>> MAYOR: WELCOME, EVERYONE, TO THIS GENERAL POLICY COMMITTEE MEETING FOR THE CITY OF GAINESVILLE CITY COMMISSION ON
THIS THURSDAY MARCH 28th, 2024. GLAD TO HAVE YOU ALL WITH US. WE HAVE A NUMBER OF TOPICS TO
GET THROUGH. WE HAVE VISITORS FROM OUT OF TOWN WITH US. GOOD TO SEE YOU ALL.
WE WILL GET THINGS MOVING IN AN EXPEDITED FASHION. MADAM CLERK. >> MR. MAYOR, WE HAVE THE
ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA. >> SO MOVED. >> SECOND. >> MAYOR: SO I WOULD ASK --
THANK YOU FOR THE MOTION AND THE SECOND. THE ITEM NUMBER 2024-278, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT STAFF IS
NOT GOING TO PURSUE THAT TODAY IF WE COULD TAKE THAT OFF, PLEASE. >> I'M HAPPY TO MAKE THAT
AMENDMENT. AND THAT'S GOOD. I DID WANT TO HAVE A LITTLE SIT-DOWN WITH STAFF TO FIGURE
OUT MORE OF WHAT THE RAMIFICATIONS OF THAT WERE BEFORE GIVING DIRECTION, SO I THINK THAT'S GREAT.
>> MAYOR: OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
[AYES] ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU. WE HAVE AN AGENDA.
MADAM CLERK. >> YES. WE HAVE THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.
>> SO MOVED. >> SECOND. >> MAYOR: MOTION AND SECOND TO ADOPT THE MINUTES AS
DISTRIBUTED. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. [AYES] ANY OPPOSED?
ALL RIGHT. THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY AS WELL. >> MR. MAYOR, WE MOVE ON TO OUR DISCUSSION ITEMS FOR THE
AFTERNOON. 2024-297 DISCUSSION ITEM FOR THE GAINESVILLE REGIONAL UTILITIES POTENTIAL REFERENDUM WITH A
RECOMMENDATION THE CITY COMMISSION DISCUSS THE GAINESVILLE REGIONAL UTILITIES POTENTIAL REFERENDUM AND TAKE
THE APPROPRIATE ACTION. >> MAYOR: AT THE LAST MEETING, OF COURSE, WE DIRECTED THE CITY ATTORNEY TO WORK ON AN ORDINANCE
THAT WOULD AT THE REQUEST OF THE COMMUNITY BRING FORTH A BALLOT INITIATIVE TO CHANGE GOVERNANCE OF GAINESVILLE REGIONAL
UTILITIES. THERE WAS INTEREST AT THAT MEETING TO HAVE SOME OPPORTUNITY FOR DISCUSSION.
THAT'S WHAT THIS IS. ANYBODY -- WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO PRESENT. BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE HAD OPPORTUNITIES FOR EVERYONE TO BE HEARD BEGINNING NOW. THIS WILL BE A LONG PROCESS AS
WE CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD. I DON'T EXPECT ANYTHING TO HAPPEN QUICKLY. THERE IS A TIMETABLE IF WE
WANTED TO BE ON A BALLOT THIS FALL. BUT WE ARE -- WE ARE HERE FOR FOLKS TO ASK QUESTIONS AND SAY
THINGS. COMMISSIONER BOOK. >> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. NO FURTHER DISCUSSION FROM ME.
THIS IS MORE JUST TO SEE IF -- SINCE JUST A VERY SHORT TIME AGO FROM THE ATTORNEY, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE WE MAY HAVE
GLEANED OR LEARNED AS A RESULT OF OUR DISCUSSION THE OTHER NIGHT? >> MAYOR: MR. ATTORNEY.
>> I'M NOT AWARE BUT I'M NOT AWARE WHAT YOU ARE ASKING ABOUT. ARE THERE QUESTIONS? >> IT IS KIND OF VAGUE, TRYING
TO BE DELIBERATELY VAGUE. >> NOTHING HAS CHANGED. >> REALLY, HAS THERE BEEN ANY RESEARCH IN THAT SHORT AMOUNT OF
TIME THAT INDICATES -- CAN WE PURSUE THINGS? IS THERE CODIFIED LANGUAGE THAT WOULD CAUSE US PROBLEMS?
ANYTHING IN THE LEGAL REALM AT THE STATE LEVEL OR LOCAL LEVEL THAT MIGHT BE IMPORTANT TO SHARE?
>> THANK YOU. I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY IMPEDIMENTS TO THE COMMISSION UNDER CHAPTER 166 GOING FORWARD WITH A
PROPOSED BALLOT REFERENDUM THAT WOULD SIMPLY AMEND ITS CHARTER EVEN TO THE EXTENT THAT IT AMENDED GOVERNING STRUCTURE SET
FORTH IN THE CHARTER BY REFERENDUM. SO ACCORDINGLY, WITH THE DIRECTION GIVEN, I REACHED OUT
TO THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS OFFICE ASKING FOR THE DEADLINES SO WE CAN START TO PUT TOGETHER A TIMELINE.
THE DEADLINES BEING I THINK PRIMARILY -- AND THERE MAY BE MORE. WHEN THE TIME FRAME IS THAT WE'D
HAVE TO NOTIFY THE SUPERVISOR'S OFFICE THAT THERE, IN FACT, WILL BE A BALLOT REFERENDUM. THEY ARE GENERALLY ALL THE SAME
SORT OF SIZE, THERE'S 75-WORD LIMIT AND SO FORTH. THAT ALLOWS THE SUPERVISOR TO ADD THE PAPER AND PREPARE FOR
THE PAGES THAT WILL BE NEEDED FOR THE BALLOT. AND I HAVE ASKED FOR THAT DEADLINE FOR BOTH THE AUGUST AND
NOVEMBER BALLOTS COMING UP SO THAT THOSE ARE OPTIONS THAT CAN BE DISCUSSED BY OUR COMMISSION. THE OTHER DEADLINES THAT I'M
AWARE OF THAT WE'LL NEED TO GET FROM THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS' OFFICE IS WHAT IS THE DEADLINE FOR THE ACTUAL BALLOT
LANGUAGE. THAT LANGUAGE WILL BE A PART OF OUR ORDINANCE THAT THE COMMISSION WERE TO PASS, OF
COURSE. BUT THE DEADLINE TO TRANSMIT THE LANGUAGE TO THE SUPERVISOR, NOT ONLY WITH THE SPANISH LANGUAGE
TRANSLATION AND SO FORTH, SO THOSE SORT OF STEPS ALONG THE WAY -- AND I'M NOT AWARE OF THE PUBLISHING DEADLINES ONCE THE
ORDINANCE IS PASSED THAT ARE REQUIRED BY STATUTE. AND WE HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO MEET.
THEY HAD AN ELECTION LAST WEEK OBVIOUSLY, THE COUNTY WIDE ELECTION. SO AS SOON AS POSSIBLE TIME,
I'LL SIT DOWN WITH HER STAFF AND FIND OUT THAT BASIC INFORMATION. BEYOND THAT, IT'S NOT A DIFFICULT ORDINANCE TO DRAFT
ONCE WE ARE ENTIRELY CERTAIN THE DIRECTION THE COMMISSION WANTS TO GO INTO. THAT SUBSTANTIVE DISCUSSION WILL
BE SET BY THE COMMISSION. AS YOU KNOW, WE DON'T SET POLICY AND ENFORCE POLICY. RIGHT NOW THE DIRECTION THAT WE
ARE GIVEN IS TO DRAFT A CHARTER -- AN ORDINANCE THAT WOULD CALL FOR ANY BALLOT REFERENDUM FOR A CHARTER
AMENDMENT THAT STRIKES ARTICLE 7 FROM OUR CHARTER. OF COURSE, ARTICLE 7 WAS BROUGHT INTO BEING BY THE SPECIAL ACT OF
THE LEGISLATURE LAST YEAR. AND THAT'S WHAT WE ARE PREPARING TO DO AND THEN TO PUT FORTH BALLOT LANGUAGE.
HOPEFULLY WE CAN BRING TO YOU SOME OPTIONS WITH THE BALLOT LANGUAGE COULD BE. IT'S ALWAYS DIFFICULT TO SORT OF
WORDSMITH THAT FROM THE DAIS, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE END UP HAVING TO DO GENERALLY. AND THAT'S WHAT WE WILL
CERTAINLY HAVE THE OPTION TO DO. WE WILL DO OUR BEST TO BRING LANGUAGE FORWARD TO YOU IN THAT REGARD.
SO NOTHING NEW. WE NEED TO DO SOME RESEARCH IN THE AREA. I DON'T SEE ANY IMPEDIMENTS TO
PROCEEDING DOWN THAT ROAD TO PUT THIS MATTER AT THE DIRECTION OF THE COMMISSION BEFORE THE ELECTORATE.
AS LONG AS YOUR DIRECTION SUBSTANTIVELY STAYS CONSISTENT, WE'LL BE ABLE TO PREPARE THAT ORDINANCE AND SHOULD BE ABLE TO
REPORT BACK HOPEFULLY RELATIVELY SOON ABOUT OUR DEADLINES. THE COMMISSION WILL ALSO WANT TO DISCUSS WHETHER YOU ARE
AIMING -- AND PROBABLY LET YOU KNOW THE DEADLINES, WHETHER AUGUST OR NOVEMBER. CHAPTER 166.01 SAYS A REFERENDUM
RESULTING IN SUCH AN ORDINANCE WILL GO ON THE NEXT GENERAL ELECTION OR SPECIAL ELECTION CALLED FOR THAT PURPOSE.
THE GENERAL ELECTION IS SORT OF A TERM OF ART IN STATUTE ABOUT THE ELECTION IN NOVEMBER. THE ELECTION IN AUGUST IS
PRIMARY BUT I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING THAT WOULD PREVENT YOU FROM CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION COINCIDING.
SO WE WANT TO COOPERATE AND GET AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE SUPERVISOR TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN PROCEED IN AN ORDERLY
FASHION. SO YES, THAT'S IT. WE WILL WORK TOWARDS WHETHER YOU WANT TO GO AUGUST OR NOVEMBER.
WE'LL GET THE DEADLINES OF WHAT'S POSSIBLE. AND THEN YOU'LL DECIDE WHETHER YOU ARE SET ON THE SUBSTANCE OF
WHAT YOU'D LIKE TO PROPOSE TO THE VOTERS. >> SO, SEE, THERE WAS SOME FEEDBACK.
[LAUGHTER] THE ONE COMMENT THAT I WOULD HAVE IS IN THE SHORT PERIOD OF TIME, SINCE IT'S COME UP, ALL
THE FEEDBACK WHETHER IT'S IN-PERSON OR VIA EMAIL HAS BEEN SUPPORTIVE OF A BALLOT INITIATIVE THAT DEALS WITH THE
REFERENDUM. SO THAT'S IT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. >> MAYOR: THANK YOU,
COMMISSIONER BOOK. BEFORE I GO ON TO THE OTHER LIGHTS, I WOULD SAY THAT FROM A PROCESS VIEWPOINT, IF WE HAVE
ANY -- IF ANYONE IN THE COMMUNITY HAS QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS, THEN THE PEOPLE TO ROUTE THOSE THROUGH ARE
INDIVIDUAL COMMISSIONERS. FOR INDIVIDUAL COMMISSIONERS, THE ROUTE THROUGH IS TO THE CITY ATTORNEY PRIOR TO SOMETHING, YOU
KNOW, TO THE ORDINANCE, DRAFT ORDINANCE BEING CREATED IF IT MOVES IN THAT DIRECTION. AND CERTAINLY, THE ONLY TIME WE
ARE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT IT AS A GROUP IS THEN AT MEETINGS. I AM INCLINED BY THE WAY TO AT LEAST AT GENERAL POLICY MEETINGS
FOR THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS CONTINUE TO MAKE THIS AN ITEM SHOULD THINGS COME UP, A STANDING ITEM.
THE WAY WE DID IT LAST YEAR WITH GRU SO THAT IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS, WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY ALREADY SCHEDULED TO
DISCUSS THEM. COMMISSIONER CHESTNUT. >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
I WOULD ASK IF THE ATTORNEY COULD RETURN TO US ON APRIL 4th WITH A SCHEDULE. AND ON THAT SCHEDULE INCLUDE
YOUR TIMELINE AND YOUR PATH FOR AN ORDINANCE. INCLUDE THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS' DEADLINE FOR A BALLOT
INITIATIVE. AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE GENERAL ELECTION FOR THE CITY IS IN AUGUST.
IT'S NOT? IT IS NOT? YOU ARE SAYING NO? >> THE CITY HAS A REGULAR
ELECTION IN AUGUST AND A RUNOFF ELECTION IN -- >> NOVEMBER. >> NOVEMBER.
GENERAL ELECTION IS A TERM REFERRED TO IN STATUTES AS THE NOVEMBER ELECTION WITH THEIR PRIMARY ELECTION IN AUGUST.
AGAIN, AS LONG AS THE TIMELINE DOESN'T INTERFERE WITH THE ABILITY OF THE SUPERVISOR TO CARRY OUT HER CONSTITUTIONAL
DUTIES, I THINK BOTH DATES ARE AVAILABLE TO YOU. IT WOULD JUST BE A MATTER OF WHETHER YOU'D HAVE TO BASICALLY
CALL FOR A SPECIAL ELECTION THAT COINCIDED WITH THE PRIMARY ELECTION. >> DO YOU THINK YOU COULD RETURN
BY APRIL 4th WITH A SCHEDULE, A TENTATIVE SCHEDULE SO WE CAN BEGIN TO LOOK AT WHERE WE WANT TO GO?
>> MY PLAN HAS BEEN AND REMAINS THAT AS SOON AS I HEAR THOSE DATES, TO TURN IT AROUND TO YOU PROBABLY IN MEMO FORM, JUST SO
YOU CAN HAVE IT TO HOLD AND LOOK INTO. AGAIN, CERTAINLY COMMIT TO GET THAT TO YOU, WHETHER THERE'S A
MEETING OR NOT. OBVIOUSLY THE NEXT MEETING YOU COULD DISCUSS THAT AS A GROUP, BUT I CAN GET THAT TIMELINE TO
YOU AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, AS SOON AS IT'S AVAILABLE. >> HOPEFULLY BY APRIL 4th. >> I HOPE IT'S BY THIS
AFTERNOON. [LAUGHTER] >> BECAUSE I HAVE TO WORK FROM A SCHEDULE.
AND SO THE LONGER WE SAY AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AND THIS AND THAT, IT SORT OF IS KIND OF NEBULOUS. BUT I THINK IF WE CAN KNOW WHAT
DATES AND WHAT TIMES WE ARE WORKING TOWARDS, IT GIVES US A BETTER IDEA. >> I AGREE.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. >> MAYOR: THANK YOU,
COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER EASTMAN. >> WE HAVE A NUMBER OF MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY AND, OF COURSE,
THAT ARE INTERESTED IN MOVING THIS FORWARD. THEN OBVIOUSLY THIS WILL BE A BIG COMMUNITY DISCUSSION.
MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE IF WE COULD, IF WE ARE ALL COMFORTABLE WITH THE BALLOT LANGUAGE AND COMFORTABLE WITH KIND OF THE
STRUCTURE OF IT -- WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD, SAY, LIKE AT THE APRIL 18th GENERAL POLICY -- CITY
COMMISSION MEETING WITH AN ORDINANCE READING? OR WOULD THAT BE TOO SOON? >> NO.
I WOULD EXPECT TO BE ABLE TO BRING BACK TO YOU A COMPLETED ORDINANCE BY THEN. THE QUESTION IS, ARE YOU GOING
TO WANT -- IT MIGHT BE DIFFICULT TO HAVE FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE WITH PUBLISHING REQUIREMENTS.
THERE'S A LEAD TIME. AND I THINK WE USE THE "GAINESVILLE SUN" LESS THAN WE USED TO.
THEY ARE REQUIRING LESS THAN SEVEN DAYS. WITH MAIN STREET, THERE IS SHORTER OF A LEAD TIME.
WE ARE COMING UP ON THAT ALREADY. SO CERTAINLY -- [INAUDIBLE]
WELL, THE 18th OF APRIL WOULD REQUIRE PUBLICATION FOR FIRST READING BY THE 8th OF APRIL WHICH WOULD REQUIRE GETTING IT
TO -- SAY IF WE WERE UNDER THE MODEL OF THE "GAINESVILLE SUN" BY APRIL 1st. DOES THAT SOUND -- MONDAY.
>> MAYOR: THAT'S MONDAY. >> SO AGAIN, WHAT I THINK IS PROBABLY MORE REALISTIC IS TO BRING TO YOU, IF YOU DESIRE, A
DRAFT OF WHAT WILL BE ADVERTISED AT THE APRIL 18th AND THEN WE COULD AT THAT POINT PERHAPS EVEN ADVERTISE.
I HATE TO ADVERTISE EVEN THE TITLE UNTIL YOU HAVE THE FINISHED ORDINANCE PREPARED. WE COULD THEN ACHIEVE DIRECTION,
ADVERTISE IT FOR THE NEXT MEETING IF THAT'S FEASIBLE. >> OKAY. SO WE'D BE LOOKING AT I GUESS
MAY. >> THE CALENDAR. >> MAYOR: THE FIRST AND THIRD THURSDAY IN MAY.
>> ALL RIGHT. THE FIRST THURSDAY IN MAY. AND THEN AS IT RELATES TO LANGUAGE, I GUESS IF WE HAVE
IDEAS, CAN WE SEND THAT TO YOU? OR IF ANYONE IN THE COMMUNITY HAS IDEAS FOR WHAT THAT LANGUAGE WOULD LOOK LIKE, IS THAT THE
EASIEST WAY TO SORT OF BRING BACK OPTIONS? AS YOU SAID, HATE TO HAVE TO WORDSMITH UP HERE HOW WE WOULD
LIKE TO DO. >> YEAH, I THINK, AS THE MAYOR INDICATED, I THINK OBVIOUSLY ANY SUGGESTIONS WE WOULD RECEIVE
FROM THE COMMISSION IS GOING TO HELP US BRING BACK ALTERNATIVES TO YOU. WE WOULDN'T HOLD AN OPEN
SOLICITATION OF INPUT FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. THAT MIGHT MORE APPROPRIATELY FILTER THROUGH YOU.
ULTIMATELY OUR GOAL IS TO TRY TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE THAT MEETS YOUR DIRECTIONS AND THAT MEETS YOUR SATISFACTION AS A BODY.
SO YEAH, RESPECTFULLY, I WOULD AGREE WITH WHAT THE MAYOR SORT OF LED US TO. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC INPUT TO
YOU, YOU CERTAINLY SEND INPUT TO US. AND WE CAN ENGAGE ON A ONE-ON-ONE BASIS CERTAINLY
WITHOUT SHARING IDEAS BACK AND FORTH. BUT ON A ONE-ON-ONE BASIS AS TO WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO CONVEY AND
MAYBE THAT'S PART OF WHAT WE PRESENT BACK WITH PROPOSED LANGUAGE. AND THEN Y'ALL CAN CHAMPION
WHICHEVER ONES THAT YOU PREFER. THAT'S THE DIFFICULTY WITH ADVERTISING. THE BALLOT LANGUAGE IS PART OF
THE ORDINANCE. SO IT'S DIFFICULT ADVERTISING IT BEFORE WE GET THE ORDINANCE SET BECAUSE I THINK IT'S FAIR THAT
WHEN MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC SEE AN ADVERTISED ORDINANCE, THEY ARE ABLE TO COME TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE AND SEE THE ENTIRE THING.
IF IT'S STILL IN FLUX, IS IT REALLY PROPER NOTICE FOR THEM. IDEALLY WE'D HAVE EVERYTHING SET, INCLUDING THE BALLOT
LANGUAGE. THEN ADVERTISE IT IN THE PAPER. AND THEN HAVE FIRST READING AFTER THAT.
IT CAN BE A CUMBERSOME PROCESS. BUT THAT'S WHAT ENSURES ALL OF YOU ARE HEARD, ALL OF YOU HAVE INPUT AND ALL OF YOU TELL US
EXACTLY WHAT YOU WANT, ESPECIALLY ON SOMETHING SUCH AS A PROPOSED CHARTER REFERENDUM. >> RIGHT.
I GUESS AS SOON AS WE GET THAT OUT, I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD JUST SO WE CAN BEGIN TO MOVE EVERYTHING WITH
COMMUNITY INPUT, WITH ALL THE DISCUSSIONS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY ABOUT HOW WE GO FORWARD FROM THIS.
IF THAT'S THE TIMELINE, THEN I GUESS THAT WILL WORK FINE. >> THE FIRST STEP IS WHAT DIRECTION WE ARE GIVEN SO FAR,
IT CAME UP AT A MEETING AS PART OF, YOU KNOW, YOUR DUTIES AND UNDER COMMISSION COMMENT -- IS THAT THE DIRECTION OF THE BODY
AS A WHOLE? BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF DIFFERENT WAYS, YOU KNOW, THAT THE CHARTER COULD BE AMENDED
EVEN WITHIN THIS SPHERE. SO IF THAT'S IT, THAT'S A VERY SIMPLE AMENDMENT, JUST ELIMINATING ARTICLE 7.
IT SORT OF REVERTS US TO A WHILE AGO. BUT THAT'S FOR YOU TO DETERMINE AS THE POLICY SETTERS.
>> I MEAN I DO -- I THINK THIS WAS KIND OF INSINUATED IN THE LAST ONE, AT THE LAST MEETING THAT I THINK THAT THERE IS A
WILL FOR REFORM AT GRU, FOR US TO TALK ABOUT GOVERNANCE IN A MUCH BROADER WAY. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT -- BUT I
PREFER THIS BALLOT LANGUAGE IS QUITE SIMPLE AND THEN WE CONTINUE THAT DISCUSSION AS TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT DOES GRU LOOK
LIKE IN THE FUTURE. IS THERE CERTAIN PROVISIONS OR ORDINANCES THAT WE CAN PASS OURSELVES THAT MIGHT, YOU KNOW,
STREAMLINE GOVERNANCE AND MAKE THINGS WORK? AS SIMPLE OF A PROCESS TO LET THE VOTERS DECIDE, I THINK
THAT'S THE WAY TO GO. >> MAYOR: THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER EASTMAN. COMMISSIONER WILLITS.
>> MR. ATTORNEY, WHEN DO CHARTER AMENDMENTS GO INTO EFFECT WHEN THEY ARE FROM A BALLOT MEASURE LIKE THIS?
>> IF APPROVED BY THE ELECTORATE, THEN THE RESULTS ARE CERTIFIED AT THE END OF THAT ELECTION.
IT'S HOWEVER MANY DAYS AFTER THAT ELECTION. IT'S A BOARD PROCESS. SHORTLY AFTER THE ELECTION, THE
RESULTS ARE CERTIFIED, REPORTED BACK TO THE COMMISSION. AND THEN PROVIDED TO -- THERE'S A STATE AGENCY.
IT COULD BE EFFECTIVE ALMOST IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE ELECTION. WITHIN A VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME AFTER THE ELECTION.
>> THAT SOMETHING WE HAVE TO PUT INTO THE ORDINANCE IF WE ARE SAYING DECEMBER 1st OR JANUARY 1st?
>> PARDON. >> IS THAT SOMETHING WE PUT INTO THE ORDINANCE? SO, YOU KNOW, THE HOUSE BILL
THAT HAD AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF JULY 1st, BUT THE BOARD ISN'T SEATED UNTIL OCTOBER 1st. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT'S LIKE A
BUDGET YEAR. BUT IF THE VOTERS RETURNED GRU GOVERNANCE TO THE COMMISSION, DO WE SET THE DATE WE INTEND THAT?
FOR JUST, YOU KNOW, EASE OF TRANSFER? OR DO WE SET IT -- >> MAYOR: IT CAN GO IN THE
ORDINANCE. THE EFFECTIVE DATE. >> THE ORDINANCE WILL PROVIDE FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF IT.
IT CAN BE EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY UPON ADOPTION AND THEN PROCEDURALLY I THINK 166.031, WHICH I THINK COMMISSIONER
EASTMAN MAY HAVE PULLED UP THERE -- >> MR. CHAIRMAN. >> HE'S CHOMPING AT THE BIT.
I THINK IT PROVIDES THAT WE SEND IT OFF TO THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE. SO UPON ADOPTION OF THE
AMENDMENT TO THE CHARTER, THE MUNICIPALITY BY MAJORITY OF THE ELECTORS VOTING IN A REFERENDUM UPON SUCH AMENDMENT, THE
GOVERNING BODY OF SAID MUNICIPALITY SHALL HAVE THE AMENDMENT INCORPORATED INTO THE CHARTER AND SHALL FILE THE
REVISED CHARTER. [INAUDIBLE] WHEREAS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THE CHARTER.
>> I JUST KIND OF WONDERED IF THERE WAS FEELINGS ABOUT EXACT DATE, IF THERE'S -- SO I'M OPEN TO THOSE DISCUSSIONS.
I JUST WANTED TO ASK ABOUT THAT. >> OR WHETHER THAT CAN BE PART OF YOUR DISCUSSION IN CRAFTING THIS ORDINANCE, WHAT IS THE
EFFECTIVE DATE. >> YEAH, WHETHER THAT'S FOR EASE OR QUICKEST OR, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S THAT DECEMBER 1st WOULD
BE ENOUGH TIME FOR ALL THE STEPS TO HAPPEN AND WE SAY GREAT. IT INTERESTS ME. IS THERE ANYTHING --
MR. ATTORNEY, IS THERE ANYTHING WE NEED TO DO BESIDES STRIKE ARTICLE 7 TO EFFECTUATE GOING BACK TO THE WAY IT WAS?
IS THERE ANYTHING ABOUT UNDOING THE STRIKEOUTS IN OTHER ARTICLES OR ALL TECHNICALLY IN ARTICLE 7? IT'S JUST STRIKING ARTICLE 7
UNDOES THE REST OF IT? >> MR. MAYOR, RESPECTFULLY, COMMISSIONER, IT DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU WANT TO DO.
WHEN YOU SAY GO BACK TO THE WAY IT WAS, GOVERNANCE BY THE UTILITY HAS BEEN BY A VARIETY OF WAYS OVER THE DECADES.
LAW 23-348 FORMERLY KNOWN AS HOUSE BILL 1645 DID WAS IT AT FIRST DELIGHTED THE CHARTER OFFICE IN 3.06 GENERAL MANAGER
FOR UTILITIES. THEN IT CREATED ARTICLE 7 WHICH PROVIDED FOR A NEW GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE FOR THE CITY'S UTILITY
SYSTEM. THAT IS THE GRU AUTHORITY, THE BOARD. AND IT ALSO MADE THE TAIL END OF
IT SOME OTHER PROVISIONS THAT RELATE TO SPENDING ON SOCIAL, POLITICAL, IDEOLOGY MATTERS, A LIMITATION THERE.
A LIMITATION AS TO THE AMOUNT OF THE TRANSFER ENSURING THAT IT DOESN'T EXTEND BEYOND THE FLOW OF FUNDS THAT IS CONTEMPLATED.
AND THAT'S VERY SIMILAR TO THE RESOLUTION THAT THIS COMMISSION PASSED LAST YEAR. THE RESOLUTION BEING MORE
DETAILED AND ESTABLISHING A FORMULA THAT WAS TARGETED AT MAKING THE TRANSFER BEAR SOME RELATION TO TAXES AND FEES THAT
ARE NOT PAID BY MUNICIPAL UTILITY. BUT THAT WOULD BE PAID BY THE INVESTOR-OWNED UTILITY AND
FRANKLY THE FORMULA ALSO IS MINDFUL OF REACHING A TARGET TO PROVIDE FOR BOLD MEANINGFUL DEBT DEFEASANCE OVER THE YEARS.
SO I THINK EVEN ITS CRITICS WOULD UNDERSTAND IT IS A VERY CONSERVATIVE MODEL OF PAYMENT IN LIEU -- THE TRANSFER HAS A
PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES AND FEES THAT MAKES ALL THE ASSUMPTIONS IN FAVOR OF TRYING TO MINIMIZE THAT AMOUNT WITH AN
EYE TOWARDS HAVING A REALLY MEANINGFUL 10-YEAR DEBT DEFEASANCE PLAN. THAT'S PART OF A WHOLE OTHER
CONVERSATION. SO THE SPECIAL ACT REMOVED THE GENERAL MANAGER CHARTER OFFICER, PUT IN ARTICLE 7 WHICH CREATED
THE GRU AUTHORITY BOARD AND TRANSFERRED GOVERNANCE POWERS OPERATIONALLY TO THE GOVERNANCE BOARD.
AND HAD SOME PROVISION THAT IS RELATED TO GOVERNANCE, BUT MORE SPECIFICALLY GOVERNANCE IN TERMS OF A COUPLE OF FINANCIAL
MATTERS. WHAT HAS BEEN PUT BEFORE YOU, THE DIRECTION WE HAVE RECEIVED NOW WOULD BE TO HAVE A PROPOSED
CHARTER AMENDMENT THAT JUST STRUCK ARTICLE 7. SO WHEN YOU SAY GO BACK TO THE WAY IT WAS, YOU GO BACK TO THE
WAY IT WAS IN THE '80s. >> SO MY SECOND PART, IF WE WANT TO BRING THE GENERAL MANAGER BACK AS A CHARTER OFFICER, DO WE
NEED TO BRING BACK 3.06 AS WELL? DO WE NEED TO DO THAT? >> IF THAT'S WHAT THE BOARD -- THIS ORDINANCE HAS TO BE PASSED
BY SUPER MAJORITY, SO IT'S 4/5 OF THE MEMBERSHIP WHICH NOW WITH A SEVEN-MEMBER BOARD CONSTITUTES 6/7.
YES, IF THE INTENT IS TO GO BACK TO THE WAY THINGS WERE A YEAR AGO, THEN THAT WOULD BE REINSTATING SECTION 3.06 AND
THEN DELETING ARTICLE 7. >> OKAY. >> IF IT JUST IS DELETING ARTICLE 7, SO WE HAVE A
STRUCTURE THAT IS -- AND DIFFERENT MUNICIPAL UTILITIES ARE STRUCTURED DIFFERENT WAYS. IT'S NOT UNUSUAL TO HAVE
MUNICIPAL UTILITIES REPORT WITHOUT A GENERAL MANAGER CHARTER OFFICER. WITH A GENERAL MANAGER THAT
REPORTS THROUGH A CITY MANAGER, FOR EXAMPLE. THERE'S A WIDE RANGE OF OPTIONS YOU COULD PURSUE.
AND THAT'S WHAT YOU ARE CONSIDERING NOW, THE SUBSTANCE OF WHAT THIS PROPOSED BALLOT REFERENDUM CHARTER AMENDMENT
WOULD BE. >> CORRECT. I THINK FOR SOME PEOPLE, WHEN THEY SAY GO BACK TO THE WAY IT
WAS, SOME MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY AND SOME OF EVEN US, YOU KNOW, WE REMEMBER MR. CUNNINGHAM SITTING DOWN HERE
AND THAT'S THE WAY IT WAS. AND SO I DON'T KNOW ABOUT MY COLLEAGUES. TO GO BACK TO STRAIGHT THE WAY
IT WAS, IT WOULD INVOLVE BRINGING BACK 3.06. IF WE ARE LOOK FORGET THE MOST STRAIGHTFORWARD RETURN, SIMPLE
RESET, REWIND SOUTH THAT MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY UNDERSTAND, THAT'S EXACTLY. I THINK MAYBE MEMBERS OF THE
COMMUNITY WANT PERHAPS SOMETHING DIFFERENT. THEY MAY WANT SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
THE STRAIGHTEST VERSION, IF WE ARE GOING TO SAY WE VALUE THE ABSOLUTE STRAIGHTEST RETURN, THEN I THINK WE NEED TO BRING
BACK 3.06. I THINK THAT'S MY OPINION. BUT THEN IF WE ARE NOT LOOKING FOR A COMPLETE -- IF WE ARE
LOOKING FOR SOME CHANGES, I HAD A QUESTION. AND I DON'T KNOW IF MAYOR PRO TEM CHESTNUT COULD ANSWER THIS
OR COMMISSIONER BOTTCHER. BUT IN THE 2020 CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION, WERE THERE ANY DISCUSSIONS OF ANY KIND OF SMALL
CHANGES THAT WERE REQUIRED TO BRING BEFORE THE REVIEW COMMISSION? LIKE WE CHANGED THE TITLE OF THE
CLERK. NOT HUGE, SMALL. WAS THERE ANYTHING LIKE THAT THAT WAS A GOOD TIME TO DO THAT?
DO YOU REMEMBER, COMMISSIONER CHESTNUT? OR COMMISSIONER BOTTCHER. >> ACTUALLY THERE WAS DISCUSSION
AS TO WHETHER OR NOT WE WANTED THE GENERAL MANAGER AS A CHARTER OFFICER. WE WERE LOOKING AT CHARTER
OFFICERS AS WELL AT THAT TIME AND LOOKING TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF CHARTER OFFICERS. AND I THINK SUSAN MAY SPEAK TO
IT AS WELL, I THINK WE JUST ENDED UP KEEPING IT AS IT WAS. BUT IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS IT.
>> MR. MAYOR, IF YOU CAN ALLOW. >> FORMER COMMISSIONER BOTTCHER, IF YOU COULD COME UP. >> TELL US YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF
THAT DISCUSSION. >> MAYOR: AS A FORMER MEMBER OF THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION. >> YES, AS A MEMBER OF THE
CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION WHICH WAS 2019 TO 2020, WHEN WE HAD THE EXPERTS COME IN AND TALK TO THE FULL CRC, THEY SAID YOU GUYS
HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF CHARTER OFFICERS. AND SO WE HAD A VERY ROBUST DISCUSSION ON AT LEAST TWO, IF
NOT THREE DIFFERENT MEETINGS -- CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, COMMISSIONER CHESTNUT -- THAT WE WOULD DO AWAY WITH THE GENERAL
MANAGER AS A CHARTER OFFICER. NOT BECAUSE WE WANTED TO FIRE ANYBODY, BUT BECAUSE WE WANTED TO THEN KIND OF DO WHAT
TALLAHASSEE DOES. THEIR MUNICIPAL UTILITY IS A DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY AND IS UNDER -- IT'S A DEPARTMENT UNDER
THE CITY MANAGER. AND SO THEY HAD A DEPARTMENT HEAD THAT RAN THE UTILITY. THAT PERSON WAS NOT A CHARTER
OFFICER. AND MY RECOLLECTION, AGAIN CORRECT ME IF I'M REMEMBERING THIS WRONG, WE WERE GOING IN
THAT DIRECTION. WHAT HAPPENED IS THE PANDEMIC HIT. AND BECAUSE OF NOT JUST IN THIS
COMMUNITY, BUT WORLDWIDE THERE WAS, YOU KNOW, CONFUSION AND FEAR AND ALL THIS, WE HAD A NUMBER OF THINGS ON THE CRC
AGENDA THAT WE WERE GOING TO PUT FORWARD TO THE COMMISSION, TO THE CITY COMMISSION TO SAY WE ARE RECOMMENDING THESE CHANGES
TO THE CITY CHARTER, AND I THINK WHAT HAPPENED IS WE LOST OUR POLITICAL WILL BECAUSE THERE WAS SO MUCH ELSE THAT EVERYBODY WAS
IN A NEAR PANIC OR AT LEAST HIGHLY CONCERNED AND WORRIED ABOUT, THAT WE FELT LIKE IT'S PROBABLY BETTER NOT TO TAKE THIS
VERY TUMULTUOUS TIME IN OUR COUNTRY AND IN OUR COMMUNITY AND THEN HIT THE VOTERS WITH ALL THESE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT
WOULD HAVE REQUIRED A LOT OF EFFORT TO EDUCATE THEM ON AT A TIME WHEN OUR HANDS WERE TIED BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC.
SO PERSONALLY, YOU KNOW, I MEAN IF WE WERE TO HAVE THE CRC AGAIN TODAY, I WOULD VOTE TO REMOVE THE GENERAL MANAGER AS A CHARTER
OFFICER AND PUT THAT POSITION UNDER THE CITY MANAGER AS ITS OWN SEPARATE DEPARTMENT. >> DID IT EVER COME UP FOR A
VOTE AMONGST THE COMMISSION, THE CHARTER COMMISSION? >> I DON'T REMEMBER IF IT CAME TO A VOTE.
AGAIN, THE PANDEMIC HIT. AND IN DISCUSSION WE JUST SAID WE'RE TABLING THIS, WE'RE TABLING THIS.
>> GOT IT. >> WE TABLED PROBABLY SIX OR SEVEN THINGS THAT WE WERE GOING FORWARD WITH.
AND IT JUST KIND OF DIED BECAUSE THE PANDEMIC REALLY TOOK THE WIND OUT OF OUR SAILS. >> THANK YOU.
>> MAYOR: THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CHESTNUT HAS SOMETHING TO ADD. >> I WOULD SAY, COMMISSIONER
WILLITS, IT WAS MOVING MORE TOWARDS HAVING THE PERSON AS A GENERAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE BECAUSE WE WERE CONCERNED WITH
JUST THE SHEER NUMBER OF CHARTER OFFICERS GAINESVILLE HAS. AND WE HAVE MORE THAN JUST ABOUT ANYONE ELSE IN THE STATE.
AND SO WE WERE LOOKING AT HOW TO STREAMLINE THAT. >> OKAY. SO IF WE DON'T BRING BACK 3.06
AND GRU WOULD BE MANAGED UNDER THE CITY MANAGER, DOES THEN THAT -- WHOEVER THAT MANAGER OF THE UTILITY IS, DOES THAT CHANGE
HOW WE -- CONTRACTUALLY CHANGE HOW THAT PERSON IS HIRED BY THE CITY? IT IS LESS OF A --
[INAUDIBLE] I MEAN THE SAME KIND OF LIKE THEY ARE HIRED AND HOW MUCH, YOU KNOW -- THEY ARE NOT NEGOTIATING
WITH US CLEARLY ABOUT SEVERANCE OR WHAT NOT. DOES IT CHANGE ANYTHING ABOUT THOSE KIND OF CONTRACTS?
>> ABSENT FURTHER AMENDMENT TO YOUR CHARTER, THEN THE GENERAL MANAGER OR WHOEVER THAT TITLE WOULD BE -- I THINK AT SOME
POINT IN THE '80s IT WAS GENERAL MANAGER. IT WAS AT SOME POINT ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER OF THE UTILITIES,
WOULD BE UNDER THE MANAGEMENT OF THE GENERAL MANAGER. AND WOULD DETERMINE COMPENSATION FOR THOSE POSITIONS.
>> I THINK THAT ANSWERS IT FOR ME. I LIKE THE IDEA IN NOVEMBER BECAUSE THE STATUTE IS SAYING
THAT'S THE GENERAL ELECTION, EVEN THOUGH OUR CITY ELECTIONS SOMETIMES ARE DECIDED IN NOVEMBER -- I MEAN IN AUGUST,
BUT REALLY IT'S KIND OF OUR VERSION OF A PRIMARY TO NARROW IT DOWN TO WHOEVER IS GOING TO BE THERE IN NOVEMBER.
I THINK IF THE IDEA IS WE WANT TO BRING IT BACK TO THE PEOPLE OF GAINESVILLE, THE LARGEST POOL OF VOTERS POSSIBLE, THIS WOULD
BE IN A PRESIDENTIAL YEAR. THAT MAKES ME FEEL THE BEST ABOUT IT. LIKE THE DECISION ABOUT GRU, BIG
PRESIDENTIAL YEAR, HIGHEST TURNOUT POSSIBLE. I LIKE THE IDEA OF NOVEMBER. I LEAN BOTH WAYS ON LIKE A
CLEAR -- GOING BACK TO THE PAST WOULD INCLUDE 3.06 TO HAVE THE GENERAL MANAGER AS A CHARTER. THAT'S WHERE I LEAN TOWARDS, BUT
I CAN HEAR ARGUMENTS ABOUT LIKE IF THE CRC HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN PUSHING MORE TOWARDS THAT, I APPRECIATE THAT AND I CAN
DEFINITELY BE CONVINCED THAT, YOU KNOW, UNLESS OUR CITY MANAGER OR OTHER ASSOCIATIONS OF CITY MANAGERS TELLS US NO, BUT
IT SOUNDS LIKE A LOT OF PLACES DO HAVE THAT UNDER THE CITY MANAGER. SO I CAN DEFINITELY BE OPEN FOR
THAT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AND THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER CHESTNUT, FOR FILLING US IN A
LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE PAST. >> MAYOR: THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER WILLITS. SO COMMISSIONER EASTMAN, I'LL
GET TO YOU IN A MINUTE AND GO BACK AROUND. I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF COMMENTS. WE'LL GO TO COMMISSIONER EASTMAN
AND TALK TO ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO IS READY TO DO SO. AND WE DON'T HAVE ACTION TO TAKE TODAY, BUT I DO THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT TO OFFER THE OPPORTUNITY TO THE PUBLIC BEFORE WE MOVE ON FOR THE REST OF THIS AGENDA.
I WANT TO NOTE THAT IF WE WERE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH PLACING EFFECTIVELY CHANGING MANAGEMENT OF THE UTILITY TO GENERAL
GOVERNMENT, TO THE OVERALL WHEELHOUSE OF THE CITY MANAGER, THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE CITY MANAGER WOULD DIRECTLY MANAGE
THE UTILITY ANY MORE THAN THE CITY MANAGER DIRECTS THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT OTHER THAN OVERALL GENERAL GOOD MANAGEMENT
OF OUR PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR. SO IN THAT SCENARIO, CITIES THAT DO THIS DO GO FIND SOMEONE WHO IS EITHER ALREADY ON STAFF OR
SOMEONE ELSE WAY AROUND THE WORLD TO MANAGE THE UTILITY. THE CITY MANAGER IN TALLAHASSEE IS NOT A HANDS-ON MANAGER OF THE
UTILITY. THEY HIRED AN ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER WHO HAS THOSE TOOLS. SO IT ABSOLUTELY -- AND I KNOW
THAT THERE ARE FOLKS OUT THERE WHO ARE READY TO SAY, OH, THEY WANT CYNTHIA CURRY TO MANAGE THE UTILITY.
THAT'S NOT WHAT WE ARE SAYING. IF WE GO THAT DIRECTION, WE WOULD SEEK PROFESSIONAL MANAGEMENT UNDER THE UMBRELLA OF
THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. THAT'S THE WAY THAT GENERALLY WORKS IN CITIES WHO DO IT THIS WAY.
SO HAVING SAID THAT, COMMISSIONER EASTMAN AND THEN THE PUBLIC. >> THANK YOU.
SO COMMISSIONER WILLITS, I'M GLAD YOU MENTIONED THE CHARTER REVIEW. I WAS ALSO ON THE CHARTER REVIEW
COMMISSION AT THE TIME. I ACTUALLY WENT BACK AND WATCHED THE SEPTEMBER 16th MEETING WHERE THIS CAME UP.
WE WERE TALKING ABOUT ALL OF THIS IN TERMS OF HOW DO WE STREAMLINE OUR GOVERNMENT TO MAKE IT MORE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE
VOTERS. AND WE WERE LOOKING AT A STRONG MAYOR SYSTEM AT THE TIME. AND WE INVITED TWO FOLKS THAT
WERE LONG-TIME CITY MANAGERS TO LOOK OVER OUR CHARTER POINT BY POINT AND FIND ANY ISSUES WITHIN IT.
AND REALLY WITH A FOCUS ON SHOULD WE MOVE TO THE STRONG MAYOR SYSTEM OR KEEP THE COUNCIL-MANAGER SYSTEM.
WE WERE PRETTY WELL CONVINCED THAT THE COUNCIL-MANAGER SYSTEM IS A PRETTY GOOD BULWARK ESTOPPING AGAINST PEOPLE -- YOU
HAVE PEOPLE WITH PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE RUNNING THINGS INSTEAD OF POLITICIANS. BUT WHAT THEY KEPT COMING BACK
TO OVER AND OVER AS TALKING THROUGH THE ISSUES WITH OUR CITY IS HOW WE ARE ONE OF THE FEW, IF ONLY GOVERNMENTS, THEY HAD FOUND
WHERE THE GENERAL MANAGER OF THE UTILITY ANSWERS DIRECTLY TO THE CITY. SOME OF THIS -- AND THEY DID NOT
LIVE IN GAINESVILLE. >> MAYOR: TO THE CITY COMMISSION YOU MEAN. >> TO THE CITY COMMISSION, I'M
SORRY. WHAT DID I SAY? >> MAYOR: YOU SAID TO THE CITY. >> TO THE CITY COMMISSION.
AS WE BROUGHT UP, YOU KNOW, THE ISSUES WITH THE FINANCES WITH GRU, THEY POINTED OUT, OF COURSE, THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO
HAPPEN AS IT RELATES TO A FUNDS TRANSFER BECAUSE ALL FIGHTS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE BROKEN UP BY THE CITY COMMISSION.
ANY KIND OF ARGUMENTS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO COME DIRECTLY TO US TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN. THEY HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD
AND THEY KEPT POINTING OUT THAT THIS WAS JUST -- THIS WAS A VERY BAD SYSTEM THAT WE NEEDED TO FIX.
AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT SINCE THAT POINT, GRU, OTHER FOLKS WITHIN OUR CITY HAVE LOOKED AT ANY OTHER CITIES THAT
ARE STRUCTURED THIS WAY. AND THEY ARE NOT. THEY ARE EITHER AN INDEPENDENT BOARD OR THEY ARE JUST A
DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF GAINESVILLE WHICH FOR MOST OF GRU'S HISTORY THEY WERE. AND IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WHEN
PEOPLE ARE CRITICIZING GRU IN SOME OF THE DECISIONS THAT GOT MADE, A LOT OF THAT CRITICISM HAPPENED IN THAT POST-1988
PERIOD WHEN WE WENT FROM MAKING IT A DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF GAINESVILLE, IT WAS DEPOLITICIZED.
IT WAS JUST A PART OF THE CITY THAT WAS OVERSEEN BY PROFESSIONAL STAFF. AND IT WAS MOVED OUT ESSENTIALLY
SO THAT THE CITY COMMISSION COULD HAVE MORE OF A HAND OVER WHAT GRU DID. AND I THINK THAT WAS THE BIG
GOVERNANCE MISTAKE THAT LED TO A BUNCH OF OTHER ISSUES THAT CAME AFTER THAT. I'M VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF MOVING
THIS INTO THE WAY THAT MOST OTHER CITIES IN THE UNITED STATES WORK. I THINK IT DEPOLITICIZES GRU AND
PUTS PROFESSIONAL OVERSIGHT OF GRU INSTEAD OF COMMISSION OVERSIGHT OF GRU. I THINK IT MAKES US MORE
EFFICIENT. I THINK JUST THE FACT THAT IT IS THE STANDARD ACROSS THE UNITED STATES FOR HOW YOU MANAGE A
UTILITY. OUR IS SO UNIQUE, I THINK IT WOULD BE FOR US TO GO TO THAT SYSTEM.
IT'S HOW GRU HAS FUNCTIONED THROUGH MOST OF ITS HISTORY, UP UNTIL THE LAST COUPLE OF DECADES, I GUESS 30 YEARS.
I WOULD ENCOURAGE US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT. BUT IT'S UP TO THIS COMMISSION BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND YOUR
POSITION OF, YOU KNOW, BRING IT BACK TO THE STANDARD AS IT WAS, YOU KNOW, IN 2020 BEFORE ALL THIS HAPPENED.
BUT I THINK IF WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY IT MAKE THIS REFORM, IT'S AN IMPORTANT REFORM AND ONE THAT WILL SOLVE A LOT OF THE
CRITICISMS THAT PEOPLE HAVE HAD ABOUT GRU AND THE GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE. IT'S SORT OF A MIDDLE GROUND
THAT DOESN'T HAVE US DIRECTLY WITH OUR HANDS IN IT AND KIND OF HAS A LITTLE BIT MORE OF AN IN-BETWEEN THE ELECTED OFFICIALS
AND THE DECISIONS OF DAY-TO-DAY GRU. I THINK IT'S A GOOD WAY TO GO FORWARD.
>> MAYOR: THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER EASTMAN. LET ME JUST MENTION ONE MORE BRIEF THING BEFORE WE GO IN.
FOR THOSE THAT ARE INTERESTED IN HOW THE PROCESS OF THE COMMISSION PUTTING SOMETHING ON A BALLOT WORKS, I WOULD SUGGEST
TO YOU THAT YOU GO BACK TO THE LATE 2017, EARLY 2018 MINUTES OF THE COMMISSION. AND YOU WILL SEE A LOT OF
DISCUSSION AND MANY, MANY VOTES ABOUT PLACING -- ABOUT REORGANIZING HOW WE ELECT CITY COMMISSIONERS, WHAT YEARS WE
ELECT CITY COMMISSIONERS AND THE LENGTH OF TERMS. WE HAVE HOURS AND HOURS AND HOURS OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT.
AND I THINK THREE DIFFERENT VOTES BEFORE WE EVER GOT TO 6-7 COMMISSIONERS SUPPORTING WHAT FINALLY WENT ON THE BALLOT IN
NOVEMBER OF '18. SO I FOUND THAT INTERESTING. I'M SURE THAT COMMISSIONER WARREN FOUND THAT INTERESTING AT
THE TIME. AND IF YOU WANT A HISTORY LESSON IN HOW THAT PROCESS KIND OF ROLLS FORWARD UNDER OUR CHARTER,
THAT'S A GREAT PLACE TO GO BACK AND REVIEW. OKAY. I SEE NO FURTHER LIGHTS, SO,
MADAM CLERK, WHAT DO WE HAVE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? >> WE HAVE DR. BOBBY MERMER. >> MAYOR: WELCOME.
BY THE WAY, BEFORE WE START THIS CLOCK, ANYONE WHO WISHES TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS, OUR STANDARD PROCESS, IF YOU HAVEN'T
BEEN THROUGH IT BEFORE, PLEASE FILL OUT ONE OF OUR PUBLIC COMMENT FORMS. TURN IT IN TO MR. CARL OVER
HERE. HE WILL GET IT TO THE CLERK AND WE WILL CALL YOU NONE THAT ORDER.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS. LONG TIME NO SEE. WE NEED TO STOP RUNNING INTO
EACH OTHER LIKE THIS. SO THE ACLC -- BOBBY MERMER, COORDINATOR OF THE LABOR INITIATIVE.
THE ACLC SUPPORTS PUTTING THIS ON THE BALLOT AND IT WAS GIVEN LAST WEEK, STRIKE ARTICLE 7. I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN
COMMITTEE SAY GO BACK TO THE WAY IT WAS, THAT WOULD INCLUDE RESTORING THE GRU G.M. AS A CHARTER OFFICER.
STRICTLY SPEAKING, THAT'S TRUE. BUT WHEN YOU TALK TO THE AVERAGE PERSON, WHEN WE THINK ABOUT OR WHEN WE SAY TO THE WAY IT WAS,
IT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ULTIMATE AUTHORITY OVER GRU GIVEN TO A GOVERNOR-APPOINTED BOARD OR IS IT GIVEN TO THE
ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF GAINESVILLE THROUGH THEIR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES, ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
SO I DON'T THINK IT'S CONFUSING OR DISINGENUOUS TO JUST LEAVE THAT FIRST SECTION OF 1645, WHICH DELETED THE G.M. AS A
CHARTER OFFICER, TO JUST KEEP THAT OFF. KEEP IT NICE AND CLEAN. STRIKE ARTICLE 7.
PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT. THE CHOICE BETWEEN A GOVERNOR-APPOINTED OVERSIGHT BOARD OR OVERSIGHT TO A BODY
ELECTED DIRECTLY BY THE CITIZENS OF GAINESVILLE. SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY WHAT IS MEANT BY GOING BACK TO THE
WAY IT WAS. THE AVERAGE PERSON DOESN'T REALLY GET INTO THE NITTY-GRITTY, WHO IS A CHARTER
OFFICER, WHO ISN'T. THAT'S NOT WHAT MOST PEOPLE THINK ABOUT. THANK YOU.
>> MAYOR: THANK YOU. MADAM CLERK. >> YES. WE HAVE MS. JANICE GARY FOLLOWED
BY ALEX HOOD. >> MAYOR: HOW MANY FOLKS DO WE HAVE? >> JUST FOUR.
MS. GARY, MR. HOOD AND MR. ENGLE. >> MAYOR: THANK YOU. WELCOME, MS. GARY.
>> MY NAME IS JANICE GARY. I'M HERE AS AN INDIVIDUAL. THE "GAINESVILLE SUN" IS NOT WHAT IT USED TO BE IN
CONTRAST -- AND THEY HAVE DIMINISHING READERSHIP. IN CONTRAST, THE "MAIN STREET DAILY NEWS" HAS INCREASING
READERSHIP. I JUST HAD A MEETING WITH REPRESENTATIVE HINSON AND THE MAIN STREET STAFF.
THEY ARE MEETING LEGISLATORS DURING THESE LUNCHEONS. I WOULD HIGHLY SUPPORT USING "MAIN STREET DAILY NEWS" FOR
PUBLISHING INFORMATION ABOUT THIS TO ENSURE THE BROADEST REACH OF READERSHIP. THANK YOU.
>> MAYOR: THANK YOU. >> ALEX HOOD. >> WELCOME, MR. HOOD. >> HI.
I'M ALEX HOOD. I'M A GAINESVILLE RESIDENT. I DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO SPEAK AT THE LAST MEETING.
I WANTED TO GIVE, YOU KNOW, ALL THE DOCTORS A CHANCE TO -- [LAUGHTER] LET THEMSELVES BE HEARD.
I'M STILL IN SCHOOL, SO -- [LAUGHTER] I JUST WANTED TO ECHO EVERYTHING THAT THEY SAID.
I THINK ALLOWING THE RESIDENTS TO DECIDE WHO THEY WANT TO RUN THEIR UTILITY, IT'S AN OBVIOUS PRO-DEMOCRACY WITH A SMALL "D"
CHOICE. I THINK, IF ANYTHING, YOU HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS TO DO EVERYTHING YOU CAN
TO BRING SOME SEMBLANCE OF CONTROL BACK TO CITIZENS OF GAINESVILLE. I THINK THE WAY TO DO THAT IS
THROUGH A VOTE. I THINK THE SIMPLEST WAY IS JUST TO STRIKE ARTICLE 7 IN ITS ENTIRETY.
THANK YOU. >> MAYOR: THANK YOU, MR. HOOD. >> JOURNEYMAN JAMES ENGLE AND THE LAST SPEAKER NANCY DARIN.
>> MAYOR: SO EVERYONE HAS A TITLE. >> I GOT TO HEAR ALL THE DOCTORS LAST TIME SO I THOUGHT I'D GO
WITH JOURNEYMAN JAMES ENGLE THIS TIME. JAMES ENGLE, A RESIDENT IN THE CITY.
TWO POINTS. I WANTED TO SAY HOW IMPORTANT IT IS TO PUT IT ON THE BALLOT AND GIVE THE PEOPLE A CHANCE TO
WEIGH IN ON HOW THEY RUN THEIR LOCAL BUSINESS. AND TWO, TO MAKE IT AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE.
I THINK THE MORE COMPLICATED THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS, THE MORE CONFUSING IT IS FOR PEOPLE AND THE MORE PROBLEMATIC IT
BECOMES. I THINK IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO PUT IT ON THE BALLOT. IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO KEEP IT
SIMPLE. THANKS. >> MAYOR: THANK YOU. >> YES, WE HAVE NANCY DARIN
FOLLOWED BY SUSAN BOTTCHER. >> MAYOR: WELCOME, MS. DARIN. >> HI, NANCY DARIN. FIRST, I JUST WANT TO SAY I'M
DISTRESSED AND CONCERNED FOR WHAT HAS HAPPENED AT THE CITY. AND I HOPE IT GETS FIGURED OUT. AND I WISH YOU ALL SAFETY AND
ABILITY TO DO YOUR JOBS AND OUR STAFF BE PROTECTED AS WELL. SO KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK. I JUST WANT TO ECHO WHAT HAS
BEEN SAID. I REALLY APPRECIATE THIS BEGINNING DISCUSSION, SO KEEPING IT SIMPLE.
GIVE US THE CHOICE. THIS REFERENDUM IS TO CRITICAL TO OUR FUTURE AND HEALTH AND WELL-BEING.
THIS WAS NOT AN INDEPENDENT BOARD. IT'S AN AUTONOMOUS BOARD WITH A FIREWALL AND THAT DOESN'T SERVE
EITHER GRU OR GENERAL GOVERNMENT WELL. I'M VERY CURIOUS ABOUT THE IDEAS AROUND JUST -- WELL, I THINK
JUST STRIKE ARTICLE 7 AND HAVE SOME MORE DISCUSSION AROUND THE G.M. AS CHARTER OR NOT. BUT THAT WAS FASCINATING.
SO THANK YOU. >> MAYOR: THANK YOU, MS. DARIN. COMMISSIONER BOTTCHER. BY THE WAY, IN CASE YOU WONDER,
MY GENERAL WAY OF DOING THINGS IS IF SOMEONE IS A FORMER ELECTED OFFICIAL, PARTICULARLY FORMER MEMBER OF THIS
COMMISSION, I WILL REFER TO THEM AS COMMISSIONER. >> NO PRESSURE. [LAUGHTER]
I KIND OF LIKE MY CIVILIAN STATUS. BUT I UNDERSTAND. SUSAN BOTTCHER.
AND I THINK BECAUSE THIS CAN BE COMPLICATED IN THE MINDS OF THE PUBLIC, WHO I LIKE TO REFER TO AS THE NORMAL PEOPLE, THE NORMAL
PEOPLE WHO DON'T PAY ATTENTION -- THEY DON'T HAVE THE LUXURY OF PAYING ATTENTION TO POLITICS AND THE GOINGS ON THE
WAY A LOT OF US DO, SO KEEPING IT AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE I THINK IS REALLY, REALLY IMPORTANT. AND IN MY MIND, THE SIMPLE WAY
TO -- AND Y'ALL ARE GOING TO CRAFT THE WORDS ON YOUR OWN. BUT KEEPING THIS IN MIND -- AND THAT IS WHAT WE'RE ASKING YOU TO
DO IS PUT A REFERENDUM ON THE BALLOT THAT'S GOING TO GIVE THE VOTERS A CHOICE, THE CITIZENS OF GAINESVILLE A CHOICE.
DO YOU WANT THE GOVERNOR APPOINTING PEOPLE TO RUN THE UTILITY? OR DO YOU WANT THE PEOPLE WE
ELECT HERE LOCALLY TO APPOINT WHO RUNS THE UTILITY? AND THAT LOCAL MESSAGE, THAT HOME RULE MESSAGE I THINK IS
REALLY OUR NORTH STAR ON ALL THIS BECAUSE I THINK THERE IS A LOT OF OUTRAGE THAT IF THERE'S A PROBLEM, WHO IN GAINESVILLE CAN
DRIVE UP TO TALLAHASSEE, KNOCK ON THE GOVERNOR'S DOOR AND SAY I'D LIKE A FEW MINUTES OF YOUR TIME?
IT JUST ISN'T GOING TO HAPPEN. THAT'S WHY IT NEEDS TO BE RETURNED TO THE PEOPLE THAT WE ELECT HERE LOCALLY SO THAT YOU
GUYS CAN DO THE APPOINTING. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR: THANK YOU. >> ROBERT HUTCHINSON FOLLOWED BY
HELEN [INAUDIBLE] >> MAYOR: FORMER COUNTY COMMISSIONER ROBERT HUTCHINSON. WELCOME, COMMISSIONER.
>> MY BUSINESS CARD SAYS POOL HUSTLER. ONE OF THE THINGS YOU MIGHT WANT TO ASK YOUR ATTORNEY TO ALSO
OPINE ON WITH RESPECT TO THE ELECTION IS, IS IT POSSIBLE TO DO A SPECIAL ELECTION ON AN ISSUE AND DO THAT BY A MAIL-OUT
BALLOT? THERE MAY BE SOME BENEFITS TO THAT, PARTICULARLY IF YOU ARE LOOKING AT FURTHER CHANGES DOWN
THE LINE TO THE GOVERNANCE OF GRU. YOU MAY NEED TO CHANGE YOUR CHARTER TO DO THAT.
AND CAN YOU DO A CHARTER AMENDMENT BY SPECIAL ELECTION, MAIL-OUT BALLOTS? THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY THING
THAT'S AN ISSUE. SO THE OTHER THING I WOULD SAY IS THAT IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE CITY COMMISSION UNDERSTAND THE
IMPLICATIONS OF GETTING INVOLVED IN GRU ISSUES RIGHT NOW. AND I'LL GIVE YOU ONE EXAMPLE. LAST NIGHT THEY DECIDED THEY ARE
MOVING FORWARD WITH BOND VALIDATION. UNDOUBTEDLY, THIS BOND VALIDATION -- WELL, THIS BOND
VALIDATION IS IMPORTANT. AND THEY ARE GOING TO PROBABLY COME TO THE CITY COMMISSION AND SAY DO YOU GUYS AGREE THAT WE
SHOULD FLOAT THESE BONDS, DO YOU GUYS AGREE THAT THE CURRENT SITUATION IS LEGAL. Y'ALL NEED TO THINK TWICE ABOUT
HOW YOU ANSWER THAT QUESTION BECAUSE ON THE ONE HAND, IF YOU GET THE BONDS VALIDATED, THAT IS DISASTROUS, DA, DA, DA, DA, DA,
MAY OR MAY NOT BE. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE FACT THAT YOU ARE DIPPING INTO GRU BUSINESS THAT HB 1645 SAYS YOU
CAN'T, IT COMPLICATES THE LEGAL STANDING OF WHATEVER YOU SAY. AND WE DON'T WANT TO GET INVOLVED IN YET ANOTHER
QUESTIONING OF DO YOU HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO WHAT YOU'RE DOING. SO THIS IS A VERY COMPLEX TIME.
FORTUNATELY, PART OF THE MESSAGING BEHIND THIS REFERENDUM IS ARE YOU TIRED OF THE CHAOS. AND THAT'S JUST GOING TO PEOPLE
WHO ARE PAYING ATTENTION TO IT. THE NORMAL PEOPLE WHO MAY JUST NOT CARE ABOUT ALL THIS INSIDE BASEBALL STUFF WON'T CARE ONE
WAY OR ANOTHER. BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO TAKE A STANCE THAT YOU WON'T GET INVOLVED WITH THE BOND
VALIDATION BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING TO ASK BOTH THE OLD BOARD AND THE NEW BOARD BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW WHICH ONE HAS THE
AUTHORITY TO START THE BOND VALIDATION. YOU'RE GOING TO ASK THEM BOTH A QUESTION.
I'M GUESSING THEY WILL COME TO YOU ALL AS WELL. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR: THANK YOU,
COMMISSIONER. >> HELEN WARREN. >> MAYOR: COMMISSIONER WARREN. >> AND THEN MARY VON DABINSKI.
>> I ENJOY BEING ON THIS SIDE OF THE DAIS. REALLY APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE COME UP.
I WAS ON THE TAIL END OF MY SERVICE WHEN THIS CHARTER REVIEW PROCESS WAS GOING ON. AND IT WAS REALLY DIFFICULT TO
CONSIDER CHANGING THE COURSE OF WHAT HAD BEEN PART OF THE PROCESS WITH GRU AND THE CHARTER OFFICER RELATIONSHIP WITH THE
CITY. AND TO THINK THAT WE COULD PICK UP WHERE WE LEFT OFF, THERE WAS A STRONG INTEREST IN MAKING THAT
CHANGE. AND I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO SEE YOU GUYS SUPPORT A STRUCTURE THAT REPRESENTS OTHER
COMMUNITIES THAT OWN THEIR OWN MUNICIPALITY AS WELL BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE -- THOSE WHO ARE NORMAL PEOPLE OR THOSE WHO
ARE NOT, IT'S GOING TO BE COMPLICATED, NO MATTER WHICH WAY IT GOES. AND WITH THE CONSIDERATION THAT
WE WERE ON COURSE TO TAKE OUT THE GENERAL MANAGER AS A CHARTER OFFICER, I THINK IT WOULD BE A GOOD TIME TO MAKE THAT
TRANSITION. AND ESPECIALLY WITH WHAT I'M HEARING CONSIDERATION OF, THEY WOULD BE SIMILAR TO HOW WE DO
OUR PUBLIC WORKS, OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT, OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT. WE WOULD BE ABLE TO GET SOMEBODY IN THERE THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO
STAY IN POSITION. I CAN'T TELL YOU -- I THINK JUST ABOUT EVERY CHARTER OFFICER WAS SWITCHED OUT AT SOME POINT
DURING MY SIX YEARS ON THE COMMISSION AND SOME MORE THAN ONCE. AND THAT PART OF INSTABILITY IS
SOME OF THAT CHAOS THAT WOULD DO WELL FOR US TO GET SOMETHING BETTER IN A LONG-TERM PLACEMENT FOR SOMEBODY.
THAT CALIBER OF PROFESSION THAT IS NEEDED TO LEAD THE UTILITY. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR: THANK YOU,
COMMISSIONER. >> WE HAVE MARY VON DABINSKI. >> MAYOR: WELCOME. YES, GOOD AFTERNOON.
I DID NOT PREPARE ANYTHING. MY NAME IS MARY VON DABINSKI. TODAY I AM SPEAKING MORE AS A CUSTOMER OF GRU.
AND JUST AS SOMEONE WHO TRIES TO LIVE A LIFE IN A VERY PRAGMATIC WAY AND DEBT FREE. AND THE WHOLE ISSUE OF GRU IS
DEAR TO MY HEART BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE COMMUNITY AND FOR ALL OF FLORIDA TO BE REALLY CONSERVING ENERGY AND
USING SOLAR ENERGY AND WIND ENERGY AS MUCH AS WE CAN. FOR ME, GRU IS A MODEL THAT OTHER UTILITIES SHOULD FOLLOW.
BUT IT'S NOT ALWAYS WHAT'S PRESENTED WITH THE GOVERNMENT WE HAVE IN TALLAHASSEE. SO AS A PERSON WHO LIVES IN
GAINESVILLE, I HAVE ALWAYS HEARD THAT PEOPLE ARE UNHAPPY ABOUT THEIR BILLS, OKAY. AND THE DECISIONS TAKEN BY
THIS -- IT IS NOT YOU, BUT BY THE COMMISSIONS THAT WERE HERE BEFORE -- AND I DON'T WANT TO INSULT ANYBODY BECAUSE I'M NOT
INTO POLITICS THAT MUCH, YOU KNOW. BUT I THINK THAT IF YOU WANT THIS MEASURE TO BE VOTED ON IN
NOVEMBER, YOU REALLY HAVE TO SPEAK TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE PAYING HIGHER BILLS. IF THEY ARE WEALTHY, THEY HAVE
ALREADY PUT SOLAR PANELS ON THEIR ROOFS. BUT IF THEY ARE NOT, THEIR BILLS IS A LARGE PORTION OF THEIR
INCOME. SO I SUGGEST THAT WHEN YOU PRESENT THIS MEASURE, THAT YOU ALSO GIVE SOME INFORMATION THAT
THE NEW GRU AUTHORITY OR BOARD OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT WOULD BE REALLY LOOKING AT HELPING PEOPLE.
I'M SURE THERE ARE WAYS TO FINANCE THE DEBT ON ONE SIDE, BUT ALSO TO FINANCE THE BILLS OR TO FINANCE AND PAY THE BILLS.
MOST PEOPLE, LOOKING AT THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THE HOUSE, ANYWAY, THERE ARE WAYS TO DO THAT.
SO YOU NEED TO BE INFORMED AND YOU NEED TO REALLY PRESENT THAT TO THE PUBLIC. THANK YOU.
>> MAYOR: THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? >> LAST SPEAKER. >> MAYOR: VERY GOOD.
THANK YOU. IT IS IMPORTANT TO REMIND EVERYONE THAT WHAT WE ARE DISCUSSING IS WHETHER OR NOT
SOMETHING GOES ON THE BALLOT. ONCE WE -- WE MAY NOT PUT IT ON THE BALLOT. IT TAKES SIX OUT OF SEVEN
COMMISSIONERS TO PUT SOMETHING ON THE BALLOT. IF WE DO THAT, THE CITY OF GAINESVILLE CANNOT ADVOCATE OR
EDUCATE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER IN THIS PROCESS. AND WE WON'T. AS INDIVIDUALS, COMMISSIONERS,
WE HAVE SPEECH RIGHTS. AND THOSE INCLUDE POLITICAL SPEECH RIGHTS. BUT AS A COMMISSION AND AS A
CITY OF GAINESVILLE, WE DO NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO ADVOCATE EITHER WAY OR EDUCATE EITHER WAY.
THAT WILL BE UP TO THE VOTERS AND THE ELECTORATE TO DO THAT WORK. SO I WANT TO SET THAT OUT
IMMEDIATELY. I DON'T WANT ANYBODY THINKING OTHERWISE. I ALSO WANT TO -- BEFORE WE GO
MOVE ON PAST THIS TOPIC, THE MENTION OF THE EXECUTIVE MAYOR SYSTEM AND CHANGING TO THAT WAS BROUGHT UP AS SOMETHING THAT WAS
DISCUSSED IN THE PAST. I DON'T WANT THAT TO GO ANYWHERE EITHER. I DON'T WANT ANYBODY THINKING
THIS IS PART OF A MOVE TO DO THAT, BECAUSE IT AIN'T. AT LEAST NOT ON MY PART. I LIKE THE JOB I HAVE.
I'M NOT INTERESTED IN MAKING A CHANGE TO THAT. SO I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER LIGHTS. THANK YOU, ALL, FOR YOUR
THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION. I APPRECIATE IT. AND, MADAM CLERK, LET'S MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM.
>> MR. MAYOR, WE HAVE 2024-293, STATE LEGISLATIVE POST-SESSION UPDATE WITH A RECOMMENDATION THE CITY COMMISSION RECEIVE A
PRESENTATION BY STAFF AND ITS CONTRACT LOBBYIST ON THE OUTCOMES OF THE 2024 STATE LEGISLATIVE SESSION.
>> MAYOR: Y'ALL, THIS IS GOING TO BE FASCINATING. YOU MAY WANT TO STICK AROUND, JUST SAYING.
[LAUGHTER] VERY GOOD, THANK YOU. MADAM MANAGER. >> MR. MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE
COMMISSION, WE HAVE MR. RYAN MATTHEWS AND ANGELA HERE FROM GRAYROBINSON. THEY ARE OUR STATE LOBBYISTS AND
WILL PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON THE SESSION THAT IS ALREADY ENDED. >> MAYOR: GOOD TO SEE YOU BOTH. COME ON UP.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS. SORRY TO DRIVE EVERYBODY OUT OF THE ROOM.
[LAUGHTER] BUT WE ARE HERE TO TALK ABOUT WHAT OCCURRED DURING THE 2024 LEGISLATIVE SESSION, GIVE YOU A
LITTLE BIT OF AN UPDATE ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED BOTH FROM A POLICY STANDPOINT AS WELL AS THE BUDGET AND JUST TO INFORM YOU OF NEXT
STEPS BECAUSE WE HAVE WHAT IS A FAIRLY LENGTHY TIME PERIOD BETWEEN THE END OF THE 2024 LEGISLATIVE SESSION AND THE
BEGINNING OF THE 2025 LEGISLATIVE SESSION. FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE NOT FAMILIAR, WE HAVE HAD THE HONOR
OF REPRESENTING THE CITY FOR OVER A DECADE NOW IN ONE FORM OR ANOTHER, WHAT WAS FORMERLY PEOPLES AND SMITH BECAME PEOPLES
SMITH AND MATTHEWS IN 2017 WHICH THEN WAS ACQUIRED BY GRAYROBINSON IN 2021. MY BACKGROUND, I AM A LAWYER AND
LOBBYIST BY TRADE SO I AM THE BUTT OF EVERY PARTY JOKE YOU CAN IMAGINE. I HAVE AN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW
BACKGROUND IN PARTICULAR. I WAS THE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION UNDER GOVERNOR SCOTT
SOMETIME AGO. MY PARTNER IN CRIME SINCE 2017 IS ANGELA DRZEWIECKI. SHE HAS WORKED FOR FORMER CFO
ALEX CYNC AND HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL BRINGING BACK STATE DOLLARS TO THE CITY OF GAINESVILLE SINCE ABOUT 2016.
THIS IS A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE ETHOS OF THE LAW FIRM OF GRAYROBINSON. WE ARE A 15-OFFICE LAW FIRM, 14
OF THOSE OFFICES LOCATED IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA. ONE IN WASHINGTON, D.C. WE HAVE OVER 350 ATTORNEYS AND
CONSULTANTS. YOU WILL SEE HERE JUST THE MAP OF WHERE WE ARE LOCATED. SO LET'S TALK GLOBALLY ABOUT
WHAT OCCURRED IN 2024. YOU COULD SEE SOME STATISTICS THERE. I WANT TO GIVE YOU SORT OF AN
IDEA OF HOW THE SESSION PLAYED OUT. AS WITH MOST ELECTION YEARS, RELATIVELY SPEAKING, THERE WAS
LITTLE DRAMA AT THE END OF THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION. PRESIDING OFFICERS, PARTICULARLY IN THEIR SECOND YEAR, IN THEIR
POSITIONS ARE TERMING OUT, IF YOU WILL AS SPEAKER AND SENATE PRESIDENT. THE GOVERNOR HAD A FAR LESS
ROBUST LEGISLATIVE AGENDA IN 2024 THAN HE DID IN 2023. I MEAN REALLY THE PACE OF THE 2024 SESSION WAS FAR DIFFERENT
THAN THAT OF 2023. AND SO THE GOVERNOR REALLY LOOKED TO DO JUST A HANDFUL OF THINGS.
HE WAS LOOKING FOR AN ADOPTION OF A BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR CONGRESS, AS WELL AS IMPLEMENTATION OF TERM LIMITS.
THE HOUSE AND SENATE HAD PUT JOINT RESOLUTIONS TO CONGRESS IDENTIFYING BOTH THOSE PRIORITIES OF THE GOVERNOR.
HIS OFFICE WAS ALSO INVOLVED IN A ONE-YEAR EXEMPTION OF TAXES, FEES AND ASSESSMENTS FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY INSURANCE
POLICYHOLDERS. THE STATE CONTINUES TO GRAPPLE WITH THE PROPERTY INSURANCE ISSUE THAT WE HAVE FACED OVER
THE COURSE OF THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS. AND REALLY, OTHER THAN THIS ONE YEAR, THIS ONE YEAR EXEMPTION,
THERE WASN'T A LOT OF WORK DONE IN THE PROPERTY INSURANCE MARKET. THE SPEAKER HAD A COUPLE OF
PRIORITIES, SPEAKER PAUL RENNER. HIS TOP PRIORITY DEALT WITH CHILDREN AND SOCIAL MEDIA. THAT BILL WAS FILED AS HOUSE
BILL 1 AND EFFECTIVELY WAS A PROHIBITION ON ANYONE UNDER 16 UTILIZING SOCIAL MEDIA. THE GOVERNOR ACTUALLY DURING THE
WANING DAYS OF SESSION VETOED HOUSE BILL 1 FOR SOME CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES THAT HE HAD SEEN IN THAT BILL.
AND MAINLY HIS MAIN OPPOSITION WAS THAT THERE WAS NO PARENTAL OPT IN FOR THOSE CHILDREN WHO WERE 14 OR 15 YEARS OLD WHO MAY
USE SOCIAL MEDIA FOR THE ACADEMIC REASONS, FOR ATHLETIC REASONS, FOR RECRUITMENT, ETC. SO DURING SESSION, THE GOVERNOR
ACTUALLY VETOED HOUSE BILL 1 WHICH WAS PASSED AROUND WEEK SEVEN. SO THAT LED TO THE SPEAKER IN
THE HOUSE SCRAMBLING A LITTLE BIT. THERE WAS A PIECE OF LEGISLATION IN HOUSE BILL 3 THAT WAS STILL
ALIVE SO IT WAS AMENDED TO INCLUDE THE PARENTAL OPT-IN FOR THOSE 14 AND 15-YEAR-OLDS. AND THEN IT WAS SIGNED.
THE SPEAKER'S SECOND PRIORITY LEADS TO A COMMON THEME FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WITHIN THE YEAR, THIS PAST LEGISLATIVE
SESSION DEALT WITH PROPERTY TAXES. AND SO HOUSE BILL 7017 ALLOWS FOR OR WILL PLACE A QUESTION ON
THE BALLOT IN NOVEMBER THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR A 3% ANNUAL CPI INCREASE TO THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION FOR PROPERTY OWNERS IN
THE STATE OF FLORIDA. THERE WERE NUMEROUS HOMESTEAD EXEMPTIONS THAT WERE FILED AS LEGISLATION THIS YEAR.
NOT ALL OF THEM PASSED. THERE WAS A PROVISION IN A BILL FILED DEALING WITH LOCAL BUSINESS TAXES.
AND NOT THE COMPLETE ELIMINATION THEREOF -- AND WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT SHORTLY. BUT ALSO, A BILL THAT WAS FILED
THAT LOOKED AT A STUDY DEALING WITH PROPERTY TAXES IN GENERAL. SO WHEN I SAY THAT THERE WAS A THEME OVER LOCAL GOVERNMENT
REVENUES, THERE WASN'T A LOT THAT ACTUALLY PASSED. BUT I THINK IT'S SAFE TO SAY OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT
THREE, FOUR YEARS, THERE WILL BE A MICROSCOPE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVENUES IN ALL FORMS FROM TALLAHASSEE.
SO IT'S SOMETHING TO CERTAINLY BE AWARE OF. WHAT I WANT TO DO NOW BEFORE GETTING INTO A WHOLE HOST OF
PIECES OF LEGISLATION IS BRING ANGELA UP, HAVE HER TALK ABOUT THE BUDGET. AND THEN WHAT I'LL DO IS
PROBABLY GO OVER 10 TO 12 BILLS THAT HAVE SOME IMPACT ON YOU. I KNOW JOHNA THOMAS WILL COME UP AFTER THAT AS WELL.
I'M GOING TO PASS IT TO ANGELA AND THEN I WILL BE BACK. >> MAYOR: WELCOME. >> GOOD AFTERNOON.
THANK YOU FOR HAVING US. JUST BRIEFLY ABOUT THE BUDGET, THE BUDGET OR THE GENERAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT FOR THE
'24-'25 FISCAL YEAR TOTALS 117.46 BILLION. OUR CURRENT FISCAL YEAR BUDGET IS 116.5 BILLION.
AND THAT BUDGET INCLUDES ABOUT 68.1 BILLION FROM TRUST FUNDS AND 49.4 BILLION IN GENERAL REVENUE.
THE BUDGET HAS NOT BEEN SENT TO THE GOVERNOR YET. ONCE HE DOES RECEIVE IT, HE'LL HAVE 15 DAYS TO ACT ON IT.
AND HE DOES HAVE A LINE-ITEM VETO AUTHORITY OVER THE BUDGET. THERE WAS A SESSION-LONG EMPHASIS IF YOU WILL OR THEME,
MAINLY BY THE GOVERNOR WHO IN DECEMBER PROPOSED A $114.4 BILLION BUDGET IN THE HOUSE, ALSO, TO MAKE FISCALLY
RESPONSIBLE ADJUSTMENTS TO THE BUDGET SO THAT IT WAS SUSTAINABLE LONG-TERM. AND ALSO TO INCREASE RESERVES.
AND WITH THAT BEING SAID, THE STATE HAS ABOUT 10 BILLION IN TOTAL RESERVES NOW AND THE BUDGET ALSO INCLUDED 500 MILLION
TO RETIRE OUTSTANDING STATE DEBT. AND PART OF THAT WAS BECAUSE IN RECENT YEARS THE STATE WAS
BOOSTED BY FEDERAL COVID DOLLARS RELIEF FUNDS WHICH ARE NOW DRYING UP. AND I WILL JUST -- I ALWAYS
THINK THIS IS INTERESTING TO PUT OUT THERE. EVEN WITH THE MORE FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BUDGET, JUST TO
GIVE YOU AN IDEA HOW MUCH THE STATE'S BUDGET HAS GROWN IN RECENT YEARS, JUST A DECADE AGO, THE BUDGET WAS UNDER 77 BILLION.
SO AGAIN, JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF HOW MUCH IT'S GROWN IN RECENT YEARS. OKAY.
AS YOU CAN SEE ON THIS SLIDE, THIS IS JUST A BREAKDOWN OF THE TOTAL BUDGET. THE LARGEST BUDGET SILO IS
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES ACCOUNTING FOR 46.5% OF TOTAL SPENDING. I'M NOT GOING TO SPEND TOO MUCH
TIME ON IT BUT I DID WANT TO GO OVER A FEW OF WHAT I CONSIDER THE KEY HIGHLIGHTS OF THE TOTAL BUDGET.
AND IF THERE ARE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS, WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE AS WELL. BUT THERE'S $100 MILLION
INCLUDED IN THIS FOR HOMETOWN HEROES PROGRAM. IF YOU ARE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT, THAT'S THE PROGRAM THAT
PROVIDES DOWN PAYMENT AND CLOSING COST ASSISTANCE TO FIRST-TIME INCOME QUALIFIED HOME BUYERS SO THEY CAN PURCHASE A
PRIMARY RESIDENCE IN THE COMMUNITY IN WHICH THEY WORK. THERE'S ALSO $75 MILLION IN THE BUDGET FOR THE FLORIDA JOB
GROWTH GRANT FUND WHICH IS AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM DESIGNED TO PROMOTE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE AND WORKFORCE
TRAINING ACROSS THE STATE. THIS IS A GRANT THAT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS CAN APPLY FOR. FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, THE BUDGET
INCLUDES OVER $400 MILLION FOR LOCAL WATER PROJECTS AND 135 MILLION FOR THE WASTEWATER GRANT PROGRAM.
SO THAT WOULD INCLUDE YOUR SEPTIC-TO-SEWER PROGRAM. FLORIDA FOREVER, THE STATE'S CONSERVATION AND LAND
ACQUISITION PROGRAM, THERE'S $100 MILLION IN THE BUDGET FOR THE DIVISION OF STATE LANDS. AND THE BUDGET ALSO ALLOCATES
14.3 MILLION FOR THE FLORIDA RECREATIONAL AND DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM WHICH PROVIDES GRANTS TO LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS FOR ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT OF LAND FOR PUBLIC OUTDOOR RECREATION. THERE'S ALSO $15 MILLION FOR
FLORIDA'S COMMUNITIES TRUST PROGRAM WHICH IS A GRANT FOR REGIONAL OPPORTUNITIES LIKE PARKS AND GREEN SPACES.
THROUGH PRESIDENT PASSIDOMO'S BILL AND THERE WERE A FEW OTHERS WRAPPED INTO THAT, THERE'S ABOUT $717 MILLION WHICH INCLUDES
EFFORTS TO RETAIN AND ATTRACT MORE HEALTHCARE WORKERS TO THE STATE. FOR EDUCATION THERE'S
1.8 BILLION TOTAL INCREASE IN K-12 SPENDING WHICH ALSO INCLUDES TEACHER SALARY INCREASES.
THE BUDGET ALSO FULLY FUNDS HOUSING PROGRAMS. SO THAT'S 174 MILLION FOR THE S.H.I.P. PROGRAM OR STATE
HOUSING INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP. AND 84 MILLION FOR SALE. THERE WAS ALSO LANGUAGE INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET TO REVERT AND
REAPPROPRIATE THE FUNDING FROM THIS PAST -- WELL, YES, THIS PAST FISCAL YEAR FOR CYBERSECURITY LOCAL GRANTS.
WHICH IN THE CURRENT BUDGET, THERE WAS ABOUT $40 MILLION WHICH I BELIEVE WASN'T SPENT SO THAT WOULD BE REVERTED AND
REAPPROPRIATED THAT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS COULD APPLY FOR. FOR THE CITY OF GAINESVILLE SPECIFICALLY, WE ARE EXTREMELY
PLEASED TO SAY THAT THE BUDGET DOES INCLUDE $350,000 FOR A REGIONAL MOBILE COMMAND HAZMAT ASSET.
THE FUNDING WAS REQUESTED TO REPLACE THE 20-PLUS-YEAR-OLD RESPONSE VEHICLE AND WILL SERVE THE 13-COUNTY REGION.
AS I DID MENTION PREVIOUSLY, THE GOVERNOR DOES HAVE LINE-ITEM VETO AUTHORITY. WE CONTINUE TO ADVOCATE FOR THE
MERITS OF THE PROJECT UNTIL THE BUDGET IS SENT TO THE GOVERNOR. I'LL TURN IT BACK OVER TO RYAN AND LET HIM DISCUSS SOME OF THE
BILLS THAT PASSED. >> MAYOR: THANK YOU. >> I APPRECIATE ANGELA BRINGING UP EDUCATION AND HEALTHCARE
WHICH WERE THE PRIORITIES OF THE SENATE PRESIDENT WHICH I FAILED TO MENTION IN MY OPENING. THERE WERE OVER 1900 BILLS THAT
WERE FILED IN 2024. 325 OF THOSE PASSED. SO AS NOT TO GO OVER ALL 325 OR 1900 IN TOTAL, WE HAVE GOT A
LIST OF PROBABLY 15 OR SO WE WANTED TO BRING UP TO YOU AND HAVE AGAIN JOHNA THOMAS COME FILL IN THE GAPS.
GOING TO KEEP THIS AT A RELATIVELY HIGH LEVEL. IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS, HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE AFTERWARDS.
THE FIRST BILL IS 389 DEALING WITH TRANSPORTATION FACILITY DESIGNATIONS. THIS IS A BILL THAT ANGELA AND I
WORKED ON TO ENSURE THAT THE DYLAN ROBERTS CROSSWALK MEMORIAL WOULD BE INCLUDED. THAT BILL HAS PASSED.
IT HAS NOT YET BEEN SIGNED BY THE GOVERNOR. BUT IT WAS FULLY VETTED THROUGHOUT THE SESSION AND
ULTIMATELY WE WOULD ANTICIPATE IT BEING SIGNED. >> MAYOR: SO THAT IS FOR ALL THE SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS THROUGHOUT
THE STATE? >> CORRECT. GENERALLY WHAT HAPPENS, MR. MAYOR, IS YOU CAN FILE AN
INDIVIDUAL BILL WITH A FACILITY DESIGNATION. MOST TIMES, MOST OFTEN THEY ARE NOT, THEY ARE CONSOLIDATED AND
ULTIMATELY PASS. WE HAD AN AMENDMENT THAT WAS PLACED TO PUT THE DYLAN ROBERTS CROSSWALK ON TO ONE OF THOSE
FINAL VERSIONS OF THE BILL TO ENSURE IT WOULD BE INCLUDED. >> MAYOR: DOES THE GOVERNOR HAVE THE POWER TO LINE ITEM THOSE?
OR IS THAT -- >> HE COULD VETO THE BILL. IT'S HIGHLY, HIGHLY UNLIKELY THAT WOULD OCCUR.
>> MAYOR: BUT HE CAN'T TAKE OUT INDIVIDUAL DESIGNATIONS WITHIN THE BILL. >> NO, SIR.
HE COULD VETO THE BILL AS A WHOLE. >> MAYOR: NO, I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT.
>> THE NEXT BILL WE'LL TALK ABOUT WHICH I MENTIONED JUST BRIEFLY IN MY OPENING IS HJR7017.
THAT IS THE CPI TO THE HOMESTEAD PROPERTY EXTENSION 3% YEAR-OVER-YEAR. THERE WAS A COMPANION MEASURE
THAT DID FAIL, ULTIMATELY HJR THAT WOULD ADD AN ADDITIONAL $25,000 TO THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION.
THIS COLLECTIVELY FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA, FROM THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT PERSPECTIVE HAD ABOUT A $1 BILLION IMPACT.
THANKFULLY THE BILL DID NOT PASS ULTIMATELY. AGAIN TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA, BECAUSE EVERY BAD IDEA BECOMES
RECYCLED IN TALLAHASSEE, THESE THINGS ARE LIKELY TO BE DISCUSSED AGAIN IN FUTURE YEARS. SO IT IS SOMETHING TO BE MINDFUL
OF. HOUSE BILL 609, AGAIN SOMETHING THAT I MENTIONED BRIEFLY IN MY OPENING DEALT WITH THE LOCAL
BUSINESS TAXES. THIS WAS NOT A COMPLETE ELIMINATION OF THE LOCAL BUSINESS TAX.
BUT WHAT THIS BILL SAID THAT YOU COULD NOT COLLECT MORE REVENUE FROM YOUR LOCAL BUSINESS TAXES THAN YOU COULD AS OF
SEPTEMBER 30th, 2023 OR SEPTEMBER 30th, 2024, WHICHEVER WAS GREATER. SO IT EFFECTIVELY PLACED A
LIMITATION ON THE AMOUNT OF LOCAL BUSINESS TAXES YOU COULD RECEIVE AND COLLECT. AGAIN, I WOULD ADVISE -- I WOULD
NOT BE SURPRISED TO SEE AN OUTRIGHT ELIMINATION OF THE LOCAL BUSINESS TAX IN THE COMING YEARS COMING FROM TALLAHASSEE.
SENATE BILL 1628 DEALS WITH LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACTIONS. FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO WILL RECALL WHEN WE PRESENTED OR WHEN THOMAS
ACTUALLY PRESENTED LAST YEAR, SENATE BILL 102 WHICH WAS THE PRIORITY OF SENATE PRESIDENT, THE MOTHER OF ALL PREEMPTIONS,
EFFECTIVELY CREATING A BUSINESS IMPACT STATEMENT FOR EVERY ORDINANCE THAT THE COMMISSION WOULD HAVE TO ADOPT.
AND THEN THE ROCKET DOCKET FOR THOSE CHALLENGES ON ORDINANCES THAT MAY HAVE HAD AN ARBITRARY OR CAPRICIOUS TYPE OF GENESIS.
THIS WAS AN EXPANSION OF SENATE BILL 102. THE ORIGINAL VERSION, ANY LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATION WAS
EXEMPT FROM 102. THIS WAS PLACING THOSE TYPE OF ACTIONS INTO A SIMILAR BUSINESS IMPACT STATEMENT MANDATE.
SO THAT BILL DID PASS AS WELL. A BILL THAT FAILED IS HOUSE BILL 1195 DEALING WITH MILLAGE RATES. IT WOULD HAVE REQUIRED 2/3 OF A
CITY OR COUNTY OR SPECIAL DISTRICT TO PASS ANY MILLAGE RATE INCREASE. AGAIN, THAT BILL FAILED BUT
LIKELY TO RETURN. HOUSE BILL 267, ANOTHER PSEUDO THEME IF YOU WILL. THERE WERE MULTIPLE BILLS THAT
WERE FILED AS IT RELATES TO BUILDING REGULATIONS. HOUSE BILL 267 REQUIRED LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO APPROVE, APPROVE
WITH CONDITIONS OR DENY A PERMIT APPLICATION WITHIN 30 DAYS FOR STRUCTURES LESS THAN 7500 SQUARE FEET.
THAT IS DOWN FROM THE WHAT WAS CURRENT 60-DAY TIMELINE FOR ANY STRUCTURE. THAT APPROVAL, DENIAL OR
APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS IS DOWN TO 60 DAYS FROM 120 DAYS PRIOR. AGAIN, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE WHAT THE LEGISLATURE WILL REFER TO AS
EFFICIENCY IN THE BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS. BUT THE ORIGINAL VERSION OF THIS BILL ACTUALLY REQUIRED A LOCAL
GOVERNMENT TO ISSUE THAT APPROVAL OR DENIAL WITHIN THREE CALENDAR DAYS. SO IF YOU CAN IMAGINE A SCENARIO
WHERE SOMEONE COMES TO YOU ON A FRIDAY WITH A BUILDING PERMIT. SO THE BILL IMPROVED, IF YOU WILL, OVER TIME.
BUT CERTAINLY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES FROM WHAT WAS EXISTING LAW PRIOR. AND THERE WILL BE ANOTHER
BUILDING PERMIT I WILL DISCUSS, BUILDING PERMIT BILL I WILL DISCUSS BRIEFLY. SENATE BILL 472 DEALS WITH
SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY. THERE HAVE BEEN ABOUT FIVE YEARS IN A ROW WITH DISCUSSION ON INCREASING THE CURRENT CAPS ON
SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY AND WHAT EXISTS TODAY. 200,000 PER PERSON, 300,000 PER OCCURRENCE.
IT WOULD INCREASE THE CAPS TO $400,000 PER PERSON, $600,000 PER OCCURRENCE. IT ALSO WOULD HAVE GIVEN LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS THE ABILITY TO SETTLE CLAIMS OUTSIDE OF THE CLAIMS BILL PROCESS. NOW, WHEN YOU HAVE A CLAIM
AGAINST A LOCAL GOVERNMENT THAT IS ABOVE THOSE LIMITS, YOU WILL HAVE A CLAIMS BILL IN TALLAHASSEE THAT IS ADJUDICATED
THERE. THIS WOULD HAVE ALLOWED LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO SETTLE ABOVE THE CAPS WHICH A LOT OF FOLKS WERE
OPPOSED TO. A LOT OF TIMES IT'S HELPFUL TO HAVE THE LEGISLATOR BE THE ARBITER ULTIMATELY OF THOSE
CLAIMS. SENATE BILL 812 DID PASS, ANOTHER EXPEDITED APPROVAL OF RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMIT
PIECE OF LEGISLATION. THIS BILL REALLY DEALS MORE WITH MASTER PLANNING COMMUNITIES. IT ESTABLISHES A TWO-STEP
APPLICATION PROCESS FOR THE ADOPTION OF FIRST A PRELIMINARY PLAT AND THEN FINAL PLAT APPROVAL.
THIS ONLY APPLIES WHERE THERE ARE CONTIGUOUS 25 ACRES OF DEVELOPMENT, TALKING GENERAL, 200, 250, 300 HOMES AT A TIME,
DEALING WITH THAT AT EXPEDITED APPROVAL OF THOSE BUILDING PERMITS. THIS IS MY LAST SLIDE, JUST SO
YOU KNOW. AND AGAIN, HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AFTER EITHER BEFORE JOHN AND THOMAS COME ON OR
AFTERWARDS. THE THEME OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS HAS BEEN CYBERSECURITY.
HOUSE BILL 1555 DEDICATES THE FLORIDA CENTER FOR CYBERSECURITY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA AS CYBER FLORIDA.
CYBER FLORIDA'S MISSION IS TO ASSIST CYBERSECURITY TRAINING, EDUCATION, PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES. AS ANGELA MENTIONED, THERE ACTUALLY HAS BEEN STATE DOLLARS FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND THEIR
EMPLOYEES FOR CYBERSECURITY TRAINING. THIS BILL WAS SOLELY REALLY A DEDICATION OF THAT OUTFIT AT
SOUTH FLORIDA AS CYBER FLORIDA. HOUSE BILL 473 ALSO DEALS WITH CYBERSECURITY. AROUND TWO YEARS AGO, THE
LEGISLATURE ADOPTED A LAW THAT SAID THAT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS COULD NOT SETTLE OR PAY A RANSOMWARE ATTACK.
IF YOU ALL WERE SUBJECT TO SUCH AN ATTACK, HOUSE BILL 473 PROVIDES INDEMNIFICATION FROM LIABILITY OF A CYBERSECURITY
INCIDENT SO LONG AS YOU COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE CURRENT LAW TRAINING THAT IS REQUIRED OF GOVERNMENTS IN THE STATE OF
FLORIDA. SENATE BILL 328 DEALS WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING. YOU'LL RECALL LAST YEAR THE LIVE
LOCAL ACT THAT WAS A PRIORITY OF SENATE PRESIDENT PASSIDOMO, THIS WAS EFFECTIVELY A GLITCH BILL IF YOU WILL.
THERE WERE A NUMBER OF PREEMPTIONS THAT WERE INVOLVED IN THAT ORIGINAL LIVE LOCAL ACT. AND THERE WERE SOME TWEAKS
THERETO. THEY ARE RELATIVELY MINOR I WOULD SAY, BUT CERTAINLY HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT THOSE.
HOUSE BILL 7073 IS THE STATE'S ANNUAL TAX PACKAGE. THERE WAS OVER $1.5 BILLION OF TAX CUTS WITHIN THAT TAX
PACKAGE. SOME OF THOSE HIGHLIGHTS INCLUDE JUST UNDER $500 MILLION FOR TOLL RELIEF.
AND AGAIN, THE GOVERNOR'S PRIORITY AS IT RELATES TO THE ONE-YEAR REDUCTION IN INSURANCE PREMIUM TAXES FOR POLICY OWNERS
IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA. HOUSE BILL 791, ANOTHER BUILDING PERMIT BILL. THIS ONE DID ULTIMATELY FAIL.
THIS WOULD HAVE FURTHER STREAMLINED THE BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS AND ACTUALLY WOULD HAVE OFFERED REFUNDS OF PERMIT FEES
IF CERTAIN TIMELINES WERE NOT MET WHEN AN APPLICANT CAME TO A GOVERNMENT FOR THOSE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS.
THE FINAL THREE WERE BILLS OF SOME SIGNIFICANT DEBATE. AND THERE WAS CERTAINLY A LOT OF TIME SPENT ON THESE PIECES OF
LEGISLATION. SENATE BILL 1530 DEALS WITH UNAUTHORIZED CAMPING AND/OR SLEEPING.
IT PREEMPTS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FROM AUTHORIZING INDIVIDUALS TO REGULARLY SLEEP OR CAMP ON PUBLIC PROPERTY OR PUBLIC
RIGHTS-OF-WAY. WHAT IT DOES DO IS ALLOW LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO ISSUE TEMPORARY PERMITS IN DESIGNATED AREAS.
IF YOU OR ANY LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA DECIDES TO DESIGNATE A CAMPING OR SLEEPING AREA, THERE ARE MINIMUM
RESOURCES THAT HAVE TO BE PROVIDED. FOR INSTANCE, DCF HAS TO BE MODIFIED IN CASE CHILDREN ARE
PRESENT. AND AGAIN, CERTAIN MINIMUM HEALTH SAFETY AND WELFARE STANDARDS DO NEED TO BE MET IN
ORDER TO COMPLY WITH THAT NEW LAW. HOUSE BILL 601 DEALS WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT AND CORRECTIONAL
OFFICERS. ANOTHER PREEMPTION WHICH PROHIBITS A LOCAL GOVERNMENT POLICE OFFICER REVIEW BOARD FROM
THE RECEIPT, PROCESSING OR INVESTIGATION OF COMPLAINTS AGAINST LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS OR CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS.
IF YOU HAVE A CURRENT BOARD THAT DOES NOT DO ONE OF THOSE THINGS, IT CAN REMAIN. BUT THOSE THAT ARE THE THREE
SPECIFIC AREAS OF PREEMPTION AS IT RELATES TO THOSE TYPES OF BOARDS. SENATE BILL -- HOUSE BILL 1417
DEALS WITH ENVIRONMENTAL FUNDING. THIS BILL ACTUALLY IS QUITE EXCITING.
IT'S SOMETHING THAT HASN'T BEEN DONE IN SOMETIME IN TERMS OF DEDICATING MONEYS TO THE ENVIRONMENT.
A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO, THE STATE PUT FORWARD ABOUT $1 BILLION IN RESILIENCY FUNDING. THAT MONEY HAS BEEN UTILIZED
AGGRESSIVELY. AND SO THE IDEA THIS YEAR UNDER HOUSE BILL 1417 IS TO UTILIZE THE REVENUE FROM THE SEMINOLE
GAMING COMPACT AND SPLIT THAT INTO THREE DIFFERENT POTS OF MONEY, ALL WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION.
HOPEFULLY, IF ONLINE GAMING SUCCEEDS THE CHALLENGE CURRENTLY BEFORE THE U.S. SUPREME COURT, YOU'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT
$1.5 BILLION PER YEAR THAT COULD BE UTILIZED FOR ENVIRONMENTAL FUNDING. SO IT'S SOMETHING EXCITING
THERE. AND THEN THE LAST THING I WILL MENTION BEFORE TURNING IT OVER TO JOHN AND THOMAS OR ANSWERING
QUESTIONS IS BECAUSE OF THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA, I DID NOT ORIGINALLY INCLUDE A BILL DEALING WITH MUNICIPAL UTILITIES
THAT WAS FILED. THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION, THERE HAS BEEN A THREE-YEAR EFFORT IF YOU WILL LOOKING AT MUNICIPAL
UTILITIES. THAT DISCUSSION HAS CENTERED AROUND THE PROVISION OF EXTRA TERRITORIAL SERVICE.
IF A MUNICIPAL UTILITY PROVIDES SERVICE OUTSIDE OF ITS MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES, SHOULD EQUITABLE RATES BE CHARGED?
THERE IS A SURCHARGE FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER FOR THOSE OUTSIDE OF THOSE TERRITORIAL BOUNDARIES. AND WHAT SOURCE OF REDRESS, IF
YOU WILL, IF THOSE CUSTOMERS RESIDE OUTSIDE OF THE TERRITORIAL BORDERS HAVE. THE BILL THIS YEAR LIMITED THE
GENERAL FUND TRANSFER WHICH IS THE TYPICAL TALLAHASSEE NARRATIVE OF THE GSC THAT YOU ALL HAVE TALKED ABOUT.
IT LIMITED THAT GFT TO 10% OF REVENUES FOR CUSTOMERS SERVICED OUTSIDE OF A MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY. IT THEN REQUIRED, IF YOU DID
PROVIDE SERVICE OUTSIDE OF YOUR MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES, ONCE A YEAR, YOU, AS THE RATE-SETTING BODY WOULD HAVE TO HOLD A
MEETING IN THE RECIPIENT AREA JUST TO ALLOW FOR THOSE CUSTOMERS SOME FORM OF DUE PROCESS, THE ABILITY TO SPEAK
BEFORE YOU, ETC. AGAIN, THAT BILL FAILED, BUT IT HAS BEEN A PART OF A THREE-YEAR CONVERSATION ON MUNICIPAL
UTILITIES. I HAVE REPRESENTED THE FLORIDA MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION FOR NINE OR 10 YEARS AT THIS
POINT. AND SO IT WOULD BE A BILL THAT I WOULD ANTICIPATE COMING BACK NEXT LEGISLATIVE SESSION AS
WELL. WITH THAT, MR. MAYOR, I WILL CONCLUDE. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS
NOW OR HAVE JOHN AND THOMAS COME UP AND THEN DO IT AT THAT POINT. >> MAYOR: VERY GOOD. THANK YOU.
SO FOR THE LAST BILL YOU MENTIONED, I BELIEVE THE CURRENT TRANSFER THAT EXISTS IS ABOUT 3% FOR GRU.
JUST FOR EVERYBODY'S EDIFICATION. I KNOW THAT'S GOING TO BE A SURPRISE TO FOLKS, THAT'S WHY I
PUT IT OUT THERE. ALL RIGHT. GENTLEMEN? ANYTHING TO FILL IN THERE?
THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR, COMMISSION. JOHN ALEXANDER, ACTING DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS AND
COMMUNITY RELATIONS, OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER. WE ARE JUST HERE TO GIVE A LEGISLATIVE UPDATE.
WE HAVE COME BEFORE YOU BEFORE. A LOT HAS HAPPENED IN TALLAHASSEE SINCE THEN. SO WE ARE JUST GOING TO GIVE A
QUICK UPDATE AND JUST A RUN-DOWN OF KIND OF WHERE WE STARTED. THIS WORK, OF COURSE, STARTED BACK IN SEPTEMBER WHERE THERE
WAS A DRAFT OF THE LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES FOR THE CITY OF GAINESVILLE. AND ON THE LIST WAS, OF COURSE,
TO SERVE AS A GUIDE FOR OUR SPECIFIC PROJECTS THAT WE WANTED AS WELL AS SOME OTHER BILLS THAT WOULD POTENTIALLY IMPACT THE
CITY OF GAINESVILLE. AND IT WAS IMPORTANT UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE CITY MANAGER THAT WE HAVE AN AGGRESSIVE PLAN
GOING INTO SESSION THIS YEAR. SO WE ACTUALLY ARRANGED A MEETING WITH OUR STATE LOBBYISTS.
IN THAT MEETING, WE SPOKE ABOUT THE DESIRED OUTCOMES FOR THE CITY OF GAINESVILLE AS WELL AS THE FORMAT, KIND OF WHAT YOU
HAVE HEARD HERE FROM RYAN AND ANGELA, A FORMAT OF KIND OF WHAT WOULD TAKE PLACE THIS YEAR. AND AGAIN, SOME OTHER THINGS
THAT MAY IMPACT THE CITY OF GAINESVILLE, OTHER STATE BILLS. WE DID COME BACK BEFORE YOU FEBRUARY 1st AND GAVE AN
UPDATE ON WHERE WE WERE. BY THEN, WE HAD DONE SOME TRIPS TO TALLAHASSEE WITH OUR STATE LOBBYISTS AND MEETING WITH OTHER
LEGISLATURES ABOUT OUR LOCAL BILLS. AND, OF COURSE, KEEPING OUR EAR TO THE GROUND OF THINGS THAT MAY
IMPACT OUR CITY AS WELL. WE ALSO ATTENDED THE FLORIDA LEAGUE OF CITIES LEGISLATIVE DAY, ACCOMPANIED COMMISSIONER
EASTMAN THERE TO DO SOME MORE WORK. AT THAT MEETING AS WELL, THERE WAS A DIRECTIVE FOR US TO GET
WITH OUR CITY ATTORNEY ABOUT THE IMPACTS OF HB 601 WHICH YOU HEARD THE OUTCOME OF THAT TODAY AS WELL.
AND SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO THOMAS HARRINGTON, OUR LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS COORDINATOR TO GIVE AN
UPDATE OF OUR LOCAL PROJECTS AND SOME OF THE BILLS. SOME YOU MAY HEAR AGAIN, BUT SOME OF THEM, LIKE RYAN STATED,
JUST FILL IN THE GAPS OF WHAT TOOK PLACE. >> MAYOR: VERY GOOD. THANK YOU.
WELCOME, MR. HARRINGTON. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. I KIND OF VIEW THIS AS A SEQUEL TO THE MID POINT THAT WE SHARED
BACK IN FEBRUARY. AND I DON'T WANT TO DUPLICATE WHAT WAS SHARED, BUT WE APPRECIATE AGAIN THE WORK ON THE
MEMORIAL CROSSWALK. THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT HAD MADE BOTH CHAMBER BUDGETS DURING THAT -- RIGHT BEFORE THAT FINAL
WEEK. AND WE ARE ZEROED OUT. BUT I DID A LITTLE MORE ANALYSIS AND ABOUT $51 MILLION OF ABOUT
22 SIMILAR PROJECTS STATEWIDE -- OF THAT AMOUNT THAT WE REQUESTED [INAUDIBLE]. AND ALL THOSE PROJECTS, WHEN YOU
LOOK AT BOTH CHAMBERS WERE FROM FOLKS IN THE SUPER MAJORITY. OURS, OUT OF ALL 22 PROJECTS, WAS THE ONLY ONE THAT HAD ONE
MEMBER THAT WAS NOT PART OF THE SUPER MAJORITY. THE REGIONAL HAZMAT, OF COURSE, THAT'S IN THERE.
THE SECOND YEAR, THE MEDICATION ASSISTED TREATMENT FUNDING WAS IN THE SENATE BUDGET AND IT NEVER RECEIVED ON THE HOUSE
SIDE. SO WE WERE CLOSE, BUT MR. JOHN AND I ARE LOOKING AT OTHER FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES, EVEN
FEDERAL WHERE THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE MAY BE A COUPLING OR SUPPLEMENTAL DOLLARS FOR THAT. ONE OF THE OTHER BILLS THAT
EARLY ON WE WERE TOLD TO HAVE ON OUR RADAR, SINCE WE ARE A MOBILITY-FEE CITY, IS THIS ONE THAT SEEMED TO SAIL THROUGH.
IT'S AWAITING THE GOVERNOR'S SIGNATURE. IT SIMPLY DEFINES MOBILITY FEE AS SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD HAVE
AS PART OF OUR PLAN. LOCAL GOVERNMENT FEE SCHEDULE ESTIMATED BY AN ORDINANCE SPECIFIC TO THE PROJECT AND OUR
LOCAL PLAN. SO THAT ONE IS AWAITING THE GOVERNOR'S SIGNATURE. AS YOU MIGHT RECALL LAST MONTH,
WE HAD KIND OF A BREAKDOWN OF WHERE THESE THINGS WERE IN THE PROCESS AND THE COMMITTEE PROCESS.
SO WE UPDATED THAT HERE. AND AS YOU'LL SEE IN SOME OTHER ONE THAT IS DIED, IT WILL KIND OF SHOW YOU WHICH CHAMBER MAY
NOT HAVE REALLY BEEN FAVORABLE TOWARDS IT. ANOTHER ONE THAT WE SHARED LAST TIME THAT OUR RTS D.O.T. IS VERY
CONCERNED ABOUT -- AND NOTHING HAS CHANGED SINCE THAT TIME -- IS THIS ONE 287. AND THAT WILL LIMIT THE AMOUNT
OF MONEY THAT FDOT CAN COMMIT TO PUBLIC TRANSIT PROJECTS TO 20%. NO MORE THAN 20%, WHICH OUR FOLKS ESTIMATE IS A $2 MILLION
CUT. THERE ARE EXEMPTIONS IN TERMS OF THE FEDERAL MATCHING DOLLAR PROJECTS THAT WE HAVE AS WELL AS
MTPO IMPROVEMENTS. BUT AGAIN, THIS IS AWAITING THE GOVERNOR'S PRESENTATION AND SIGNATURE.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION, THIS BILL WE BROUGHT UP. AT THE TIME WE WEREN'T SURE WHERE IT WAS HEADED.
IT DEALS WITH COASTAL SEAWARD AREAS. HOWEVER, FOLKS IN THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMUNITY INVOLVED
WITH THOSE ADVOCACY EFFORTS THINK THAT THIS MAY BE KIND OF A STEPPINGSTONE WAY TO FURTHER AND POSSIBLY HAVE SOME OTHER
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES FOR LOCALLY DESIGNATED PROPERTIES. SO THEY ARE ACTUALLY WORKING NOW TO TRY TO PUT AN EXEMPTION NEXT
YEAR IN SOME LEGISLATION THAT WOULD PROTECT THOSE ALREADY EXISTING LOCALLY DESIGNATED PROPERTIES FROM BEING PUT IN THE
NON-CONFORMING DEFINITION CATEGORY. THIS WAS ACTUALLY -- THIS HAS BEEN UPDATED SINCE I SUBMITTED
THIS. THIS WAS ACTUALLY APPROVED BY THE GOVERNOR. ANOTHER ONE THAT DID NOT MAKE
IT, BUT SOMETHING THAT WAS ON OUR RADAR AND AS RECENT AS THIS MORNING IN THE CONVERSATION WITH REP HINSON, SOMETHING THAT SHE
SUPPORTS AND SAID SHE WOULD EVEN LOBBY FOR NEXT YEAR IS THIS MAIN STREET PROGRAM AND HISTORIC TAX CREDITS WHICH WOULD LIKELY HELP
WITH OUR DOWNTOWN AREA IN TERMS OF ANY HISTORIC RENOVATION PROJECTS THAT WE MIGHT HAVE. SO AGAIN, SOMETHING TO KEEP ON
YOUR RADAR FOR NEXT SESSION. AS APPEARS WE ALREADY HAVE ONE IN OUR DELEGATION WHO IS VERY SUPPORTIVE.
SOME OF THE GUN BILLS THAT WERE OF CONCERN, THESE TWO DIED THANKS TO SENATE PRESIDENT PASSIDOMO.
THE FIRST ONE WOULD HAVE MADE THE WAITING PERIOD, EXCLUDING HOLIDAYS AND WEEKENDS. THE SECOND ONE WOULD HAVE GONE
BACK, KIND OF A REVERTER TO THE 2018 POST PARKLAND LEGISLATION THAT WOULD HAVE REDUCED THE AGE FROM 21 BACK TO 18.
THE SENATE NEVER HEARD IT. BUT JUDGING BY SOME CONVERSATIONS I HAVE HAD FOR NEXT SESSION, IT IS SOMETHING
THAT COULD STILL BE IN PLAY GIVEN NEW SENATE LEADERSHIP. AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE WASN'T EVEN A SENATE COMPANION BILL TO
THE AGE REDUCTION ONE. THE LAST GUN BILL THAT CAME TO OUR ATTENTION KIND OF MIDWAY IN SESSION IS 1181.
AND THIS ONE IS ENROLLED. IT IS WAITING TO BE PRESENTED AND APPROVED BY THE GOVERNOR BUT IT DEALS WITH MAKING HARSHER
PENALTIES ON YOUTH WHO CARRY FIREARMS FROM MISDEMEANOR TO A FELONY. AND THE LATEST ANALYSIS OF THIS
BILL SHOWS THAT THERE IS QUITE A VARIATION IN TERMS OF SCENARIOS, SITUATIONS OF WHAT EXTENDED ATTENTION MEANS AS WELL AS WHAT
APPEARS TO BE AN ELONGATION OF COMMUNITY SERVICE DAYS SO AGAIN IT KIND OF DEPENDS ON THE OFFENSE AND THIS IS SOMETHING
THAT I SHARE WITH OUR GPD. THIS IS ALSO SOMETHING THAT REP HENSON BROUGHT UP AS RECENTLY AS YESTERDAY AT A CHAMBER LUNCHEON
AS A BILL SHE WAS QUITE CONCERNED ABOUT AND SOME INSTANCES FELT THAT OR THOUGHT THAT THERE MAY BE CERTAIN
CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE YOUTH MAY END UP BEING IN DETENTION 15 TO 20 YEARS LONGER BUT AGAIN SOMETHING I THINK CAN SERVE ANY
INTEREST TO GPD AND SOMETHING FOR CONSIDERATION. THE OTHER BILLS THAT RYAN AND ANGELA TOUCHED ON DEAL WITH
HOUSING, HOMELESSNESS. I DIDN'T WANT TO BEAT A DEAD HORSE BUT WE DID CONDUCT A FOLLOW-UP WITH LEGAL AFTER THE
FEBRUARY MEETING. WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE EXCHANGES. AS OF RIGHT NOW IT SEEMS LIKE THIS BILL WHICH BY THE WAY TOOK
ON THE SENATE LANGUAGE WHICH ALLOWS THE SHERIFF AND THE POLICE CHIEFS TO ESTABLISH THEIR OWN BOARD NOT MANDATORY BUT
SOMETHING THAT THEY MAY ESTABLISH COULD BE SUPPLEMENTAL TO WHAT WE HAVE AND WE DID NOT SEE IT AS ANY REAL THREAT TO THE
EXISTING FUNCTIONS THAT OUR BOARD HAS. WITH THAT, I WILL LEAVE IT OPEN FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU ALL MIGHT
HAVE. I FIGURE BETWEEN THE FOUR OF US WE HOPEFULLY CAN ANSWER ANYTHING.
>> MAYOR: THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER WILLITS? >> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I DON'T KNOW WHO CAN ANSWER
THIS. DID HOUSE BILL 773 ABOUT PROPERTY TAX BASICALLY ON THE SALES TAX IT IS RESIDENTIAL BUT
DOES THAT INCLUDE APARTMENTS AND MULTI-FAMILY THAT ARE TECHNICALLY COMMERCIAL, IS THAT CONSIDERED COMMERCIAL INSURANCE
OR WILL THEY GET THAT 6% REDUCTION? JUST BECAUSE AS WE LOOK AT OUR COMMUNITY AND SAY IF, YOU KNOW,
IF LOTS OF PEOPLE LIVE IN MULTI-FAMILY IN OUR COMMUNITY -- [INAUDIBLE] TO LOOK FORWARD TO HOW WE --
>> I THINK SO LONG AS YOU ARE A PROPERTY INSURANCE POLICYHOLDER YOU ARE ELIGIBLE FOR THE -- >> I KNOW THAT FOR THE PERSONAL
BUT THE OVERALL -- >> I'M UNSURE SO I DON'T WANT TO GIVE YOU, YOU KNOW, THE INCORRECT ANSWER.
I DON'T THINK THAT WAS THE INTENT IN TERMS OF THE EXPANSION OF THAT EXEMPTION. >> OKAY.
YOU KNOW, DIRECT WE ARE IN AN APARTMENT BUT TECHNICALLY IN AN HOA SO WE HAVE HOA INSURANCE AND IT SOUNDS LIKE I DIDN'T KNOW IF
THE OVERALL THAT'S TECHNICALLY COMMERCIAL BUT TO PROTECT RESIDENTIAL SO I DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT'S THE CASE.
>> I DON'T BELIEVE IT IS EXTENDED TO COMMERCIAL. WE WILL GO BACK AND LOOK AND GET YOU AN ANSWER.
>> LARGE APARTMENT COMPLEXES THAT ARE OWNED BY ONE OWNER, IS THAT RESIDENTIAL INSURANCE OR IS THAT COMMERCIAL?
>> I HONESTLY DON'T KNOW, COMMISSIONER. I WOULDN'T KNOW IF THAT WOULD QUALIFY.
>> I SHOULD HAVE ASKED THE APARTMENT FOLKS THIS MORNING I MET WITH. WHEN WE ALL LOOK AT OUR TAX BILL
AND NOT THE TAX BILL BUT WHEN WE GO OH, WE GET A BREATHER BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE TO PAY 6% ON OUR PROPERTY INSURANCE BUT TENS OF
THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE LIVE IN APARTMENTS I WONDER ARE THEY ALSO GETTING A BREAK PARTICULARLY I KNOW IT WOULD GO
TO THE OWNERS BUT THAT'S WHAT I HAD THE QUESTION ABOUT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. >> MAYOR: MR. EASTMAN?
>> SO, RYAN, YOU WORKED A BIT ON THE LIVE LOCAL ACT AND THERE WERE CHANGES IN THE LAST MINUTE ON THE MIDDLE MARKET TAX
EXEMPTIONS. CAN YOU GO INTO WHAT THOSE CHANGES WERE AND HOW THAT MIGHT IMPACT US AND WHAT WE HAVE
MOVING FORWARD? >> SO WHAT YOU ARE SPECIFICALLY TALKING ABOUT, COMMISSIONER, WAS THERE WERE A COUPLE OF THINGS IN
TERMS OF THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR TAX REDUCTIONS. THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT
REDUCTION SPECIFICALLY FOR THE FLORIDA KEYS. WHAT YOU AND I HAD WORKED WITH AND WORKED WITH THE SENATE
PRESIDENT ON WAS WHETHER OR NOT STUDENTS WOULD EFFECTIVELY QUALIFY UNDER THAT AND THE ULTIMATELY THE CLARIFICATION
THAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR DID NOT MAKE IT INTO THAT FINAL BILL BECAUSE THEY WERE PLACING EFFECTIVELY THE CLASSIFICATION
OF STUDENT UNDER A CERTAIN POVERTY LEVEL AND OBVIOUSLY STUDENTS DON'T GENERALLY HAVE SIGNIFICANT INCOME AND SO WE
WERE HOPING THAT THOSE TAX EXEMPTIONS FOR DEVELOPERS WOULDN'T BE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF BUT THAT CLARIFICATION NEVER
MADE IT INTO THE FINAL LIVE LOCAL ACT. >> THERE WAS SOME EXEMPTION PLACED THE VERY LAST MINUTE ON
THE TAXING -- THE COUNTY AND THE CITY WOULD BE ABLE SO LONG AS WE DON'T HAVE THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF UNITS AT OR ABOVE 120% AMI WE
COULD EXEMPT OURSELVES FROM THAT WHOLE MIDDLE MARKET TAX EXEMPTION, AM I REMEMBERING THIS CORRECTLY?
>> YOU ARE. AND SO THERE IS A PROCESS THAT YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW EFFECTIVELY AND I BELIEVE THAT IT REQUIRES
YOU TO WORK WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE TO ENSURE THAT BUT I WILL GET THAT TO YOU JUST SO WE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU NEED TO DO
TO ENSURE QUALIFICATION. >> ALL RIGHT. AND THEN THERE WAS ALSO I WAS READING ABOUT PREEMPTION ON
ELECTRIC CHARGING STATIONS OR SOMETHING PUT INTO THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE. CAN YOU SPEAK MORE ON THAT AND
WHAT THAT LOOKED LIKE? >> THERE WAS A SUBSTANTIAL CONVERSATION AS IT RELATES TO EV'S NOT ONLY ON THE
REGISTRATION FEES BUT ALSO IN I BELIEVE IT WAS THE DEPARTMENT OF AG IN THE CONSUMER SERVICES BILL.
OF THE REGULATION OF CHARGING STATIONS WAS PREEMPTED TO THE STATE. WHAT THEY DID NOT WANT TO HAVE
IS THAT PATCHWORK OF REGULATIONS FROM A CITY AND COUNTY LEVEL ON CHARGING STATIONS THEMSELVES. SO THAT WAS PREEMPTED.
>> BUT THEN THEY DID SET A MINIMUM THRESHOLD FOR NEW CHARGING STATIONS NEED TO BE PLACED INTO RESIDENTIAL UNITS OR
IS THAT -- >> I'M UNFAMILIAR WITH THAT PIECE OF IT IN TERMS OF THAT BUT GLOBALLY WHAT THEY HAVE DONE IS
PREEMPTED TO THE STATE THE CHARGING STATIONS. >> AND THEN GOING TO SB 1628, THE BUSINESS IMPACT STATEMENT ON
NEW LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATES AND MAYBE SOMEONE FROM THE CITY BUT WHAT KIND OF AN IMPACT DO YOU THINK THAT WOULD
HAVE IN TERMS OF US BEING ABLE TO MOVE THROUGH LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATES, THE IMPACT THAT WOULD HAVE ON STAFF, WHAT DOES
THAT LOOK LIKE FOR US? >> MR. MAYOR, ANDREW PERSONS, CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER. SO THERE IS ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS
THAT STAFF WILL HAVE TO MAKE ANY TIME WE BRING A LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE OR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT FORWARD.
THERE IS IRONICALLY AN EXEMPTION FOR PRIVATELY INITIATED COMP PLAN OR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS FROM THE REQUIREMENT.
IF YOU RECALL I THINK THE FIRST ONE THAT WE PRESENTED TO THE COMMISSION WAS PART OF THE ACE DISTRICT AND THAT WAS WHEN THE
LAW STILL PROVIDED AN EXEMPTION FOR 163 ORDINANCES SO I JUST WAS MESSAGING WITH PLANNING STAFF ABOUT IT AND MAKE SURE, YOU
KNOW, YOU TALK ABOUT THIS WITH THE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE NEXT TIME YOU ALL MEET SO WE WILL INCORPORATE IT WHEN IT GETS INTO
AN ORDINANCE FORM. THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAVE TO ANALYZE LIKE A LOT OF STATE LEGISLATION IT IS PRETTY
VAGUE SO IT DOES CREATE SOME OPPORTUNITY FOR CHALLENGE IF -- DEPENDING ON IF THERE ARE BUSINESS INTERESTS BUT -- THAT
WANT TO MAKE AN ISSUE OF, YOU KNOW, AN ORDINANCE THAT WOULD AFFECT THEM. >> BECAUSE WHAT IS THE TERM THEY
USE IN STATUTE IT CAN BE ARBITRARY AND THINGS LIKE THAT? >> YES, THOSE ARE SORT OF LEGAL PRINCIPALS.
THE STATUTE DOES HAVE SOME SPECIFIC -- THEY DO HAVE CRITERIA BY WHICH WE HAVE TO EVALUATE AND WE HAVE TO ADDRESS
WITH THAT BUSINESS IMPACT STATEMENT IN TERMS OF NUMBER OF BUSINESSES ESTIMATED AFFECTED, COSTS TO THE GOVERNMENT TO
ACTUALLY DO THE REGULATION, YOU KNOW, SOME IDEA AS SORT OF THE IMPACT TO ACTUAL BUSINESS OPERATIONS DEPENDING ON THE
CONTEXT OF THE ORDINANCE. >> PERFECT. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR: SO 1530 IS THE
CAMPING BILL, RIGHT? >> YES, SIR. >> MAYOR: THAT'S A MUCH MORE PLEASANT WAY TO THINK ABOUT IT
AS A CAMPING BILL. DO YOU HAVE THOUGHTS ABOUT WHERE CHALLENGES TO THAT ARE LIKELY TO COME FROM OR HAVE YOU HEARD
ABOUT CHALLENGES TO THIS POINT? I'M TRYING TO THINK OF HOW WE BROADLY PREPARE FOR THIS AS YOU PROBABLY KNOW WE HAVE EXTENSIVE
EXPERIENCE WITH A CAMPING FACILITY AT THE FORMER DIGNITY VILLAGE AND IT JUST FEELS LIKE NOBODY TALKED TO LAW ENFORCEMENT
OR ANY FIRST RESPONDERS ANYWHERE WHO HAD EXPERIENCE WITH THIS AND I AM BEWILDERED THAT THEY DON'T SEEM TO HAVE TALKED TO FIRST
RESPONDERS ABOUT THIS. DO YOU HAVE BROAD THOUGHTS ABOUT IT? >> I WILL TALK A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT THE GENESIS. NUMEROUS STATES ACROSS THE COUNTRY HAVE DONE SOMETHING SIMILAR AS IT RELATES TO, YOU
KNOW, HOMELESS ENCAMPMENTS OR CAMPING SITES IF YOU WILL. THE STATE OF COLORADO, THE STATE OF OREGON, AND THE CITY OF
ORLANDO AS WELL HAS ACTUALLY HAD AN EXTENSIVE, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC HOMELESSNESS CAMPING CONVERSATION RECENTLY.
YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF I GUESS I WOULD NEED CLARIFICATION WHEN YOU SAY IN TERMS OF CHALLENGE. IS THAT REQUEST FOR VETO, IS
THAT CHALLENGE OF THE LAW ONCE PASSED? >> MAYOR: BECAUSE IT HAS ALREADY BEEN SIGNED, YES.
>> IT HAS BEEN SIGNED AS OF YESTERDAY. >> MAYOR: SO OBVIOUSLY WE WILL FIND A WAY TO COORDINATE IT.
SOME PEOPLE WHEN I TALK TO THEM THINK IT IS VERY MUCH A BURDEN ON COUNTIES. I THINK THERE ARE SOME MAYS IN
THERE THAT LET THE COUNTIES OPT OUT BASICALLY. DOES THAT SOUND ACCURATE TO YOU >> THIS IS A VOLUNTARY PROGRAM
AND I THINK THE BILL IS WRITTEN IT IS THE COUNTY THAT IS ELIGIBLE TO DESIGNATE THE CAMPING AREA.
NOW, YOU AS THE CITY COMMISSION HAS TO AGREE WITH THAT AREA DESIGNATION THAT THE COUNTY MAKES SO THEY CANNOT FORCE IT
UPON YOU, BUT, YES, IT IS VERY MUCH A VOLUNTARY PROGRAM BUT I THINK WHAT -- WHERE YOU MAY BE VULNERABLE AND WHERE ALL CITIES
COULD BE VULNERABLE WITH THE PASSAGE OF THE LAW IS THAT IT DOES ALLOW FOR EFFECTIVELY CITIZEN CHALLENGES TO SAY CITY X
IS ALLOWING SOMEONE TO CAMP OR SLEEP IN A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OR A PUBLIC BUILDING, PUBLIC AREA AND THEN THAT INSTITUTES AN
INVESTIGATION AND POTENTIAL CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST THE CITY. SO THERE CERTAINLY ARE LIABILITY
CONCERNS THERE. >> MAYOR: RIGHT. COMMISSIONER SACO? >> SO BY ALLOW DO YOU MEAN, YOU
KNOW, WE'RE NEGLIGENT IN OUR DUTIES TO STOP THAT BEHAVIOR OR WE HAVE I GUESS KIND OF DESIGNATED A SPACE THAT THEY DO
NOT APPROVE OF PERSONALLY AND THEN CHALLENGED? >> I THINK FORMER YOU ARE DERELICT IN YOUR DUTY TO PREVENT
THIS FROM HAPPENING. >> SO WE'RE ON THE HOOK REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE SITE IS ESTABLISHED IF WE -- THERE IS
NO SITE ESTABLISHED THE HOMELESS PEOPLE EXIST. >> RIGHT. >> THEY DO.
THAT BECOMES 20, 30, 100 CHALLENGES. >> YOU COULD BE ON THE HOOK IN BOTH INSTANCES, YES, ABSOLUTELY.
>> THANKS. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR: ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY COMMUNITIES PREPARING CHALLENGES
TO THIS? >> I AM NOT AS OF TODAY. AGAIN, I BELIEVE IT WAS YESTERDAY OR JUST THE DAY PRIOR
THAT THE BILL WAS SIGNED INTO LAW. I KNOW THAT THROUGH OUR REPRESENTATION OF THE LEAGUE OF
CITIES THERE WERE CERTAINLY A LARGE NUMBER OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WHO HAVE LOOKED AT THIS LEGISLATION.
I AM NOT AWARE OF A DIRECT, YOU KNOW, CHALLENGE AT THIS POINT. >> MAYOR: OKAY. THANK YOU.
COMMISSIONER CHESTNUT? >> THANK YOU. WHEN DO YOU EXPECT THE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS SHEET?
WHEN DO YOU EXPECT SOMETHING TO BE RELEASED BY THE DEPARTMENT THAT ANSWERS QUESTIONS? >> WHICH DEPARTMENT IN
PARTICULAR? >> WELL, WHICH DEPARTMENT IS HANDLING THIS? >> FOR THE CAMPING AND THE
HOMELESSNESS ISSUE? >> YES. >> IT WOULD LIKELY ULTIMATELY BE THE LAW ENFORCEMENT FDLE.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS SPELLED OUT IN THE LEGISLATION OR NOT. SO I WOULD HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT QUITE FRANKLY
BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE FDLE ULTIMATELY. >> OKAY. THANK YOU.
>> MAYOR: THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. I HAVE HEARD A DISCUSSION OF SOME $30 MILLION POT THROUGH
DCF. CAN YOU TELL US MORE ABOUT THAT >> SO I BELIEVE THE GENESIS OF THAT AGAIN IS IF ONE OF THESE
AREAS WERE ESTABLISHED DCF DOES HAVE TO BE NOTIFIED IN THE INSTANCE THAT THERE ARE CHILDREN PRESENT.
HOW THAT PROGRAM WILL BE SPENT OR UTILIZED I BELIEVE TO PROVIDE THE NECESSARY RESOURCES FOR, AGAIN, HEALTH SAFETY AND
WELFARE. >> MAYOR: IF THERE ARE CHILDREN INVOLVED. >> CORRECT.
>> MAYOR: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ANY OTHER LIGHTS. COMMISSIONER WILLITS? >> MAYBE NOT A QUESTION JUST THE
BILL ABOUT CAMPING AND THE LIVE LOCAL. I JUST WANT TO REITERATE I DON'T EXPECT A SPECIAL SESSION FOR
EITHER OF THOSE SPECIFICALLY BUT ACTUALLY THE CAMPING ONE, YOU KNOW, I WOULD BE FINE URGING THIS BODY TO URGE A SPECIAL
SESSION TO COME FIND A LOT MORE MONEY THAN THAT JUST TO GO AHEAD AND SAY THAT THE STATE IS GOING TO TAKE A MUCH STRONGER ROLE IN
HOMELESSNESS BY SAYING AT MINIMUM WE WILL FUND ENCAMPMENTS SHOULD YOUR COUNTY WANT TO DO IT SO THERE IS A CLEAR STREAM AND
IT IS NOT JUST FOR CHILDREN BUT THEY PROBABLY NEED, I MEAN, PROBABLY HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO REALLY IN ONE SWIPE
REALLY GIVE US ALL OF THE TOOLS WE NEED. SO I MEAN I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS SOMETHING WE WOULD NEED AND
TO BE IN PREPARATION OF SPECIAL SESSIONS, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WILL BE SPECIAL SESSIONS THERE PROBABLY WON'T BUT FOR MY
PRIORITIES TWO THINGS THAT I FEEL LIKE I MEAN THERE ARE LOTS OF THINGS I WISH I COULD CHANGE ABOUT THE LEGISLATURE AND WHAT
THEY DID THIS YEAR BUT THOSE ARE ONES THAT SEEM LIKE NOT JUST US BUT OTHER COMMUNITIES HAVE THAT NEED.
THAT AND ALL COLLEGE COMMUNITIES COULD PROBABLY WOULD BE PROTECTED BY LOOKING AT THE LIVE LOCAL SO I JUST WANT TO SAY IT
AGAIN I GUESS I'M NOT READY TO MAKE A MOTION OR ANYTHING BUT IT IS JUST, YES, THANKS. >> MAYOR: THANK YOU,
COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER CHESTNUT? >> I WOULD BE INCLINED NOT TO PUSH THE IDEA OF A SPECIAL
SESSION. PROBABLY SPEND THAT 30 MILLION THAT THEY ALLOCATED FOR DCF HAVING A SPECIAL SESSION IF YOU
WERE TO ASK FOR THAT BUT I THINK AT THIS POINT I WOULD NOT BE ON THE SIDE OF TRYING TO PUSH TO HAVE A SPECIAL SESSION.
>> REALLY THIS IS JUST ME SAYING -- [INAUDIBLE]. PUT IT ON THE PRIORITIES FOR NEXT YEAR TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW,
THIS IS WHAT WE ARE EXPERIENCING. WE STILL HAVE TIME BUT I THINK THAT NEXT YEAR IT IS MY OPINION
THOSE ARE TWO THINGS WE NEED TO PUT ON NEXT YEAR'S PRIORITIES IN ESSENCE STARTING NOW. I FORGET ON OUR SCHEDULE WHEN WE
DO PRIORITIES EXACTLY BUT THE CONVERSATIONS START NOW SO THAT'S MY OPINION IS THAT THOSE ARE TWO EASY ONES THAT I THINK
WE REALLY BEHOOVE NOT JUST US BUT OTHER COMMUNITIES THAT ARE SIMILAR TO US. >> COMMISSIONER, THAT'S A GOOD
SEGUE, SO THE 2025 LEGISLATIVE SESSION BEGINS IN MARCH AND RUNS THROUGH MAY OF 2025. THAT LIKELY MEANS THE
LEGISLATURE WILL BEGIN THEIR WORK IN THE COMMITTEE WEEK PROCESS LATE DECEMBER MAYBE NOT EVEN UNTIL JANUARY 2025.
WE WOULD ADVISE AND HAVE ADVISED CLIENTS THAT YOUR PRIORITIES SHOULD BE FINALIZED BY OCTOBER, LATE SEPTEMBER IS PROBABLY IF
YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT SCHEDULE THAT IS EARLIER FANTASTIC BUT I REALLY WOULDN'T WAIT PAST EARLY OCTOBER TO HAVE YOUR LEGISLATIVE
PRIORITIES FINALIZED. >> MAYOR: WE CAN GET MOSTLY THROUGH OUR BUDGET SEASON AND GET INTO THOSE DISCUSSIONS.
>> I'VE HEARD, I HAVE READ THE GOVERNOR IS TALKING ABOUT A SPECIAL SESSION POTENTIALLY ON HAITI.
IS THAT LIKELY TO OCCUR? WHAT HAVE YOU GUYS HEARD? >> I HAVE HEARD SIMILAR THINGS, COMMISSIONER, THAT IN THE VERY
NEAR TERM THE NEXT TWO TO THREE WEEKS THERE COULD BE A SPECIAL SESSION ON IMMIGRATION SPECIFIC FOCUSED ON HAITI.
THE GOVERNOR HAD INSTITUTED A NUMBER OF FLIGHTS INTO THE COUNTRY TO PICK UP FLORIDIANS WHO MAY BE STUCK BECAUSE OF THE
CIVIL UNREST GOING ON IN THE COUNTRY BUT THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER STATES WHO HAVE HELD OR AT LEAST PASSED IMMIGRATION LAWS
AND I THINK FLORIDA WOULD LOOK TO EMULATE SO IT IS LIKELY IN MY MIND. >> THANK YOU.
>> MAYOR: OKAY. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS, AND THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE AND WE APPRECIATE THE UPDATES AND
THE CONVERSATION AND WE WILL EVENTUALLY REACH OUT IF FOLKS HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS SO THANK YOU AND WE ARE GOING TO TAKE TEN
MINUTES TO STRETCH OUR LEGS AND WE WILL BE BACK AT 3:00. OKAY? [RECESS TAKEN]
>> Mayor: THANK YOU ALL FOR THE BRIEF SESSION THERE. I APPRECIATE IT. MADAM CLERK, WHAT DO WE HAVE?
>> MR. MAYOR, WE HAVE 2024, 264 UNSOLICITED PROPOSAL POLICY WITH A RECOMMENDATION THE COMMISSION REINSTATE THE UNSOLICITED
PROPOSAL POLICY. >> YES, MR. MAYOR. STAFF WILL GO THROUGH IT. >> THANK YOU.
I'LL JUST JUMP RIGHT IN. IN APRIL 2012, THE CITY COMMISSION APPROVED A SIX-MONTH PILOT FOR AN UNSOLICITED BID
PROPOSAL PROCESS. THAT SUNSETTED IN NOVEMBER, 2022. IN ORDER TO DEVELOP THAT POLICY
STAFF REACHED OUT TO 22 FLORIDA ENTITIES TO LEARN MORE ABOUT HOW THEY HANDLE THEIR UNSOLICITED PROPOSALS.
WE REACHED OUT TO 14 LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, FOUR COUNTIES, UTILITY, TRANSIT, AVIATION AGENCIES, AND A UNIVERSITY.
BASED ON THIS AND OTHER FEEDBACK THAT WE COLLECTED WE DEVELOPED THE PROPOSAL, THE PILOT POLICY THAT INCLUDED THE FOLLOWING
COMPONENTS. A DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN AN UNSOLICITED CONCEPTUAL PROPOSAL, AND A DETAILED PROPOSAL.
AND THE REQUIRED INFORMATION NEEDED TO BRING THE -- TO THE CITY COMMISSION EITHER PROPOSAL. WE LOOKED AT FEES THAT OTHER
CITIES CHARGE ON THAT RANGE FROM ZERO TO $2500. AND WE DEVELOPED AN APPROACH FOR UNSOLICITED CONCEPTUAL PROPOSAL,
AND A DETAILED PROPOSAL AND THEY WOULD PHASE IN THE FEES UP TO $6,000 IF APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION.
TO MOVE FORWARD. THE DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF STAFF'S AND COMMITTEE CONCEPTUAL PROPOSAL AND A DETAILED
UNSOLICITED PROPOSAL ARE ALSO OUTLINED. THERE'S A DESCRIPTION OF THE COMPETITIVE PROCESS FOR REVIEW,
INCLUDING EVALUATION CRITERIA. AND THERE'S A DESCRIPTION OF A NEGOTIATION PROCESS, IF THE UNSOLICITED PROPOSAL IS CHOSEN
BY THE CITY COMMISSION. AND INCLUDING THE NEGOTIATION CRITERIA. STAFF AT THAT TIME AND TODAY
RECOMMENDS THAT THE FEES FOR THESE CONCEPTUAL PROPOSALS BE RAISED FOR A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION THAT SUBMITS A
PROPOSAL IN THE FOLLOWING FOCUS AREAS WHICH ARE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AND PROJECT FOR GCRA.
DURING THE SIX MONTH PILOT THE CITY DID RECEIVE THREE UNSOLICITED PROPOSALS, AND THE UNSOLICITED PROPOSAL POLICY
ALLOWED THE CITY AND STAFF TO HAVE A STRUCTURED AND WELL THOUGHT OUT PROCESS BY WHICH TO EVALUATE ANY PROPOSALS THAT ARE
SUBMITTED. SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO ASK THE COMMISSION TO REIN-TATE THE UNSOLICITED PROPOSAL POLICY
AND WE'RE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE. >> Mayor: VERY GOOD, THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER SACO?
>> THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU TO ALL THE STAFF WHO REALLY WORKED ON THE FIRST KIND OF A PILOT OF THIS.
I THINK -- I KNOW WE HAVE SEEN AT LEAST ONE THAT KIND OF CAME THROUGH AND DID THE WHOLE RIGMAROLE WITH US AND I THINK
IT'S COMING OUT AS SOMETHING GOOD, HOPEFULLY DUE DILIGENCE PENDING. BUT I THINK THAT IT'S GIVEN US A
LITTLE MORE TIME, AND THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE ASKING US TO DO, KIND OF SEE HOW IN THE LONGER RUN IT OPERATES.
I'M HOPEFUL, AND I'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO MAKE THAT TODAY. I THINK -- AND WILL GIVE SUGGESTIONS ON WAIVING SPEEDS IN
SPECIFIC CATEGORIES FOR NONPROFITS AND I APPRECIATE THAT YOU HAD THE FORETHOUGHT TO SPECIFY, IF YOU'RE A NONPROFIT,
IT HAS TO BE IN THESE AREAS. BECAUSE ANYBODY CAN BE A NONPROFIT. BUT NO, FOR CRITICAL AREAS OF
NEED FOR OUR CITY. SO, I THINK THAT IS WELL THOUGHT OUT AND PERFECTLY SOUND. >> VERY GOOD, THANK YOU.
>> Mayor: WE ALSO GOT AFTER OUR MEETING THIS AFTERNOON THE E-MAIL FROM THE -- PALMER WHO HAS ALREADY BEEN THROUGH THE
PROCESS, AND IS NOT ASKING FOR ANY OF YOU, BUT RECOMMENDING THAT WE CONTINUE THIS PROCESS, AND HE FOUND IT PARTICULARLY
USEFUL FOR HIS ORGANIZATION. I KNOW THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER OPPORTUNITIES, I HAVE NO IDEA HOW MANY, BUT I'M AWARE OF AT
LEAST TWO OR THREE, THAT WOULD HAVE MADE A LOT OF SENSE FOR OUR COMMUNITY AND WOULD HAVE BEEN USEFUL FOR OUR COMMUNITY, BUT
THERE WAS QUITE LITERALLY NO WAY FOR THEM TO MOVE FORWARD IN ANY KIND OF SYSTEMIC WAY. THERE WAS NO -- NO POLICY THAT
ALLOWED PEOPLE, NO PROCESS TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO SAY, I HAVE A GREAT IDEA FOR THIS PIECE OF CITY PROPERTY, OTHER THAN
KNOWING THE RIGHT PEOPLE. AND IT SHOULDN'T BE A WHO YOU KNOW SYSTEM. WHAT THIS DOES IS ALLOW IT TO BE
A PROCESS THAT IS PUBLICLY AVAILABLE, THAT ANYONE CAN WORK THROUGH. AND THAT'S HOW LOCAL GOVERNMENT
OUGHT TO BE. I REALLY HAVE NO IDEA HOW MANY OPPORTUNITIES WE HAVE MISSED AS A COMMUNITY BECAUSE THERE WAS NO
WAY FOR -- FOR ANYBODY TO WALK UP TO THE COMMISSION AND SAY, I HAVE A GREAT IDEA, LET'S WORK ON IT.
I'M PLEASED WITH THE WAY THAT WORKED FOR THE NOT, AND THEN THE OPPORTUNITY WE'RE ALL EXPERIENCING THERE, WHICH
CERTAINLY IS NOT DONE, BUT HAS MOVED THROUGH, AND I'M HOPEFUL THAT -- THAT OTHER FOLKS WILL BE ABLE TO MOVE A SIMILAR SYSTEM
THAT IS OPENLY AVAILABLE AND TRANSPARENT TO ANYONE WHO FILLS OUT THE FORM. ALL RIGHT.
I DON'T SEE ANY LIGHTS. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS? >> NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
>> Mayor: VERY GOOD. ALL RIGHT. ANY COMMENT? OKAY.
COMMISSIONER SACO. >> COMMENT? THEN I MOVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
>> SECOND. >> Mayor: ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO MOVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
COMMISSIONER BOOK? >> YEAH, THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. SO THIS IS ONE THAT'S CAUSING ME SOME CONCERN WHEN WE DID HAVE
THE NOT COME FORWARD IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT IT WAS A TREMENDOUS PROPOSAL. AND I FEEL THAT IN KIND OF
KNOWING A PARTICULAR BUSINESS OWNER, AND BELIEVING THAT THEIR INTENT IS TO BUILD OUT JUST AN INCREDIBLE AREA DOWN ON SOUTH
MAIN STREET, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD THING. ON THE OTHER HAND, I DO SO SEPARATE AND DISTINCT FROM THAT
PARTICULAR PROPOSAL I DO HAVE CONCERN THAT IT'S -- IT'S ACTUALLY SOME OF THE SAME. WHERE YOU HAVE PEOPLE WHO BASED
ON THEIR CONTACTS AND THEIR NETWORKS, THEY'RE ABLE TO ESSENTIALLY GET MORE TRACTION ON A PROPOSAL, AND MOVE FORWARD
WHERE THERE SHOULD BE SOME VERY CLEAR DELINEATIONS AND BOUNDARIES BETWEEN BOTH GOVERNMENT, AND PRIVATE
BUSINESS, AND INDUSTRY. SO KIND OF A SPIN TO WHAT YOU HAPPENED TO SAY MR. MAYOR IS I WORRY ABOUT SOMETIMES PEOPLE
HAVING INS SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE I HAVE AN UNSOLICITED PROPOSAL, AS OPPOSED TO GOING THROUGH PROCESSES, AND PROTOCOLS, IT MAY
BE A LITTLE ONEROUS, A LITTLE BURDENSOME. ON THE OTHER HAND, IT DOES CAUSE THEM TO HAVE TO KIND OF CROSS
EVERY "T" AND DOT EVERY "I." BUT THAT'S JUST SOME COMMENTS ON IT BUT I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THE NATURE OF IT.
THANK YOU. >> Mayor: SO, I'M CONFUSED. I -- WHAT THIS DOES IS, IS PUT A PUBLIC POLICY PROCESS FORWARD.
WHAT IS, TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, WHAT'S THE PROCESS FOR, AND WE WILL NOT BECAUSE -- IN THE THINGS THAT EXIST, TO YOUR
KNOWLEDGE, WHAT'S THE PROCESS FOR MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT IF WE DON'T HAVE THIS? >> I THINK WHAT I WAS
INDICATING, THIS IS THE TYPE OF THING THAT WILL NEED TO BE IN PLACE. IT GIVES US A LITTLE MORE
STRUCTURE TO -- SO IF YOU'RE SAYING THAT WE'RE IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT PARTICULAR ASPECT. >> Mayor: ABSOLUTELY.
>> I JUST ALWAYS AM CONCERNED [CHOPPY AUDIO] HOW MANY TIMES IT DOES IN FACT GIVE THEM SOME. BUT THIS IS A BETTER SYSTEM THAN
NO ONE SOLICIT -- I MEAN I SEE YOU SHAKING YOUR HEAD BIG THERE. SO I UNDERSTOOD THAT. I WAS TRYING TO MAKE THAT
CLEARER. I DO HAVE SOME CONCERN ABOUT THE CLOSENESS OF PEOPLE'S ABILITY TO GET INVOLVED, EMBED THEMSELVES
AND MOVE THROUGH THINGS. AND THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE PROCESS IN THE FIRST PLACE. >> Mayor: SO, YES, I SUPPORT
THIS BECAUSE I WANT THERE TO BE A PROCESS WHERE NONE CURRENTLY EXISTS. COMMISSIONER WILLITS?
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. YOU KNOW, THIS SEEMS LIKE A GOOD PLAN, A GOOD POLICY SO THAT THE SAME WAY ANY MEMBER OF THE
COMMUNITY SAYS -- CAN COME UP WITH AN IDEA, JUST BRING IT, YOU KNOW, GO OH, THAT'S INTERESTING, AND WE CAN DECIDE YES OR NO, WE
SHOULD GO WITH THAT OR NOT. FEELS LIKE IT'S THE SAME THING BUT, YOU KNOW, FROM OUR LAND OR FACILITIES FROM SOMEONE IN THE
BUSINESS COMMUNITY OR BUSINESS OWNER OR PROPERTY OWNER OR SOMEONE WANTS TO TRY SOMETHING. I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT THE
PROCESS OF NOT HAVING TO COME FORWARD PARTICULARLY BECAUSE WE MAY NOT HAVE -- WE MAY NOT -- OUR DIRECTION MAY NOT HAVE BEEN
LIKE ALL RIGHT IT'S TIME TO MOVE ON TO SOMETHING, BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW EVERY LITTLE LAST CORNER OF THE MARKET.
WE NO LONGER HAVE A BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT MANAGER, IS THAT CORRECT, RIGHT? WE CURRENTLY DO HAVE THAT.
WE HAVE A GCRA MANAGER WHO UNDERSTANDS AT LEAST WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THAT AREA ABOUT DEVELOPING BUSINESSES OR, YOU
KNOW, OPPORTUNITIES BUT WE DON'T KNOW THE WHOLE MARKET, AND HAVE THEM COME BACK AND SAY HEY IT'S TIME TO DO THIS OR SO I LIKE
THAT IDEA, AND -- SO I UNDERSTAND COMMISSIONER BOOK'S CONCERN, BUT HOLDING OUT TO EVEN DECIDE TO HAVE AN RFP ON
SOMETHING IS JUST AS -- JUST AS FRAUGHT WITH THE INFLUENCE POTENTIALLY OF DON'T MOVE ON THIS, BECAUSE SOMEONE WHO WANTS
TO GO PUT IN, THEY'RE NOT READY, THEY DON'T HAVE THEIR FINANCING TOGETHER, THEY DON'T -- OR THEIR BUSINESS CYCLES -- THEIR
BUSINESS CYCLE IS JUST NOT THERE YET. SO THE DELAYING OF THAT, PLUS ON US AS WELL TO JUMP ON IT NOW,
IS -- THERE'S GOING TO BE JUST THAT SAME KIND OF DELAY, AND THAT'S WHY JUST BEING ABLE TO COME DIRECTLY AND SAY I HAVE AN
IDEA, THIS IS LAND YOU HAVE, AND I DO THINK IT, IT MAKES US THINK ABOUT SOME THINGS SOONER THAN LATER, WHICH I THINK IS GOOD,
BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE COULD STOP AND THINK AND SAY OH, THAT LAND IS JUST, YOU KNOW, IT'S LAND YOU HAVE TO DEAL WITH A YEAR OR NOW,
TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, I LIKE THE IDEA THAT, YOU KNOW, I SUPPORT THIS. >> Mayor: THANK YOU,
COMMISSIONER WILLITS. COMMISSIONER EASTMAN? >> IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, SO WE GET THE UNSOLICITED BID IN,
BUT THEN WE STILL OPEN IT UP FOR OTHER PEOPLE TO COME TO US TO GET INFORMATION, CORRECT? SO IT'S NOT LIKE SOMEONE COMES
TO US, SAYS I HAVE THIS IDEA. WE SAY WE'VE REVIEWED IT, IT'S GOOD, BUT DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY OTHER IDEAS NOW THAT THAT
PROCESS, WHICH I THINK IS WHAT OPENS THAT UP A BIT MORE, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS I LIKE ABOUT IT.
IT'S -- YOU KNOW, IT ENSURES THAT THAT DOES NOT HAPPEN, AND THAT WE ARE GETTING THE BEST THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS TO OFFER.
LIKE WE GOT TWO REALLY GOOD PROPOSALS OUT OF THAT AND I KNOW WE STRUGGLED WITH WHICH ONE WE WERE GOING TO GO WITH, AND I
FELT THE NOT COME FORWARD WITH A VERY GOOD PROPOSAL AND SOME FOLKS CAME FORWARD WITH SOME OTHER IDEAS OF THEIR OWN TO
WHERE THE MUSEUM COULD GO SO I THINK THAT THAT IS A REALLY IMPORTANT FACTOR. >> Mayor: SO I'M NOT SAYING
PROPERTY. WE HAD YEARS BEFORE THAT A LOCAL BUSINESS OWNER COME FORWARD AND SAY, REALLY INTERESTED IN THIS
SITE. I'D LOVE TO BUY THIS, BUT WE DON'T REALLY KNOW. WE DON'T HAVE A PROCESS FOR
THAT. SO, THIS MAKES THAT A POSSIBLE THING FOR THERE TO BE GOOD PUBLIC DISCUSSION ABOUT IT,
WHERE EVERYTHING SHOULD BE, EVERYTHING TO BE LITERALLY IN THE OPEN, AND TRANSPARENT. SO, I'M SORRY IF I MISUNDERSTOOD
THE CONCERNS THERE. SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE GOOD. I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER LIGHTS, SO -- COMMISSIONER BOOK?
>> I -- THAT'S RIGHT. IT ADDRESSES A GAP THAT OCCURS IN BASICALLY THE LATE 2022 THROUGH NOW ESSENTIALLY IF THIS
WERE TO MOVE FORWARD, AND IT DOES PUT STRUCTURE IN. I DON'T -- I'M NOT ENTIRELY COMFORTABLE WITH IT, BUT IT'S
CERTAINLY AN IMPROVEMENT IN STRUCTURE PROCESS AND PROTOCOL, AND GIVES US SOME ESSENTIALLY CITY GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRATIC
STEPS, WHICH IS IMPORTANT SOMETIMES IF YOU WANT TO BE ETHICAL AND MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY HAS A FAIR AND
EQUITABLE PATH TO WHETHER DEVELOPMENT OR BUILDING, OR REZONING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT FOR ANYTHING.
SO, THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. >> Mayor: VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, SEEING NO OTHER
LIGHTS. ALL IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE. [AYES] ANY OPPOSED?
ALL RIGHT THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY WITH COMMISSIONER DUNCAN-WALKER ABSENT. MADAM CLERK.
>> MR. MAYOR WE HAVE 2024-291, COMMUNITY GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION ALLIANCE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING.
WITH THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THE GENERAL POLICY COMMITTEE REVIEW THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF GAINESVILLE,
SANTA FE COLLEGE AND ALACHUA COUNTY FOR COMMUNITY GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION ALLIANCE AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER OR
THE DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE THE MOU AND EXECUTE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE CITY ATTORNEY AS TO FORM AND
LEGALITY. >> BRANDY IS HERE, SHE'S OUR PUBLIC HEALTH DIRECTOR, AND HAS BEEN WORKING VERY DILIGENTLY
WITH CHIEF DIXON ON THE GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION INITIATIVE. WE'RE ALSO JOINED BY MISS BRUNINGS, FROM SANTA FE COLLEGE.
SHE MAY SPEAK A LITTLE BIT LATER. BUT WHAT I'D LIKE TO ASK BRANDY TO DO IS COME UP TO SPEAK TO WHY
WE ARE WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW WITH THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING. THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION
AT PREVIOUS MEETINGS TO THIS POINT WHERE WE COULD GET SOMETHING TO HELP US THROUGH OUR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
PROGRAMMING. SO THAT'S WHY BRANDY IS HERE. SIMILARLY SHE REPRESENTS THE CITY WHERE WE ARE IN THIS
FRAMEWORK WHERE THE COUNTY IS, AND THE FRAMEWORK, SO WE DIDN'T WANT TO GO TOO MUCH FURTHER WITHOUT COMING TO THE COMMISSION
TO ALLOW YOU TO HAVE SOME INPUT SO THEREFORE BRANDY IS HERE. PLEASE. >> Mayor: WELCOME.
>> THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS. BRANDY STONE, COMMUNITY HEALTH
DIRECTOR WITH GAINESVILLE FIRE RESCUE. SHOULD I HAVE THE PROJECTOR? >> IF IT'S --
>> OKAY. SO AS MS. CURRY MENTIONED, THIS HAS BEEN A WORK IN PROGRESS AND WE'RE HAPPY TO BE ABLE TO BRING
THIS TO THE COMMISSION NOW. BEFORE WE REALLY DIVE INTO THIS, I DO WANT TO SHARE THAT WE HAVE FOCUSED ON THE TERM ALLIANCE
HERE. AND, THAT WAS SELECTED FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS. I ACTUALLY LOOKED UP THE
DEFINITION OF ALLIANCE AND FEEL IT VERY MUCH FITS WITH THE PARTNERSHIP THAT WE ARE TRYING TO CREATE WITH THIS.
SO, AN ALLIANCE IS A UNION OR ASSOCIATION FORMED FOR MUTUAL BENEFIT, ESPECIALLY BETWEEN COUNTRIES OR ORGANIZATIONS, AND
IS DEFINED AS A RELATIONSHIP BASED ON AFFINITY AND INTERESTS, AND QUALITIES. I THINK WHEN WE THINK ABOUT GUN
VIOLENCE PREVENTION OUR MUTUAL BENEFIT IS THE SAFETY AND OUR WELL-BEING OF OUR COMMUNITY. WHEN WE LOOK AT THE THREE PEOPLE
AND ENTITIES THAT ARE INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS. SO, AS MENTIONED, THE CITY OF GAINESVILLE, SANTA FE COLLEGE,
AND ALACHUA COUNTY ARE THE THREE ENTITIES UNDER THIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING. AND IT IS TRULY TO FORM THIS
ALLIANCE. FORM THIS PARTNERSHIP FROM WHICH WE CONTINUE TO GROW OUR EFFORTS. SO AS WE SEE WITH THE BACKGROUND
IT IS VERY MUCH STILL FOCUSED ON STRATEGIES. IT'S VERY MUCH STILL FOCUSED ON SOLUTIONS.
AND IT IS VERY MUCH SO FOCUSED ON UNDERSTANDING BEST PRACTICES AND DATA COLLECTION, AS WELL. IT DOES FOCUS ON THE PUBLIC
HEALTH PERSPECTIVE, WHICH IS AN AGREED UPON PERSPECTIVE FROM BOTH THE CITY AND THE COUNTY. AND WE'RE GRATEFUL TO HAVE SANTA
FE ON BOARD WITH US TO SUPPORT THAT PERSPECTIVE. SO THE COMMON GOALS OF THIS MOU ARE TO DEFINE AND MONITOR THE
PROBLEM, IDENTIFY RISK AND PROTECTIVE FACTORS, DEVELOP AND TEST PREVENTION STRATEGIES, AND ENSURE WIDESPREAD ADOPTION OF
EFFECTIVE STRATEGIES. OF COURSE, GUIDED BY DATA COLLECTION. SO WHEN WE THINK ABOUT THE
STRUCTURE OF THIS ALLIANCE, AND THIS ISN'T QUITE EXPLICIT IN HERE BUT I WILL SHARE THAT WE'VE HAD SOME FOLLOW-UP CONVERSATIONS
ABOUT EXACTLY WHAT THIS WILL LOOK LIKE LOGISTICALLY. AND SO WHILE WE HAVE THE THREE ENTITIES THAT WILL BE
SPEARHEADING OR PUTTING FORWARD THIS WORK, OF COURSE, WE WANT TO ENGAGE ALL OF OUR COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDERS THAT ARE INVOLVED
IN THIS CONVERSATION, AND ALSO COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN THIS. AND SO, ONE OF THE THINGS WE
TALKED ABOUT IS SUBCOMMITTEE STRUCTURE WHERE WE HAVE VARIOUS SECTORS THROUGHOUT OUR COMMUNITY REPRESENTING SUBCOMMITTEES
SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID AT OUR GUN VIOLENCE SUMMIT WITH OUR BREAKOUT ROOMS. SO THINGS LIKE OUR PUBLIC HEALTH
SECTORS, OUR PUBLIC SAFETY, JUDICIAL SECTOR, OUR YOUTH, OUR INDIVIDUALS WITH LIVED EXPERIENCE, OUR COMMUNITY-BASED
ORGANIZATIONS, ET CETERA, AND HAVING SUBCOMMITTEES THAT COLLECT THEMSELVES, A REPRESENTATIVE THAT SITS ON THIS
LARGER GATHERING BODY TO REPORT UP TO THE ALLIANCE, AND TO CARRY INFORMATION BACK TO THEIR SUBCOMMITTEES.
TO STREAMLINE THAT COMMUNICATION, AND SPUR EACH OF THOSE ENTITIES TO BE ABLE TO FOCUS THEIR WORK ACCORDINGLY.
SO WITH THAT, WE'LL GO INTO THE PURPOSE A LITTLE BIT FURTHER. OF COURSE, THIS IS ALL GROUNDED IN PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION, AND
MOVING SOME OF THESE ACTION ITEMS FORWARD. SO FIRST, SUPPORTING EXPANSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE-BASED OR
EVIDENCE-INFORMED COMMUNITY GUN VIOLENCE AND VIOLENCE INTERVENTION PROGRAMS. THINGS LIKE HBIPs OR HOSPITAL
BASED INTERVENTION PROGRAMS. ABILITY TO CONNECT SURVIVORS TO SUPPORT SERVICES, DEFUSING NEIGHBORHOOD CONFLICT, ET
CETERA. THIS ALSO COULD INVOLVE MEDICAL CARE AND THINGS LIKE THAT, AS WELL.
LOOKING SPECIFICALLY AT POINT "B" THIS IS MORE ABOUT SURVEILLANCE. SO THAT WOULD BE THE DATA
COLLECTION, WORKING CLOSELY WITH OUR PUBLIC, HEALTH, AND SAFETY OFFICIALS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE
AVAILABLE TO US. AND THEN LOOKING AT PART "C," OF COURSE, FOUNDED IN A TRAUMA-INFORMED APPROACH.
MISS COLEMAN HAS COME ON TO THE TEAM HAS ASSISTED IN DRAFTING THIS, AND WITH HER BACKGROUND WE BELIEVE THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT
COMPONENT TO THE WORK THAT WE'LL BE DOING. NEXT MOVING TO THE GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND DESIRED OUTCOMES.
OF COURSE OUR MAIN GOAL IS TO IDENTIFY SOLUTIONS AND STRATEGIES TO REDUCE AND PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE AND VIOLENT CRIME
IN OUR COMMUNITY. I THINK WE CAN ALL AGREE THAT THAT IS THE ROOT AND FOUNDATION OF OUR EFFORTS.
AGAIN OUR OBJECTIVES ARE DATA INFORMED, SPECIFICALLY WORKING WITH YOUTH TO IDENTIFY RISK AND PROTECTIVE FACTORS, LOOKING AT
EVIDENCE-BASED PROGRAMS AND BEST PRACTICES. REVIEWING THE EXISTING SERVICES IN THE COMMUNITY TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE'RE ABLE TO EMPHASIZE THOSE. AND THEN ALSO FOCUSING ON INTERVENTION STRATEGIES THAT
DETER ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF FIREARMS. AND THEN LOOKING AT OUTPUTS AND OUTCOMES, REALLY LOOKING AT
BUILDING AND STRENGTHENING OUR PARTNERSHIPS, IDENTIFYING EFFECTIVE STRATEGIES, EMPHASIZING TRAUMA-INFORMED
CARE, OUR DATA COLLECTION, COMMUNITY PROGRAMS, REDUCING AND PREVENTING MORBIDITY AND MORTALITY, AND THEN MOBILIZING
AND ENHANCING COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, AND EXPANDING, YOU KNOW, PROSECUTION WHEN IT COMES TO VIOLENT CRIME.
THE REST OF THIS PAGE IS A LITTLE BIT MORE OF THE , YOU KNOW, THE STRUCTURED LANGUAGE, SO I'LL MOVE INTO MORE OF THE
RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE THREE ENTITIES THAT ARE PARTICIPATING IN THIS AGREEMENT. SO FIRST YOU WILL SEE THE
RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CITY. I WILL NOTE THE FIRST POINT IS THE SAME ACROSS ALL THREE ENTITIES AND THAT'S, OF COURSE,
SERVING ON THIS ALLIANCE AND BEING A PART OF THAT CONVERSATION IN ORDER TO DEVELOP A PLAN AND AN IMPLEMENTATION
STRATEGY FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION. SPECIFIC TO THE CITY, WE HAVE LEVERAGING AVAILABLE RESOURCES
THROUGH OUR CITY DEPARTMENTS. BASED ON OUR PRESENTATION THAT I GAVE ON MONDAY, YOU WILL NOTICE THAT A LOT OF THE PROGRAMMING
THAT I DISCUSSED THERE IS LISTED HERE, AS SOME OF THE WAYS THAT WE CAN CONTINUE OUR WORK AS A CITY.
WE ALSO, OF COURSE, HAVE OUR COMMUNITY CARE CALLOUT INITIATIVE MENTIONED HERE. THAT'S OUR NEW INITIATIVE THAT'S
LED BY GPD WITH SUPPORT FROM GAINESVILLE FIRE RESCUE AND ALACHUA COUNTY CRISIS CENTER AND VICTIMS SERVICES.
THAT IS OUR WALK THROUGH OF COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE RECENTLY BEEN INCIDENT TO HELP IDENTIFY A NEED AND GET THOSE FOLKS
CONNECTED TO SERVICES. SO CONTINUING THAT, AS WELL. NEXT IS, OF COURSE, IDENTIFYING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A BUDGET.
AND ASSOCIATED PROGRAMS, SPECIFICALLY FOR THE CITY, WE HAVE HERE THAT WE WILL CONTRIBUTE A PRO RATA SHARE FOR
THE EXPENSES INCURRED BASED ON THE AGREED-UPON BUDGET. MEANING THAT THE THREE ENTITIES WILL COME TOGETHER, DETERMINE
WHAT OUR BUDGET IS FOR PROGRAMMING AND THE CITY WILL CONTRIBUTE A PRO RATA SHARE FOR THAT.
PART "E" IS PROVIDING REPORTS BACK TO THE CITY COMMISSION. THAT WOULD BE IN THE FORM OF OUR GFR QUARTERLY REPORT, UNLESS
REQUESTED OTHERWISE. AND THEN LASTLY, OF COURSE, IS PROVIDING THE AVAILABLE DATA TO SANTA FE COLLEGE FROM, YOU KNOW,
ANY OF THE CITY'S RESOURCES THAT I REQUESTED. NEXT LOOKING AT THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF SANTA FE
COLLEGE. SO IN CONVERSATION, SANTA FE HAS BEEN VERY MUCH IN AGREEMENT TO SERVE AS THE CONVENER AND KIND
OF THE COLLABORATOR FOR THIS INITIATIVE AND YOU WILL NOTE THAT THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES DO REFLECT THAT.
SO FIRST AS I MENTIONED, IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY AND COUNTY, THIS IS TO SERVE ON THE ALLIANCE, AND PARTICIPATE IN THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A PLAN, IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES FOR OUR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION PROGRAM.
SECOND, IS TO ASSIST IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF A BUDGET, AND I WILL SAY THAT THIS ONE IS ACTUALLY QUICK CHANGE FROM SOME
CONVERSATIONS I HAVE ACTUALLY HAD THROUGHOUT THE DAY TODAY. SO, SANTA FE COLLEGE WILL BE CONTRIBUTING IN-KIND SERVICES
FOR THIS WORK. IN THE FORM OF STAFF TIME, SPACE, AND OTHER THINGS. AND DR. BURNINGS IS HERE AND CAN
SPEAK TO THAT IF YOU ALL WOULD LIKE HER TO ELABORATE MORE ON THAT, BUT THAT LINE ITEM WILL SHIFT, AND BE MORE FOCUSED ON
THE IN-KIND SERVICES THAT SANTA FE COLLEGE WILL BE PROVIDING TO THE ALLIANCE. THIS IS A REFLECTION OF THAT.
"C" IS PROVIDING SPACE IN THE SANTA FE BLOUNT CENTER FOR ALL MONTHLY MEETINGS OF THE ALLIANCE.
A MONTHLY MEETING WAS DETERMINED JUST SO WE CAN STAY ON TRACK. IF YOU GET A LITTLE FURTHER THAN A MONTH, A LITTLE BIT OF TIME
PASSES, SO WE THOUGHT A MONTH WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR THIS WORK. ADDITIONALLY, SANTA FE COLLEGE
HAS AGREED TO GIVE THEIR -- THEIR STAFF EXPERTISE IN THEIR ECONOMIC RESOURCES TO SERVE TO COMPILE AND ANALYZE THE DATA
THAT IS FED IN TO THE ALLIANCE. SPECIFICALLY, THAT OF THE CITY AND THE COUNTY AND ANY OTHER PARTNERS THAT ARE INVOLVED IN
THE LARGER GROUP. THEY WILL HELP DISSEMINATE THAT COMPILED DATA IN THE FORM OF A REPORT TO STAKEHOLDERS THAT ARE
AROUND THE TABLE THROUGH DIGITAL AND PRINT MEANS, AND OF COURSE THE LARGER COMMUNITY. AND THEN LASTLY, PROVIDE
SUPERVISION, AND WORK SPACE OF A PART-TIME ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION. THAT WILL ASSIST WITH THE
ADMINISTERING ONLINE. THAT INCLUDES COORDINATING MEETINGS, PREPARING AND SHARING REPORTS AND SUPPORTING THAT
ADMINISTRATIVE PIECE. AND THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT'S INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET. NEXT LOOKING AT THE
RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE COUNTY OF COURSE THEY WILL ALSO SERVE ON THE ALLIANCE TO LOOK FOR IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES FOR
THE VIOLENCE PREVENTION PROGRAMS. SIMILAR TO THAT OF THE CITY, THEY WILL ASSIST IN THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A BUDGET, AND CONTRIBUTE PRO RATA SHARE BASED ON THE AGREED-UPON BUDGET ADOPTED BY THE COUNTY
COMMISSION. SPECIFICALLY THE COUNTY WILL LEVERAGE ITS VICTIM SERVICES AND RAPE CRISIS CENTER TO CONTINUE
TO SUPPORT AND ASSIST SURVIVORS OF GUN VIOLENCE BY ADDRESSING THEIR NEEDS SPECIFIC TO TRAUMA AND HEALING AND ALSO PROVIDE
CRISIS DE-ESCALATION, AND INTERVENTION TRAININGS FOR COMMUNITY MEMBERS IMPACTED. THEY WILL CONTINUE TO SUPPORT
OUR COMMUNITY CARE CALLOUT WALKS WITH THEIR VICTIM SERVICES, AND CRISIS CENTER TEAMS. AND WILL PROVIDE REGULAR REPORTS
BACK TO THEIR CITY COMMISSION, AND ANY OTHER BOARDS THAT DO REQUEST THAT. AND LASTLY, SIMILAR TO THE CITY,
WE'LL BE PROVIDING AVAILABLE AND RELATED DATA TO SANTA FE COLLEGE TO BE COMPILED INTO THIS LARGER GROUP.
SO, THE SPECIFIC -- I'LL GO DOWN TO THE BOTTOM. SO JUST PROFESSIONAL EXPECTATIONS FOR THE GROUP AS WE
GO THROUGH THIS. SPECIFICALLY, BEING PROFESSIONAL, PROVIDING CONSULTATION WHEN APPROPRIATE,
SHARING REPORTS OUT TO THE PUBLIC. WORKING COOPERATIVELY, RECOGNIZING THAT EACH PARTY IS
INDEPENDENT OF ONE ANOTHER. CARRYING APPROPRIATE INSURANCE, AND IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ITS OWN ASK.
FOLLOWING THAT IS JUST GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS. SO, ONE THING I NEGLECTED TO MENTION AT THE BEGINNING IS
RIGHT NOW WE HAVE THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING TO BE IMPLEMENTED THROUGH DECEMBER OF 2024.
WITH AN ANNUAL RENEWAL THROUGH DECEMBER OF 2026. AND THAT IS ALL I HAVE AT THIS TIME.
>> Mayor: OKAY. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE YOU WORKING ON THAT.
PUTTING IT TOGETHER. COMMISSIONER SACO? >> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU, DIRECTOR STONE AND
FOR WORKING ON THIS AND EVERYBODY ELSE'S WORK ON THIS, IT'S A LOT. AND I APPRECIATE YOU COMING TO
US BEFORE -- BEFORE GOING FURTHER, THANK YOU. I DID HAVE A QUESTION. SO, CAN YOU ZOOM OUT A LITTLE.
BECAUSE I WANT TO -- NOPE. THERE WE GO. I'M ZOOMING OUT. THANKS.
IF YOU GO TO OUR PORTION, I THINK IT KIND OF LISTS OUT ALL OF OUR MANY DEPARTMENTS, AND THE PROGRAMS WITHIN THEM THAT CAN BE
OF HELP. >> YES. >> BUT IF YOU FLIP TO THE COUNTY, AND I UNDERSTAND THE
COUNTY IS DOING SOME OTHER CONTRIBUTIONS IN THE PROGRAM, THEY HAVE SOME SIMILAR DEPARTMENTS OR PARALLEL
DEPARTMENTS THAT COULD BE EQUALLY OFFERING UP THOSE TOOLS, AND I DON'T SEE THEM HERE. IS THERE A REASON -- SO I'M
THINKING, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, IS THERE HOUSING, THEIR DEVELOPMENT, DO THEY HAVE THEIR OWN AFFORDABLE
HOUSING -- ARE THOSE NOT BEING -- >> I'M GOING TO DEFER TO DEBBIE FOR THAT.
>> MY QUESTION BEING, YOU HAVE SOME PARALLEL DEPARTMENTS THAT COULD OFFER SOME OF THE SAME THINGS THAT WE DO ESPECIALLY
OUTSIDE OF THE CITY LIMITS OR EVEN IN CONJUNCTION TO KIND OF BREAK UP THAT STORM. WHY AREN'T YOU DOUBLING UP, SO
TO SPEAK, ON THE DEPARTMENTS THAT THE WE CAN HAVE TO HAVE A STRONGER FRONT ON THOSE PROJECTS?
>> MAY PER, CARL SMART, DEPUTY COUNTY MANAGER. PLEASURE TO COME OVER AND SPEAK WITH YOU TODAY, ON THIS
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING. AND WE SEEM TO BE WORKING IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY, AND THE COUNTY ON THIS IMPORTANT
EFFORT OF GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION. TO ANSWER COMMISSIONER SACO'S QUESTION, YES, WE WILL BRING ALL
OF OUR DEPARTMENTS TO BEAR TO HELP WITH THIS ISSUE. WE DIDN'T LIST THEM HERE IN THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BUT
WE CERTAINLY ARE COMMITTED TO BRINGING THEM AND PROVIDING THOSE RESOURCES TO HELP DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE.
WHEN IT COMES TO LIKE FOR EXAMPLE COMMUNITY SUPPORT SERVICES, INCLUDES HOUSING, AS WELL AS THE CRISIS CENTER, AND
THE VICTIM RATE AND ADVOCATE CENTER THERE, AS WELL AS OTHER CASE MANAGEMENT, WE'LL BRING ALL THOSE SERVICES TO BEAR.
WE HAVE COURT SERVICES THAT DEAL WITH PROBATION AND WITH TREATMENT COURTS. ALL OF THOSE SERVICES, ALL THOSE
RESOURCES, AS THEY ARE NEEDED, WILL BE BROUGHT TO BEAR TO DEAL WITH THOSE ISSUES. >> THANK YOU, MR. SMART.
AND I APPRECIATE YOU ALL JUST SAVED MONEY ON INK FOR NOT LISTING THEM OUT. BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL
FOR ME, AND I KNOW CERTAINLY, BECAUSE WE GET TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS. LIKE SEVEN OF US GET TO ASK YOU
QUESTIONS. THE COMMUNITY GENERALLY DOES NOT, THE AVERAGE PERSON DOES NOT GET TO WALK UP AND ASK YOU THAT.
BUT JUST FOR SOME CLARITY FOR OUR COMMUNITY, WOULD WE REALLY AMPLIFY WHAT WE'RE DOING AND SHARE THESE DOCUMENTS WITH OUR
COMMUNITY. I THINK IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO HAVE -- YOU KNOW, I THINK THE COMMUNITY, WHAT IS IT?
SUPPORT SERVICES, I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL AS AN ADDENDUM, WHAT HAVE YOU, TO OUTLINE THOSE THAT THE COUNTY HAS AVAILABLE,
JUST FOR THE SAKE OF, OF CLARITY AT FOR THE COMMUNITY AND FOR US. >> SURE. >> BECAUSE I DID NOT KNOW THAT
YOU WERE KIND OF COUNTING ALL THOSE FOLKS BUT I'M GLAD TO KNOW THAT YOU ARE COMMITTED TO THAT. IT JUST WAS NOT READILY APPARENT
IN THE LANGUAGE, AND AS A LAWYER, I LIKE TO DOUBLE-CHECK THAT WORDS MEAN WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO MEAN.
SO, THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARITY, MR. SMART. THANK YOU. >> UNDERSTOOD, THANK YOU.
>> Mayor: ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER CHESTNUT. >> OKAY. THANK YOU.
MR. MAYOR, SO AS A FOLLOW-UP TO THAT ISSUE, MR. SMART, I WANT TO GO BACK, ARE WE GOING TO CONTINUE WORKING ON THIS DRAFT,
AND THEN HAVE THE COUNTY LIST THE SUPPORT SERVICES THAT THEY WILL BE PROVIDING? I THINK THAT WOULD BE -- THIS IS
OUR FIRST GO-ROUND AT GETTING AN UNDERSTANDING. I THINK THE MORE CLARITY WE HAVE, THE BETTER.
SO I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER SACO THAT I'D LIKE TO HAVE THINGS ENUMERATED SO WE CAN SEE WHAT'S ACTUALLY IN IT.
THEN I HAD ANOTHER QUESTION. CAN WE GO BACK AND LIST THOSE? >> SURE. I'D BE GLAD TO.
>> THANK YOU. SO, ON THE FISCAL NOTE, SO, THE ONLY MONEYS THAT'S BEING PROVIDED FOR THIS PROGRAM ARE
THE MEMORANDUM IS THE $150,000 FROM THE CITY? IS THAT WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING? >> I ALSO MAY DEFER TO DEPUTY
SMART, AS WELL. IN TERMS OF THE COUNTY'S -- >> OKAY, DEPUTY SMART. >> MR. MAYOR, I THINK THE
150,000 WAS SEED MONEY TO GET THIS PROGRAM GOING. THE CITY OF GAINESVILLE STEPPED UP, AND ALLOCATED THAT AMOUNT OF
MONEY TO GO AHEAD. AND THESE WORKING AND PLANNING AND SETTING UP THE COMMITTEES AND RESOURCES TO DEAL WITH THIS
ISSUE. BUT THE COUNTY HAS EXPRESSED, OUR BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HAVE EXPRESSED
THAT THEY WILL CERTAINLY COMMIT OUR PRO RATA SHARE OF A BUDGET. AND WE HAVE BEEN CHARGED, THE REPRESENTATIVE FROM CITY, COUNTY
AND SANTA FE COLLEGE, TO COME UP WITH A BUDGET, AND THEN IDENTIFY WHAT THAT PRO RATA SHARE IS. >> OKAY.
>> IT MAY BE 150,000, OR IT MAY BE MORE THAN THAT. AND SO, WE ARE READY TO PAY OUR SHARE, IF YOU WILL.
>> THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO BE SURE YOU STAND READY TO PAY YOUR SHARE. [LAUGHTER]
THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> YOU'RE WELCOME. >> IF I MAY, COMMISSIONER, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADD THAT, OF
COURSE, WE ARE CONTINUING TO PURSUE ADDITIONAL GRANT OPPORTUNITIES, AND, YOU KNOW, BEYOND, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE
THINGS THAT WE'VE ALREADY MENTIONED. SO THERE'S ALWAYS MORE POSSIBILITY.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU. WELL, A LOT OF WORK HAS GONE INTO THIS, AND SO I'M GLAD TO
SEE IT MOVING FORWARD. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. >> Mayor: THANK YOU,
COMMISSIONER CHESTNUT. COMMISSIONER WILLITS? >> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. READING THROUGH THIS, GUN
VIOLENCE, AND CRIME, IS SUICIDE INCLUDED IN HERE, IN GUN VIOLENCE? AND IS IT SPECIFIC OR DO WE JUST
KNOW IT'S INCLUDED IN GUN VIOLENCE? >> WE DIDN'T SPECIFICALLY NAME THE FORMS OF GUN VIOLENCE BUT AS
A GROUP WE DO RECOGNIZE THAT GUN VIOLENCE TAKES MANY FORMS AND WE WILL GEAR OUR PROGRAMMING ACCORDINGLY.
>> OKAY. AND THEN ON THE NONDISCRIMINATION PORTION, AND I DON'T NOTICE ABOUT WHAT WE ARE
ALLOWED TO DO SO I'M JUST GOING TO ASK IT AS A QUESTION AND SOMEONE CAN TELL ME I'M WRONG, OR -- CAN WE, IN THIS LEVEL OF
AGREEMENT AT LEAST NOT DISCRIMINATE ON PEOPLE BASED ON THEIR BACKGROUND, WHETHER THEY HAVE BEEN JUSTICE INVOLVED OR
NOT? MR. ATTORNEY? >> YOU COULD CERTAINLY AGREE WITH THAT.
THIS IS A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING. I THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO KEEP THAT IN MIND, AND THAT
ULTIMATELY, THE BUDGETING, BUT AS LONG AS EVERYONE'S GOING FORWARD, YOU CAN PUT THAT IN THERE, AND YOU CAN -- YES.
>> OKAY. SO, AND LEGALLY WE CAN POINT TO THOSE AND SAY THAT WE KNOW THOSE.
I HAVE AN INTEREST IN HAVING THAT CONVERSATION. I THINK COMMISSIONER DUNCAN-WALKER WOULD ALSO LIKE TO
HAVE THIS -- YOU KNOW, HAVE AN OPINION ON THIS. IT'S NOT IN THERE. IT'S NOT SOMETHING USUALLY EVERY
OTHER FORM OF NONDISCRIMINATION LOOK AT. BUT, IF I KNOW SOME PEOPLE HAVE AN INTEREST, AND I'M SURE THAT
SOMEWHERE IN THIS, THAT WE ARE DEFINITELY INVOLVING, GETTING OPINIONS, AND SO I JUST, THAT WOULD BE A PLACE WHERE PUTTING
IT WOULD TO SOME DEGREE, YOU KNOW, PUT US ON PAPER. I GOT -- I DON'T -- ANOTHER THING I DON'T THINK IT CAN BE
ANYWHERE ELSE, BUT THIS IS ONE TOPIC THAT PEOPLE TALKED ABOUT IT. SO, I WILL COME BACK TO THAT,
MAYBE. THE -- MADAM MANAGER, THE 150 WE SET ASIDE, 150,000, IS NOT NECESSARILY JUST FOR THIS
ALLIANCE, BUT THAT WHERE OUR PORTION WOULD COME FROM, THAT WOULD DEFINITELY IN FY2024? >> CORRECT.
THAT IS CORRECT. >> OKAY. AND THEN THERE WAS -- THEN THERE WAS A QUESTION -- OR YOU
MENTIONED ABOUT COMMUNITY GROUPS OR YOUTH, PARTICULARLY YOUTH PARTICIPATION, THAT'S SORT OF DOWNSTREAM FROM WHERE OF THIS
ABOUT WHAT THEY DO, HOW THEY CALL PEOPLE TOGETHER, OR HOW THEY ARE MANAGED, OR WHERE INFORMATION COMES FROM, AND SO I
JUST WANT TO ASK AGAIN WHERE DO THEY ENVISION IN REFERENCE TO THIS AGREEMENT? >> SURE.
SO, AS THE THREE OF US DISCUSSED RECENTLY, WE ALMOST ENVISION A SUBCOMMITTEE STRUCTURE AND ONE OF THE SUBCOMMITTEES WOULD BE
INDIVIDUALS WITH EXPERIENCE WHO ARE JUSTICE IMPACTED, AND ANOTHER WOULD BE YOUTH. SO THAT GROUP COULD NOMINATE A
REPRESENTATIVE THAT WOULD SIT ON THE LARGER GROUP WITH ALL OF THE REPRESENTATIVES. THAT WOULD BE KIND OF THE FORMAL
MEETING OF THE ALLIANCE. WE DO ENVISION HAVING THESE PROGRAMS. >> SO THEY'RE MEETING WITH THE
ALLIANCE, ALL THESE PEOPLE ARE MEETING WITH THE -- OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I KIND OF UNDERSTOOD WHERE YOU WERE
GOING THERE. AND SO ARE WE LOOKING AT -- THIS IS KIND OF A FIRST DRAFT AND THEN IT WILL COME BACK TO US,
COMMISSIONER CHESTNUT HAD ASKED ABOUT -- YOU'RE HOPING NOT. OKAY. YOU'RE HOPING NOT.
>> LEGAL HAS REVIEWED, HAS DONE A CURSORY REVIEW. >> RIGHT. SO THE JUSTICE INFORMED OR
JUSTICE INVOLVED, AND JUSTICE IMPACTED PIECE, I KIND OF WANT TO SEE THEM THERE, MAYBE IT'S SOMETHING THAT POPS UP LATER BUT
IT'S A PLACE WHERE SUDDENLY IT COULD LIVE. SO. >> I'M SORRY, MR. MAYOR IF I
MIGHT. SO, WE HEARD YOU, SPEAKING JUST BRIEFLY WITH THE ATTORNEY, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN
TALK TO YOU [INAUDIBLE] >> DO WE THINK SANTA FE OR THE COUNTY, OR THE COUNTY ABOUT THAT?
>> IT WAS DIRECTED BY Y'ALL. WE WILL CERTAINLY ADD INTO THE NONDISCRIMINATION CATEGORY. I DON'T KNOW THAT ANYONE WOULD
BE OPPOSED TO READING THAT ESPECIALLY A POPULATION THAT IS DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THESE MATTERS.
IF THEY -- IF IT'S A STICKING POINT FOR THEM IT WILL COME BACK TO YOU. I KNOW THAT FOR EXAMPLE, IT
SOUNDS LIKE, YOU KNOW, OUR OFFICE REVIEWED THIS, I THINK THE COUNTY REVIEWED IT, SIGNED OFF ON IT, SANTA FE CAME BACK
WITH SOME SMALL CHANGES, THAT I BELIEVE YOU HAVE, AND THAT'S WHAT THEY'VE BEEN PRESENTING TO, SO THIS WOULD BE A SMALL CHANGE
THAT'S REALLY -- AND IF YOU'RE FINE WITH IT THEN YOU GO FORWARD. IF NOT, WE'LL COME BACK.
>> Mayor: OKAY. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER SACO. >> OKAY, THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST SINCE WE
SEEM TO BE AT THE LAST OF THE LINE FOR KIND OF AN OPINION ON THIS, WE COULD ALSO JUST APPROVE IT, AND THEN COME BACK WITH AN
AMENDMENT TO ADD THOSE CHANGES. SO THAT, WAITING FOR APPROVAL DOES NOT STALL OUT ANY FURTHER AS WE GO BACK AND FORTH PICKING
ON WORDS OR PHRASES OR ADDITIONS, WE COULD, YOU KNOW, APPROVE WHAT THE LAST VERSION EVERYBODY ELSE HAS ALREADY
APPROVED. WE COULD APPROVE THAT, MOVE ON, COME BACK, THE NEXT MEETING WITH AN AMENDMENT TO ADD, YOU KNOW,
AT SECTION "X," "Y," "Z," THESE WORDS AND THAT WAY THEY HAVE PERMISSION TO MOVE ALONG AND START THE REST OF THEIR WORK.
>> JUST TO CLARIFY IF I TOO, MR. MAYOR, WE'RE BRINGING IT TO THE POLICY COMMITTEE TODAY. BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT THE COUNTY
HAS TAKEN THAT. I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT PROCESS IS. AND YOU ALL TAKE IT TO YOUR
COMMISSION, AS WELL? >> MR. MAYOR, WE DO PLAN TO TAKE IT TO OUR COMMISSION. THE FIRST MEETING IN APRIL,
WHICH I THINK IS APRIL 9th, OUR LEGAL HAS REVIEWED IT, AND IT MEETS THEIR STANDARDS, AND WE THINK IT MEETS THE SPIRIT OF
WHAT THE BOARD HAS DIRECTED STAFF TO DO. SO, WE'LL TAKE IT TO OUR BOARD ON THE 9th, AND WE EXPECT IT
WILL BE APPROVED THERE. WE'LL TAKE IT WITH THE AMENDMENT THAT -- THAT WE'RE SUGGESTING HERE.
>> -- [INDISCERNIBLE] FOR STAFF, ALL THREE OF THEM, BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF STAFF WORKING ON THIS, I'M GOOD WITH THIS.
I AM ALSO GOOD WITH THE, I WAS LOOKING -- BUT AS COMMISSIONER WILLITS WANTED TO REALLY SPECIFY, THAT POPULATION.
I HAVE NO OBJECTIONS TO ANY OF THE OTHERS. >> WE DO HAVE A BRIEF EDIT THAT WILL NEED TO HAPPEN IN THE SANTA
FE COLLEGE SECTION AS WELL AS ABOUT THE IN-KIND SERVICES AND WE'LL NEED TO MAKE THAT ADJUSTMENT, AS WELL.
>> Mayor: SO, I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER LIGHTS I'LL GIVE YOU MY THOUGHTS AND THEN WE'LL GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT IF THERE IS ANY.
I APPRECIATE ALL WHO, TREMENDOUS EFFORTS, AND LENGTH OF DISCUSSION HAS GONE INTO THIS, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO IT.
BECAUSE GOING FORWARD SO THAT WE CAN GET THE WORK, IN MORE THAN JUST THE DRAFT LANGUAGE. I DO SUPPORT ADDING ADDITIONAL
PROTECTIVE CATEGORY. I SUPPORT ALSO ENUMERATING ALL THE COUNTY'S VARIED DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE LIKELY TO BE A PART OF
THIS. I'D LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE ENUMERATED ON BOTH SIDES.
THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION THAT I WOULD HAVE IS, IS -- HAVE WE SPOKEN WITH THE PUBLIC DEFENDER, WITH THE STATE ATTORNEY, THE
SHERIFF, CLERK OF COURTS, BECAUSE REALLY THOSE ALL HAVE A PART TO PLAY IN THIS. AND I'M HOPEFUL THAT -- I'D LOVE
TO GET THEM ON RECORD AS SIGNATORIES TO THIS. BUT IF NOT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE PART OF THE SYSTEM.
PARTICULARLY I SAY THE PUBLIC DEFENDER BECAUSE THIS DOES REACH OUTSIDE THE CITY OF GAINESVILLE. IT REACHES OUTSIDE ALACHUA
COUNTY. IT IS VERY MUCH AN EIGHTH CIRCUIT ISSUE. AND I WOULD HOPE THAT THERE'S
SOME OPPORTUNITIES FOR THAT, AS WELL. I'M NOT GOING TO HOLD THIS UP FOR THAT.
>> MR. MAYOR, YES, WE HAVE SPOKEN WITH THE SHERIFF. OF COURSE WE HAD SHERIFF GAINEY HERE AT THE MEETING EARLIER THIS
WEEK, AND SO WE CERTAINLY HAVE TO HAVE HIM INVOLVED. AS WELL AS THE STATE ATTORNEY, AND PUBLIC DEFENDER.
WE KNOW GUN VIOLENCE IS NOT A BENEFIT TO THE CITY OF GAINESVILLE. IT'S ALL OVER THE COUNTY AND
BEYOND BUT CERTAINLY WE NEED ALL THE PLAYERS INVOLVED HERE IN ALACHUA, IN GAINESVILLE AND ALACHUA COUNTY TO DEAL WITH THIS
ISSUE. SO WE HAVE LIKE A PUBLIC SAFETY, IF YOU WILL. I MEAN WE KNOW IT'S BEEN
DECLARED A PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUE. BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO HAVE ON THE FRONT LINE, A PUBLIC SAFETY INVOLVEMENT.
AND SO WE'VE ALREADY SPOKEN TO THEM. ADDITIONALLY, THIS ITEM IS ON THE AGENDA FOR THE PSCT, THE
PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL. AND THAT'S LED BY THE CHIEF JUDGE AND INCLUDES ALL THOSE
PLAYERS THAT YOU JUST NAME. WE'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT. >> Mayor: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT WOULD EXCLUDE ALACHUA AND
THEY ARE A VITAL PART OF OUR INVOLVEMENT. SO WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA INVOLVED
IN SOME WAY. >> AND SANTA FE COLLEGE. >> RIGHT. THEY'RE INTRINSIC TO THIS.
OKAY. I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT?
>> NO PUBLIC COMMENT. >> ALL RIGHT. SO, SOMEBODY WANT TO MAKE A MOTION?
>> MOVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE WITH THE MODIFICATIONS. >> SECOND.
>> Mayor: HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. MADAM CLERK, DO YOU HAVE THE MODIFICATIONS, A GOOD
UNDERSTANDING OF THOSE MODIFICATIONS. >> I'LL MAKE SURE I HAVE THEM. >> Mayor: GOOD.
ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE. [AYES] ANY OPPOSED?
ALL RIGHT. THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. WITH COMMISSIONER DUNCAN-WALKER ABSENT.
THANK YOU ALL FOR DOING A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WORK FOR THIS. I DID NOT MEAN TO EXCLUDE
ANYONE. IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF SANTA FE AND HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD THERE, I'D APPRECIATE IT.
SINCE YOU'LL BE DOING THIS. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. MAYOR. AND CITY COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS BASHA, AND I'M THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF ORGANIZATION AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT WITH SANTA FE COLLEGE.
WE ARE VERY EXCITED ABOUT THIS OPPORTUNITY TO CONVENE ALL THE RELEVANT PARTNERS, IN SOMETHING THAT AFFECTS ALL OF OUR
COMMUNITIES, AND ALL THE WORD COMMUNITY HAS BEEN TAKEN OUT OF OUR NAME IT'S VERY MUCH A PART OF WHO WE ARE AND PART OF WHAT
WE WANT TO DO. SO WE HEARD YOUR CONCERNS, AND WE WILL TAKE THEM INTO CONSIDERATION.
AND OUR MONTHLY MEETINGS WE'LL HAVE ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS THAT YOU MENTIONED. >> Mayor: VERY GOOD.
>> THANK YOU. >> Mayor: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WONDERFUL.
IT'S EXCITING TO HAVE THIS MOVE FORWARD AND WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT IT. SO GLAD TO SEE IT ON PAPER AND
HOPEFULLY THE COUNTY WILL -- WILL DO LIKEWISE. MADAM CLERK? >> WE HAVE MEMBER COMMENT,
MR. MAYOR. >> Mayor: ALL RIGHT. ANY MEMBER COMMENT? WE HAD A LOT OF COMMENT THIS
WEEK ALREADY. HAD MANY OPPORTUNITIES TO BE TOGETHER, AND I APPRECIATE ALL OF THAT.
I ALSO WANT TO SAY, I APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S SUPPORT OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF DAYS. THE LAST DAY AND A HALF SINCE WE
HAD YET ANOTHER INCIDENT OF VANDALISM, STAFF WAS EXCEPTIONALLY SUPPORTIVE, AND SO WE'RE, YOU AS COMMISSIONERS, AND
I APPRECIATE YOU, AND I AM ONCE AGAIN COMMITTED TO ALL OF US CONTINUING TO DO THE WORK THAT THE PEOPLE HIRED US TO DO.
UNDISSUADED. SO, WITH ALL THAT SAID, I SEE NO FURTHER LIGHTS. HOPEFULLY I'LL SEE MOST, IF NOT
ALL OF YOU TOMORROW MORNING AT THE MLK PRAYER BREAKFAST. IF NOT I'LL SEE YOU IN THE NEXT FEW DAYS.
WE ARE ADJOURNED.