Sep 28, 2026 Special Board of County Commissioners

[Call to Order by Chair]

[00:00:06]

>> GOOD MORNING. WE CALL TO ORDER THIS SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.

MR. CLARKE, IF YOU WOULD CALL ROLL.

CHAPLAIN LIEUTENANT OF FIRE RESCUE FOR OUR INVOCATION AND ASK JOE MCDERMTT TO STEP UP AND DO OUR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, THANK YOU. LIEUTENANT?

>> GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE. I WOULD LIKE TO READ A PASSAGE OF SCRIPTURE. IT SAYS THE LORD APPEARED TO SOLOMON AT NIGHT SAID, I'VE HEARD YOUR PRAYER AND CHOSEN THIS PLACE FOR MYSELF AS A SACRIFICE.

A TO THE FATHER, IN THE NAME OF JESUS AS WE PRAY THIS MORNING.

WE PRAY FOR THIS ASSEMBLY AND GOD AND PRAY FOR ALL THOSE THAT ARE IN CHARGE. WE LIFT UP OUR LEADERS OF THIS COUNTY AND MAKE IS IT THE GREATEST COUNTY IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND THE NATION. WE PRAY FOR OUR NATION RIGHT NOW, ALL THE SOLDIERS THAT ARE FIGHTING FOR OUR SAFETY OVERSEAS AND IN HARM'S WAY AND PRAY THAT JESUS PROTECT THEM SUPER NATURALLY AND WE PRAY FATHER GOD THAT YOU WOULD JUST KEEP THIS THE GREATEST NATION IN THE WORLD AND THAT WE WOULD CONTINUALLY BIND US TOGETHER AND LET EVERY MAN LOVE ANOTHER EVEN AS THE SECOND COMMANDMENT THAT YOU GAVE THAT WE LOVE ONE ANOTHER EVEN AS WE LOVE OURSELVES. WE ASK YOU GIVE US WISDOM.

WE PRAY, AMEN. >> GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS.

PLEASE JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE TO OUR FLAG.

I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION, UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

GOD BLESS THIS COUNTRY. >> GOD BLESS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THANK YOU, GOOD MORNING.

[ Additions/Deletions to Special Agenda]

ARNOLD. >> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER

JOSEPH. >> I HAVE NONE.

[Approval of Special Agenda]

>> WE'LL HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE REGULAR AGENDA.

OR THE SPECIAL AGENDA. >> DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> WE HAVE A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE?

[Items 1 & 2]

WE'LL GO TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 1.

SO I GUESS IT WOULD BE COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST.

DO YOU HAVE THE FLOOR? YOU DO HAVE THE FLOOR.

>> ALL RIGHT. OBVIOUSLY I MADE THE MOTION TO BRING THESE ITEMS BACK FOR RECONSIDERATION BUT REALLY AS A BOARD DISCUSSION WHICH WAS THE MOTION.

I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE STANDARDS BY WHICH WE'RE EVALUATING THESE APPLICATIONS AND SO IT'S REALLY THAT I WANTED TO PROMPT THE DISCUSSION BETWEEN THE BOARD WHILE WE EVALUATE THE APPLICATIONS BASED ON THE LETTER OF THE LAW OR BY OTHER VARIABLES THAT WEREN'T MENTIONED DURING THE MEETINGS AND OPENED UP FOR A BOARD DISCUSSION. MR. CHAIRMAN, DO YOU INTEND TO

HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT TODAY? >> THERE WAS NO CONSIDERATION OF DUE PROCESS AND WE WEREN'T GOING TO OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. THIS WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER WE SHOULD CHANGE OUR DECISION OR NOT.

[00:05:03]

>> OKAY. SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO HEAR FROM PUBLIC COMMENT. I WOULD LIKE TO DO SOMETHING --

>> ORDER, PLEASE. >> I WOULD LIKE TO DO SOMETHING I'VE RARELY DONE IN MY TIME. I PREPARED SOME REMARKS IN THE SPIRIT OF HAVING A DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS APPLICATION SO IF YOU PERMIT ME, I WOULD LIKE TO READ THOSE REMARKS INTO THE RECORD.

>> YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, SIR. >> ALL RIGHT.

COUNTIES ARE SUBDIVISIONS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND, THEREFORE, DERIVE THEIR AUTHORITY TO GOVERN FROM THE STATE.

THE POWER THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE DECISIONS FOR THE RESIDENTS WE REPRESENT COMES FROM THE STATE'S CONSTITUTION.

WHEN EVALUATING THE MERITS OF REZONING APPLICATIONS OR DEVELOPMENT OF ANY NATURE, FLORIDA STATUTES 163 GRANTS US SIGNIFICANT DISCRETION WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK ESTABLISHED BY FLORIDA LAW. OUR WHOLE AUTHORITY OVER OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND ZONING WAS, IS AND WILL ALWAYS BE SUBJECTED TO THE AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA STATE LAWS. A FEW EXAMPLES ARE WE MAY NOT, AS A LOCAL BOARD, ADOPT GUN CONTROL REGULATIONS.

WE MAY NOT TELL A HOMEOWNER HOW LONG THEY CAN RENT THEIR SHORT-TERM VACATION PROPERTIES. WE HAVE LIMITATIONS ABOUT HOW WE CAN REGULATE TREE REMOVAL ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.

ALTHOUGH I HAVE TRIED MANY TIMES I'VE BEEN UNSUCCESSFUL IN CREATING A MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN VAPE SHOPS AND THE SCHOOLS IN THIS COUNTY BECAUSE OF STATE PRE-EMPTION LAWS.

ALL OF THESE PRE-EMPTIONS WERE PUT IN PLACE BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE AT SOME POINT DURING OUR STATE'S 205-YEAR HISTORY BECAUSE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS SOMEWHERE WAS DOING SOMETHING THAT SOUGHT TO IMPACT PEOPLE'S FREEDOM OR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS IN SOME WAY. ALL OF THESE PRE-EMPTIONS, PER THE STATE'S CONSTITUTION, ARE LEGAL, HOWEVER.

WE ARE GOVERNED BY THE CHANGES MADE IN EACH LEGISLATIVE SESSION AS ARE THE OTHER 66 COUNTIES. MANY OF THESE PRE-EMPTIONS THAT ARE PASSED, LIKE THE LIVE LOCAL ACT, WHICH HAS BEEN A TOPIC OF DISCUSSION HERE IN THIS ROOM, ARE PASSED BECAUSE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WHO USE THE AUTHORITY THEY ARE GRANTED TO PICK WINNERS AND LOSERS BASED ON THINGS OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED. WHEN CONFRONTED WITH THE NEW LIVE LOCAL LAWS, THERE WERE GOVERNMENTS THAT REFUSED TO ADMINISTER THE LAW AS WRITTEN. IN RESPONSE TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS IGNORING THEIR DUTY TO THE STATUTE, THE LEGISLATURE DIDN'T ABOLISH THE LAW. THEY DIDN'T FOLD UP TENT AND DO AWAY WITH IT. THE STATE LEGISLATURE WENT BACK AND STRENGTHENED THE PROVISIONS WITHIN THE LIVE LOCAL ACT.

THE FOLLOWING SESSION, THEY ADDED AWARDS OF LEGAL FEES FOR APPLICANTS WHO ARE FORCED TO APPEAL THROUGH THE JUDICIAL PROCESS. SO WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM THE PRE-EMPTIONS I MENTIONED? WHAT CAN WE LEARN SPECIFICALLY FROM THE LIVE LOCAL ACT? DENYING CERTIFICATION WITHOUT COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD SENDS A SIGNAL TO LAWMAKERS IN TALLAHASSEE THAT THE LOCAL GOVERNING BODY STUPT DOESN'T TAKE ITS AUTHORITY IT WAS GRANTED BY THE STATE OR THE OATH OF OFFICE SERIOUSLY. WORST OF ALL THIS GOVERNMENT DID A DISSERVICE TO THE PEOPLE IT REPRESENTED BY PUTTING THE GOVERNMENT IN AN UNWINNABLE POSITION IN THE COURT OF LAW WHERE TAXPAYER DOLLARS, NOT COMMISSIONER DOLLARS, BUT THE TAXPAYER DOLLARS ARE ON THE LINE WHICH WE HAVE A DUTY TO PROTECT.

I'M REMINDING EVERYONE LISTENING THAT DENYING CERTIFICATION OF A STATE GOVERNED PROCESS BASED ON WHO THE APPLICANT IS OR WHICH DISTRICT THE PROJECT ABOUT WILL BE BUILT IN OR WHICH WAY THE POLITICAL WINDS HAPPEN TO BE BLOWING DURING THAT SPECIFIC DAY OR ELECTION CYCLE NOT MAKING THE DECISION BASED ON THE EVIDENCE IS INVITING MORE AND MORE STATE INTERFERENCE INTO OUR COUNTY GOVERNMENT PROCESS WHICH WE HAVE BEEN ENTRUSTED TO RUN.

OUR STAFF HAS ISSUED REPORTS STATING THAT SEVERAL APPLICATIONS DID NOT MEET THE CRITERIA TO BE CERTIFIED AS AN ENCLAVE PROJECT AND NOBODY QUESTIONED THE COMPETENCY OR BANDWIDTH OF OUR STAFF DURING THOSE APPLICATIONS.

HOWEVER, WE HAVE FOUR APPLICATIONS THAT THE SAME STAFF SAID DID MEET THE CRITERIA AND WERE PASSED ONTO THE BOARD TO DO THE SIMPLE TASK OF LOOKING AT THE EVIDENCE AND CERTIFYING BASED ON THE EVIDENCE. FOR THE THREE OF THE FOUR APPLICATIONS, WE HAD THREE COMMISSIONERS WHO WERE WILLING TO DO THEIR DUTY. UNFORTUNATELY, ONE APPLICATION WAS PUT THROUGH AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT PROCESS, ASKED ENTIRELY DIFFERENT QUESTIONS AND ULTIMATELY SAW AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT OUTCOME. THE QUESTION THEN BECOMES BY

[00:10:04]

THERE HAVE BEEN MANY TIMES I'VE HAD TO SUBMIT MY DESIRE FOR A POLITICAL VICTORY IN ORDER TO DO MY DUTY TO FOLLOW THE STATUTES THAT HAVE BEEN HANDED DOWN BY TALLAHASSEE.

THIS JOB IS A SACRIFICE. YOU GET CRITICIZED FOR DOING THE THING THAT THE LAW REQUIRES YOU TO DO.

BUT CHEAP POLITICAL VICTORIES RARELY RESULT IN LONG-TERM GOOD GOVERNANCE. SO TODAY I'M URGING THIS BOARD TO CONSIDER THE SCALE OF THE LIABILITY THAT YOU ARE CREATING FOR THOSE YOU REPRESENT, CONSIDER WHAT YOU SAID WHEN YOU TOOK YOUR OATH OF OFFICE. I WOULD URGE THE BOARD TO CHOOSE TIMELESS AND UNWAVERING PRINCIPLES, TO CHOOSE GOOD GOVERNANCE OVER POLITICS. THAT CONCLUDES MY FINAL REMARKS.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. >> THANKS.

COUNCILOR JOSEPH, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

>> ACTUALLY I'M KIND OF SHOCKED BECAUSE YOU'RE THE ONE WHO BROUGHT ALL THIS BACK. WHO WROTE YOUR DIATRIBE AND WHO DID YOU TALK TO REGARDING WRITING IT?

>> COMMISSIONER. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

WHEN YOU SAY "DIATRIBE" ARE YOU REFERRING TO THE REMARKS THAT I

JUST MADE? >> WHO WROTE THAT? TO CENSURE COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST BECAUSE HE WASTED EVERYONE'S TIME BY BRINGING BACK NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER TWO FOR RECONSIDERATION WHEN HE'S REALLY NOT RECONSIDERING THIS.

HE'S ACTUALLY MAKING SOME FORWARD STATEMENT ABOUT DECISIONS THAT WERE MADE BEFORE WE GOT HERE.

DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> CAN I SPEAK?

>> YES, YOU CAN. THERE IS NOT A SECOND.

SO THAT FAILS. YOU STILL HAVE THE FLOOR,

COMMISSIONER JOSEPH. >> HE WASTED ALL YOUR TIME OUT THERE BECAUSE HE'S NOT REALLY BRINGING THESE BACK.

HE JUST BROUGHT THEM BACK SO HE COULD TELL YOU ALL THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING WHEN WE LOOK AT THESE ENCLAVES IS NOT APPROPRIATE AND BASICALLY YOU'RE WASTING OUR TEAM'S TIME, OUR STAFF'S TIME, THE COMMISSIONER'S TIME, THE PEOPLE'S TIME.

IT'S JUST INCREDIBLE THAT YOU DID THAT TODAY.

>> I APPRECIATE YOU ANNOUNCING TO THE BOARD YOU DIDN'T LISTEN TO OR CONSIDER A SINGLE WORD THAT I JUST UTTERED.

THANK YOU. >> BECAUSE YOU DID NOT BRING

THIS BACK FOR RECONSIDERATION. >> NEVER CHANGE.

KEEP DOING WHAT YOU DO. >> I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THE BACK AND FORTH. COMMISSIONER, WOULD YOU --

>> I THINK IT GETS BACK THAT THIS IS A QUASI JUDICIAL DECISION AND THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS REQUEST 100% ON THE APPLICATION TO PROVE EVERY ELEMENT OF SECTION 163.3164.

I DO HAVE A NUMBER OF THINGS, AND I ACTUALLY WANT TO THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST, BECAUSE I DO FEEL THAT ON THE DAY -- WHEN WE DID LOOK AT THIS PROPOSAL THAT ENOUGH DETAIL WASN'T PUT INTO IT. WE'VE HAD MORE TIME TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT IT AND I AM GOING TO BE SHARING SOME INFORMATION THAT I HAVE FOUND SINCE THAT. I ACTUALLY GREATLY APPRECIATE YOU GIVING US MORE TIME TO LOOK BACK.

WHAT I WANTED TO SAY IS I DO HAVE SLIDE ONE THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE, TYLER. AND I HAVE A QUESTION FOR OUR ATTORNEY AS WELL. IF YOU CAN PLEASE CONFIRM THAT UNDER SECTION 163.3164 THAT AN URBAN SERVICE AREA MEANS THAT IT'S AN AREA IDENTIFIED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHERE PUBLIC FACILITIES ARE ALREADY IN PLACE OR IDENTIFIED IN THE CAPITAL

IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT. >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT OUR COMP CAN PLAN WITH REGARD TO OUR DEVELOPMENT

BOUNDARY? >> I'M SPECIFICALLY ASKING ABOUT THE URBAN SERVICE AREA THAT IT'S BEEN IDENTIFIED, THAT IT'S AN

[00:15:05]

IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT. >> SURE.

SO THAT'S THE STATE DEFINITION FOR AN URBAN SERVICE DISTRICT SO NOT ALL COUNTIES HAVE THOSE SO GENERALLY, IF YOU LOOK AT THE REPORT FOR HERITAGE EAST AND WEST AND THE OTHER REPORTS, THAT IS THE COUNTY'S DEVELOPMENT AREA.

>> CORRECT. THIS IS DIFFERENT.

SO LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT THIS. WHAT I WANT TO SEE IS I NEED TO SEE -- THE ORDINANCE IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR THE FUTURE USE MAP THAT ESTABLISHES AN URBAN SERVICE AREA FOR STATE ROAD 27I95 THE WAY ORDINANCE DID FOR URBAN.

>> SURE. I'M GOING TO ASK JACOB COME UP AND ASSIST WITH THIS FOR AN INTERPRETATION.

LET ME BRING UP THE REPORT REAL QUICK, PLEASE.

>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. >> GOOD MORNING, SIR.

>> TO COMMISSIONER TAYLOR'S QUESTION, WE DO NOT HAVE AN URBAN SERVICE DISTRICT. WE USE A DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY AND OBJECTIVE A12 OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SAYS THE COUNTY SHALL IMPLEMENT A DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY TO MANAGE GROWTH IN AREAS SERVED BY INFRASTRUCTURE.

IT CONTINUES TO GO ON AND GIVE FURTHER EXPLANATION BUT IN LIEU OF HAVING AN URBAN SERVICE DISTRICT, WE USED OUR

DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY. >> AND THAT'S WHAT I ASSUME.

THAT'S THE PROBLEM. BECAUSE A DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY IS NOT AN URBAN SERVICE AREA.

THEY'RE TWO VERY DIFFERENT THINGS THAN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY IS A VERY GENERAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT LINE WHEREAS AN URBAN SERVICE AREA IS VERY SPECIFIC DESIGNATION THAT THE STATUTE SPECIFICALLY DEFINES. SO THEN WE CANNOT TREAT THEM THE SAME. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME.

AND UNFORTUNATELY HERE IN ST. JOHN'S COUNTY, WE DO HAVE AN URBAN SERVICE AREA AND THAT IS WHY I WANTED TO SHARE AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT A TRUE URBAN SERVICE AREA LOOKS LIKE.

AND THAT IS WHAT DURBIN CREEK IS.

IF YOU LOOK TO EAST AND WEST, THEY'RE VERY DIFFERENT.

WE CANNOT SAY THE TWO ARE THE SAME.

IT IS NOT. IT IS NOT THE SAME.

IT IS NOT AN URBAN SERVICE AREA.

>> ORDER, PLEASE. >> OKAY.

THEN ALSO -- >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, TO QUALIFY THAT. WHETHER OR NOT SOMETHING MEETS THAT DEFINITION IS WHAT THE COUNTY HAS DETERMINED WITH REGARD TO THE DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY BECAUSE IT SATISFIES THE DEFINITION UNDER THE STATE STATUTE.

>> CORRECT. THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS STATUTE READS. THE STATUTE IS VERY CLEAR.

THIS IS WHAT AN URBAN SERVICE AREA IS.

IT'S VERY SPECIFIC. IT IS DIFFERENT.

IT'S DIFFERENT. IT'S NOT UP TO THE COUNTY TO SAY -- IT GOES BY WHAT THE STATUTE STATES.

THAT'S WHAT THE STATUTES STATE. >> CORRECT.

THAT DEFINITION MEETS OUR DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY DEFINITION. THAT'S ALL I CAN SAY.

>> OKAY. SLIDE TWO, PLEASE.

SO ON AUGUST 19TH, THE APPLICANTS DESCRIBED COUNTY STAFF'S FINDING THIS WAY. MR. WALTERS, REPRESENTING THE HERITAGE EAST APPLICATION, SAID THAT WHEN STAFF REVIEWED THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, INCLUDED OBJECTIVE A.1.2, STAFF DETERMINED THAT THE DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY IDENTIFIES THE AREAS WHERE URBAN PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES ARE PROVIDED AND PLANNED. ACCORDINGLY, STAFF FOUND THAT DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY SATISFIES THE STATUTORY DEFINITION OF AN URBAN SERVICE AREA.

THAT'S WHAT YOU JUST STATED. MR. WALTERS ALSO REPRESENTING HERITAGE WEST APPLICATIONS AND STAFF HAS WRITTEN THE REPORT ALSO MADE A DETERMINATION THAT ST. JOHN'S COUNTY DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY IS ESSENTIALLY FOR FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENT OF AN URBAN SERVICE AREA. AND THAT WAS BASED ON THE VIEW OF THE STATUTORY DEFINITION IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ELEMENTS IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. STAFF MADE THE FOLLOWING FINDING: THAT THE APPLICATION DOES DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE WITH THE SECTION. HOWEVER, IS PROVIDED OR PLANNED OR A FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENT THE STATUTORY DEFINITION OF AN URBAN SERVICE AREA. AND I'M ASKING THAT TO OUR

ATTORNEYS. >> I THINK BASED OFF OF THE COMP PLAN AND THE STATE DEFINITION THAT WE HAVE CONCLUDED THAT IT

[00:20:03]

IS THE EQUIVALENT. >> OKAY.

CAN YOU PLEASE READ THE DEFINITION DIRECTLY FROM SECTION 163 AND 164 INTO THE RECORD TO EXACTLY WHERE IT SAYS PROVIDED OR PLANNED OR FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENT.

>> URBAN SERVICE AREA IS AN AREA IDENTIFIED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHERE PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES, INCLUDED BUT NOT, CENTRAL WATER, SEWER, ROADS ALREADY IN PLACE OR ARE IDENTIFIED IN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT.

>> EXACTLY. SO THAT'S THAT.

IT'S NOT WHAT THAT STATES. IT'S VERY CLEAR WHAT THE STATUTE STATES. NEXT, SLIDE THREE, PLEASE.

THIS STATES THAT IDENTIFIED IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS DEVELOPMENT MEANS SPECIFIC FUNDED PROJECTS IN THE COUNTY'S ADOPTED FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL SCHEDULE SO EXACTLY THE WAY ORDINANCE 2015-4 FOR 51.3 MILLION DOLLARS INTO THE CIA FOR DURBIN CREEK. SEPARATELY THE AREA ITSELF MUST STILL BE IDENTIFIED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS AN URBAN SERVICE AREA. SO I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW WHERE -- POINT TO THE SPECIFIC PROJECTS IN THE COUNTY'S ADOPTED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT SURFACE PARAMETER, THE ROAD, THE WATER, THE SEWER CAPACITY, THE WAY ORDINANCE 2015-4 IDENTIFIED 51.3 MILLION DOLLARS FOR DURBIN CREEK.

CLEARLY WE DON'T HAVE THAT. WE DON'T HAVE THAT.

>> LET ME THROW SOMETHING IN HERE.

SHE'S ASKING SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS APPLICATION.

SHOULD WE BRING THE APPLICANT'S ATTORNEY UP AND LET THEM ANSWER

THESE QUESTIONS? >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, TO THE EXTENT THAT THE COMMISSIONER IS MAKING FINDINGS, THOSE ARE

FINDINGS FOR YOU ALL TO MAKE. >> OKAY.

THANKS. >> OKAY.

SO CLEARLY, WE DON'T HAVE APPROPRIATE THAT IDENTIFIES THE AREA AS AN URBAN SERVICE AREA.

SO IF IT'S NOT IDENTIFIED, THEN THAT PATH DOESN'T APPLY.

BECAUSE CLEARLY PLANNED OR GENERAL DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY AND THE STATUTORY PHRASE IDENTIFIED IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT. I MEAN, WHAT OUR ATTORNEYS HAVE SHARED, WE DON'T HAVE THAT. IT'S VERY, VERY DIFFERENT.

WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO -- THIS IS THE THING.

OUR OWN DEPUTY ATTORNEY TOLD THIS BOARD THAT UNDER SB686, YOU WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THE STATUTORY DEFINITION AND APPLY THESE ELEMENTS AS TO WHETHER OR NOT IT MEETS THE DEFINITION OF AN AGRICULTURE ENCLAVE, RELYING STRICTLY ON STATE LAW, NOT THE COUNTY COMP PLAN. SO THAT WAS EXACTLY WHAT I'M DOING. THE STATE'S DEFINITION OF AN URBAN SERVICE AREA IDENTIFIED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WITH FACILITIES ALREADY IN PLACE OR IDENTIFIED IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT AS THE STATE LAW COUNSEL TOLD US TO APPLY STRICTLY. SO THIS ISN'T THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OVERRIDING SB686. IT'S THE STATE'S OWN DEFINITION APPLIED EXACTLY AS COUNSEL ADVISED AND ON THIS RECORD, IT HASN'T BEEN THAT. I MOVE TO DENY --

[00:25:03]

>> CAN WE -- >> -- INSERT 26-06.

THE APPLICANT HAS NOT CARRIED ITS BURDEN UNDER SECTION 163.3164. THE PROPERTY IS NOT SURROUNDED BY A LEGALLY ESTABLISHED URBAN SERVICE AREA WHICH IS AN AREA IDENTIFIED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WITH FACILITIES IN PLACE OR IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENTS.

RELIANCE ON THE DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY AS PROVIDED OR PLANNED OR IS A FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENT OF AN URBAN SERVICE AREA DOES NOT MEET THAT STANDARD. AND STAFF SEPARATELY FOUND THE SERVICES ARE NOT PRESENTLY ADEQUATE FOR THE SITE.

>> ORDER, PLEASE. >> I SECOND THAT.

>> UNLIKE ORDINANCE 2015-4 FOR DURBIN CREEK, NO ORDINANCE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVISION OR DESIGNATION ESTABLISHES AN URBAN SERVICE AREA HERE. CERTIFICATION IS NOT AUTHORIZED AND I DIRECT OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE THE FINAL WRITTEN ORDER WITH FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.

>> ORDER, MROO HE IS. >> I SECOND THAT BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT I HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PERIMETER ALSO. AS I SAID EARLIER --

>> MR. WHITEHURST -- SORRY. >> I JUST SECONDED IT.

I DIDN'T SAY MY COMMENT. >> YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

>> I JUST FINISHED SAYING THAT I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A THIRD VOTE. I THINK WE WASTED OUR TIME HERE TODAY. I WOULD SECOND THAT AND I DO THINK THERE'S ISSUE WITH THE PARAMETER ALSO.

THANK YOU. >> COUNCILOR WHITEHURST.

>> I WANT TO CONTRAST HERE. MY REMARKS IN SUMMARY WERE LET'S MAKE OUR DECISION BASED ON THE EVIDENCE, NOT ON POLITICS.

WE HAVE ONE COMMISSIONER WHO HEARD THAT AND HAULED OFF AND MADE A POLITICAL COMMENT AND A MOVE TO HAVE ME CENSURED AND WE HAVE ANOTHER COMMISSION WHO BROUGHT ME SOMETHING OF SUBSTANCE I CAN CONSIDER, SOME EVIDENCE TO CONSIDER.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER TAYLOR. I APPRECIATE YOU DOING THE WORK OF BRINGING SOMETHING OF SUBSTANCE THAT I CAN ACTUALLY CONSIDER. I APPRECIATE THAT.

SO -- >> I CANNOT THANK YOU ENOUGH BECAUSE IT TOOK TIME TO LOOK INTO THIS EVEN FURTHER.

AND IF WE DID NOT HAVE THAT TIME, WE WOULD NOT BE HERE

TODAY. >> THANK YOU.

SO ON THE MERITS OF WHAT YOU SAID, I'VE GOT A QUESTION FOR OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY BECAUSE YOU RAISED SOME VERY INTERESTING QUESTIONS THAT NEED TO BE DISCUSSED.

THANK YOU FOR RAISING THOSE QUESTIONS.

THROUGH THE CHAIR, MR. COMMANDO, IS AN ENCLAVE PROPERTY APPLICATION REQUIRED TO BE WITHIN AN URBAN SERVICE AREA?

>> THROUGH THE CHAIR TO COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST, IT DEPENDS ON WHAT PERIMETER CALCULATION YOU'RE USING.

CERTAIN RELY TO BE WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OR LINE OF --

>> DOES THE ADD ENCLAVE PROPERTY, IS IT REQUIRED TO BE WITHIN A DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY OR IS THAT TWO SIDES OF THE SAME COIN? IS IT ESSENTIALLY THE SAME ANSWER AND IT'S TIED TO THE PERIMETER CALCULATION?

>> YES. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

IS THE ADD ENCLAVE STATUTE ACCOMPANIED BY DEFINITIONS FOR WHAT AND WHAT DOES NOT QUALIFY AS AN URBAN SERVICE AREA AND A

DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY? >> SO 163.31 6 4, THE DEFINITION OF AN AGRICULTURAL ENCLAVE USES THE TERM AS DEFINED IN THE

STATUTE. >> THAT'S THE STAFF'S ASSESSMENT IS IT DOES, IN FACT, FIT THE CATEGORY OF THE STATUTE FOLLOWING THE STATUTE'S LANGUAGE, BACK TO OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND NOT THE STATE'S LANGUAGE.

>> IT'S INCORPORATED IN. >> ORDER, PLEASE.

>> FOR THE RECORD, INCIDENTED TO HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT.

I DID NOT MAKE THAT DETERMINATION.

>> THEN I WAS ALSO TOLD THAT WE DO HAVE TO HAVE BY LAW, WE DO HAVE TO HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT. THEY USED THEIR URBAN SERVICE AREA FOR THEIR APPLICATION. THAT WAS TIED TO THE APPLICATION. WHAT A TRUE URBAN SERVICE AREA.

[00:30:03]

BEFORE WE HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT? >> I'M SUPPOSED TO BE ASKING YOU

THAT. >> SORRY.

GIVE ME JUST A MINUTE. YOU'VE GIVEN US A LOT TO DIGEST AND SO WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THE COMPLICATION ITSELF.

YOU BROUGHT UP A COUPLE OF THINGS.

YOU BROUGHT UP THE URBAN SERVICE AREA AND YOU ALSO BROUGHT UP UTILITIES. NOW, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT AS FAR AS HAVING UTILITIES PRESENT, THAT CAN BE MITIGATED BY THE FACT THAT THEY AGREE TO BRING SERVICES -- UTILITIES IN THEMSELVES AT A LATER TIME. IS THAT MY UNDERSTANDING?

>> CORRECT. THAT'S AN EXPRESSED OPTION UNDER

163.3164. >> OKAY.

THANK YOU. NOW, MAYBE THIS COULD BE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. THE QUESTION HAS BEEN ASKED HERE IS DOES IT MEET THE CRITERIA UNDER URBAN SERVICE AREA? BUT THE STAFF FELT LIKE IT DOES BECAUSE IT -- CAN YOU WALK ME

THROUGH THAT. >> YES, SIR.

AGAIN, JACOB SMITH FOR THE RECORD.

THIS APPLICATION, WHICH IS THE EAST PARCEL, QUALIFIED UNDER SECTION C2 OF THE AG ENCLAVE PERIMETER REQUIREMENT.

I WILL READ IT OUT LOUD. DO NOT EXCEED 700 ACRES, SURROUNDED BY AT LEAST 50% OF THE PERIMETER BY PROPERTY DESIGNATED ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP TO BE ZONED FOR INDUSTRIAL OR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES IN THE PARCEL OR PARCELS SURROUNDED ON AT LEAST 50% OF THE PERIMETER BY A PARCEL OR PARCELS WITHIN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA OR LINE OR... THEN IT GOES ON TO THE NEXT ONE. SO CERTAINLY THAT IS A PORTION OF THAT QUALIFIER IS AT LEAST 50% OF THE PERIMETER BY PARCEL OR PARCEL WITHIN AN URBAN SERVICE DISTRICT AREA.

>> I THINK THE QUESTION'S BEEN -- SO YOU FEEL THAT IT MEETS THE STATUTES REQUIREMENTS OF AN URBAN SERVICE DISTRICT BASED ON

-- >> YES, SIR, WE DID ANALYZE IT AS OUR DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY AS THE STAND-IN FOR THAT

TERMINOLOGY, YES, SIR. >> THANKS.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> COULD YOU GO BACK TO SLIDE 1, PLEASE. JACOB, IF YOU DO LOOK UP HERE, YOU CAN SEE THAT THESE ARE TWO VERY, VERY DIFFERENT STANDARDS THAT WE HAVE HERE. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE LEFT, LOOK AT DURBIN CREEK AND EVERYTING THAT'S REQUIRED FOR AN URBAN SERVICE AREA AND LOOK AT THE RIGHT AND THEY'RE THE SAME.

SO JUST STRICTLY A DEVELOPMENTAL -- THAT BOUNDARY THAT YOU REFERRED TO, THAT DOES NOT MAKE IT AN URBAN SERVICE AREA WHICH IS WHAT THE APPLICANT IS USING FOR THIS.

HERITAGE EAST AND WEST IS NOT AN URBAN SERVICE AREA.

>> I WILL DO MY BEST TO ADDRESS THIS.

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OBJECTIVE A12 IS DEVELOPED THE BOUNDARY THE COUNTY SHALL DEVELOP A BOUNDARY TO MANAGE GROWTH IN AREAS SERVED BY INFRASTRUCTURE AND FURTHER GOES ON AND SAYS IN A124, THE COUNTY SHALL DIRECT, IN THE DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY, WHERE PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICE EXISTS.

THE DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY IS THE AREA DESIGNATED ON THE MAP THAT DEPICTS THE OVERALL FUTURE GROWTH PATTERN OF THE COUNTY.

>> THANK YOU. BUT I GUESS I'M REALLY REFERRING TO WHAT THE STATE SAYS. THE STATE STATUE OF AN URBAN SERVICE AREA OVERRIDES THAT. I CAN'T BE ANY CLEARER THAN THAT. ANYBODY ELSE?

>> THANK YOU. >> OKAY.

>> THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

WE NEED TO GO FORWARD NOW. PUBLIC COMMENT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT HE WAS PLANNING ON ALLOWING.

WE WOULD BE HERE ALL DAY. >> I WAS TOLD --

>> ORDER. >> I WAS TOLD THAT WHEN THERE'S A MOTION THAT YES, WE HAVE TO TAKE COMMENT.

>> SO FOR QUASI JUDICIAL MATTERS, YOU DO HAVE TO HAVE

[00:35:03]

YOU'VE HAD PUBLIC COMMENT. TO THE EXTENT THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO HAVEN'T SPOKEN PREVIOUSLY, YOU CAN CONSIDER THAT.

I DO SAY SINCE THIS IS NEW INFORMATION THAT THE APPLICANT

SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT TO REBUTT. >> OKAY.

>> OKAY. >> ARE WE GOOD?

>> I'M READY TO HEAR FROM PEOPLE.

>> I'M READY TO HEAR FROM THE REBUTTAL FROM THE APPLICANT.

DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE ANY REBUTTAL?

>> DO THEY WANT TO WAIT UNTIL AFTER COMMENT?

>> I CAN'T IMAGINE. BECAUSE WE HAVE NEW INFORMATION,

REBUTTAL IS PROPER AND -- >> IT'S UP TO THE APPLICANT IF THEY CHOOSE TO ADDRESS THAT, WE CAN.

FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE NOT MADE A COMMENT PREVIOUSLY IN THIS PARTICULAR HEARING. WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THAT.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THAT. IF YOU'VE ALREADY SPOKEN ON THIS ISSUE, BEFORE, THEN THIS APPLICATION, THEN YOU WON'T BE ALLOWED TO SPEAK. WE WILL ALLOW PEOPLE WHO HAVE NOT SPOKEN TO COME UP AND SPEAK. YOU'LL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES.

IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO SHARE, USE THE MIDDLE AREA.

ALSO TOO, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT, PLEASE UTILIZE THE CENTER PODIUM. A LAPTOP CAN BE SET UP FOR USB PRESENTATIONS. AFTER PRESENTING, PLEASE PROVIDE THE MATERIALS TO THE STAFF OF THE CLERK OF THE COURT TO BE ENTERED INTO PUBLIC RECORD. GOOD MORNING.

>> JACOB JUST STATED POLICY A127.

HE LEFT OUT A VERY IMPORTANT PART, IF WE CAN GET IT UP ON THE SCREEN. AREAS DESIGNATED R AND AI ARE NOT DEVELOP AREAS. IF WE'RE GOING TO READ STATUTES, I ASK THAT WE FINISH THE STATUTES.

IN ADDITION, ST. JOHN'S COUNTY 129-2025 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SAYS THAT WE SHOULD INVESTIGATE DESIGNATIONS OF URBAN SERVICE AREAS. ONE OTHER THING ABOUT DURBIN CREEK NATIONAL, THIS IS IMPORTANT, BECAUSE IT IS AN URBAN SERVICE AREA, IN OUR 2025 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THEY SHALL BE EXEMPT FROM DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT PURSUANT TO SECTION 380. YADA-YADA.

I HATE TO HOP ACROSS THE STATE BUT I DO WANT TO DO SO TO PASCO COUNTY. NORTH OF TAMPA.

WHO HAS ALSO JUST RECENTLY DONE THEIR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND NOTICE THAT THEY HAVE URBAN SERVICE AREA HERE AND THEN THEY HAVE THIS GREEN AREA UP HERE THAT SAYS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO EXPAND INTO THAT AREA. WHY HAVEN'T THEY DONE THAT YET? BECAUSE IT'S NOT IN THEIR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THIS SECTION IS VERY IMPORTANT. AND I WANT TO PUT IT UP AGAINST SAINT JOHNS COUNTY. THAT'S I75 AND STATE ROUTE 52, THAT AREA, MUCH LIKE OUR -- 95 AND 207.

THEY LOOK VERY SIMILAR. CLAY COUNTY, THERE ARE DEVELOPMENT AREAS OUTSIDE OF THAT.

AND DUVAL COUNTY. THEY ALSO HAVE URBAN SERVICE DISTRICTS. WE ALL KNOW THAT JACKSONVILLE HAS DEVELOPMENT ALL THROUGHOUT THIS AREA AND YET IN JACKSONVILLE, THESE ARE THE URBAN SERVICE DISTRICTS.

YOU HAVE TO TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY. WE ONLY HAVE ONE IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY.

>> THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING.

>> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS KERRY GUSTAVSON.

I'M HERE TO SAY THAT WE NEED CONSISTENCY IN APPLYING THE LAW AND ENSURE THAT SIMILAR CASES ARE TREATED ALIKE, FOSTERING FAIRNESS AND PREDICTABILITY WITHIN THE LEGAL SYSTEM.

THIS PRINCIPLE IS CRUCIAL FOR MAINTAINING PUBLIC TRUST AND UPHOLDING JUDICIAL DECISIONS. ST. JOHNS COUNTY SHOULD FOLLOW THE LETTER OF THE LAW. SB686,S THE EXACT WORDS OF THE TEXT. SJC SHOULD NOT ASSUME OR INFER ANYTHING. WE MUST SEEK STRICT COMPLIANCE, NOT IGNORE PARTS OF THE LAW OR EXERCISE A MORE LIBERAL INTERPRETATION OF THIS TEXT OR STATUTE.

SO HERE WE HAVE SB686 AND WITH PALM VALLEY, WE WERE TOLD THE PARCEL WERE PARCELS, NOT PORTIONS THEREOF.

[00:40:03]

ST. JOHNS COUNTY HAS BEEN HIT WITH SIXTEEN OF THESE AND THEY'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO COME UNLESS WE START PLAYING BY THE EXACT WORDS THAT WE WERE GIVEN.

MAYBE IF WE FOLLOW ONLY WHAT THEY SAID WE WON'T HAVE THESE APPROVALS. AND I WILL SAY THAT STARTING TODAY, WE WILL BE PUTTING IN OUR OBJECTIONS BEFORE THE STAFF MAKES THEIR DECISIONS. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO SAY COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST, THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS BACK TO VOTE.

COMMISSIONER TAYLOR, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE INCISIVE RESEARCH YOU'VE DONE. I DON'T GET MY INFORMATION OFF OF FACEBOOK. I LEARN A LOT TODAY JUST SITTING HERE AND I FEEL THAT IT IS STILL BE RUSHED INTO AND THERE'S TOO MANY UNDECIDES AND I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A LEGAL WAY TO EXTEND IT SO WE CAN GET THE INFORMATION THAT'S BEING BROUGHT FORWARD NOW THAT WAS NOT AVAILABLE A MONTH AND A HALF AGO.

SO IT JUST SEEMS LIKE WE'RE JUST KIND OF WILLY-NILLY LOOKING AT IT AND WE NEED TO TAKE THE INFORMATION WE WERE GIVEN AND TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT IT BECAUSE THIS IS A LOT OF VALUABLE INFORMATION WE'VE BEEN GIVEN. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS, FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU.

PODIUMS. GOOD MORNING.

>> GOOD MORNING. I WASN'T INTENDING ON SHARING IT. BUT HERE IT IS.

GOOD MORNING. MY NAME'S KELLY SIMMONS.

AND THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SERVICE TODAY FOR BRINGING THIS UP AGAIN. I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY IN STAGE THREE WATER SHORTAGE AND CLEARING THE LAND FOR THESE DEVELOPMENTS WILL DECREASE THE LAND'S CAPACITY TO ALLOW STORMWATER TO SEEP BACK INTO THE AQUAFER WHICH IS WHERE WE GET OUR DRINKING WATER FROM. WHEN YOU CLEAR THE LAND, YOU TAKE AWAY THAT CAPACITY. I DON'T SEE ANY END TO THIS WATER SHORTAGE. THERE'S NO WAY FOR US TO CREATE WATER. THERE IS NO WAY TO MAKE THIS BETTER. WHEN YOU CLEAR THE LAND, YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CREATE THE RETENTION PONDS WHICH WOULD ABSORB AS MUCH WATER AS THE LAND WHEN IT IS VEGETATED, BUT YOU STILL DON'T HAVE THE FULL CAPACITY AS YOU WOULD IF THE LAND WERE LEFT VEGETATED. SO WITH INCREASED DEVELOPMENT IN THIS COUNTY, WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE THOSE OF US THAT HAVE LIVED HERE FOR TEN YEARS OR MORE FOR WATER SUPPLY? HOW ARE WE GOING TO SUPPLY THE WATER FOR PEOPLE TO DRINK, THE WATER THAT'S REQUIRED TO RUN THE HOMES? HOW ARE WE GOING TO THEN TAKE THAT STORMWATER AND MAKE SURE OUR EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE STORMWATER SEWAGE, MAKE SURE THE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE CAN HANDLE ALL THE THAT EXCESS STORMWATER NOW THAT WE'VE CLEARED THE LAND? IT IS PART AND PARCEL OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS COMING TO OUR COMMUNITIES FOR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

GOOD MORNING. >> HI.

>> HANG ON JUST A SECOND. FOLKS, LISTEN, WE STILL HAVE A MEETING TO GO. IF YOU WANT TO SHOW YOUR SUPPORT OF SOMEONE UP HERE, DO SO WITHOUT DISTURBING THE NEXT SPEAKER. I CAN'T EXPRESS THIS STRONGLY ENOUGH THAT WE HAVE A MEETING TO GET THROUGH.

DO IT AT THE RIGHT TIME FOR THE RIGHT REASON WITHOUT DISTURBING THE NEXT SPEAKER. YOU MAY GO.

>> I'M SUZANNA AND I'VE SPOKEN ABOUT THE OTHER ENCLAVE AT PALM VALLEY. I'M A RESIDENT FOR 26 YEARS IN ST. AUGUSTINE. I LIVE AT 380 HICKORY LANE.

IN RUNNING FOR FLORIDA HOUSE DISTRICT AGAINST REPRESENTATIVE SAM GRECO WHO DID VOTE FOR THIS BILL.

AND WE'RE HERE TODAY BECAUSE OUR THREE HOUSE REPRESENTATIVES ALL VOTED FOR THIS. AND I JUST WANT TO SAY TO THE BOARD AND THE COMMUNITY THAT COMMISSIONERS, YOU'VE ALL HEARD THE PUBLIC. WE DON'T WANT THIS.

WE'RE ALL CONCERNED ABOUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND I KNOW THAT YOU'RE TIRED OF HEARING ABOUT THIS.

[00:45:04]

MY NAME IS COUNTY FOR FIFTY YEARS. I DON'T THINK MUCH OF THIS AGRICULTURAL ENCLAVE RULE. IT SEEMS TO TAKE POWER AWAY FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND GIVE IT TO BIGGER GOVERNMENT.

BUT THAT ASIDE, I'M JUST A LAYPERSON BUT THIS DEVELOPER, DEVELOPMENT, DOESN'T EVEN SEEM TO PROPERLY ADDRESS ITS DEMANDS.

AND I STOOD UP HERE A WHILE BACK FOR CONCERNS ABOUT A HUGE DEVELOPMENT ON 214. ON CHRISTMAS EVE, I WAS SERVED WTH AN EIGHT-PAGE SUBPOENA WITH OVER 20 DEMANDS.

THE PROCESS SERVER HAD A STACK LIKE A PHONE BOOK.

IT SEEMED LIKE MOST EVERYBODY THAT SPOKE UP WITH CONCERNS GOT ONE OF THESE SUBPOENAS. MY FIRST SUBPOENA EVER.

I FELT INTIMIDATED, MAYBE SUPPRESSED, AS DID MANY OTHERS.

IF PLANS LIKE THIS ARE EMPLOYED TO A REGULAR RESIDENT OF ST.

JOHNS COUNTY LIKE MYSELF, IT MAKES ME WONDER WHAT ASPECTS OF THE CURRENT MAY BE USED WITH THE COMMISSIONERS AND COUNTY.

I HOPE THAT THE COMMISSIONERS STAY STRONG AND DO WHAT IS RIGHT FOR THE RESIDENTS OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY.

>> I'M ASKING THE COMMISSIONERS TO DENY THIS.

I APPLAUD COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST FOR BRINGING IT UP AND COMMISSIONER TAYLOR ANDOVERS FOR VOTING AGAINST THIS INITIALLY AS WELL. WITH THE BILL BEING SO NEW, YOU ALL WERE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE INTRICACIES OF EVERYTHING THAT WAS INVOLVED AND I'M SURE IT WAS A LOT TO DIGEST.

SO I'M APPRECIATIVE OF THAT. EVERYTHING I'VE WATCHED AND READ, IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM TO FIT INTO THE REQUIREMENTS.

AND I'M NEW TO ALL THIS BUT IT SEEMS LIKE A NO-BRAINER TO ME.

I'M SURE THAT THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE.

I THINK WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING REALLY FITS BECAUSE IT COULD SET A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT FOR FUTURE APPLICATIONS AS WELL. IT DIDN'T FIT FOR THESE PEOPLE BUT I'VE GOT THE SAME KIND OF APPLICATION IF IT DOESN'T FIT, WHY DID YOU APPROVE THAT? I THINK THERE'S GOING TO BECOME A BIG PROBLEM IF YOU APPROVE THIS ONE.

PLEASE LOOK CLOSELY AT THE REQUIREMENTS AND VOTE ACCORDING TO THAT AND ONLY THAT. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. GOOD MORNING.

>> GOOD MORNING. I'M 2141 WATER PLANT ROAD.

DO I WANT BRING YOUR ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT OUR COUNTY IS ALREADY MESSED UP WITH SILVER LEAF, ALLOWING A LARGE COMPANY TO COME IN. THE COUNTY IS NOW PAYING TO HAVE TO FIX ROADS AND ALL THAT AND IF THIS COMPANY IS NOT BEING REQUIRED TO PUT OUT FOR OUR ROADS, OUR SCHOOLS, OUR FIRE DEPARTMENTS, OUR INFRASTRUCTURE IS A MESS RIGHT NOW.

YOU CAN'T GO ANYWHERE IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY THAT YOU CANNOT EASILY ACCESS ROADS. 207 IS THE ROAD THAT BRINGS OUR PEOPLE INTO TOWN TO VISIT OUR COMMUNITY, WHICH IS SUCH A BEAUTIFUL PLACE AND PEOPLE LOVE TO COME.

BUT THIS IS STARTING TO BE A MESS FURTHER BLOCKING EVERY ACCESS TO OUR COMMUNITY. OUR AGRICULTURE IS SO IMPORTANT OUT THERE. WE HAVE SO MANY FARMERS, HASTINGS, I MEAN, WE HAVE THAT. THE RIVER.

THAT RUNOFF OF ANY OF THESE SUBDIVISIONS IS GOING TO OUR RIVERS. SO WE REALLY NEED TO STOP AND LOOK AT OUR COMMUNITY AND MAKE THESE SUBDIVISIONS AND PEOPLE

[00:50:01]

I HOPE YOU'LL DISAPPROVE IT. >> GOOD MORNING.

>> GOOD MORNING. >> I'VE LIVED HERE FOR 64 YEARS NOW AND SEEN A LOT OF CHANGE.

I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU BROUGHT THIS BACK.

I UNDERSTAND HAVING BEEN ON THE DIAS MYSELF THAT THE BUSINESS THAT YOU PLAN TO DO IS IMPORTANT.

SOMETIMES THE BUSINESS THAT YOU HAVEN'T PLANNED TO DO IS IMPORTANT TOO. I QUESTION -- I'M NOT MAKING ACCUSATIONS -- I QUESTION HAVE BEEN STRICTLY LOOKED AT IN TERMS OF THE PUBLIC INPUT IN TERMS OF THAT COMMUNICATION. YOU ALL HAVE SPENT A LOT OF TIME IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS WORKING ON UPDATING AND THIS PUTS IT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME AND IT ALSO MEANS THAT WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL BECAUSE ONCE THINGS ARE DONE, YOU CAN'T UNDO IT VERY EASILY. THANK YOU.

>> GOOD MORNING. I'M AN ALTON RESIDENT.

I WANTED TO STATE LIKE MR. WHITEHURST SAYS, THE STATE DOES THINGS THAT YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW BY THE LAW WHICH I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND, WHICH IS WHY I DID NOT SPEAK AT THE FIRST MEETING ABOUT THESE AGENDAS. THE STATE WAS VERY CLEAR AND IF THEY MET THESE ITEMS, THEN THEY COULD BE APPROVED.

BUT NOW, WE'RE HEARING FROM STAFF THAT THE STATE SAYS URBAN SERVICE AREA AND WE FIT A DEFINITION WE ALREADY HAVE.

THAT'S NOT WHAT THE STATE SAYS. IF YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW EXACTLY WHAT THE STATE SAYS AND DEAL WITH THOSE CONSEQUENCES, THEN YOU NEED TO FOLLOW WHAT THE STATE SAYS.

WE MIGHT BE HERE NEXT MONTH WITH A HEARING ABOUT URBAN SERVICE AREA AND WE'LL DEAL WITH THAT NEXT MONTH WHEN IT COMES.

BUT I THINK WE NEED TO DO EXACTLY WHAT THE STATE SAYS IT HAS TO BE AN URBAN SERVICE AREA AND THIS IS NOT.

THAT'S ALL. >> GOOD MORNING.

>> MY NAME'S I'M A RETIRED WATER PLANT OPERATOR.

AND THIS IS WHERE I HAVE AN OBJECTION WITH THE STAFF SAYING THAT REALLY THE BOUNDARIES IS THE SAME THING AS HAVING WHAT THE DEVELOPERS ARE ASKING FOR. IF YOU DON'T HAVE THIS IN PLACE, THIS DEVELOPMENT HERE IS THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT 15,000 HOUSES.

THAT'S FOUR TIMES THE POPULATION OF ST. AUGUSTINE.

TO SERVE ALL OF ST. AUGUSTINE AND SOME OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. THIS IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS GOING TO BE SOMETHING LIKE FOUR TIMES THE AMOUNT.

IF YOU TAKE THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO BE THERE, 30, 40, 50 HOWEVER MANY THOUSAND PEOPLE THAT THEY FINALLY SETTLE UPON AND MULTI"MULMULTI-OMICS MULTI TRUST ME, THIS COSTS A LOT OF MONEY.

YOU ALL KNOW HOW MUCH IT COSTS. TO PUT THAT MANY PEOPLE AND THEY'RE ALL GOING TO HAVE THEIR OWN WELL.

ANYBODY THAT LIVES IN ALTON THE LAST 10 OR 15 YEARS, YOU'VE HAD TO REDRILL YOUR WELL DEEPER A COUPLE OF TIMES.

SO I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE TAKEN INTO

[00:55:03]

THANKS. >> THANK YOU.

WE HAVE THREE PODIUMS. PLEASE BE READY TO GO.

GOOD MORNING. >> THE CHAPLAIN SAID IN HIS PRAYER, I BELIEVE WE LIVE IN THE BEST STATE AND THE BEST COUNTY ANYWHERE. I'VE LIVED ALL OVER IN THIS COUNTRY. I'M SO THANKFUL TO BE HERE.

I THANK YOU FOR BRINGING IT FORWARD.

AND HAVING I THINK OUR STATE GOVERNMENT MADE SOME DECISIONS THAT MADE IT MURKY AND I THINK IT'S A LITTLE CONFUSING AT THE OUTSET. I THANK YOU, MS. TAYLOR, FOR BEING VERY CLEAR AND USING BROKEN RECORD TECHNIQUE ABOUT THE SERVICE DISTRICT. WE'RE NOT THERE YET.

THE BEAUTY OF THE POWER OF THE PAUSE, AND I HATE POLITICS AND I NEVER GO TO MEETINGS, BUT THIS IS HUGE FOR OUR COMMUNITY.

I LOVE THAT PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT THE WATER.

THE WATER CONCERN BECAUSE OF THE POWER OF THE PAUSE, WE CAN SAY, WE DON'T HAVE NO MATTER WHAT SOME EYES AND VOICES THINK -- WE DON'T HAVE THIS URBAN SERVICE AREA RIGHT HERE.

I LOVE THE GENTLEMAN THAT SAID IT DOUBLES THE POPULATION.

THAT'S THE POWER OF THE PAUSE. IF YOU HAVE TRAVELLED TO 07, WHICH MOST OF US HAVE TRAVELLED 207, IT'S TERRIFYING.

IT IS ABSOLUTELY A NIGHTMARE. OUR INFRASTRUCTURE, WHETHER THE LAW SAYS WE CAN WIGGLE THIS DEVELOPMENT IN OR NOT, IS NOT -- THAT'S PART OF IT. BUT THE OTHER PART IS WE CAN'T ABSORB THIS NUMBER OF PEOPLE, THIS STRAIN ON OUR WATER, THIS DRAIN ON OUR INFRASTRUCTURE. WE'RE NOT EQUIPPED FOR THAT.

I BELIEVE IN SAFE HEALTHY DEVELOPMENT BUT NOT THIS.

AND I'M SO GRATEFUL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PAUSE AND LOOK AGAIN. I TRULY BELIEVE AND I'M PRAYING THAT THIS PAUSE WILL BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO RELOOK AT THIS AND SAY, IT THIS BEST FOR OUR COMMUNITY, THE SAFETY OF OUR CITIZEN AND IS OUR CHILDREN? BECAUSE YOU CAN'T EVEN GET TO OUR SCHOOLS OFF THE 207 RIGHT NOW.

THERE'S ACCIDENTS ALL THE TIME. I WANT TO HUMBLY SAY TO YOU, WHEN YOU DON'T WANT ANYONE TO SAY YES, PEOPLE HAVE USED UP THEIR THREE MINUTES AND I REALIZE THERE'S A MEETING AND I'M STAYING FOR IT. IT'S YOUR JOB TO HAVE THIS MEETING. IT'S VERY CONDESCENDING WHEN YOU TALK LIKE THAT AND IT'S VERY HURTFUL.

VERY HURTFUL. AND I HOPE THAT THAT'S NOT YOUR INTENT, BUT I WANT TO TELL YOU, AS A CITIZEN, IT FEELS LIKE A COMPLETE SHUT-DOWN OF OUR VOICES.

THANK YOU.

>> GOOD MORNING. I'M SO NERVOUS TO BE UP HERE.

BUT I'M DOING THIS BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING I BELIEVE IN.

>> CAN YOU STATE YOUR NAME. >> LINDA RICE.

THIS IS MY SON, PARKER. I JUST WOULD LIKE TO REMIND YOU -- ONE SECOND. I JUST WOULD LIKE TO REMIND YOU THAT YOU ARE HERE TO SERVE US AND TO SERVE THE LAW.

THE LAW IS NOT INTERPRETIVE. IT'S NOT MEANT TO BE READ AND RESHAPED BY PEOPLE WITH PARTICULAR INTERESTS.

IT QUITE LITERALLY IS THE WORD OF LAW.

IT IS CLEAR AND IT IS INTENTIONAL FOR A REASON WHEN IT IS WRITTEN. I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO REMIND THAT YOU PEOPLE ARE WATCHING. MY SON IS WATCHING.

OKAY. HE IS OF A FUTURE GENERATION.

AND LAWMAKERS UPHOLDING THE LAW IS WHAT HE OUGHT TO BE SEEING AND MODELING. OUR CHILDREN ARE WATCHING.

THE DECISION THAT IS YOU'RE MAKING.

THIS IS NOT A FEELINGS ISSUE AS MUCH AS I APPRECIATE OUR ENTIRE COMMUNITY COMING TO SPEAK. THIS IS A MATTER OF LAW.

IT'S A LEGAL ISSUE. YES, WE DON'T WANT TO SEE OUR BEAUTIFUL COMMUNITY OVERDEVELOPED.

BUT IN THIS MATTER, THE LAW IS CLEAR AND IT'S NOT ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT OUR COMMUNITY DEVELOPED.

IT'S A MATTER OF THE LAW AS IT'S WRITTEN, FOLLOWING IT AND

[01:00:02]

REPRESENTING US. THE LAW IS CLEARLY DEFINED.

I WOULD LOVE TO TELL MY SON THAT WOULD PEOPLE WHO ARE LEADING MY SON ARE DOING IT WELL AND FOLLOWING THE LAW AS IT'S WRITTEN. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

>> THANK YOU.

>> GOOD MORNING. ED HE HAD SLAVIN, I'VE REFED IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. GLENDA RICE AND PARKER AND I AGREE WITH THEM AND EVERY SINGLE PERSON.

I'M PROUD TO BE IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY AND I ESPECIALLY WANT TO THANK COMMISSIONER CHRISTIAN WHITEHURST AND COMMISSIONER ANNE TAYLOR. I AGREE WITH BOTH OF Y'ALL AND I AGREE THAT THE FOUNDING FATHERS WOULD BE PROUD OF YOU.

THIS IS WHY WE'RE HERE. THIS IS WHY WE'RE HERE.

ACTUALLY THINKING AND TALKING ABOUT ISSUES.

NOT LISTENING TO DEVELOPER AGENTS WHO ARE WRONGFULLY HIRED AS COUNTY ATTORNEY AND HE SHOULD GO.

THERE'S A WRIT OF PROHIBITION PENDING IN CIRCUIT COURT.

DID YOU ALL KNOW ABOUT THAT? I READ ABOUT IT IN THE LOCAL BUSINESS PUBLICATION IN JACKSONVILLE AND I WENT TO THE CIRCUIT COURT WEBSITE AND I WROTE Y'ALL AND I WROTE THE CIRCUIT COURT CLERK AND I WROTE EVERYBODY.

I HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO GET A COPY OF THE PROHIBITION FILED BY MR. SHE WHO DOESN'T WANT THIS MEETING TO EVEN TAKE PLACE.

MAYBE MR. SHE COULD COME UP HERE AND ANSWER MY QUESTIONS.

>> MAYBE YOU CAN KEEP YOUR COMMENTS TO THE BOARD, PLEASE.

>> COULD YOU PLEASE ASK MR. SHE TO COME UP HERE AND ANSWER OUR QUESTIONS BECAUSE AS TOM RICKERS JOURNALISM PROFESSOR SAID AT NORTH CAROLINA MANY YEARS AGO, IF YOU'RE GOING TO TELL A STORY ABOUT A BEAR, LET'S BRING ON THE BEAR.

NOW, THIS WRIT OF PROHIBITION IS FRIVOLOUS.

BUT SOMEBODY SAID, LET'S GIVE AN EXCLUSIVE TO ONE OF THE JACKSONVILLE NEWSPAPERS, BUSINESS PAPERS, AND NOT LET THE PEOPLE READ IT. IT'S NOT IN THE COURT'S WEBSITE.

YOUR COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS IT. I DON'T KNOW IF THE ATTORNEY WAS KIND ENOUGH TO SHARE IT. I WROTE THEM.

I CALLED THEM. NO, WE DON'T HAVE A COPY.

WHAT IS THE LEGAL ARGUMENT WHY THIS MEETING SHOULD NOT BE HELD? POWER. IT'S ABOUT POWER.

AND SENATOR GARRY HART TOLD HIS STAFF IN 1975 TO ASK ABOUT EVERY LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL BEFORE THE UNITED STATES SENATE.

IS IT BASED UPON NEED OR GREED? THIS AGRICULTURAL ENCLAVE BILL, WELL, PASSED THE FLOOR OF THE LEGISLATURE, SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN PASSED. OUR LEGISLATORS SHOULD NEVER HAVE SUPPORTED IT. THE GOVERNOR SHOULD HAVE VETOED IT. WE SHOULDN'TED BE HERE.

BUT WE'RE HERE. PLEASE VOTE THIS DOWN.

I WANT TO COMMAND YOUR ATTENTION TO MATTHEW.

A MAN CANNOT SERVE TWO MASTERS. THAT APPLIES TO U.N. COUNTY ATTORNEYS TOO. HE'S WORKED FOR DEVELOPERS.

WHO ARE CONVICTED OF FEDERAL INCOME TAX EVASION.

YOU SHOULD NEVER HAVE HIRED HIM. AND YOU ARE THE DECIDING VOTE, MR. CHAIR. THIS THING SHOULD BE TURNED DOWN. TURNED DOWN ON THE MERITS.

WHAT ABOUT PROHIBITION, WHICH OBVIOUSLY THEY'RE SO ASHAMED OF IT, THEY WON'T EVEN GIVE US A COPY.

THEY GAVE AN EXCLUSIVE ABOUT THE WRIT OF PROHIBITION TO A JACKSONVILLE NEWSPAPER BUT APPARENTLY DIDN'T FEEL -- IF I HAD IT, I WOULD PUT IT ON THE BLOCK.

PEOPLE COULD READ IT. IT WOULD BE AN HONOR TO HAVE YOU VOTE. THIS WHOLE SITUATION WITH THE FLOODING IS SOMETHING OF GREAT CONCERN TO US.

THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. VOTE NO.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME A RYAN CONNOLLY.

I'VE GROWN UP IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY.

I LIVE IN HASTINGS AND I LOVE IT OUT THERE BECAUSE IT'S RURAL AND I WOULD LIKE TO RESERVE SOME OF THAT IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY.

I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS TWO POINTS.

ONE IS THE WATER THAT'S ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSED.

ACCORDING TO THE ST. JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, EACH RESIDENT USES 115 GALLONS OF WATER A DAY.

IF WE'RE LOOKING AT 15,000 RESIDENCES BEING BUILT, ACCORDING TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY, THERE'S 2.62 PEOPLE PER HOUSEHOLD, SO THAT'S 15,000 TIMES 2.62.

LIKE 39 AND CHANGE. 39,000 AND CHANGE.

TIMES 115 GALLONS A DAY. THAT'S FOUR AND A HALF MILLION GALLONS OF WATER A DAY. ADDED BECAUSE OF THIS ONE ENCLAVE WE'RE SPEAKING OF CURRENTLY.

FOUR AND A HALF MILLIONS GALLONS OF WATER A DAY.

THE SECOND POINT I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS IS LAND.

OVER THE PAST 15 YEARS, ST. JOHNS COUNTY HAS A REZONED ROUGHLY 12,000 ACRES FROM EITHER AG TO RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL.

[01:05:05]

IN THE PAST 90 DAYS, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 7500 ACRES.

IN 90 DAYS, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REZONING HALF THE AMOUNT OF LAND WE'VE REZONED OVER THE PAST 15 YEARS.

WATER AND LAND IS MY CONCERN. ALSO MY CONCERN IS WHERE ARE ALL THE YOUNG PEOPLE TO WHOEVER'S WATCHING IN PUBLIC, LIKE, THIS AFFECTS YOU AND I AND THE YOUNGER GENERATION FAR MORE THAN ANYONE ELSE WHO'S CURRENTLY SITTING HERE AND I JUST WOULD ASK YOU TO USE YOUR VOICE AND SPEAK AND THANK YOU FOR HEARING OUR VOICES TODAY.

>> GOOD MORNING. >> GOOD MORNING.

MICHAEL MCDONALD. I WASN'T EXPECTING TO GET TRIPPED UP BY THE SECURITY GUARD ASKING TO SEARCH MY HAT THIS MORNING ON NEW DIRECTIVES. THAT WAS A LITTLE ANNOYING TO SAY THE LEAST. SO WHAT BRINGS ME HERE TODAY IS THE OBVIOUS OVERDEVELOPMENT OF ST. AUGUSTINE.

WE DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES, THE INFRASTRUCTURE, THE -- WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING. YOU GUYS ALL KNOW.

WHAT WE ALSO HAVE IS THE LACK OF RESOURCES WHEN IT COMES TO LABOR. THIS ISN'T GOING TO PRY US ANY JOB OPPORTUNITIES PAUSE THE PEOPLE THAT BUILD MASS DEVELOPMENTS DON'T BRING ANY LOCAL JOB OPPORTUNITIES.

THIS ISN'T -- THEY'RE NOT HIRING LOCAL BUILDERS, LOCAL TRADEMEN, LOCAL ANYTHING. YOU CAN AFTER THE FACT MAYBE, MAYBE ONCE THE COMMUNITY'S BUILT OUT, THEN THEY START TO HIRE.

YOU CAN LOOK AT SILVER LEAF. IS THERE ANY -- THERE MAY BE TRICKLING EFFECT OF EMPLOYMENT. BUT A LOT OF THAT CONGESTION THAT IS TAKING EVERYBODY'S TIME UP IS BECAUSE MUCH ALL THAT WORK BEINGS IS BECAUSE ALL THE PEOPLE ARE COMMUTING GOD KNOWS WHERE, JACKSONVILLE, CLAY COUNTY. THAT'S WHY WITHED TO BUILD THE MASSIVE EXTENSION. SO WITH THE DEVELOPMENT IN THIS COUNTY, WE DON'T HAVE THE WATER. THAT WAS CLEARLY ARE JUST SPOKEN ABOUT. THE WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT SAID THAT. THEY SAID WE WERE COVERED A LITTLE BIT OF IT. IT'S STILL RECORD LOW.

SO WHAT POINT DO WE JUST BACK DOWN? OR DO WE STEP UP AND FIGHT WHEN WE'RE OUT OF WATER, WHEN WE'RE OUT OF RESOURCES? WHEN THERE'S NO HOPE ON THE HORIZON OR STEP UP WHEN WE'VE GOT A LITTLE BIT OF WATER, SOME BOATS, BEER, THERE'S SOME OPPORTUNITY.

NOW ARE WE GOING TO RUN OURSELVES TO THE BOTTOM EDGE OF EVERYTHING TO WHERE EVERYBODY IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY, INCLUDING CLAY, IS GOING TO HAVE TO DRILL A DEEPER WELL WHEN THERE'S NO WATER IN THAT AREA? THAT'S JUST LOGICAL FACT WHEN EVERYBODY -- YOU COULD GOOGLE THAT.

EVERYBODY'S HAVING TO DIG TOWARD THE BOTTOM.

EVERYBODY'S FINDING NOTHING. LET'S FIGHT IT WHILE WE STILL HAVE SOME WATER AND SOMETHING TO HOLD ON AND A LITTLE BIT OF PROPERTY VALUE THAT. WOULD BE NICE.

WE DON'T HAVE THE -- THE INTEREST RATES ARE GARBAGE BECAUSE THERE'S GOING TO BE NO INTEREST IN THIS COMMUNITIES.

WHO'S GOING TO PAY FOR THEM OTHER THAN INSULATED PEOPLE THAT SHOP THE LOWEST BOTTOM PRICE THEY CAN FIND WHEN THEY DO SERVICE WORK. THAT'S OTHER DOWN SIDE.

ALL THESE INSULATED COMMUNITIES, THEY ALL HIRE OUT TO THE CHEAPEST PERSON THEY DON'T WANT TO FIND THE BEST -- THE CLOSEST, THE MOST REASONABLE. THEY WANT TO FIND THE CHEAPEST.

THAT'S WHY EVERYBODY'S DRIVING FROM JACKSONVILLE, DUVAL, WHEREVER BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE -- NOBODY IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY CAN AFFORD TO BE CHEAP WHEN MORTGAGE RATES ARE CRAZY WHEN EXORBITANT PRICES, GAS PRICES.

FIGHT WHILE WE GOT A CHANCE. >> THANK YOU.

>> GOOD MORNING. I DID NOT PLAN ON SPEAKING.

I APOLOGIZE. BUT SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TRAFFIC AND THE WATER ISSUES, I FELT THE NEED TO GET UP AND SAY SOMETHING. I WANT TO ASK YOU A QUESTION.

WHEN YOUR FAMILY AND FRIENDS COME TO VISIT, DO THEY COME TO SEE THE BUILDINGS? DO THEY COME TO SEE THE ROADS? DO THEY COME TO SEE THE STORES? OKAY.

UNLESS THEY'RE GOING TO HISTORIC "S"ING AUGUSTINE, THEY'RE NOT COMING TO SEE NEW WATER PLANTS TO SUPPORT OUR NEW DEVELOPMENTS.

THEY COME TO SEE OUR NATURE, WATER, OUR WILDLIFE.

AND SO I JUST WANT US TO KEEP IN MIND THAT THIS IS NOT ONLY OUR PLANET, BUT THERE'S OTHER BEINGS ON THIS PLANET THAT RELY ON IT.

I'VE LIVED HERE MY ENTIRE LIFE. I HAVE WORKED WITH OUR NATIVE ANIMALS MY ENTIRE LIFE. I HAVE NEVER SEEN THE NUMBER OF

[01:10:02]

I'M TELLING YOU THAT I AM SEEING GATORS HIT MORE THAN I EVER HAVE IN MY LIFE, OTTERS, FOR TH FIRST TIME IN MY LIFE, I'M SEEING OTTERS ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD.

SO IF YOU WANT TO DRIVE MONEY TO OUR COMMUNITY AND TO OUR COUNTY, FOCUS ON WHAT ATTRACTS PEOPLE TO OUR COUNTY, WHICH IS OUR NATURE, WHICH IS OUR WILDLIFE. IT'S IMPORTANT WE KEEP IN MIND THIS LAND IS NOT ONLY FOR US TO SURVIVE ON BUT FOR OTHER CREATURES AS WELL. THANK YOU.

>> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME'S JOSEPH ROBERTSON.

I HAVE LIVED HERE IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY SINCE 1989.

IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY THE DEBATE TODAY IS REALLY ABOUT THIS APPLICATION AND WHETHER IT FOLLOWED THE RIGHT RULES AND REGULATIONS TO SUFFICE. FOLLOWING THE LETTER OF THE LAW AND WE SHOULD, FOLLOWING THE LETTER OF THE LAW, A GOOD ATTORNEY, CRIMINAL ATTORNEY, COULD GET A MURDERER OFF.

BY BENDING THE LAW. THE LETTER OF THE LAW AND THERE'S THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW. THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW TELLS YOU WHAT'S RIGHT AND WRONG. SO I ASK THAT YOU FOLLOW THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW WHEN YOU MAKE YOUR DECISION.

THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> GOOD MORNING.

>> GOOD MORNING. CHRIS FARRELL.

FIRST THIS IS A QUASI JUDICIAL HEARING AND WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE CRITERIA AND MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON THAT.

BUT WHAT I WOULD SAY, THE INCREDIBLE OUTPOURING OF COMMENTS FROM THE COMMUNITY JUST SHOWS HOW IMPORTANT THIS IS AND THAT I HOPE YOU WOULD REALLY BE SCRUTINIZING THIS AND MAKING SURE THAT IF YOU WERE CERTIFYING ANALOGY ENCLAVE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND ALL OF THE CRITERIA IN STATUTE AND YOU HAVE CROSSWALKED THAT AND YOU COULD EXPLAIN IT TO SOMEBODY ELSE WHY EACH APP QUALIFIES BASED ON THE APPLICATION MATERIALS AND NOT JUST THAT IT'S A STAT REPORT IS POSITIVE AND SO YOU'RE ACCEPTING THAT. A COUPLE OF LITTLE THINGS WITH THIS APPLICATION. IT MENTIONS RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL. I THINK IT'S QUALIFYING UNDER PART OF THE STATUTE THAT JUST ALLOWS RESIDENTIAL, SO THAT SHOULD PROBABLY BE CLEARED UP. IT SAYS THERE'S AN OFFER TO NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH WHEN THE STATUTE REQUIRES A BINDING AGREEMENT. THAT'S SOMETHING THEY CAN PROBABLY DO THROUGH TESTIMONY. IT'S NOT IN THE APPLICATION ITSELF THAT THEY'RE WILLING TO ENTER INTO A BINDING AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES THAT AREN'T INTEREST.

THE MOST IMPORTANT THING THAT MAKES THIS IS WHAT COMMISSIONER TAYLOR SAID THIS MORNING. AND IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S SOME SEMANTICS. I'M KIND OF CONFUSED.

WE'RE PLAYING NAME GAMES. THE STATUTE DOESN'T SAY YOU HAVE TO GO OUT IN AN URBAN SERVICE OR DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY.

IT DOESN'T MATTER. I THINK THE IMPORTANT THING IS FOCUS ON WHAT THE CRITERIA ARE AND SAY, YOU KNOW, ASK COUNTY STAFF, ASK THE ATTORNEYS, DO WE HAVE AN AREA THAT EITHER HAS SERVICES OR HAS A CIE? IN PLACE TO PROVIDE THEM? IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT WE CALL IT.

DO WE HAVE THAT IN PLACE? I THINK THE ANSWER ENDS UP BEING NO FOR THIS. JUST BECAUSE THE STATUTE CALLS THAT AN URBAN SERVICE AREA AND WE'RE SUBSTITUTING OUR CLOSEST THING, WHATEVER WE HAVE NAMED IT, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT WE HAVE, THAT WE DON'T HAVE AN URBAN SERVICE AREA AND WE ONLY HAVE A DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY. IF IT DOESN'T HAVE THE SAME -- MEET THOSE CRITERIA OF THE STATUTE, IF IT DOESN'T HAVE SHOW AN AREA WHERE WE ALREADY HAVE SERVICES IN PLACE OR WE HAVE A CIE TO PUT THOSE IN PLACE, THEN WE CAN'T SUBSTITUTE IT.

WE COULD JUST DROP THE NAMES AND ASK THEM, DO WE HAVE AN AREA AROUND THIS ENCLAVE THAT HAS THOSE CRITERIA OR NOT? WE'LL KNOW WHETHER OR NOT IT MEETS THEM.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

COME ON UP. COME ON UP.

WE'VE GOT THREE MICS. >> FOLKS, I GOT TO TELL YOU STRAIGHT OUT, I DON'T KNOW A THING ABOUT ANY OF THIS.

SO WHAT I DID WAS I HAD A BIG POWWOW WITH MY NEW BEST FRIENDS, CLAUDE, CRONK, PERPLEXITY, GEMINI, CHAT AND I FED IT ALL IN THERE. YOU WON'T BELIEVE IT.

IT CAME BACK SJC TAXPAYER AND A PICTURE OF A BIG SCREW AND A "D"

[01:15:02]

IF THIS PERSON HAS OBEYED THE LAWS, THEN THIS PERSON IS BEING ABUSED TODAY. I APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER ANNE WHO HAS PROVEN TO BE AN INCREDIBLY THOROUGH COMMISSIONER COMING UP WITH THESE THINGS. I HOPE THEY'RE ALL ACCURATE.

COMING FROM OUR MILLION DOLLAR COUNTY ATTORNEYS, I DON'T KNOW ANYMORE. BUT ANYWAYS, SO I SAID TO MY BEST FRIENDS, I NEED MORE. THE ONE WORD THEY GAVE ME WAS "DESALINATA "DESALINATATION." SAL BECAUSE WATER, WATER, WATER. IT USED TO BE JOBS, JOBS, JOBS.

BUT I'M A GOOD LISTENER. AND ALL I HEAR IS PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT WATER, WATER, WATER. AND I DON'T THINK IT WOULD HURT AT THIS POINT TO AT LEAST CHECK OUT SOME DESALINATION PLANNED COST. FINALLY I WANT TO LEAVE YOU WITH TODAY WHAT REALLY REALLY DOES SCARE ME IS AN EXECUTIVE ORDER.

JANUARY 2027. AND WHO WOULD THAT COME FROM? DATA CENTERS BULLY. TRUMP LOVES DATA CENTERS.

HE TOLD OUT ALL OF THIS AGRICULTURE ENCLAVE, ALL OF THESE PEOPLE

THAT ARE AGAINST IT OR FOR IT. >> STICK TO THE ISSUE, MROO HE

IS, SIR. >> IT IS THE ISSUE.

AN EXECUTIVE ORDER IS THE ISSUE. >> THAT'S SOMETHING IN MIND FOR JANUARY. I APPRECIATE YOUR PASSION FOR

THAT. >> GOD BLESS YOU ALL.

DO A BETTER JOB.

>> SOME OF Y'ALL DO KNOW ME BECAUSE I HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT THINGS THAT DON'T BELONG IN AN AREA.

THIS IS ONE THAT DOESN'T QUALIFY.

I APOLOGIZE. I AM KIM WILLIAMS. I AM YOU HAVE IN FRUIT COVE. I HAVE LIVED THERE MY EXPIRE EXPIRE LIFE. I'VE SEEN DEVELOPMENT.

I'VE HAD TO FIGHT FOR IT. BECAUSE THINGS DON'T BELONG IN CERTAIN AREAS. THIS IS ONE OF THEM.

WE HAD TO FIGHT UP IN FRUIT COVE WITH RISE.

WE HAD TO FIGHT WITH FIRST COAST ENERGY BECAUSE IT DOESN'T BELONG. ONCE AGAIN, NOW WE'RE FIGHTING WITH SHEA. IT DOESN'T BELONG.

IT DOESN'T MEET THE CRITERIA AND WE EXPECT Y'ALL TO WATCH AND MAKE SURE THAT IT QUALIFIES AND NOT GO OFF YOUR OWN INTERESTS OR WHATEVER. WE WANT, AS THE PEOPLE, IT DONE AND WE WANT IT DONE CORRECTLY. I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

MS. TAYLOR, I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THAT YOU PUT INTO IT.

THANK YOU FOR BRINGING IT BACK TO THIS FOR US TO BE ABLE TO STAND UP HERE AND MAKE SURE THAT Y'ALL UNDERSTAND THAT IF IT DOESN'T MEET SOMETHING AND IT DOESN'T BELONG IN AN AREA, IT DOESN'T BELONG. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

>> THANK YOU.

>> GOOD MORNING. >> IT IS MORNING.

GOOD MORNING. WEST CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE.

THESE COMMISSIONERS HAVE MADE UP THEIR MINDS BEFORE AN AGENDA ITEM WAS HEARD AND THE PUBLIC COULD SPEAK.

[01:20:09]

I THINK WE NEED TO BE MORE RESPECTFUL OF THE PUBLIC THAT ARE SHOWING UP WITH THEIR CONCERNS.

THEY WANT TO TAKE YOUR TIME. YOU'RE HERE TO WORK FOR US.

SO LET'S SEE WHAT THE VOTE'S GOING TO BE.

THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AT THIS TIME? GOOD MORNING.

>> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME'S CHRIS WALSH.

TRUE FLORIDIAN, BORN AND RAISED. I SEE AN EXTENSIVE AMOUNT OF GROWTH HERE IN THE FLORIDA REGION FROM ORLANDO UP TO HERE.

I DID NOT PLAN ON SPEAKING TODAY BUT DEFINITELY FELT HEART FELT HEARING ALL Y'ALL'S TESTIMONIES ON WHAT IS GOING ON HERE.

I DON'T CARE ABOUT POLITICAL WHERE Y'ALL STAND OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. TO ME, IT JUST BOILS DOWN TO COMMON SENSE. WHEN YOU HAVE BLACK AND WHITE UP ON THE SCREEN, IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW YOU TRY TO CHANGE THE NARRATIVE LOOKING THROUGH YOUR DOCUMENTATION TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO MEET YOUR EXPECTATIONS. AND IT JUST DOESN'T FLY.

WHEN I SPEAK IT MY NIECES AND NEPHEWS, Y'ALL ARE DAMN SMART.

COMMON SENSE ISN'T THERE. RIGHT NOW, FROM WHAT I'M SEEING, I'M STARTING TO QUESTION THE COMMON SENSE HERE EXCEPT FOR A COUPLE OF INDIVIDUALS. IF WE CAN'T RELY ON Y'ALL JUST TO APPLY BASIC COMMON SENSE WHAT CARES WHAT THE NARRATIVE IS? BLACK AND WHITE, APPLES TO ORANGES.

WHY ARE YOU EVEN HOLDING THE MEETINGS? WHY HAVE YOU GUYS EVEN BE UP THERE LISTENING TO EVERYBODY? WHY SHOULD WE EMPLOY YOU IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE JUST BASIC COMMON SENSE? I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

DO THE RIGHT THING. >> THANK YOU.

COMMENT AT THIS TIME ON AGENDA ITEMS 1 AND 2? OKAY. SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE PUBLIC

COMMENT. >> ALL RIGHT.

BACK TO THE BOARD. DISCUSSION? ANYONE? YOU GET A REBUTTAL.

MAY I REMIND EVERYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE, THEY WERE VERY POLITE TO HAVE LET YOU HAVE YOUR SAY SO LET'S BE POLITE AND LET THEM HAVE THEIR SAY. ROBERT WALTERS ON BEHALF OF HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT. I'LL TRY TO BE BRIEF IN MY COMMENTS TODAY. BUT I JUST WANTED TO START AND REQUEST THAT NO ACTION IS TAKEN TODAY AND I'LL TAKE THIS POSITION FOR THREE REASONS. ONE ON PROCEDURAL GROUNDS AND TWO ON SUBSTANTIVE AND THEN TOWS SUBSTANTIVE GROUNDS, WE CAN GET INTO WHAT WAS BROUGHT UP ON REBUTTAL TODAY.

VERY KIND OF HIGH LEVEL ON A PROCEDURAL GROUND AND IT WAS BROUGHT UP BY ONE OF THE SPEAKERS ABOUT THE WRIT OF PROHIBITION THAT WE FILED LAST WEEK.

ON PROCEDURAL GROUNDS, WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS BOARD HAS THE AUTHORITY TO RECONSIDER THIS APPLICATION AFTER IT WAS ALREADY APPROVED. THE AMENDMENTS MADE BY SB686 WERE EXPRESSED PRE-EMPTION AND VERY PRESCRIPTIVE AND CREATED A VERY, VERY CLEAR PROCESS FOR CERTIFYING ENCLAVE THAT MEET THE DEFINITION. WE ALL KNOW THAT AFTER SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION, STAFF IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A WRITTEN REPORT WITHIN THIRTY DAYS, WITHIN THIRTY DAYS AFTER THAT, THEN A PUBLIC HEARING HAS TO OCCUR FOR EITHER APPROVAL OR DENIAL. IF AN APPLICATION IS APPROVED, IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT THE APPLICANT THEN CAN THEN MOVE INTO STEP TWO WHICH IS SUBMITTING THOSE DEVELOPMENT PLANS TO THE COUNTY. IT ALSO MAKES A VERY CLEAR APPEALS PROCESS FOR DENIAL WITH WRITTEN COMMENTS.

OUTSIDE OF THAT, THERE'S NO OTHER APPEALS, NO THIRD PARTY STANDING FOR IT TO CHALLENGE AN APPROVAL AND THUS IT'S OUR POSITION THAT YOU DO NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO RECONSIDER THESE APPLICATIONS AFTER AN APPROVAL IS ALREADY MADE.

ON SUBSTANTIVE GROUNDS, LET'S GO WITH TWO KIND OF BIG PICTURES.

ONE, OUR APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED ON OR AROUND JULY 1ST.

STAFF WENT THROUGH THAT APPLICATION.

STAFF MADE THE SAME DETERMINATION THAT WE DID IN OUR APPLICATION THAT IT MEETS EVERY REQUIREMENT OF THE DEFINITIONS.

I'LL JUST PUT THIS UP ON HERE FOR A VERY KIND OF BRIEF OVERVIEW AS TO WHY HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT EAST MEETS ALL THE

[01:25:02]

ONE, ALL THREE PARCELS ARE -- ALL TWO PARCELS ARE UNDEVELOPED AND ARE LOCATED WITHIN ST. JOHNS COUNTY.

BOTH PARCELS ARE OWNED AND CONTROLLED BY HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT. BOTH PARCELS HAVE HAD AG CLASSIFICATIONS FROM THE PROPERTY APPRAISER FOR AT LEAST THE LAST TEN YEARS. THE PERIMETER ANALYSIS, AND I'LL GET INTO THAT BRIEF DISTINCTION, IF OVER WHAT IS AN URBAN SERVICE AREA, BUT AT LEAST 50% OF THE PERIMETER ON THAT APPLICATION MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS. ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, WE PROVIDED -- WE ASSERTED THAT WE WOULD ENTER INTO GOOD FAITH NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE COUNTY TO PROVIDE FOR PUBLIC SERVICES.

AND THEN ALSO THE APPLICATION DIDN'T CONTAIN PARTIAL PARCELS THAT EXCEEDED ACHEERS AND ST. JOHNS HAS A POPULATION OF LESS THAN 1.75 MILLION PEOPLE. SO AT A VERY, VERY HIGH LEVEL, OUR APPLICATION DEMONSTRATED THROUGH APPLICATIONS THAT THESE TWO PARCELS MET THAT REQUIREMENTS.

STAFF WENT THROUGH THE APPLICATION AND DETERMINED THAT THE TWO PARCELS MET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LAW AND THUS DEMONSTRATED THROUGH COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT ALL THE REQUIREMENTS WERE MET. ON AUGUST 19TH WHEN THIS APPLICATION WAS BEFORE THIS BOARD, THIS BOARD MADE THAT DETERMINATION AS WELL. YOU HEARD FROM YOUR COUNSEL THEY MADE THAT SAME DETERMINES THAT BASED ON HOW ST. JOHNS COUNTY COMP PLAN IS WRITTEN, IT MEETS THE ESSENTIALLY THE DEFINITION OF AN URBAN SERVICE AREA. AND I'M NOT SOMEONE WHO'S VERY GOOD AT MAKING METAPHORS, BUT I'LL TRY TO SAY THIS.

IN A JOKINGLY WAY. IF I SAY I'M A HORSE BUT DESCRIBE IT AS A LARGE ANIMAL WITH BLACK AND WHITE STRIPES, I DON'T THINK I ACTUALLY OWN A HORSE.

I THINK I OWN A ZEBRA. AND SO WHENEVER WE'RE LOOKING AT THE STATUTORY DEFINITION OF AN URBAN SERVICE AREA, IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOT -- AS AUDUBON SOCIETY SAID, IT'S NOT IMPORTAT TO LOOK AT WHAT THE WORD OR THE DEFINITION IS, BUT WHAT THAT DEFINITION ACTUALLY STATES. AND THERE HAS BEEN COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE BOTH FROM COUNTY STAFF AND FROM THE INTERPRETATION MADE BY YOUR COUNSEL THAT WHAT ST. JOHNS COUNTY HAS AS ITS DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY IS AN URBAN SERVICE AREA AS STATUTORILY DEFINED.

YOU MAY HAVE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE CALLED URBAN SERVICE AREAS IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY, BUT THOSE PROBABLY GO ABOVE AND BEYOND AS WHAT IS REQUIRED UNDER THE STATUTORY DEFINITION.

WE PROVIDED ANALYSIS OF WHY WE BELIEVE THE BOUNDARY MEETS THE STATUTORY DEFINITION OF AN URBAN SERVICE AREA AND I'LL JUST READ ARE BASED ON WHAT WAS IN OUR APPLICATION.

SO THE 2025 ST. JOHNS COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DIRECTS GROWTH AND SUPPORTING PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES TO DEVELOPMENT AREAS DEPICTED ON THE FLUM.

SPECIFICALLY FUTURE LAND USE POLICY A.127 STATES THE COUNTY SHALL ENCOURAGE URBAN AND SUBURBAN GROWTH IN DEVELOPMENT AREAS WHERE PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES EXIST.

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT POLICIES D.115 AND D.412 STATE RESPECTIVELY THAT POTABLE WATER INES AND SANITARY SEWER LINES SHALL SERVE DEVELOPMENT LOCATED WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT AREAS. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED ON 78% OF ITS PERIMETER BY PARCELS LOCATED WITHIN AN URBAN SERVICE AREA, AN AREA WHERE EXISTING CENTRAL WATER AND SEWER CAPACITY IS AVAILABLE AND THAT IS SERVED BY EXISTING ROADS, SCHOOLS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AND HAVE

[01:30:01]

THUS AS YOUR STAFF AGREED WITH OUR DETERMINATION AND HAS MADE THE POSITION THAT THE DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY IN ST.

JONS COUNTY MEETS THE STATUTORY DEFINITION OF AN URBAN SERVICE AREA AND THUS, THE PERIMETER ANALYSIS STILL STANDS FOR THIS APPLICATION. AS WE WENT OVER IN OUR INITIAL PRESENTATION AND THIS BOARD AGREES WITH US, THIS APPLICATION ENCERT 2026-05 MEETS THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS.

IT MEETS ALL EIGHT ELEMENTS. FLUME FOR THOSE REASONS WE GO REQUEST THAT THE COUNTY TAKE NO ACTION TODAY AND UPHOLD THE PRIOR APPROVALS THAT OCCURRED ON AUGUST 19TH OF THIS YEAR.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD?

YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. >> IT'S FOR MR. COMMANDO.

WE HAVE, IN THE PAST, RECONSIDERED APPLICATIONS WHEN THEY'VE COME BACK AND ACTUALLY WE CHANGED THE VOTE.

WAS THAT CORRECT? WASN'T IT -- COMMISSIONER MURPHY

DID THAT? >> YEAH.

>> OKAY. SO THERE'S NO ISSUE WITH THAT, RIGHT? ALSO, I NOTICED IN THE SUBJECT LINE ABOUT THE STAFF, THEIR CONCLUSION SAYS IT APPEARS TO SATISFY STATUTORY DEFINITION, WHICH APPEARS TO ME IS NOT OTHER WORDS THEY'VE USED AS APPLICATION DOES DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE IN OTHER AREAS. SO I JUST THINK THAT'S -- AND ALSO SERVICE AREAS, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHY THE OWNER WOULDN'T WANT TO JUST GO THROUGH THE BOARD, WORK OUT ALL THESE ISSUES WITH THE BOARD AND THE PEOPLE IN THAT AREA AND NOT JUST BYPASS THEM AND BE GREEDY AND GET IT DONE AND START DEVELOPING. THERE ISN'T WATER.

THERE ISN'T SERVICES OF ELECTRIC DOWN THERE.

I MEAN, YOU KNOW WE'RE GOING TO END UP PAYING FOR THAT.

THEY'RE NOT GOING TO PAY FOR THAT WHOLE THING GOING DOWN THERE. ARE THEY? ARE THEY GOING TO PAY FOR ALL THE SERVICES TO COME DOWN THERE?

NO TAXPAYERS? >> SO AS REQUIRED BY THE STATUTE, THE APPLICATION WILL ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE

COUNTY TO ESSENTIALLY -- >> HAVE THE TAXPAYER PAY?

>> WELL, THEY'LL PAY FOR THEIR -- I'M FERPTH FORGETTING -- PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF WHAT'S REQUIRED TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH ST. JOHNS COUNTY'S EXISTING LAND DEVELOPMENT.

> SO IT'S SO WEIRD BECAUSE I THINK THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THIS IN THE FIRST PLACE WAS A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT'S SURROUNDED BY FULL DEVELOPMENT AND WANTS TO GET ZONED AND I JUST FEEL LIKE THAT THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT A COURT NEEDS TO GO THROUGH BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT'S ANYTHING WHAT YOU JUST SAID.

I'M GOING TO STAY WITH MY NO VOTE.

>> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE?

NO PONTIFICATIONS? >> I'M NOT SURE.

I WANT YOU TO DO WHAT YOU WANT TO DO.

COUNCILOR TAYLOR, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANT TO ADD?

>> I JUST WANT TO ADD SOMETHING ABOUT WHAT A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT IS. AND MAKE THAT VERY, VERY CLEAR AND HAVE TONIGHT IT ON THE RECORD.

THAT IS PART OF THE COUNTY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT WAS THE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS, ROAD, WATER LINES, SEWER, DRAINAGE THAT THE COUNTY HAS COMMITTED TO BUILD AND ACTUALLY BUDGETED MONEY FOR. AND OFTENTIMES IT'S RUNNING OVER A FIVE-YEAR SCHEDULE. SO IT'S NOT A WISH LIST TO BE IN THE CIA. IT IS A PROJECT THAT HAS TO BE NAMED, SCHEDULED AND FUNDED, WHICH IS WHAT I EXPLAINED EARLIER IN MY SLIDE. I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE THAT.

>> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION BEFORE THE FLOOR. SO GIVE US AN OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE ON THIS. IT'S A VOTE TO DENY.

[01:35:35]

THAT COMES FROM BOTH OF THEM, RIGHT? ACCORDING TO THE MOTION. BOTH ONE AND TWO? OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY ELSE TO COME BEFORE THE BOARD TODAY? I DID ASK.

>> YOU DID. OKAY.

MY MOTION INCLUDED BOTH APPLICATIONS, CORRECT?

>> OKAY. >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT OTHERWISE WE HAVE TO READ IT ALL AGAIN.

>> COMMISSIONER, I'M NOT ALLOWED TO SPEAK OFF MIC, SO I WANT TO SAY ON MIC WHAT I SAID TO YOU. DID YOUR MOTION INCLUDE BOTH

APPLICATION OR ONE APPLICATION? >> I SAID 2605 AND 06.

BOTH. >> ANYTHING ELSE TO COME BEFORE THE BOARD? WE'RE AD

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.