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THE ROADS THAT ARE IN THE AREAS ARE NOT YET PLATTED. I THINK I STATED THAT INCORRECTLY. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT 
          FOR THE RECORD. >> YOU CAN TELL THE PRIVATE ROADS FROM THE PUBLIC ROADS HOW? IT'S THE ONES THAT ARE IN BLUE. 
          AND THEN THE PRIVATE ROADS ARE THE ONES THAT ARE COLORED IN 
          PINK. >> THE PRIVATE ROADS ARE GATED. 
          YES, I'M SORRY. >> YOU SAID NO. 
          ALL RIGHT. >> DJ SMITH. 
          I DID WANT WANT TO CLARIFY ONE THING THAT WAS MENTIONED. 
          I WOULD SAY OVER TWO-THIRDS OF THE SECTION HAS BEEN DEDICATED, WHICH LEAVES TWO COMMUNITIES AND MAIN STREET 5 LEFT TO BE DEDICATED. I'D ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT WITH MAIN STREET FIVE, WE DO HAVE A NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, AS EVERYONE IS AWARE OF THAT'S GETTING READY TO OPEN THIS FALL, WHICH IS AN ACCESS THROUGH RIVERTOWN TO GET TO THAT. 
          THERE'S ANOTHER SCHOOL, A LITTLE CLOSER THAT WE RECENTLY DEDICATED, WHICH WILL BE ANOTHER SCHOOL GOING THERE FOR PUBLIC 
          ACCESS. >> GREAT. 
          ALL RIGHT. >> MOTION? 
          >> COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST? >> YES. 
          A QUICK COMMENT. YOU FORCED ME TO CONSIDER WHEN WE SHOULD -- AT THE LAST MEETING, YOU ASKED WHEN SHOULD WE HAVE THE COUNTY PAY FOR IT. I HAVE HAD TIME TO CONSIDER THAT. THIS HELPED ME CLARIFY. 
          IT'S ONE THING AT THE OUTSET THEY KNOW UP FRONT. 
          WHAT WE LEARNED WITH THIS PLAT IS THAT THIS WAS UNANTICIPATED. 
          SO TO SLAP POTENTIALLY 10,000 RESIDENTS WITH AN UNANTICIPATED EXPENSE, IT'S NOT SOMETHING I'M WILLING TO DO. 
          MOVING TO ADOPT. APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT PARCEL 
          39  1. >> SECOND. 
          >> WE HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR? 
          >> YES. >> COMMISSIONER MURPHY? 
          >> YES. >> I'M A QUESTION. 
          [7. PLAT 2024-41 Silverleaf Market Loop Road. The subject of this Resolution is Final Plat approval for Silverleaf Market Loop Road. This project consists of 3.18 acres and the platting/dedication of roadway with no residential lots. The road right of way designated as Fox Squirrel Drive is proposed to be dedicated to the County. Per the Silverleaf PUD Ordinance 2021-93, the interior roadway system may remain private, may be conveyed to a CDD or an applicable HOA or POA, or be dedicated to the County subject to acceptance by the County. Provided all project roads meet applicable St. Johns County standards, the County will accept ownership and maintenance of all roads within the Silverleaf PUD. This plat is consistent with previous road dedications throughout portions of the Silverleaf Plantation Development and has been found to be in compliance with the Silverleaf Plantation Planned Unit Development. A Required Improvements Bond in the amount of $330,858.93 was filed with the Clerk’s office. A Required Improvements Bond in the amount of $170,382.00 will be required for maintenance. Water and sewer will be provided by St. Johns County Utilities.]
          ARNOLD? >> YES. 
          >> THERE WE GO. 5-0 PASSES ON TO THE NEXT ONE. 
          >> THIS ONE IS A LITTLE EASESIER. 
          ELLEN AVERY SMITH. WE ALL JUST SAVE YOU THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE CHAPTER 177 FLORIDA STATUTES. 
          WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY WITH RESPECT TO SILVERSILVER LE MARKET LOOP ROAD, AND I'LL SHOW YOU THAT IT IS LITERALLY PLATTING A ROAD. AND SO THIS IS HOW THE ROAD IS BEING DEDICATED TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY. 
          IT WILL BE CALLED FOX SQUIRREL DRIVE. 
          THIS IS A COMMERCIAL PARCEL. THESE WILL BE RESIDENCE SHL DEVELOPMENT. YOU SEE SILVER LEAF PARKWAY. 
          SO ALL ROADS THAT ARE PUBLICALLY AVAILABLE AND PEOPLE WHO LIVE OUTSIDE OF SILVER LEAF ALL OF THE TIME. 
          WITH THE DIFFERENCE ALSO, SO ON THIS PLAT, THAT ROAD IS BEING PROPOSED TO BE DEDICATED OR THE RIGHT-OF- IS PROPOSED TO BEING DEDICATED TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY. 
          AND THE PUD FOR SUBTLE INVESTIGATOR LEAF SAYS WILL BE PROVIDED ALL ROADS MEAN THE STANDARDS. 
          SO WITH THAT, I BELIEVE THE PUD, WHICHES WAS APPROVED BY THIS 
          [06:30:02]
MODIFICATION WAS APPROVED BY THIS BOARD LAST YEAR, AND COMMISSIONER JOSEPH, YOU MAY RECALL THAT THERE'S ACTUALLY ANOTHER PAGE IN THE PUD WHERE AT THAT HEARING WHEN THE PUD WAS APPROVED LAST YEAR, YOU ASKED FOR ONE OF THE ROADS THAT WOULD GO THROUGH PARCEL 40 TO BE PRIVATE, WHICH THE TEAM AGREED TO ON THE FLOOR. THEN THE BOARD VOTED TO APPROVE THAT MODIFICATION. SO NOT ALL OF THE ROADS WITHIN SILVER LEAF WILL BE PUBLICLY DEDICATED, BUT THE ONES THAT ARE CONSTRUCTED TO COUNTY STANDARDS THAT ARE ALLOWED TO BE SO IN THE PU DURKS DO HAVE THAT LEGAL RIGHT. 
          >> ANY QUESTIONS? >> PUBLIC COMMENT? 
          >> WE'LL NOW HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 7. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON, MA'AM. >> BJ, ST. AUGUSTINE. 
          IF YOU ALL ARE SATISFIED WITH THE PRESENTATION, AGAIN, THE TERMINOLOGY, IF YOU KNOW WHICH ROADS THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT IS OURS AND WILL BE OURS, THE COUNTY, AND WHICH WILL BE THEIRS, BECAUSE ONCE AGAIN, MAY REMAIN PRIVATE, CDD OR APPLICABLE TO HOA OR DEDICATED TO THE COUNTY, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, I WANT TO KNOW WHICH ONE THE COUNTY IS ACCEPTING AS OWNERSHIP. WAS THAT CLARIFIED -- THE ONE THAT IS IN THE AIR. DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHERE THE COUNTY ROADS ARE SO THE PUBLIC WILL KNOW WHERE THE COUNTY ROADS ARE AND WHERE THE PRIVATE ROADS ARE, AND HOW COME THIS IS BY ST. 
          JOHNS COUNTY? WHY IS IT EASIER TO GET TO THIS ONE THAN THAT OTHER ONE THAT'S GOING TO BE USING THE JEA? SO AS LONG AS YOU ALL KNOW IN YOUR MINDS WHICH ROADS TO SWITCH AND IT'S CLARIFIED THROUGHTHROU PRESENTED HERE IN THE WRITING, THEN THAT'S FINE. THEN I DO REALLY APPRECIATE THIS BEING PUT ON ON REAL AGENDA. REALLY AND TRULY, I AM HAPPY, HAPPY A AT 4:15 IN THE AFTERNOON. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU. 
          ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE PUBLIC 
          COMMENT. >> DO WE HAVE A MOTION? 
          >> I HAVE A QUESTION. >> I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH ANY CDDS IN IT SILVER LEAF. CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHERE THOSE ARE? DO THEY HAVE CDDS? THERE ARE SIGNS EVERYWHERE. 
          >> THERE ARE NO CDDS IN SILVER LEAF. 
          TO CLARIFY, I JUST GOT CLIR FATE INDICATION, ANY ROADS WITHIN SILVER LEAF THAT ARE GATED WILL BE PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. 
          ROADS THAT ARE NOT GATED AND ARE CONSTRUCTED TO COUNTY STANDARDS WILL BE DEDICATED. 
          >> THAT IS WRITTEN RIGHT INTO THE PUD , COMPARED TO THE OTHER 
          ONE? >> THANK YOU. 
          >> MOTION . >> I WILL MAKE A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT 25. APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT FOR SILVERLEAF ORCHID LOOP. 
          >> SECOND. >> COMMISSIONER ARNOLD? COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST ? I AM A YES. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR? 
          [8. County Attorney Advisory Review Committee (ARC) Recruitment Update. Status update regarding the County Attorney Advisory Review Committee (ARC) recruitment for the next County Attorney. The presentation will include a summary of the recruitment timeline, a presentation of the County Attorney ARC's recommended candidates for final consideration by the Board of County Commissioners, and details regarding the special meeting scheduled for 3/25/2025.]
COMMISSIONER MURPHY? THAT PASSES 5-0. 
          >> ALL RIGHT, COUNTY ATTORNEY UP DATE. 
          >> I ALMOST SAID GOOD MORNING, GOOD AFTERNOON. COMMISSIONERS . 
          I'M DESIREE WARNER, THE HR DIRECTOR, AND I'M HERE TO GIVE YOU WHAT MAY BE A FINAL UPDATE, DEPENDING ON THE COUNTY ATTORNEY SEARCH. FIRST OFF I WANTED TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT OUR AGENDA TODAY. WE ARE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT THE RECRUITMENT TIMELINE, TO GIVE AN OVERVIEW TO OUR COMMISSIONERS AND THE AUDIENCE. WE WILL TALK ABOUT CANDIDATE RECOMMENDATIONS AS WELL AS THE SPECIAL MEETING CONSIDERATIONS THAT WE HAVE FOR MARCH 25. STARTING WITH OUR TIMELINE, JUST A REMINDER THAT THE BOARD DID DIRECT THE RESOURCES OFFICE TO CONDUCT A SEARCH, AND THAT HAPPENED MY SECOND DAY HERE, ON DECEMBER 3RD. SO THAT WAS QUITE THE JOURNEY, AND I APPRECIATE THIS. 
          WE DID ADVERTISE THAT POSITION ORIGINALLY FOR 30 DAYS, STARTED THAT POSITION DECEMBER 10, THAT WENT TO JANUARY 10. THEN MADE AN 
          [06:35:04]
UPDATE TO THE BOARD TO ASK FOR DIRECTION LOOKING FORWARD, SO WE DID GET SOME PERMISSION THERE FOR SPECIAL COMMITTEE MEETING THAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN. EXCUSE ME, JUST A SECOND, MY EYES ARE NOT THAT GREAT. YOU DID APPOINT A COMMITTEE. THAT COMMITTEE CONSISTED OF COMMISSIONER TAYLOR, COMMISSIONER MURPHY, AND MYSELF. SO WE WERE CHARGED WITH PUTTING A BROAD SEARCH AND ALSO REVIEWING THIS CANDIDATES. ON THE 23RD WE DID HAVE CONSENSUS AFTER LOOKING AT OUR POOL THAT WE THOUGHT WE COULD DO A LITTLE BIT BETTER, SO WE EXPANDED OUR SEARCH, WE REFRESH OUR ADVERTISEMENT, AND WE ALSO INCLUDED A REFRESHED SALARY THAT WE THOUGHT WOULD BE MORE ATTRACTIVE TO APPLICANTS. SO WE DID , WE FOUND TO BE SUCCESSFUL THAT WE HAD A BROADER POOL. THAT WENT FOR ANOTHER 30 DAYS. SO, WITH THAT, THAT RAN THROUGH FEBRUARY 21ST. SO WE, AGAIN, THAT WAS A 60 DAY ADD RUN THAT WE HAD. IN MULTIPLE LOCATIONS. THE COMMITTEE MET ON THE 27TH TO REVIEW THOSE CANDIDATES AND TO SHORTLIST. FROM THERE WE SCHEDULED INTERVIEWS FOR FIVE CANDIDATES AT THAT TIME, ONE WITHDREW, SO WE HAD TO INTRODUCE FOUR CANDIDATES. THEN, FROM THERE, WE NARROWED THE POOL DOWN TO THREE. SO WITH THAT, I WANTED TOPROVIDE A QUICK SUMMARY FOR YOU. THE FIRST CANDIDATE THAT WE HAVE IS BRADLEY BOOT ICE. HE IS CURRENTLY EMPLOYED AS ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNCIL AT THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE. HE HAS PRIOR EXPERIENCE AS AN ATTORNEY WITH ST. JOHNS COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. HE HAS A STRONG BACKGROUND IN LITIGATION AND LITIGATION AVOIDANCE. OUR SECOND CANDIDATE IS RICHARD KOMANDO, HE IS CURRENTLY RETAINED BY ST. JOHNS COUNTY AS THE INTERIM COUNTY ATTORNEY THROUGH BRADLEY, GARRISON, AND KOMANDO P.A. HE DOES HAVE OTHER CLIENTS. PUTNAM COUNTY, BRADFORD COUNTY, AND PUTNAM COUNTY IS BASICALLY A SHORTLIST FOR YOU. PRIOR EXPERIENCE WITH THE OFFICE ESTATE OF ATTORNEY. AND A STRONG BACKGROUND IN CHILD WELFARE, CHILD ADVOCACY THROUGH THE GUARDIAN AD LITEM PROGRAM. THEN OUR FINAL CANDIDATE THAT WE HAVE IS MICHAEL RODRIGUEZ. HE IS CURRENTLY EMPLOYED AS THE CHIEF DEPUTY ATTORNEY AT THE CITY OF PALM BAY. HE HAS PRIOR EXPERIENCE WITH VOLUSIA COUNTY AND HE HAS A STRONG BACKGROUND IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT, SUPPORTING BOTH COUNTY AND CITY GOVERNMENTS. SO THOSE ARE YOUR THREE CANDIDATES THAT THE COMMITTEE HAS PRESENTED FOR YOU. AND THEN, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO NOW IS JUST PROPOSED TO USE SOME CONSIDERATIONS FOR THAT SPECIAL COMMITTEE MEETING THAT IS SCHEDULED FOR TUESDAY. WE ARE MAKING THE RECOMMENDATION FOR THE FINALIST CANDIDATE INTERVIEWS AFTER SPECIAL MEETING SCHEDULED FOR TUESDAY, MARCH 25TH. THAT IS ONE CONSIDERATION FOR THE FINALIST CANDIDATES . 
          RICHARD KOMANDO AND MICHAEL RODRIGUEZ. WE ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE INTERVIEW QUESTIONS THAT ARE SUBMITTED. WE HAVE MAGGIE LORI OF, WHO HAS BEEN THE ASSISTANT TO YOU AND TO THE COMMITTEE, WHO I BELIEVE HAS MET WITH EACH OF YOU, HAS TALKED ABOUT THE UPCOMING MEETING, TO HAVE YOU THINK ABOUT YOUR QUESTIONS. AND THEN PROVIDE THOSE BACK TO HER SO THAT WE CAN MAKE SURE THERE ARE NO DUPLICATES AND THAT WE HAVE MEANINGFUL QUESTIONS FOR EACH OF THE CANDIDATES. WE ALSO ARE GOING TO BROADCAST RECORD THAT AT THE INTERVIEWS. WE WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN THESE INTERVIEWS AT 10:5TH 10 A.M. BASED ON THE CANDIDATE REQUEST WITH HIS SCHEDULE. AND ALSO, CONFIRM THE LENGTH OF TIME FOR THOSE INTERVIEWS. SO THAT WILL BE PRESENTED BEFORE YOU TODAY IF, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU HAVE FIVE QUESTIONS IN FIVE MINUTES, THAT'S 25 MINUTES FOR THAT. SO IF YOU THEN EXPAND THAT TO TWO QUESTIONS, WE ARE LOOKING AT ABOUT AN HOUR. SO THAT WILL BE CONSIDERATION. TO GIVE YOURSELVES TIME AND FOLLOW-UP, I WOULD SUGGEST AT LEAST 45 MINUTES TO AN HOUR THAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER. AND THEN, ANY OTHER CONSIDERATIONS FROM YOU . AT THIS TIME, IF YOU WOULD JUST GIVE US YOUR FEEDBACK ON THOSE , AND CONSENSUS WOULD BE GREAT. 
          AND ANY QUESTIONS THAT I CAN ANSWER. 
          >> COMMISSIONER MURPHY? >> YEAH, I WOULD THINK WE WOULD NEED AT LEAST AN HOUR FOR CANDIDATE FOR THIS, FOR THE 
          [06:40:03]
INTERVIEW PROCESS. SO I WOULD SUGGEST AN HOUR. 
          >> MY ISSUE IS, FIRST OF ALL, I'M KIND OF CONCERNED BECAUSE I WATCHED THE VIDEOS AND I JUST REALIZED THAT RICHARD KOMANDO IS COMING AS A FIRM, NOT AS A PERSON. SO THAT IS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THING THAT WE ADVERTISE. I WAS JUST CURIOUS WHAT THE REST OF THE BOARD THOUGHT ABOUT THAT. ANY 
          THOUGHTS? >> YES, CHAIR, IF YOU DON'T MIND, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK. MAYBE IT SHOULD NOT GO TO MR. KOMANDO, MAYBE I SHOULD GO TO OUR COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR OR PERHAPS DESIREE WITH HR. WHAT DID WE EXCLUDE A FIRM FROM APPLYING? 
          >> WE DID LOOK BACK AT YOUR QUESTION ON THAT, AND WE DID NOT SPECIFICALLY ADVERTISE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. WE DID HAVE AN EMPLOYMENT APPLICATION THAT THE CANDIDATES COULD LEAD INTO, WE DID LOOK AT ORDINANCE FOR LANGUAGE IN REGARDS TO THAT, AND THE ORDINANCE THAT WE REVIEWED IS ORDINANCE NUMBER 2003-64 . IN THAT IT DOES NOT RETAIN ANY LANGUAGE IN REGARDS TO EMPLOYEE. 
          IT IS SILENT ON THAT. IT WAS NOT VERY CLEAR ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. 
          >> I JUST HAD A COUPLE OF FIRMS CALLED TO SAY THAT THEY WOULD'VE PUT THAT IN HAD THEY KNOWN. THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS -- 
          >> MATTE FINISH? >> EXCUSE ME? -- 
          >> SHE JUST WANTS TO FINISH -- >> I DIDN'T KNOW SHE WAS STILL TALKING. IT'S HARD WHEN I DON'T SEE A LIGHT OVER HERE. 
          >> I APOLOGIZE. THANK YOU, DESIREE. I JUST WANTED CLARIFICATION ON THAT, BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING IS MOST ATTORNEYS ARE NOT JUST INDIVIDUAL PROVIDERS. THEY ARE WITH A FIRM. AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DID NOT EXCLUDE ONE OR THE OTHER. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT 
          CLARIFICATION. >> OKAY. I WAS GOING TO ASK MS. ANDREWS, MR. KOMANDO, IS HE AN EMPLOYEE OF OUR COUNTY? 
          >> HE IS UNDER CONTRACT WITH THE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS. 
          >> DOES HE RECEIVE A PAYCHECK FROM THE COUNTY? 
          >> HE DOES. I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS INDIVIDUAL OR AS A TERM. 
          >> THAT IS THE QUESTION I HAVE. IF IT IS AS A FIRM HE IS NOT AN EMPLOYEE OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY. DO YOU RECEIVE A PAYCHECK FROM THE 
          FIRM OR FROM THE COUNTY? >> FROM THE FERMENT. 
          >> SO WHEN YOU THOUGHT OUR APPLICATION YOU ARE AN EMPLOYEE OF THE COUNTY AREA SO YOU ARE NOT AN EMPLOYEE OF THE COUNTY. 
          >> NO, I SAID I WAS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE FERMENT. 
          >> NO, IT DOESN'T. IT SAYS DO YOU WORK FOR THE COUNTY, YOU 
          SAID YES. >> I AM WORKING AS YOUR INTERIM 
          COUNTY ATTORNEY. >> OKAY. 
          >> HE WORKS FOR THE COUNTY. >> HANG ON. LET ME LOOK AT THIS 
          THE SECOND. >> EMPLOYES CAN BE A W-2 EMPLOYEE OR A CONTRACT EMPLOYEE, JUST LIKE YOU ISSUE 1099S FOR 
          EMPLOYEES OR W-2S. >> IT WAS A LITTLE CONFUSING ON THAT, AS WELL AS , I CHECKED WITH A LOT OF OTHER LARGE COUNTIES, AND PEOPLE ARE PRETTY SHOCKED THAT WE WOULD HAVE A FIRM WHEN WE ALREADY HAVE FIVE ATTORNEYS ON STAFF. ESPECIALLY WITH THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST THAT CAN HAPPEN. AND I'M JUST SAYING THIS, ALSO, THAT I AM NOT GOING TO GIVE YOU THE QUESTIONS AHEAD OF TIME. BUT WE ARE ALLOWED HOW MANY QUESTIONS? 
          >> 1-2 . >> SO I WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH THOSE QUESTIONS THAT DAY. SO PUT MY NAME ON THERE AND I WILL PROVIDE. BECAUSE THE QUESTIONS TO A PERSON WHO WORKS FOR A FIRM ARE GOING TO BE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT TO THE FULL-TIME PERSON THAT WILL BE ON STAFF HERE. AND THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS IN THE AD, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE A FULL-TIME PRESENCE HERE ALL DAY LONG. SO IF THAT IS ALL RIGHT WITH YOU. 
          >> IT WOULD BE AT YOUR PLEASURE. 
          >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU. >> RUSSIAN, MA'AM. DID WE ADVERTISE FOR A COUNTY ATTORNEY? THAT'S WHAT WE ADVERTISE FOR, 
          RIGHT? >> YES, WE DID. 
          >>'S OUR EXPECTATIONS GOING FORWARD ARE THAT ANYONE WHO IS QUALIFIED FOR THIS POSITION WILL, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE ARE HIRING A FULL-TIME ATTORNEY. 
          >> YES, SIR. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST? 
          >> THANK YOU. I THINK WHEN YOU SAID THAT SOME PEOPLE HAD ISSUES, BECAUSE OF POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, I MEAN, WE HAVE HAD, AND WE ARE DIRECTING THIS AT MR. KOMANDO, 
          -- >> NO, SIR, THE FIRM. 
          >> ABOUT THE FIRM >> THE FIRM HAS OTHER CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. PROBABLY WITH THEIR COUNTY AND OUR COUNTY, I'M SURE WE ALL CROSS PATHS. ACTUALLY, THERE WAS ONE WHERE HE WAS AN 
          [06:45:03]
INTERVIEW ABOUT SOLID WASTE, SO DO WE PAY FOR THE ATTORNEY TO LOOK AT THAT? WHEN YOU CANNOT DO THAT BECAUSE OF CONFLICT OF 
          INTEREST? >> NO, YOU ARE ALREADY PAYING 
          THE ONE TO LOOK AT IT. >> OKAY, IT SOUNDED LIKE YOU ASKED SOMEONE IN YOUR FIRM TO LOOK AT THAT. I JUST WATCH THE INTERVIEW, I DON'T KNOW, I WAS NOT A QUESTION THAT. 
          >> YOU CAN ALWAYS ASK ME. >> BUT THAT WAS A CONFLICT FOR 
          YOU. >> IT WAS THE APPEARANCE OF A CONFLICT, AND TO AVOID EVEN THE APPEARANCE I MADE SURE THAT I 
          WAS NOT THERE. >> THAT IS MY. 
          >> OKAY. >> THAT WAS THE ONE TIME IN THE PAST YEAR THAT I'VE BEEN HERE. 
          >> I UNDERSTAND, BUT GOING FORWARD THERE'S GOING TO BE A 
          LOT MORE THAN THAT, I'M SURE. >> I DON'T KNOW WHAT A LOT MORE 
          WOULD MEAN. >> YEAH, I THINK THAT IS MAKING AN ASSUMPTION AND NOT GIVING THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT. THESE QUESTIONS ARE SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO MR. KOMANDO'S 
          CANDIDACY. >> I'M NOT ATTACKING THEM, I'M GUESSING THAT THOSE ARE MY CONCERNS. 
          >> YOU ARE SAYING YOU ARE SURE THERE WILL BE MORE, YOU'RE PROJECTING DOUBT ABOUT THE FUTURE OF HIS EMPLOYMENT HERE. I THINK YOU MAY NOT WANT TO CALL IT AN ATTACK, BUT IT IS TRYING TO CAST DOUBT BASED ON SOMETHIN THAT HASN'T HAPPENED OR MAY NOT EVER HAPPEN. SO I'M NOT SURE THAT THAT IS FAIR. I THINK EVERY CANDIDATE DESERVES TO BE FAIRLY VETTED BY THE BOARD AND NOT HAVE DOUBTS THROWN OUT PRIOR TO THE FORMAL HEARING THAT WE ARE GOING 
          TO HAVE. >> IS NOT A CANDIDATE. HIS FIRM AS A CANDIDATE. THAT'S A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THING. 
          >> HIS NAME IS ON THE LIST. >>'S CONTRACT WILL BE WITH THE FIRM, NOT WITH HIM. SO HE'S KIND OF NOT REALLY DOING WHAT 
          THE OTHER TWO ARE DOING. >> I THINK YOU ARE PICKING NITS. 
          >> I DON'T KNOW, THAT SORT OF TIME LOOKING AT IT. I'M JUST BLACK AND WHITE ABOUT THAT STUFF. SORRY. 
          >> I'M SORRY, TOO. >> IF I MAY. 
          >> MADAM CHAIR. >> COMMISSIONER MURPHY HAS THE 
          FLOOR, THEN WE WILL GO TO YOU. >> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. MY QUESTION IS, THE QUESTION IS ABOUT RICH KOMANDO IS PROBABLY BEST SUITED FOR WHEN WE INTERVIEW THESE GUYS AND WE GET TOGETHER TO DETERMINE WHO WE ARE GOING TO INVITE, THOSE ARE CONSIDERATIONS. AND I AGREE, THEY ARE CONSIDERATIONS. BUT PROBABLY NOT FOR THIS PARTICULAR BOAT. GOING FORWARD. FOR THIS UPDATE. IT'S GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT WE WILL DEAL WITH AT THE TIME WHEN WE MAKE A DECISION, IF HE ENDS UP ON THE 
          TOP OF THE LIST. >> THANK YOU, SIR. COMMISSIONER 
          ARNOLD? >> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I GUESS I WOULD JUST GO BACK TO DESIREE . DID OUR JOB HOSTING 
          EXCLUDE FIRMS APPLYING? >> NO MA'AM, IT DID NOT. 
          >> IT JUST SAID COUNTY ATTORNEY. THAT DID NOT SAY COUNTY ATTORNEY 
          OR A FIRM. >> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER JOSEPH. DESIREE, DID OUR JOB APPLICATION EXCLUDE FIRMS FROM 
          APPLYING? >> NO MA'AM, IT DID NOT SPEAK 
          TO THAT. >> OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          >> ANYTHING ELSE? THANK YOU FOR THE UPDATE. 
          >> NO, I MEAN, I WOULD JUST SAY, COMMISSIONER JOSEPH, I WOULD SAY THAT I DON'T KNOW THAT I WOULD NECESSARILY CONSIDER THE FIRM'S CLIENT LIST AS A CONFLICT. SO MUCH AS A STRENGTH . NOT JUST FROM EXPERIENCE, BUT IN HELPING US ALL WORK MORE COHESIVELY AS A 
          REGION. >> THANK YOU, MA'AM. 
          >> OKAY, NO MORE QUESTIONS? >> NO, THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          >> DO WE NEED PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS? 
          >> NO, BECAUSE OF PRESENTATION. IT'S A PRESENTATION ONLY, SIR. 
          I'M SORRY. BUT YOU CAN COME TO THE MEETING NEXT TUESDAY. HELLO, 
          [9. Consider appointment to the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee (AHAC). Currently, there are (3) vacancies on the Affordable Housing Committee due to the expiring terms of Gregory Burke and Polly Crabtree, and the resignation of Karl Vierck. A vacancy ad was placed and ran for (30) days. Please find attached for your review and consideration (3) recommendation letters from AHAC and (10) applications: Tracie Sax, Dist. 1; Gregory Burke, Dist. 2; Christopher Walker, Dist. 3; Marvell Ford, Dist. 3; Paul Morris, Dist. 3; Randolph Jones, Dist. 3; Laila Iarossi, Dist. 4; Anna Straughan, Dist. 5; Barb Puryear, Dist. 5; Polly Crabtree, Dist. 5.]
          JOANNE . >> GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS. JOANNE SPENCER, SENIOR ASSISTANT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. I'M HERE WITH THE LAST BUT NOT LEAST ITEM OF THE DAY, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER NINE. THIS IS TO CONSIDER THE WOMEN'S TO THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE. 
          THERE ARE THREE VACANCIES ON THIS BOARD. TWO ARE DUE TO EXPIRED TERMS, AND ONE FOR RESIGNATION. I WOULD ASK YOU TO CHECK YOUR PACKET , FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION THERE ARE THREE RECOMMENDATION LETTERS AND 10 APPLICATIONS. I WILL ADVISE YOU THAT THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE OR AHAC DID PUT FORTH A RECOMMENDATION TO REAPPOINT GREG BURKE, REAPPOINT POLLY CRABTREE, INTO A POINT TRACIE SAX FOR A PARTIAL TERM. 
          IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS I'M ON STANDBY. 
          >> ANY QUESTIONS? >> THE ADVISER FOR THAT BOARD IS COMMISSIONER TAYLOR. DO WE WANT TO MAKE A MOTION, OR DO YOU WANT TO GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ALL THREE? WHAT WOULD YOU PREFER? 
          >> YEAH, WE CAN GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          >> FOR ALL THREE? >> YEAH, OKAY. 
          >> PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER NINE. GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          >> GOOD AFTERNOON. GREG BURKE, 434 MONTSERRAT DRIVE IN SAINT 
          [06:50:06]
AUGUSTINE. THIS WILL BE MY THIRD YEAR SERVING ON THE BOARD, AND I FIND IT CRITICALLY AND THAT AN ARCHITECT BE INVOLVED IN THIS BOARD, AND WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE DOING SO. THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE, WE 
          WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT. >> ANY QUESTIONS OR EMOTION? 
          >> I APPRECIATE HIM BEING HERE TODAY. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO REAPPOINT GREG BURKE AND POLLY CRABTREE, ALSO TRACIE SAX TO THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMITTEE. 
          >> SECOND. >> SECOND. 
          >> TO COMMISSIONER TAYLOR, TRACIE SAX IS NOT A REAPPOINTMENT. YOU WILL BE APPOINTING HER FOR A PARTIAL 
          TERM. >> SO PROBABLY DO HER SEPARATE. 
          DO THE FIRST TWO TOGETHER. >> OKAY, I WILL DEWHURST SEPARATE. LET'S APPOINT GREG BURKE AND POLLY CRABTREE , SO THEY WILL EACH HAVE A FULL FOUR YEAR TERM. 
          >> SECOND. >> ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE. COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST? COMMISSIONER ARNOLD? 
          >> I'M A YES. COMMISSIONER MURPHY? 
          >> YES. >> COMMISSIONER TAYLOR. 
          >> THAT PASSES 5-0. >> NEXT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR TRACIE SAX FOR A PARTIAL TERM SET TO EXPIRE ON 
          AUGUST 17TH, 2025 >> SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR. COMMISSIONER MURPHY. I'M A YES. 
          COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST. COMMISSIONER ARNOLD. THAT PASSES 5-0. THANK YOU. THANKS, JOANNE. WE ARE NOW AT COMMISSIONER 
          [Commissioners’ Reports]
REPORTS. COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST? 
          >> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I WILL KEEP IT BRIEF. IT HAS BEEN A LONG AND SOME OF YOU HAVE TRAVEL AHEAD. SOME GOOD NEWS FROM AROUND ST. JOHN COUNTY INCLUDES THE PLAYERS CHAMPIONSHIP. I THINK THE WEATHER WAS MADE TO ORDER UP UNTIL SUNDAY, IT WAS ABSOLUTELY GORGEOUS, PEOPLE WERE HAPPY, THE GOLF WAS COMPETITIVE. GREAT TIME FOR ST. JOHNS COUNTY RESIDENTS , AND TO THE POINT EARLIER IN THIS MEETING, YES, IT IS IN ST. 
          JOHN'S COUNTY. THIS IS A ST. JOHNS COUNTY TOURNAMENT, A SOURCE OF PRIDE FOR MANY OF US. SO WELL DONE TO THE PGA TOUR, 
          AND EVERYONE WHO ATTENDED. >> COMMISSIONER ARNOLD. 
          >> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I WILL KEEP IT BRIEF. JUST LIKE COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST. I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU TO OUR AMAZING TEAM, TO OUR AMAZING ADMINISTRATOR, TO FORMER SENATOR TRAVIS HUDSON, TO CURRENT COMMISSIONER CHRISTIAN WHITEHURST, AND THE AMAZING COMMUNITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE, TO COME TO TALLAHASSEE LAST WEEK WITH THE COMMUNITY OF WEST AUGUSTINE, WHERE OUR FIRST COMMITTEE BILL FOR THE BLACK HISTORY MUSEUM PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. IT WAS A DAY THAT WE MADE HISTORY. SO I JUST WANTED TO SEND MY HEARTFELT THANK YOU AND CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL THOSE INVOLVED. THANK YOU. 
          >> WELL DONE. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR? 
          >> YES, I KNOW THAT AT THE LAST MEETING WE ALL HEARD FROM RICHARD MARKEY, WHO SPOKE ABOUT HIS SON THAT SUFFERS FROM SEVERE MENTAL ILLNESS. THAT WAS A VERY MOVING PRESENTATION THAT HE GAVE US. AND I ACTUALLY HAVE A BACKGROUND IN MENTAL HEALTH AND AM VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT IT, AND WHEN HE SPOKE THERE WAS A LOT OF CONCERN REGARDING SOME PROPOSED CUTS OF ABOUT $10.9 MILLION FROM OUR GOVERNOR, FOR THE FACT PROGRAM. AND THAT IS A BIG CONCERN, BECAUSE THIS TEAM ACTUALLY HELPS OVER 100 INDIVIDUALS IN PUTNAM AND ST. JOHN'S, AND IT IS A WONDERFUL TEAM APPROACH. ONE OF THE BIGGEST CHALLENGES WITH MENTAL ILLNESS , ESPECIALLY SEVERE MENTAL ILLNESS, IS COMPLIANCE AND MEDICATION. AND THE OTHER CHALLENGES THAT WE WANT TO DO ALL WE CAN TO KEEP THEM OUT OF JAIL, REDUCE INCARCERATION, AND REDUCE HOSPITALIZATIONS. I WAS AMAZED TO LEARN SO MUCH ABOUT THIS TEAM, AND THAT THE ANNUAL COST IS 1.5 MILLION FOR TREATING OVER 100 INDIVIDUALS, THAT IS AMAZING. WHAT ELSE I LOVED IS THAT THEY SAVED OVER $13.6 MILLION IN ANNUAL SAVINGS FROM HOSPITALIZATIONS. SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO, I WOULD LOVE TO ASK FROM THE BOARD FOR A LETTER OF SUPPORT TO GOVERNOR DESANTIS, AND JUST FOR SUPPORT THAT HE DOES NOT CUT THE FUNDING FOR THOSE VERY, VERY IMPORTANT PROGRAMS FOR MENTALLY ILL. 
          >> MONSIEUR ARNOLD? CONSENSUS. >> I WOULD ABSOLUTELY GIVE 
          [06:55:01]
CONSENSUS. IN FACT, I'M SO GRATEFUL, I BROUGHT THIS UP IN THE LAST MEETING. I HAD REQUESTED A PROCLAMATION FOR THIS. OR AN AGENDA ITEM, ACTUALLY, RATHER AN AGENDA ITEM. 
          AND I'M SO GLAD THAT COMMISSIONER TAYLOR HAS MET WITH THEM, AS WELL, AND IS GOING TO SUPPORT THIS EFFORT. THANK YOU, 
          COMMISSIONER TAYLOR. >> I AM ON BOARD , SO WE HAVE 
          CONSENSUS FOR THAT. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> THAT'S IT? COMMISSIONER MURPHY? 
          >> I HAVE NOTHING TO THIS POINT TODAY. 
          >> I HAVE ONE QUICK THING. STANDING AGAINST ANTI-SEMITISM IS STANDING WITH AMERICA, AND THEY VISITED. BUT I MISS THEM, I WAS NOT IN THAT DAY. SO I'M JUST HOLDING THIS UP HER PEEKABOO BOARD, I APPRECIATE SOMEONE STANDING UP FOR THAT. 
          AND NOW WE ARE ON COUNTY ADMINISTRATORS REPORT. 
          [County Attorney’s Report]
          >> I HAVE NO REPORT TODAY, THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. 
          >> COUNTY ATTORNEY. >> JUST A PUBLIC NOTICE, THE CONCLUSION OF THE FIRST INVESTIGATIVE REPORT WAS DISSEMINATED TO EACH OF YOU. THERE'VE BEEN SOME PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS. THOSE REQUESTS HAVE TO BE REVIEWED FOR REDACTION ISSUES. BUT IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS WE CAN 
          DISCUSS THEM OFF-LINE. THANKS. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT THAT, ESPECIALLY SINCE WE HAD -- 
          >> COMMISSIONER TAYLOR. >> YES, THANK YOU. I DID WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT REGARDING THAT, AND WE ALL HEARD FROM THE GENTLEMAN THIS MORNING REGARDING THE INVESTIGATION, AND HOW IT , HOW THAT OCCURRED. AND HIS THOUGHTS ON IT. I WANTED TO COMMENT THAT THE REPORT OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND RETALIATION IN ST. JOHN'S COUNTY AND WHAT HAPPENED, I MEAN, I HAD ALREADY VOICED MY OBJECTION TO ATTORNEY KOMANDO SELECTING A FIRM THAT HAS A FINANCIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST DUE TO HIS LONG-STANDING RELATIONSHIP WITH DEFENDING THE COUNTY. AND EVEN THE INVESTIGATOR HIMSELF, GARY WHEELER, WROTE IN THE REPORT THAT HE IS NOT INDEPENDENT. SO HOW CAN A FIRM THAT REGULARLY DEFENDS THE COUNTY IN EMPLOYMENT MATTERS BE CONSIDERED A NEUTRAL, INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATOR? IF WE LOOK AT WHAT MR. WHEELER CONCLUDED, EVEN THOUGH HE DID CONCLUDE THAT THERE WAS MISCONDUCT ON THE PART OF THE INDIVIDUAL ACCUSED OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT, FOR SOME REASON THE COMPLAINANT WAS PUT ON ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE BUT NOT THE INSTIGATOR. AND SHE IS STILL ON LEAVE. AND ACCORDING TO AN EMAIL THAT THE COMPLAINANT SENT TO ME, SHE WAS PUT ON ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE FOR A MONTH WITH NO EXPLANATION AS TO WHY , WHEN, OR EVEN IF SHE IS COMING BACK TO WORK. SO WE, THE TAXPAYERS, ARE PAYING HER SALARY EVERY DAY FOR A MONTH AND SHE IS NOT ALLOWED TO DO HER JOB. BEING PUT ON LEAVE WITHOUT BEING TOLD WHY IS ON EXCEPT. IN CONTRAST, THE ALLEGED SEXUAL HARASSER WAS NEVER PUT ON ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE , ACCORDING TO THE SUMMARY. HE WAS SCHEDULED TO MOVE TO A DIFFERENT LOCATION SEVEN DAYS AFTER THE COMPLAINT. SO TWO WOMEN WHO COMPLAINT HAD TO FACE HIM FOR THOSE SEVEN DAYS. AND THAT MEANT THAT THEY COULD EITHER ENCOUNTER HIM IN A PARKING LOT OR WILL ONE OF THEM ALLEGES THAT HE HARASSED HER, AND SHE COULD BE EXPOSED EVEN FURTHER FOR MORE HARASSMENT. WHY WASN'T HE PUT ON LEAVE OR AT LEAST MOVED OUT IMMEDIATELY? I ALSO HAVE TO WONDER IF HE IS RECEIVING ANY GUIDANCE TO ENSURE THAT THERE IS NOT A REPEAT OF THE BEHAVIOR. MR. WHEELER CLAIMS THAT THE COUNTY'S RESPONSE ENSURED THAT NO FURTHER INCIDENTS OCCURRED AFTER THE COMPLAINTS ON AUGUST 5TH , 2024. THAT IS CLEARLY FALSE, BECAUSE BETWEEN AUGUST 5TH AND AUGUST 12, ANOTHER INCIDENT COULD EASILY HAVE OCCURRED, AND THOSE WOMEN SHOULD HAVE BEEN, SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SUBJECTED TO HIM AFTER THE COMPLAINT, IN MY OPINION. WHAT IS VERY CONCERNING IS THAT THE COMPLAINANT WAS NEVER INTERVIEWED BY THE INVESTIGATOR , AS WE HEARD THIS MORNING. HOW CAN MR. WHEELER CONCLUDE THAT THE COMPLAINANT WAS NOT RETALIATED AGAINST IF HE NEVER EVEN INTERVIEWED HER? HE ALL BUT ADMITTED IT WAS RETALIATION WHEN HE WROTE THE CORRECTIVE ACTION WAS TAKEN AGAINST HER, BECAUSE SHE DEMANDED THAT HER SUPERVISOR TAKE DIFFERENT AND STRONGER RESPONSIVE ACTION THAT HE TOOK AND THREATENED TO TAKE THE MATTER TO HUMAN RESOURCES. NOTE THAT SHE HAD TO TAKE THE MATTER TO HUMAN RESOURCES. HER SUPERVISOR DID NOT. MR. WHEELER'S SUMMARY CONCLUDES THAT THE COUNTY CONDUCTED AN APPROPRIATE INVESTIGATION INTO THE ALLEGATIONS, WHICH I DISPUTE FOR THE REASONS I JUST STATED. FURTHERMORE, I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW HOW MUCH THIS REPORT COST US AS TAXPAYERS. 
          >> GO AHEAD. >> YOU COVERED A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT TOPICS. THAT INVESTIGATIVE REPORT DOES NOT SAY THAT THE INVESTIGATOR COULD NOT BE IMPARTIAL, IN FACT, HE SAID THE COMPLETE IMPARTIALITY IS IMPRACTICAL, BECAUSE YOU ARE ALWAYS GOING TO PAY, WHOEVER IT IS THAT IS CONDUCTING THE EVALUATION, THAT THERE ARE NO FIRMS THAT THAT THIS KIND OF WORK THAT DO IT FOR FREE. SO YOUR STATEMENT THAT HE SAID HE COULD NOT BE IMPARTIAL REALLY IS NOT A FAIR DEPICTION OF WHAT HE 
          [07:00:03]
WROTE IN THE REPORT. AS FAR AS THE COMPLAINANT, THE COMPLAINANT IS NOT THE PERSON WHO REPORTED THIS TO YOU. SO THE COMPLAINANT ACTUALLY DID HAVE THEIR ISSUE RESOLVED, AND THE REPORT INDICATED THAT THE COMPLAINANT'S ISSUE WAS TAKEN CARE OF. AS FAR AS HOW WE DISCIPLINED THE INDIVIDUAL WHO WAS THE SUBJECT OF THE COMPLAINT, THE CHALLENGE WITH THAT IS HE DOES NOT WORK FOR US. WE DON'T HAVE AUTHORITY OVER HIM TO SUBJECT HIM. SO WE DID CONTACT OUR CONTRACTOR, WHO DOES HANDLE THAT EMPLOYEE, AND THE ISSUE WAS RESOLVED, AS YOU SAW IN THE REPORT. IN AN APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OF TIME. AS FAR AS WHETHER OR NOT THE PERSON WHO IS MAKING THE COMMENTS WAS INTERVIEWED, THEY WERE OFFERED THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE INTERVIEWED AND CHOSE TO DECLINE. CLAIMING AN A.D.A. 
          ACCOMMODATION, WHICH IS NOT RECOGNIZED BY THE A.D.A.. DID I 
          MISS ANY OF YOUR QUESTIONS? >> WAS THERE ANYWAY YOU COULD HAVE MADE THE TIME FOR THE COMPLAINANT? 
          >> TIME WAS MADE FOR THE COMPLAINANT. 
          >> REASONABLE TIME ? >> TIME WAS MADE FOR THE COMPLAINANT. THE COMPLAINANT DID NOT WANT TO SPEAK TO THE 
          INVESTIGATOR ALONE. >> ALONE? WHY. 
          >> YOU HAVE TO ASK THE COMPLAINANT THAT. 
          >> CAN YOU DO THAT WITH SUPPORT, OR NO? 
          >> NO, THAT IS NOT HOW AN INVESTIGATION OCCURS. AN INVESTIGATION TALKS TO THE PEOPLE WHO, I MEAN, COMMISSIONER MURPHY, YOU CONDUCTED A NUMBER OF INVESTIGATIONS. YOU DON'T ALLOW WHOEVER WANTS TO COME INTO THE INVESTIGATION, THAT INFECTS THE INTEGRITY OF THE ENTIRE DESTINATION. 
          >> IF IT'S RELATED TO HER, NO. 
          >> IT WAS NOT RELATED TO HER. >> COMMISSIONER MURPHY. 
          >> YEAH, I THINK MAYBE THAT IS THE CHALLENGE WE FACE HERE, WE HAVE THREE DIFFERENT PARTIES INVOLVED IN THIS INCIDENT. WE HAVE AN ALLEGED VICTIM, WE HAVE AN ALLEGED PERPETRATOR, AND THEN WE HAVE THE ALLEGED VICTIMS SUPERVISOR. SO THE COMPLAINANT IS NOT THE VICTIM. IS THAT RIGHT? THE COMPLAINANT IS THE 
          SUPERVISOR. >> THAT IS CORRECT. 
          >> I DON'T WANT TO CALL ANYBODY'S NAMES OUT, BUT THE SUPERVISOR WAS THE ONE THAT INITIATED THE COMPLAINT. 
          >> THAT IS CORRECT. >> NOT THE VICTIM. IS THE VICTIM 
          SATISFIED? >> TO OUR KNOWLEDGE, YES. 
          >> OKAY, SO WE DON'T EVEN KNOW THE VICTIM IS. 
          >> NO, WE KNOW. >> YOU KNOW, I DON'T. 
          >> NOT PUBLICLY. BECAUSE THERE ARE PROTECTIONS IN PLACE. AND WE DON'T WANT TO RETRAUMTIZED THAT INDIVIDUAL. 
          >> LIKE WE CONTINUE TO DO. >> CORRECT. 
          >> THANK YOU SO MUCH, COMMISSIONER MURPHY. THAT IS BEEN MY CONCERN THIS ENTIRE TIME, RE-TRAUMATIZING THIS INDIVIDUAL WHO IS NOT THE COMPLAINANT. 
          >> COMMISSIONER TAYLOR, DO YOU HAVE ANY MORE? YOUR LIGHT IS ON. 
          >> I WOULD JUST LIKE TO KNOW WHEN SHE IS ABLE TO GO BACK TO WORK AREA AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY -- 
          >> THAT IS A PERSONNEL ISSUE THAT WE SHOULD NOT BE DISCUSSING IN A PUBLIC MEETING. AND BECAUSE WE HAVE GOTTEN THE PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST WE DOING A COPY OF WHAT YOU'RE READING FROM, BECAUSE THAT ACTUALLY NOW HAS TO BE INCLUDED WITH THE PUBLIC 
          RECORDS RESPONSE. >> OKAY. 
          >> ANYTHING MORE? >> NO. 
          >> ANYTHING MORE, MR. KOMANDO?
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.