[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:00] From the town manager, the town attorney or commissioners, public comments, I'll go so fast. I'm on a tear here.
[0:20] All right, we have a consent agenda to approve anything. Any comments on the consent agenda or polls?
[0:30] Here we accept it.
[0:34] The second.
[0:38] We have a motion in a second to approve the consent agenda.
[0:41] All in favor?
[0:43] Opposed?
[1:02] All right.
[1:02] So our first guest this morning is Sarah Herd.
[1:08] Chairman of the Martin County Commission.
[1:11] And a friend of mine, even though when I served on the Martin County Commission,
[1:16] we didn't talk for four years.
[1:17] but a woman that I admire and who has been a real asset to the county and those of us who
[1:28] favor slow growth and transparent good government.
[1:33] So please join me in welcoming Commissioner Herd and if you have questions for her,
[1:44] I'm for
[1:44] that.
[1:45] Good morning and thank you the most important thing that I have to express this morning is
[1:49] My sincere appreciation for Jupiter Islands resounding support on August 18th of all the
[1:56] precincts in Martin County in the election.
[1:58] Jupiter Island was the most supportive so it's great to have your support.
[2:06] I've been a commissioner for 24 years and so I will be a commissioner hopefully for 28 years
[2:13] being the longest serving county commissioner in Martin County.
[2:17] So just a couple of things about what's going on in Martin County, things that will be of interest to you.
[2:25] One is the harmony. Our staff has finished their final report for the application to have a future land use amendment change.
[2:37] Our staff are growth management staff and they have recommended denial.
[2:45] There has been a pause in the lawsuit.
[2:48] I don't know if story is going to come to us to make a decision about the future land use
[2:58] amendment or if they're going to pursue the lawsuit, we will find out another potential
[3:06] lawsuit that we're facing is last fall, culture homes, which is a national home builder,
[3:12] came to the county with a proposal to change the land use on approximately 400 acres of agricultural land to allow
[3:22] instead of 20 houses on that property which is the allowable density instead of 1000 houses on 400 acres.
[3:35] We denied them, and so they sued us, and then they went to the state legislature and got the house and the Senate to approve a bill that we refer to as the agonclave bill, which would allow them to put 1,200 homes on those 400 acres.
[3:54] The governor signed it into law, it became effective in July.
[4:00] They made an application to Martin County for a 1,200 unit residential community.
[4:08] And our staff did a wonderful job of evaluating the application and found that it didn't comply with the requirements of the legislation.
[4:17] So the staff recommended denial.
[4:19] culture has withdrawn their application, so we don't know if they're going to get us a new application
[4:27] or if they're going to make active, they're lawsuit who'll find out amendment 3, if it's
[4:37] successful in November will be a catastrophic change in Martin County. We are heavily dependent
[4:45] upon residential admiral armed taxes, particularly homesteaded taxes.
[4:51] 44% of our budget is comes from residential admiral armed taxes.
[4:57] Most of that, those to public safety, pardon me.
[5:02] So we estimate that if Amendment 3 is successful in the first year,
[5:06] we will see a $42 million shortfall.
[5:09] second year, a $75 million shortfall, third year, $170 million shortfall, and that's out of
[5:18] $360 million.
[5:20] Public safety is not protected?
[5:23] No, it's not, and it consumes 66% of our budget.
[5:30] So, those are the highlights of what's going on in Martin County. Now, I'm happy to answer any
[5:35] questions that you have.
[5:36] You have some good news?
[5:39] No.
[5:42] Well, I think the denials are very good news.
[5:46] Yeah.
[5:47] We have firm legs to stand on so we're confident that we'll prevail.
[5:52] And will the county be taking a position on data centers?
[5:57] We are, as a matter of fact, I think our next meeting,
[6:01] not tomorrow, but the meeting following that,
[6:03] we're going to be having a presentation on a moratorium.
[6:08] And when we made a recommendation, it was a four-to-one recommendation to pursue a moratorium.
[6:15] Have you guys looked around at what some other states have done deal with us, Ohio is really
[6:23] leading the way with getting these data centers to be self-sustaining, if you build a data
[6:33] generation center with the stipulation, any excess power goes back to the grid.
[6:38] And now with cooling advances, air cooling and whatnot means that they're not no longer
[6:43] taking water out of the aquifer to cool this stuff.
[6:46] Because I mean, I think what's going to happen is you might see temporary moratoriums, but
[6:51] what's happened recently is the Department of Defense has come out with a finding of how
[6:56] far behind China.
[6:57] They're finding that we are falling and this is going to become a national security issue
[7:02] in which case all these moratoriums are going to be pushed up, pushed to the wayside.
[7:07] And my suggestion is working with the data centers to try and come up with a way to make
[7:11] themselves sustaining, so they're actually a benefit to the local tax basis.
[7:17] What have you without being an environmental problem is probably your best bet, rather than
[7:21] just getting in the way and not having a plan to move forward.
[7:24] because all the data center businesses have been really lacks in there.
[7:30] PR, they're not PR people, they're tech people, and they have an opportunity to kind of get out
[7:36] front of these things if you choose to.
[7:39] Yeah, I think that's reasonable, and I think it may be necessary, which is why we're pursuing
[7:44] a more touring.
[7:45] So we can keep evaluating rather than pursuing that.
[7:48] But there's a lot of states that have been, Ohio's a smart as so far of the ones I'm aware
[7:52] of, Texas hasn't done anything about it, and they're another big data center state, but
[7:57] Ohio has been quite clever about figuring out a way to take the inevitability of the data
[8:02] centers and make it a net positive for the state.
[8:05] It.
[8:08] Any other questions?
[8:10] Observation.
[8:11] I was driving around in just east of Laris Avenue.
[8:15] There's a whole bunch of, I don't know, townhouses going up in a bank and development across
[8:21] the street.
[8:22] It's a block that was empty and it's now being built up.
[8:26] Well, I'm sure quickly.
[8:28] I'm sure you've noticed that there's been a lot of change
[8:30] in Hobesound.
[8:31] It seems like all of our applications
[8:33] for a new development seem to be in Hobesound.
[8:35] Lots of storage facilities, for lots of townhouses,
[8:39] lots of multi-family, they're not huge developments,
[8:42] but they're sized up, particularly when they add up.
[8:47] There, I'm curious.
[8:48] Florida, I used to do a commercial development
[8:51] and up in the Northeast and in California,
[8:54] and part of our development plan was always
[8:56] traffic mitigation. Florida seems to be sort of reversed in that. And that there is no traffic
[9:02] mitigation tied to a specific development. It's tied to state funding which doesn't
[9:06] kick until after the development is completed, which seems really counterintuitive because
[9:11] you're, you know, the stacking up with these railroad between the railroad crossings which
[9:16] are a nightmare. And now the extra traffic on Dixie Highway and Bridge Road and whatnot, it
[9:23] seems to me that the town of Hobbsown and the county really could do a lot more towards
[9:30] getting ahead of the traffic problems before, I mean, you know, it's all fun and games until
[9:35] school bus gets tea-bombed over there.
[9:39] You remember that we used to have a Department of Community Affairs that was a state agency
[9:43] that reviewed all comprehensive plan amendments to make sure that these new proposed developments
[9:49] weren't having impacts outside of their jurisdiction, outside of their boundaries.
[9:54] So when a developer proposed a development that was going to diminish capacity on roadways,
[9:59] they had to pay a proportionate fair share in order to make up that additional capacity.
[10:05] We're excited.
[10:05] Did away with the Department of Community Affairs, we no longer have concurrency.
[10:10] We no longer have a way to force developers to pay for the deficiencies that their
[10:16] developments are creating in our infrastructure. So what's, you know, it's this county is going
[10:22] at a long time.
[10:27] Commissioner heard, thank you for coming this morning and thank you for all you do
[10:33] and you are a one woman argument against her limits. Thank you very much.
[10:44] And next on our agenda, we have Mr. Ken Pruitt of the P5 Group who will join us electronically
[10:55] is he ready?
[10:57] Yes, yes, he is.
[10:58] If I could just make a comment on Mayer.
[11:01] Good morning.
[11:02] Good morning.
[11:03] Good morning.
[11:03] Good morning.
[11:04] Good morning.
[11:05] I just wanted to recognize the fact that Ken spent the greater part of the day physically
[11:12] here last Friday, Senate memorandum with a complete breakdown and analysis of the impacts
[11:19] of the bills that came out of the last session and their effect to each individual
[11:24] department in the town and spent time with each department director going over those impacts
[11:30] and helping us really understand and wrap our heads around what some of these bills mean
[11:35] and what measures need to be taken to be in compliance.
[11:39] So, we appreciate a lot the time that you spend here Friday.
[11:44] I just wanted to say thank you, Ken, for that and turn it back over to the mayor.
[11:49] Right, that's true.
[11:52] You're just a morning man, a mayor and a mayor and a mayor.
[11:56] But thank you, and really, the thanks goes to Mr. Darlow for providing the opportunity
[12:02] opportunity for us to meet with the professional staff,
[12:06] although there are some amazing things.
[12:09] Let me interrupt you for a moment.
[12:11] Mr. Bruit and ask our IT department,
[12:14] if we could get a clearer.
[12:17] Is it us or is it?
[12:20] Oh, your Wi-Fi is all right.
[12:26] So, you're a little choppy in the presentation.
[12:30] I'll take a look at it.
[12:32] Is this better now?
[12:34] Yes. Yes.
[12:37] Okay. Well, thank you. And I want to thank Mr. Garlow and the team for the opportunity.
[12:45] There are some who are saying why are you starting so early.
[12:49] November 3rd election, it would be here before we know it.
[12:53] And it's important for us to get a general bond of the activities that are going to be taking place.
[13:00] particularly since we'll have a new legislature, a new governor, and so it's important that I
[13:07] Mr. Garland last made to to grade the response that we've been getting our firm has been getting
[13:14] from the professionals that I told him it was a net loss
[13:18] because in Tallahassee they work in 15 and 30 minute increments
[13:23] particularly when there's a one hour deadline and so the speed in which they have provided us
[13:30] With information and feedback, it's been quite frankly, it's been incredible.
[13:37] So, I needed to give a shout-out in queues to Mr. Garland and the team.
[13:42] For just being so responsive and Kimberly, of course, grateful for work and expediting this as well.
[13:51] So, that was important for me to be there to share what are the needs.
[13:56] and as we move forward, particularly as amendment 3,
[14:01] it comes up as we start to see if, in fact, that passes.
[14:06] So, Bill, if you could go to the first slide, please, sir.
[14:16] Well, amendment 3, I believe the commissioner heard,
[14:20] I can't even hardly add to what the term catastrophic that she used
[14:27] because, while there are some communities that will not be hit
[14:32] as much as others. We are going to be taking an indirect hit.
[14:40] Happens is that when you are seeing the type of numbers
[14:46] that will be seeing if in fact, if it passes, the indirect impacts
[14:53] and ultimately the direct impacts will be significant.
[14:56] cap. So just to give you a brief overview.
[15:00] It does the whole set exemption increases of $150,000 in $27,250 and $28. If you're a new resident, so if you're a student who has gone to another state and set up residency, they have for tuition purposes, or if you're a singer, and you're just like my son, served 12 years in the military.
[15:27] and now is a resident from here, obviously residency purposes, and North Carolina where
[15:36] you station and re-restation, if you come back to Florida, which is your home state, you
[15:42] have to wait five years before you're eligible to be able to get what the others will be
[15:49] if in fact, if it passes on November 3rd, on the business side of it, they're really going to be taken a huge debt,
[16:02] because they're in on-home stead, and their cap is going to go from 10 to 5 percent to 5 percent.
[16:19] And Commissioner Warner, you talked about, so public safety is not protected.
[16:27] The only protection here for anyone in the entity is education.
[16:35] The law enforcement, what they've done, is the legislature just called it a core service.
[16:40] So those core services are going to be public safety, infrastructure, and employee benefits.
[16:51] But if the ad the alarm goes down, extravagantly as commits in our heart, stated, there's not going to be any money to give those increases to the core services.
[17:04] So the course services could be the priority, but if you don't have the funds to provide
[17:12] for them, it's as if there weren't a priority to be getting with it.
[17:18] So I'm not saying that it's not important for them to be a core service, but what I'm
[17:23] sharing with you is the core hard reality is that exponential losses of these funds are
[17:31] And in fact, across the board, when we were meeting with the professional staff last week,
[17:40] you know, these are relatively just considered a recreation.
[17:43] Well, no one has a course service recreation and infrastructure, and John Duchak here
[17:50] was assisted on the manager.
[17:52] We have a conversation about changing the restoration to infrastructure, so it would be
[17:59] or a different category, which I completely and wholeheartedly agree.
[18:06] So the last on this point is that there are 29 small counties in Florida, and the
[18:15] given total candidates have stated that if a amendment 3 passes, that those small counties
[18:24] will be the priority now individually it's not a lot of money but when you put 29 small
[18:32] counties together the aggregate there's going to be enormous dust funds are going to come
[18:39] right off the top the legislative budget so what that does is that's going to impact your
[18:47] I'm going to emphasize how to sort of your large county as well.
[18:52] Of course it takes 60% for this to pass on November 3rd.
[18:57] No, I think you can go to the second.
[18:58] You can go to the next one for the debate.
[19:01] Page two, sir. Thank you.
[19:04] So the courts step down your original language,
[19:09] but in Florida, when a constitutional element is brought before the court,
[19:17] Secretary of State, and if it the courts can I,
[19:23] the Attorney General has the ability, when it's a joint resolution and constitutional amendment that's done by a legislature to change the language, and that's what happened.
[19:34] The Attorney General did modify the language that did say, which was struck by the courts,
[19:41] save our homes for excessive property taxes, and they changed it to increased homes
[19:47] that exemption and work cap on increases and non-unumsted copies assessment.
[19:54] And that is what will be on the ballot on November 3rd.
[19:58] I'm going to pause here to see if you have any questions on that,
[20:01] that I'm there unless you want me to go through the presentation we can come back.
[20:06] No, I think it's a good idea to ask questions now if there are any.
[20:12] I just, if there are so many devastating consequences for this proposal, why was it proposed?
[20:29] The governor wants to have something attached to his history of his, whatever, as opposed to just being the guy who decided to sue Disney, you know, because he has become a footnote and a joke. So why wouldn't this turn on him, too?
[20:49] because it's a state, because it's low hanging fruit for the populists.
[20:52] Well, is it an attempt, Mr. Pruitt, to rain in
[20:59] profligate spending in some counties with a one-size-fits-all
[21:05] across the state, and that one-size-doesn't fit all?
[21:10] Would that be a fair way to characterize it?
[21:15] Mr. Chair, I'm fond of it for me to try to share the motivations of the Governor or
[21:20] by frankly, any like an official, but it has been a consistent theme for Legislature
[21:28] and also the Executive Branch, the KICU, the CFO, doing the doge exercise throughout the
[21:38] It's been repeated that they have felt that local governments have been spending more than what they should have.
[21:47] But what this proposal does, I'm going to apply on the proposal.
[21:53] We accomplished back in 2008.
[21:57] I was sent at President of the time, Marco Rubio was a speaker, and we did a tax cut.
[22:04] We did a $25,000 increased exemption.
[22:09] We brought about portability.
[22:12] We took the tangible tax exemption to $25,000.
[22:17] But we did it with a scalpel.
[22:19] And I'm going to share with you our thought process at the time.
[22:23] It's there at times at the local government level that we was having.
[22:30] And the local government, but we also believe that the government, the best government, and the most effective government, is that government, which is closest to the people, and certainly folks from Fallahassee, while they have an opinion, and obviously that they have everything right to do what they did, is that what this is done is, it used to be the, like a marriage we have back and forth, you know, something that somebody does,
[23:00] or whatever. But this is, this is going to be, it will change in paradigm of the relationship
[23:07] between local government and state government. And what's going to happen is that many
[23:14] of the programs that have been delegated down to the local level, so I'm which you are enacting
[23:20] the next time the state comes to you and provides you with seed money, perhaps the first
[23:27] to three years. I'm not going to hold time that you're going to say no to it, but it's going to be very difficult for you to be able to do any programs.
[23:39] You know, unless you have a huge reserve, remember the reserves at the state are not recurring. There are one time flights.
[23:48] Because of the language, and I need to make sure that everybody sees this, it says that it talks about 150 and 27, 250,000, but what a lot of folks are missing is the last few words and just for the fact that they never have to.
[24:11] And it says on the ballot to increase the hope that exemption up to full says value that is the goal.
[24:24] So what's going to happen, and I'm going to give you the city of Fort San Luis is a great example.
[24:29] The meeting in price of the home in Fort San Luis is 325,000 dollars.
[24:35] When that's falling, takes effect in 2008, the exemption will be $250,000, that leaves
[24:43] them with $75,000 in value to tax, for every home and poor second losing.
[24:51] But what happens when the inflation factor is kicked in, and of course you've got your 3%
[24:58] they have our homes. But if you have inflation of 5%, 6%, for 7%, then what's going to happen
[25:06] is your assessment. In terms of your exemption, we'll be 250,000 this year. Next year
[25:15] it could be 260,000. The following year, 270,000. And of course, we're talking about
[25:22] success value year. And so it is going to have a to attend the words of commissioner
[25:28] and she was spot on. This will have a catastrophic attack.
[25:38] Commandment here if you move on to the next if you'd like to see.
[25:42] Well, okay, as soon as I pick myself up off the floor for this one, please do, Mr. Proin.
[25:52] Well, if you could go where it says presiding officers for the 27th and 7th section, or thank you,
[25:56] I appreciate it. So in November, after November 3rd, 2 weeks thereafter, we will have
[26:04] a new speaker, the new speaker will be Sam Garrison from Clay County, specifically
[26:10] from Living Island. And so he has been, he has served not only in local government,
[26:18] But he's also a former assistant, State Attorney, and then Jim Boyd is going to be the
[26:27] New Senate President.
[26:29] He has an insurance pack now, and in both of these leaders are very seasoned, and they're
[26:37] served, not only, obviously, in the house, but in the Senate, and also in other forms
[26:45] of government as well.
[26:46] So these are your two, these will be your two new presiding officers.
[26:54] Now, if we go to the next one, please thank you.
[26:58] I wanted to share with you about the turnover in the House of the Senate, and of course
[27:04] terminal units, the admin of terminal units, while we're seeing in the Florida House
[27:10] of Representatives, there are 120 seats in the Florida House of Representatives, all of them
[27:17] for collecting, there were contested seats, obviously, and longest, but what is striking
[27:28] is that out of the 120 seats that are up for the general election, 89 are contested.
[27:36] Now, what is telling you is the power of the infancy, there's no more.
[27:42] What has happened is you have a lot more races that are out there, it's a very visual cycle, because we all know.
[27:51] And then at the Senate, which we really striking is that there are 40 seats in the house, but only 20, because they go on two year cycles.
[28:01] So 20 will be at this cycle, 20 up next cycle. Out of this 20 seats, 18 are fantastic.
[28:11] So normally, it's kind of like a congressional member, they have the power of the infirmancy.
[28:18] I believe that those days, quite frankly, we're not.
[28:24] They didn't look if you go to the next one.
[28:26] We have
[28:35] a governor's race, y'all are extremely aware of that.
[28:39] We have barring Donald, who's the Republican, and he's a former United States congressman.
[28:44] that a lot of folks don't know that barring donals was also a member of the Florida legislature
[28:52] and he served in the state house.
[28:55] A different Charlie is on a Democrat side.
[28:58] He's a former Republican Congressman.
[29:00] He's now the Democrat and the Len Brown is running.
[29:04] So that will be decided on November 3rd.
[29:09] Mr. Garland, what I'm so important about meeting and we'll have self-signament
[29:14] meetings on that path is that you can imagine how many are leaving the Governor to
[29:22] stay in a situation and because obviously they know in November which
[29:27] going to be a new governor and they're obviously looking for new jobs and new
[29:31] opportunities. But you can imagine the number of new Governor right
[29:37] and also a professional staff. What was critical about us having a meeting is that
[29:45] can you remember third, there would be a transition team that will be set up,
[29:49] whoever's given it. And we want to make sure that we hit the ground running,
[29:56] the blood's not a spread. Because
[30:00] What dollars that are going to be available? We want to make sure that, obviously, the juvenile, yes, this fair share. I also want you to know that they've done a long term, this is a process that's done that they every year, they look three years out to see what the fiscal outlook is for the state.
[30:23] In 2027, the fiscal outlook is going to be a $2 billion debt to the state, unless you're
[30:30] revenue, and in 2028, it's going to be a $6 billion debt.
[30:37] Those numbers change because dynamics change in the coming of these coming go, but just
[30:44] you know that's why we're being very sensitive in terms of the amount of skinning of what's
[30:52] going to be available out there. But I can assure you that whatever is available, you know,
[30:58] we're going to make sure that we fight the fair share. And Bill, if you go to the last slide
[31:03] So, last next, well, we've already started once next, November 17th to 19th, will be the organizational session, and then committee meetings will start in earnest on November 30th all the way through February 18th and then on March 2nd will be the regular session, and then in the last regular day for session will be April 30th.
[31:34] So, I've
[31:37] met with Mayor and Commissioner, because that's all that I have.
[31:40] It's an update.
[31:40] There's a whole lot longer, but obviously, you know, we sensitive to your time, more
[31:47] than happy to come back and provide you with dates as the admin.
[31:53] We appreciate all that you do for us, Mr. Prood.
[31:57] Glad to have you on our side.
[32:01] And happy to help you fix that Wi-Fi.
[32:06] not as easy to hear as we had hoped, but I think we got most of the, most of the
[32:14] just of it, and at this point I will ask my colleagues if anyone has questions
[32:20] for Mr. Prood. This was taped. We could listen to it again if we needed to,
[32:25] because it is hard to.
[32:27] Yeah, yes, yes, it's all recorded.
[32:32] Could we get a copy of your slides by any chance?
[32:37] Yes, we'll have those.
[32:39] I can have those.
[32:41] All right, if we could get those distributed, please, Kim.
[32:45] And also, do you, are you aware of any campaign,
[32:49] which is promoting this to voters in the state of Florida this side of it?
[32:55] because I know real estate brokers have a $10 million campaign
[32:59] to promote the other side for obvious reasons,
[33:03] but is there any entity that is promoting the data,
[33:07] the information you presented today?
[33:11] Yes, Commissioner, the Association,
[33:14] and Madam Mayor of my,
[33:19] yes,
[33:20] Commissioner,
[33:23] the Sheriff's Association is opposing this,
[33:26] five-dimensional association is opposing this. All of your environmental groups are opposing
[33:34] us, but why greater association is opposing just so there are government, look as you know,
[33:42] governments can't do campaigning, they can provide information. And so that's what we're doing
[33:49] and trying to get the local governments to provide that information to their citizens. But there
[33:55] multiple groups, but as you pointed out, the realtors have put $10 million
[34:01] aside to go ahead and promote this. And that's the only group that I can think
[34:08] of that is actively on the proponents side of us.
[34:13] So, who sponsored this?
[34:18] But this was, this was the governor's proposal as the commissioner of filming as he, as he pointed out.
[34:28] This was, this was completely, the governor's proposal and the difference to the governor, you know, the house and the Senate, you know, passed it forward.
[34:39] This was, this was, this was the governor's proposal.
[34:41] All right?
[34:44] Great.
[34:44] Any more questions for Mr. Pro at you?
[34:47] Do you have a sense of the two Governor's potential candidates that are running?
[34:53] Have they declared a position on this publicly?
[34:58] Either of them?
[35:03] John the former Congressman, John Lee, is opposed to it, and Governor, if Governor Donald
[35:14] is elected, he is proposed that if it does not pass, that he would have the Constitutional
[35:21] Revision Commission, which means, on serving 20 years and then it's up to me in the next
[35:27] couple of years, that he would have simply to take a look at it.
[35:34] Thank you.
[35:38] All right. Thank you, Mr. Prude. Any further questions? Anyone in the gallery have any questions?
[35:47] All right. So thank you and we look forward to hearing from you again, Mr. Prude.
[35:54] I apologize for the sound system.
[35:58] Well, it would be helpful to have it clearer.
[36:02] I don't think you can tell how awkward it was here, but thank you.
[36:10] I apologize for that.
[36:13] Yes, we'll maybe that, sorry.
[36:16] We'll make the recording end of minutes available to the commission.
[36:20] And the slides also.
[36:22] Great.
[36:22] Thank you.
[36:24] Thank you.
[36:25] And now we have Dr. David Cribio, who is, has, oh, Mr. Dojock, would you please introduce this?
[36:37] Yes, thank you, Mayor.
[36:40] So on the agenda today, we have Dr. Cribio. Under the agenda title, Barrier Island Construction Considerations,
[36:47] What we're talking about is not to, say, address what town code requirements are for
[36:55] construction IAM, where the risks there, what we invited him to do, is to come in and
[37:01] outline what are the technical, meaning, engineering, et cetera, considerations that you
[37:06] should and must undertake when you build on a barrier, such as Jupiter Island.
[37:11] So with that, give his brief bio for those who haven't met him before, Dr. Creeble is the owner
[37:18] of Coastal Analytics, they've been working for the town since 2014 on various issues related
[37:25] to the beach to the inlet to seal up a rise.
[37:27] He was on our vulnerability assessment steering committee.
[37:30] He is well. He's also presented some findings that are specific to the island, which I believe he'll start touching upon in this.
[37:37] When we look at the 600 block in the island, we do have very special considerations of dunes.
[37:43] It's at which he has evaluated for erosion and potential impacts to the island.
[37:49] These are things that you'll see in his presentation today kind of play out.
[37:55] But he's also professor emeritus for the United States Naval Academy.
[38:00] He has been there since early,
[38:02] believed the late 1980s as a professor and now professor emeritus teaching ocean engineering
[38:07] at the Naval Academy highly qualified in a highly valued asset to the town in assisting
[38:12] us with these types of issues.
[38:14] So with that, I'm going to hand this over to him.
[38:16] He has a presentation to go through and then obviously we'd have some, I think, some drill-down
[38:21] questions because we'll not intend to do a fully assessed basements on the island.
[38:25] These are all bits of information that the commission should consider when starting to look at these more deeply.
[38:31] Thank you.
[38:32] Good morning, Dr.
[38:33] Help me out here.
[38:34] Crabial?
[38:36] Crabial?
[38:36] Crabial?
[38:37] Crabial?
[38:39] My wife says when two vows go walk in, the second one does the talk in.
[38:45] So thank you, Mayor.
[38:47] Commissioners, Tom Manager, it's a pleasure to be with you.
[38:50] I haven't been here a while, so it's a pleasure to be back talking to you again.
[38:55] As John mentioned, he wanted me to address really a wide range of coastal issues pertaining to
[39:01] barrier islands, and so what I thought I'd do is partly talk about the risks of living
[39:06] on a barrier island.
[39:07] I think you're familiar with the hurricane risks, but certainly if you're on the ocean front,
[39:13] the storm surge is a risk, but the wave action is really the damaging part, and particularly
[39:20] the waves, of course, cause erosion. And as the graphic on the right is trying to show, if
[39:25] the doon erodes, there's a potential for the waves to kind of climb over the doon and wash
[39:31] over the barrier island. So that's one of the things we're kind of looking at when we talk
[39:36] about risks on the ocean side. The intercostal side is a little bit more benign. It's mostly
[39:42] the storm surge issue there. The waves are not really the big issue.
[39:49] How do you manage these risks
[39:50] These are sort of the tools that are in your quiver and the town, of course, and the state have setback requirements.
[39:59] But the beach nourishment and the beach district operations really are the number one.
[40:04] Healthy beach is the best thing you can have to protect the ocean side.
[40:08] And, of course, the town's been very active with beach nourishment, as well as do nourishment and do in reconstruction.
[40:14] The picture on the right shows a sequence of damage in the 600 block from hurting the coal with reconstruction and re-vegetation following it.
[40:26] And then as I'll get into talk today, building code requirements, both at the town level, at the state level, at the federal level, all come into play as well.
[40:37] And I'll try to review those.
[40:38] understand we have the rest of the data talk about basements, so hopefully we'll get there.
[40:49] I think the two most important things in terms of regulatory control of the coastal reason.
[40:56] Number one is probably the Florida Coastal Construction Control Line, the CCCL.
[41:03] I drew it as a red line here on the aerial photograph just about where we are.
[41:10] The state defines this as a zone of influence of what they call the 100 year hurricane.
[41:16] You might think of that as a storm that might happen every 100 years on average.
[41:21] But if you flip that around, it also as a storm that has a 1% chance of occurring every year.
[41:28] So, it's become the regulatory standard for addressing these types of impacts.
[41:34] And the CCCL documents kind of the farthest inland extent of storm surge, wave effects
[41:40] and erosion of that.
[41:43] And I think you're probably aware the CCCL does not prohibit building, but it layers
[41:48] on a number of construction standards that have to be met.
[41:53] And it also tries to protect the due and environment, so it not only talks about building
[41:58] things, but it also tries to protect the the doon sediments that are there as well as the
[42:03] doon vegetation.
[42:06] The other regulatory environments, which I'm sure you're familiar with, is the, are the
[42:11] FEMA flood hazard zones, and this is a copy of the FEMA flood map for this area.
[42:18] The FEMA also uses the 100-year water level as their basis,
[42:25] but they define different zones.
[42:27] I might say at the outset that FEMA by itself is not really regulatory.
[42:32] It's a flood insurance metric, and but as I'll talk later, it gets adopted within the
[42:40] Florida building code, so the FEMA flood insurance zones, even though not really intended
[42:44] as regulatory zones, become regulatory zones.
[42:48] The important one is on the ocean side, what FEMA calls the VE, I like to think it is
[42:53] high velocity zone, that's where wave impacts are expected.
[42:59] On the intra-coastful side, they have what's called the A-E zone, I didn't make up all
[43:05] these things, but that's the name of the zone on the intra-coastful side and that has a low wave
[43:11] hazard, probably a technical point that I'll talk about with your building folks, FEMA also
[43:17] also has what they call it coastal a zone, which is not in Jupiter island. Jupiter has
[43:24] them, steward has them, Jupiter island does not. These are inland inter coastal sides
[43:29] with large waves, and fortunately Jupiter island does not have that. Jupiter island has
[43:36] two what they call a ozones, and these are where the O, maybe for overtopping. This is where
[43:42] the waves are predicted to be able to come over the coastal dune, wash across the barrier island.
[43:47] So there's one on North Beach Road, another one in the 600 block, there's two locations.
[43:55] The shaded X zone is the tan color on the map, and it is the 500-year, a more rare or more extreme storm.
[44:04] It's not included in regulatory zones now, but as I'll talk about later, it probably will be in 2027.
[44:12] It will become a regulatory zone for flood hazards.
[44:15] And then, in the middle, the area that's not shaded, where you just have the regular aerial
[44:20] photograph, that's what FEMA calls the X zone, it's kind of a silly name, but it's an area
[44:27] that is not regulated at all for the Federal Flood Insurance Program.
[44:32] So, if we go for a little tour around the island, this is part of North Beach Road,
[44:38] turned on its side.
[44:39] At the bottom, the A-E-Zone floods most of the area along the intercostal waterway coming
[44:45] up to a kind of a blue curve boundary that I showed.
[44:49] On the ocean side, the V-E high velocity zone comes in and hits most of the coastal sand dunes
[44:55] in there.
[44:57] I should have mentioned the start that the...
[45:00] Background, the red colors in the background are higher elevations, typically 12, 15 foot elevations, the green are down in the vicinity of four, five foot elevations.
[45:14] On the North Beach road, on the left-hand side, you can see what's called the A.O. Zone, that's where FEMA predicts waves could wash over the barrier island in a hurricane.
[45:24] And then in white cutting through there is the location of the coastal construction control line.
[45:32] And probably use worth understanding that the CCCL and the FEMAZones essentially have nothing to do with each other.
[45:39] We're developed separately for different purposes, but they both have become regulatory standards.
[45:45] As we move along the island, the top panel, and then moving farther south in there.
[45:51] You can see though that the CCCL, the white, and the v-zone boundary, the high velocity boundary,
[45:58] on the ocean side, more or less kind of track each other along the length of the island
[46:03] as you move down.
[46:06] And as you go farther south into, let's say the 400 block of south beach road, the v-zone
[46:13] in blue is consistently farther seward of the CCCL.
[46:18] And then, as you can see, moving on down through blowing rocks and down to the 600 block.
[46:23] And you can see that shaded zone on the lower right.
[46:27] That's, again, that overwash zone that FEMA predicts in the 600 block area.
[46:35] So, one thing I find disturbing about this is I mentioned already that FEMA and the state use different water levels.
[46:45] In theory, they're the same hundred-year storm, but they were derived at different times with different methods.
[46:52] And probably in red is the most important in the table.
[46:58] The regulatory elevation adopted by the state, a Florida Department of Environmental Protection, in the construction control line,
[47:08] varies from about 15 to 16 foot elevations along the length of the island.
[47:12] And on the right, what I'm trying to show there is that regulatory elevation is sort of the highest level that the waves and water level can reach in the storm.
[47:23] So it's really not the still water level, or it's not what you would see if you really thought about a flood, it's where the waves are reaching above that.
[47:31] And that becomes the regulatory elevation.
[47:34] The FEMA 100-year level is seven to 10 feet along the island.
[47:39] The part I mentioned I'm a bit disturbed, FEMA has remap the island three times, and essentially
[47:45] the water level that they predict keeps going down.
[47:50] And probably in the most communities with homeowner's playing flood insurance rates, they
[47:55] would welcome that, but it has caused a few issues which I'll try to discuss later.
[47:59] Right now, in some of the regulatory zones, we have the state mandated coastal control line
[48:06] elevation and the FEMA elevation, and as you can see, they differ by, in some cases,
[48:12] six to eight feet in elevation.
[48:14] But they're both in the Florida building code.
[48:19] John mentioned he's had me do some work on kind of the threat to some of the existing dunes,
[48:25] and I've just done a couple snapshots here of a computer model.
[48:28] In black is an existing ground topography across section up in the North Beach Road area, and you can see starting on the left the ground elevations roughly six feet and then rising up to a dune height at almost 16 feet and then dropping down to the ocean.
[48:47] In red is the eroded profile if I use the DEP-Hunter-Dear condition and it predicts that you
[48:57] could erode almost the entire dune in this case.
[49:02] With that, the dark blue line is sort of the water level without the wave effects and
[49:07] you can see that it actually could over top that red curve and that's partly why FEMA developed
[49:15] this overwash zone in North Beach Road area where they predict the water could go over the island.
[49:23] The dash blue curve at the top is where the upper wave crests are.
[49:26] That's where a house first floor would have to be in this zone.
[49:31] So to give you a little perspective, and I'll go very quickly just a couple examples.
[49:35] Working our way south, the top one is a little bit still in North Beach Road area.
[49:42] The dune is not quite as pronounced, but it's a little wider.
[49:47] And you can see that the erosion may go through the primary dune, but at least we predict
[49:52] there that the water itself, the dark blue does not go over it.
[49:56] But wave effects up to the dotted blue could go over.
[50:00] And that's what, again, everybody's trying to prevent wave effects in these zones.
[50:06] As we move farther south, you can start to see that the whole island gets higher.
[50:10] And you can see that the dune has a little four dune, but then the, oops, excuse me, the ground elevations go up to 16 or 17 feet, and at that case, at this point, as we work our way south on south beach road, the predictions would be that we do not over top the dune, and we do not really interact with the homes along that.
[50:35] Continuing, farther south on south-beat road, the top example shows much the same thing.
[50:41] And then finally at the bottom, we get down to the 600 block, and that again is a vulnerable area.
[50:46] Relatively narrow dunes with a potential to a road considerably through those in a storm.
[50:53] And as you can see, the dotted line can go over top of the eroded dunes.
[50:58] That's again where FEMA suggests we have this overwash issue.
[51:02] So it's not surprising, maybe that John and the Beast District have spent a lot of time working on
[51:08] doing reconstruction both North and South.
[51:13] It's strange that the highest elevation of our island is also where the largest threat of
[51:25] the waves.
[51:27] It's, I mean, our island is very significantly high
[51:30] in the east side of the island, and low on the west side.
[51:35] Yeah, the intercostal is just a little bit too narrow
[51:39] to have really large wave effects there.
[51:42] So for the most part, that's really not the main concern
[51:44] on the intercostal side.
[51:47] And on the ocean side, of course, you have wave effects everywhere.
[51:51] At the north and south, the dunes are relatively narrow,
[51:55] And in some case more intermittent, most of the middle of the island is much higher elevation.
[52:01] It's just strange that higher where the waves are.
[52:06] I'm sorry.
[52:07] I'm happy to take questions as we go to.
[52:10] If it's a good time to take some more questions or.
[52:12] I would urge my colleagues if you have a question just.
[52:18] Okay.
[52:19] Well, let me turn now to how we manage that risk through the different building codes.
[52:23] And this is no more clear, I have to say, because there's a layering of different...
[52:30] Friend, jurisdictions that come into play here. FEMA, federal emergency management agency with their flood insurance program is one. We talked about their flood zones. FEMA has construction requirements for people that want to qualify for flood insurance. Those also, however, get adopted in building codes as I'll try to explain. The one that you've probably never heard of, A-S-C-E-24.
[52:59] American Society of Civil Engineers is a professional organization and it adopts
[53:06] building standards and the reason it does that is that it's a professional
[53:11] consensus organization and that those standards can then be adopted by
[53:17] individual state building codes.
[53:20] So ASCE24 has an extensive set of guidelines on flood protection.
[53:24] And probably the most important thing to note about it is it adopts all the FEMA, flood insurance
[53:30] regulations.
[53:32] So everything that FEMA puts out gets adopted by ASEE 24, and then it gets adopted
[53:38] by Florida Building Code.
[53:41] The Florida Coastal Construction Control Line, a separate entity, as we've talked about
[53:46] within Florida, and then we get to the Florida Building Code.
[53:51] This establishes statewide standards, but it has two sections that deal with coastal flooding.
[53:57] One of them refers to ASCE 24 and FEMA.
[54:01] So all the FEMA standards are buried in the Florida building code.
[54:05] And the other one refers to the coastal construction control line.
[54:09] So all the state standards are also buried in the coastal construction.
[54:13] Excuse me, in the Florida building code.
[54:14] So, the Florida Building Code basically is over arching document that includes these others.
[54:22] I listed at the bottom here that the town building code also comes into play.
[54:27] And the way these codes work is the town, the local jurisdiction, can always adopt
[54:32] requirements that are more stringent than the Florida Building Code.
[54:38] Generally, not less stringent, but all communities are allowed to adopt more stringent requirements.
[54:44] So the way it kind of works in that is on the graphic on the right.
[54:48] The town really is the dominant one because it can adopt something more stringent than the next one,
[54:53] the Florida Building Code, Florida Building Code refers to both FEMA and Coastal construction control line.
[55:00] So the question, are you aware of anybody or any municipalities that have tried to tighten their
[55:08] building codes with standing behind the flood protection issue in the face of Senate Bill 180.
[55:15] How is that?
[55:17] I'm not, you know, I don't live in Florida.
[55:19] So I wasn't aware of what Senate Bill 180 was attempting to do.
[55:23] So I'll have to dial any intelligence on that.
[55:26] I mean, I'm just curious when we're looking at RLDRs and all the rest of stuff.
[55:30] You know, I think we pretty much all agree up here that the way the coastal construction line works
[55:37] As absurd, we're on one side of North Beach Road, my house is at six feet, eight inches.
[55:42] And if I built it on the other side, I'd have to raise a thing up 1,011 feet or whatever.
[55:47] I mean, it's nonsensical for us, as an island, the way that the coastal construction line manifests itself.
[55:56] And if we wanted to adopt a set of building standards that were more uniform to represent the real threat of flooding,
[56:04] how would that work in the face of 180?
[56:08] There'd have to be done very carefully,
[56:10] and as Dr. Criple mentioned,
[56:12] the CCCL is jurisdictional.
[56:15] It's all of those additional requirements
[56:16] have to be met, if you follow, then that zone.
[56:21] But what SB 180, the challenge it presents is,
[56:24] if you're passing legislation that's more restrictive,
[56:28] it could be subject to a challenge, right?
[56:30] There is, and time frame in which that law will.
[56:34] Sunset, if you will. And you'll be able to explore legislation that will be more restrictive and its application.
[56:45] But for now, that's what the law precludes.
[56:48] But even less we have another hurricane.
[56:51] Right. Exactly right.
[56:53] Well, our just becomes a political football.
[56:57] Like the tax property tax stuff, it's just theater.
[57:03] I will touch on these issues.
[57:07] There are a number of different counties in towns within Florida that have adopted higher elevations
[57:14] for construction land or to the control line.
[57:17] They've done that through two different ways.
[57:18] One is just simply ordinances from the town that mandate and additional what is called
[57:23] freeboard and additional safety margin, if you will.
[57:27] The other one, I was going to mention it later, but the little box on the right that's
[57:31] white, the FDEP Coastal Building Zone, the Florida Legislature has already established by statute,
[57:41] what they call these coastal buildings zones and it's everything on a barrier island
[57:45] landward of the Coastal Construction Control Line.
[57:49] I don't believe Jupiter Island has adopted any regulations in that zone, but a number
[57:54] of other municipalities and counties have, so that's already on the books that zone that
[58:00] established and it can be used as far as I'm aware. I'm not an attorney, so see what Kyle says about that,
[58:08] but I think it's something that, you know, certainly the town should look at and be aware of.
[58:15] So going through these codes, the Florida Building Code, which again includes all the other
[58:20] of things, tells you what you can build, how high to build it, and basically how to build it,
[58:25] those things. And I won't read through everything here, but I guess the important part is
[58:30] is generally the codes applied to new buildings, substantial improvements.
[58:38] So anything where you deem that more than a 50 that you're expanding the footprint
[58:44] or expanding the value considerably or repair of major damage.
[58:49] It's not intended to apply to existing homes unless or to modifications that stay within the footprint.
[58:57] those provisions are in all the codes, but I think the substantial improvement is the one that
[59:05] can trigger a lot because if you expanded on your property and let's say you had a separate
[59:13] building, guest house or something that you were going to put in, if that can be deemed to be a
[59:19] substantial improvement to the entire property, you may trigger that other other other buildings on
[59:25] property have to be brought up to code.
[59:27] So another area that I think has more legal questions
[59:30] than technical ones, but that's in the code.
[59:35] As we go through, there's quite a bit of difference
[59:37] between residential and non-residential.
[59:40] Some things are allowed for commercial properties that
[59:42] are simply not allowed for residential.
[59:45] And as well, between habitable places with living spaces
[59:50] and non-habitable garages and things like that.
[59:54] So I won't go through all the rest of this, we'll talk about each of these, but probably in terms of elevation.
[1:00:01] The picture at the right probably explains, the FEMA flood maps have what they call a base flood elevation, the 100-year water level, plus the wave crests.
[1:00:13] So the idea is that again, if you see a FEMA elevation, it always has the potential of including those wave effects.
[1:00:21] The building codes all have something called design flood elevation, where some level of freeboard
[1:00:28] has been added.
[1:00:29] A safety margin is put in above the FEMA mandated elevation.
[1:00:36] The Florida building code mandates one foot, so that's already built into the building code.
[1:00:42] But this is where communities, a number of them, have set higher freeboard levels.
[1:00:46] And I just listed two year different counties that have higher freeboards.
[1:00:51] But that's a mechanism that both counties and towns have used to add a little extra safety margin.
[1:00:58] And that's all allowed within the building code.
[1:01:02] At the bottom sort of offset is this coastal construction control line.
[1:01:06] And it's again a different animal.
[1:01:08] It has what they call the hundred year elevation for hurricanes, which also includes waves,
[1:01:13] but it does not include freeboard.
[1:01:15] and I don't think there's anything in the code,
[1:01:17] which allows you to add a freeboard to that particular value.
[1:01:24] Okay, well what can you do to your home
[1:01:26] within the Florida Building Code?
[1:01:28] So this slide deals with the ocean front,
[1:01:32] everything within the coastal construction control line
[1:01:35] or within the FEMA wave impact zones.
[1:01:42] In these requirements are pretty clear,
[1:01:45] the bottom. It's a lot of verbiage. But the bottom of the first floor structure, support.
[1:01:52] So any horizontal beams and things below the first floor, that has to be above the
[1:01:58] design flood elevation, whether it's the hundred year hurricane for the coastal construction line
[1:02:04] or whether it's the design flood from the FEMA zones. So you have to be above the higher of those two,
[1:02:12] or the code always says this and elevates the specified by the jurisdiction.
[1:02:18] So that gives the town the ability to specify what they would like to do in this.
[1:02:25] In this high velocity, high erosion zone, large waves zone, everything has to be built on piles.
[1:02:32] So waves can pass underneath.
[1:02:34] structural fill is not allowed here to raise an elevation and build directly upon it.
[1:02:43] The coast of control line also restricts the amount of movement of sediment that's allowed
[1:02:50] and re-grading within that zone for environmental reasons.
[1:02:55] And then the bottom one, the space below this,
[1:03:01] the code in this zone allows three things.
[1:03:05] Parking, storage, and building access,
[1:03:09] stairways, elevators, that sort of thing.
[1:03:13] So there's no other uses mentioned in these zones in the code.
[1:03:19] That entire lower unit, if it is used,
[1:03:21] has to have what are called breakaway walls, so if waves hit them, they need to fail without
[1:03:28] taking the rest of the structure down with them. So that's a provision there, and dry flood
[1:03:35] proofing, that is making that space completely watertight is not permitted in this zone. So even
[1:03:41] with the breakaway walls, you have to have what are called flood vents, those are the holes at the
[1:03:46] to let flood water in and out.
[1:03:49] So, I'd say in this zone that restrictions and requirements are pretty clear.
[1:03:55] Somewhat less clear if we move to the intercostal side.
[1:03:58] Again, here we're not worried about waves.
[1:04:02] In this case, the Florida building code says that the lowest inhabited floor
[1:04:09] has to be above the flood elevation, design flood elevation.
[1:04:14] And here the word basement appears and if you look at the lower right, I've actually
[1:04:19] clipped out a little copy of part of the code on elevation requirements and I've highlighted
[1:04:26] in yellow what it says that the lowest floor including basement shall be elevated in conformance
[1:04:35] with that means to meet the water level elevations listed above.
[1:04:41] So, for something that's going to be considered a basement, it actually still has to be in
[1:04:47] this zone, has to be above the flood elevation, that's listed by FEMA on the flood maps.
[1:04:54] Structural fill is allowed here.
[1:04:56] You can build on it with slab on grade and other means, so it's a lot more forgiving.
[1:05:02] Anything below that design flood elevation has to be free flooding.
[1:05:06] So again, you have to have those holes in the foundation to let water in and out.
[1:05:11] And here's a case where dry flood proofing, making that area completely water tight is not permitted for residential.
[1:05:20] It is, if you had a restaurant and a commercial property, but not for residential.
[1:05:26] Okay, well things get even more interesting.
[1:05:29] I mentioned earlier, the FEMA X zone is really the middle of the island.
[1:05:35] It's the area that does not appear in any of the other flood zones.
[1:05:39] It's the area here that's just the aerial photograph.
[1:05:42] It's not the high velocity zone on the ocean side.
[1:05:46] It's not the AE zone on the intercostal side.
[1:05:50] So everything in there is the X zone, which FEMA says is outside the floodplain.
[1:05:56] The state differs, in some cases, because the coastal construction control line,
[1:06:02] as it does in this photograph, cuts through that zone.
[1:06:06] So here's a case where on the right side of the red line,
[1:06:10] the state says it will flood, and you have to follow the flood guidelines.
[1:06:15] FEMA says it won't flood.
[1:06:17] But you have to follow in the Florida Building Code, the higher of the two.
[1:06:21] So you'd follow the state guidelines.
[1:06:25] If you're landward of that red line,
[1:06:29] And basically, that's not regulated by either the state control line or by flood provisions
[1:06:37] of the Florida building code.
[1:06:40] So right where the white ex zone is on the diagram, that zone is outside of any flood zone
[1:06:47] right now.
[1:06:48] And that is only governed by town ordinances.
[1:06:53] Because it's not in a flood zone, the Florida building code does not apply special flood
[1:06:57] provisions.
[1:06:58] You still have wind provisions, you have to meet, but no special flood provisions.
[1:07:03] So I think, as far as your consideration, that zone is the one that right now is unregulated.
[1:07:12] It is within, as I mentioned earlier, that coastal building zone that the Florida Statutes
[1:07:16] have already established, but that just establishes a zone, as far as I can tell, no requirements.
[1:07:26] All right, and I'm sorry I'm going kind of slowly through this, but I know you've
[1:07:30] And discussing some of these basement type issues for a while. So that's kind of what I'm getting at here.
[1:07:36] The building code for non-inhabited structures says that at the top, you can see that the provisions
[1:07:48] that we've already talked about in all the flowed zones would not necessarily apply to things like
[1:07:56] decks, or porches, or garages, carports, pools, et cetera, or accessory storage structures.
[1:08:04] All of those are considered non-inhabited.
[1:08:07] They all have somewhat less restrictive requirements, and I haven't bothered listening them,
[1:08:14] because there's a lot of them.
[1:08:15] But the key distinction in here is whether it is structurally attached to the main house or
[1:08:22] detached.
[1:08:23] So that makes a big difference.
[1:08:25] The goal of all the codes is that if one piece of the structure fails, they don't want the whole structure to go down in a hurricane.
[1:08:32] So you can imagine that the ones that are attached to the main structure have more stringent requirements than those that are detached.
[1:08:41] I noticed, I noted here, though, from talking to John, we talked a bit about this word accessory structure.
[1:08:46] And I think there's a difference here, the building codes call an accessory structure by definition non-enhabited,
[1:08:53] Whereas I think the town may refer to accessories structures that might include things like
[1:08:59] guest houses or beach houses and things like that.
[1:09:03] So that word accessory beware that it might keep doing that, sorry about that.
[1:09:09] It might differ between what the building code says and what the town considers those to be.
[1:09:15] As far as the Florida building code, any inhabited structure, like a guest house, or a beach house would have to meet the same elevation and construction regulations as the primary building.
[1:09:30] And the definition of inhabited usually means living space, cooking space, eating space, sleeping space. Those are sort of the things that distinguish what they call an inhabited structure.
[1:09:44] Good question. Good question. Good question.
[1:09:52] This slide.
[1:09:56] The box at the right is from the Florida building code.
[1:10:00] And they have a definition of what's called a loud use. And this is an interesting thing.
[1:10:09] Remember, I talked earlier about how, in some cases, the coastal construction elevation is here and the FEMA elevation is here.
[1:10:17] Well, this addresses how you can use that space in between.
[1:10:21] And I think it comes in to play in Jupiter Island, because remember FEMA has lowered their flood levels pretty low.
[1:10:27] So if you meet the construction control line elevation, and if you stay above the FEMA elevation, you could easily have eight to ten feet of space in there to work with.
[1:10:40] And that's where this allowed use comes in.
[1:10:44] And if you go through, your question on bathrooms is here.
[1:10:49] If you go through what it says, it says in all those verbs,
[1:10:53] the verb is there, bathrooms could be allowed in that zone.
[1:10:57] And it has recreational spaces, gyms, things like that.
[1:11:02] And then it has the uses of a similar nature in yellow, right there.
[1:11:09] And again, I'm not an attorney just from what I've been able to glean this is where sort
[1:11:19] of the interpretation of town officials comes in to play is what is a use of a similar
[1:11:24] nature.
[1:11:26] And I'm sure Kyle, you can probably help me out on this or whether lawsuits have yet been
[1:11:30] But anyway, this kind of gets at that issue of how you use that space in between those two.
[1:11:43] And it's part of this larger issue then of how you use the enclosures that might be below a flood elevation.
[1:11:50] And I think I've mentioned all these things before that the code says parking storage access.
[1:11:56] Those things.
[1:11:58] If it's considered habitable living space, you have to elevate.
[1:12:04] I think I put in here, basements in the code are generally considered areas that have
[1:12:13] our below ground on all sides,
[1:12:18] so it would be below the ground level if you will, a bathtub
[1:12:22] that would catch water.
[1:12:25] One way to distinguish something that might not be a basement is if it's not below ground
[1:12:32] on one side.
[1:12:34] So portions of it could be below ground,
[1:12:38] at least one side would be at ground or above.
[1:12:41] And what that would do would be to make it a free flooding structure.
[1:12:45] So you'd have flood vents, water could come in, water could go out.
[1:12:48] It would have a place to drain.
[1:12:51] So I don't know if that helps your deliberations, basements at all.
[1:12:55] It's a dizzying array of different requirements.
[1:12:58] But I think the simplest thing is that the the most clearly permitted uses are parking
[1:13:04] storage in access and beyond that you have that allowed use provision and that's where
[1:13:12] the town I think has to come in and decide what uses a similar nature are question question
[1:13:17] for you and I don't want to speak on behalf of the mayor but I'm just going to prompt you
[1:13:21] to revisit some of the comments that have been made up here and that is that the real question
[1:13:25] And as for us and our responsibility to everybody on the island as it were, when we allow
[1:13:34] a new structure to come in and permit a basement that's, you know, large square footage
[1:13:39] or roughly covers the same footprint as the structure itself.
[1:13:44] Are we in some way or compromising neighbors north and south, is there a scenario in which if
[1:13:53] you get a washover that having that basement structure where there wasn't changing the
[1:13:59] parkability underneath the structure, does that in any way compromise neighbor's north
[1:14:04] south or east or west?
[1:14:07] It certainly could.
[1:14:08] Well, if you're in a washover zone, most of the building codes have requirements that a
[1:14:13] registered professional engineer would analyze the water runoff characteristics.
[1:14:18] There's skepticism here as to whether the sort of state supplied engineers really a reliable source for that information.
[1:14:27] The floor is at a rubber stamp, and we're trying to be responsible to everybody's interests.
[1:14:34] We need to understand, or maybe you can help guide us towards better information, because that is an ongoing discussion that we have up here, and I hope I'm not speaking on your behalf.
[1:14:46] How do you voice out?
[1:14:49] Well, yes.
[1:14:50] I think as the
[1:14:56] local government, our responsibility is to...
[1:15:00] And if we permit something, that's why we started our impact review committee, because you comply, doesn't mean you get to have an impact on your neighbors. And I've been curious for some time as to whether building underground affects the water table, the neighbors.
[1:15:24] Orosity next door, the, so.
[1:15:28] And we do have some contingent liability as a legislative body up here from if you will, the person who we deny a permit to based on something we're not sure about to the people that, in a sense if we grant the permit and there's some problem down the road will, it's a, it's an easy shot to go back and look at the town as a target.
[1:15:51] so we'd like to have the best advice,
[1:15:54] and if you could help guide us, that would be very, very, very.
[1:15:58] Yeah, I'd certainly like to take a deeper look at that.
[1:16:01] I think as a rough rule of thumb,
[1:16:03] what the building codes are trying to do is,
[1:16:06] first of all, prevent one building from failing
[1:16:08] and the debris washing into a neighbor.
[1:16:11] So the building codes try to prevent that.
[1:16:15] And I'm sorry I didn't talk about it today,
[1:16:16] but the whole issue of changing the flow of water,
[1:16:19] The codes do address that, again, they do require a professional engineering analysis of that.
[1:16:28] They don't really address groundwater, but I think on a barrier island, I would certainly
[1:16:33] be concerned about that because, you know, to my knowledge, we don't know exactly where the groundwater table is
[1:16:42] around Jupiter Island, but typically it's above sea level.
[1:16:45] So, if you dug down on the barrier island, at some point you're going to hit a fresh water ground
[1:16:51] water lens before you get down into salt water.
[1:16:56] And certainly by putting, at least what us Northerners would consider our basement, you
[1:17:02] have the potential to disrupt that.
[1:17:04] I don't have any means of talking about exactly how you would do that.
[1:17:08] But there are ground water experts that we do need help in that, because that's a contentious
[1:17:14] basement issue is contentious on a number of grounds and I think we need to have more facts
[1:17:22] to go with what we're working on our comprehensive plan looking at our development rules
[1:17:29] and there should be a focus on this but we want to make decisions based on facts because we're
[1:17:35] going to get sued one way or the other we'd like to at least get have a good defense that we started
[1:17:40] with facts rather than not.
[1:17:43] Does that make sense to you, Bob, can we talk further about getting
[1:17:46] obviously we're going to need criteria in our LDRs.
[1:17:51] But we need an expert to come in and say, no, you're going to impact this house,
[1:17:58] so you're going to impact the water level or something.
[1:18:00] So it's got to clear those hurdles.
[1:18:01] When we sort of have to have a fits all.
[1:18:04] I mean, if we're making a regulation as far as whether we're going to allow basements or
[1:18:09] allow basements at all. We need to have a question. The question is, is it going to meet the criteria?
[1:18:18] So, Dr. Cribble, how many barrier islands on the east coast of Florida are you familiar?
[1:18:29] jurisdictions on barrier I live on one part of the year in Brevard County. I'm
[1:18:34] familiar with that working with the town of Manalapand right now so is anybody
[1:18:41] getting this right I have a feeling we're not getting it. Well the issue of
[1:18:45] basements doesn't come up very often I think because there's a pervasive feeling
[1:18:49] that many ways they don't belong on barrier islands recognizing that many
[1:18:55] There are islands are lower than Jupiter island.
[1:18:59] You know, you're fortunate that a lot of the island is at a much higher elevation, but
[1:19:04] I think certainly what we've talked about today, I would recommend we find a groundwater
[1:19:08] expert that could talk about that issue and groundwater surface water and the things I'm
[1:19:14] talking about the debris generation.
[1:19:17] Can you guys work together towards helping absolutely, right now, we'll try to find it.
[1:19:23] Can I ask you a question?
[1:19:24] How does that affect digging, and we don't have to get into it too much, but digging a huge pond?
[1:19:33] Does it affect groundwater, fresh water, salt water, the integrity of the land around it
[1:19:40] if you dig the very deep pond?
[1:19:43] Yeah, as the pond fills up, the water level you see in the pond, the groundwater either side
[1:19:49] is a little bit higher than that.
[1:19:50] So, if you see water in upon collecting and staying there, generally the groundwater is a little bit higher on adjacent areas.
[1:19:59] So, you can refer that.
[1:20:02] It's also, you know, geology wise, you have the, what's called the anesthesia rock formation, which crops up, blowing rocks, the visible rocks there, a part of that.
[1:20:15] uh... bathtub beach
[1:20:17] uh... down upon beach they have some outcroppings there
[1:20:20] uh... i don't think we know where those rock surfaces are underneath
[1:20:24] jupiter island but
[1:20:25] as you know they're very porous and uh... so if you hit those then you have opened up
[1:20:30] a pathway to
[1:20:32] ground water does a different year
[1:20:34] does a differential intensity between salt water and fresh water
[1:20:38] help
[1:20:38] prevent them from co-mingling or does it really not care
[1:20:42] i know it does yeah the fresh water
[1:20:44] In some sense, it's floats on top of the saltwater.
[1:20:48] So usually if you have a barrier island,
[1:20:51] saltwater on the two sides, saltwater under,
[1:20:55] and then they call the lens of fresh water,
[1:20:58] and then of course there's a mixing zone.
[1:21:00] So I think, I don't think Jupiter Island allows tapping
[1:21:04] into that for landscaping, but many jurisdictions do.
[1:21:09] And it's easy to pull up saline water in years
[1:21:11] where you don't have much rainfall,
[1:21:12] because that density do I'm gonna come to hate this thing.
[1:21:18] Just generally speaking, are you saying that Jupiter Island would have
[1:21:24] because of the changing topography that the building code has to change
[1:21:29] within those environmental differences?
[1:21:32] Well, in some respects it already does because you've got, again,
[1:21:38] sort of the ocean side building code requirements,
[1:21:42] the intercostal side, and then you have this section in the middle that at present as we speak
[1:21:48] that FEMA X zone is not considered a flood zone in the Florida building code, so none of the
[1:21:55] flood provisions apply in there. So that's really perhaps where a lot of your battleground is in
[1:22:03] in that zone. There are jurisdictions that regulate adjacent to existing flood zones into
[1:22:12] that ex zone.
[1:22:15] So, part, and I alluded to earlier, there's a lot of uncertainty on what the
[1:22:19] hundred year water level actually is. So, a lot of communities have tried to hedge bets on
[1:22:25] uncertainties by establishing buffer zones, I think, in a-
[1:22:30] Panelist County, they have that, they have a 300 foot wide buffer zone next to the coastal construction control line. They have different regulations there.
[1:22:43] And I'm almost done, but I do want to alert you to what changes may be coming, and this will affect the island, and it will affect what you're discussing.
[1:22:56] The American Society of Civil Engineers has already approved a movement to make the 500-year hurricane level, the regulatory standard, not the 100.
[1:23:10] It's a 0.2% chance of occurring each year. I'm sure many of you are saying that's kind of ridiculous.
[1:23:16] But it turns out, if you own your home for 50 years, there's almost a 10 percent chance that you could see that kind of flood level.
[1:23:25] So that's what's driving. And remember, too, that building codes get driven by Hurricane Sandy in New Jersey, Hurricane Harvey in Houston, Hurricane Katrina in the Gulf Coast.
[1:23:36] So, those large losses are what's, you know, driving these changes, but already been approved to move to the 500 year level.
[1:23:45] Already approved to include sea level rise over the next 50 years.
[1:23:49] Right now, FEMA doesn't include sea level rise provisions at all.
[1:23:55] And the way that, sorry about my misspelling here,
[1:23:57] but the way they code would work then it would be the design elevation would become the 500 year plus sea level rise level.
[1:24:06] or the elevations set by the community.
[1:24:09] So, but this would significantly widen the intercostal flood zone.
[1:24:15] It would push elevations higher and extend farther inland.
[1:24:20] And I've done some preliminary mapping.
[1:24:21] I didn't bring it today, but we could take a look at that.
[1:24:25] Now, this has been approved by the American Society of Civil Engineers.
[1:24:30] The next step would be for it to be approved by the Florida Building Code,
[1:24:34] which hasn't been done yet, but I believe it's scheduled to be considered in 2027.
[1:24:41] So this is on the horizon and, you know, the question is how the town might anticipate
[1:24:48] or work with that, FEMA notoriously doesn't remap often for sea level rise issues, never.
[1:24:58] So they're not likely to remap for this.
[1:25:01] Your vulnerability assessment did consider C-level rise plus hurricane, but I don't think they did the 500 year hurricane, so that might be an add-on to that work to get that.
[1:25:15] Sometimes I have adopted just an additional free board as a way to just in a very simple way capture some of these uncertainties, so that would be a potential.
[1:25:24] And then the part I'm intrigued with, as I mentioned earlier, is the Florida statute that has created this building zone, everything from the control line to the intercostal waterway.
[1:25:39] So it is a defined zone.
[1:25:42] Some counties and communities have adopted special regulations within that zone.
[1:25:47] So if you have interest in that, there would be a next area to do, probably some legal
[1:25:52] research on what's been done.
[1:25:55] But there are a number of different jurisdictions that have used that.
[1:25:59] So if I had to summarize, if you said this morning, I wouldn't be able to, but I can summarize
[1:26:09] is my own personal concern here.
[1:26:14] And that is that the current boom of building
[1:26:19] and development in Florida seems to be happening
[1:26:26] without real care, it's we're being
[1:26:31] inundated with people who have no experience in Florida.
[1:26:36] And therefore, no memory of how bad things can get.
[1:26:43] And they come in and they see how beautiful it is and say,
[1:26:46] Oh, good.
[1:26:46] Well, I could make it even better.
[1:26:51] And the pressure to allow development that may be improved.
[1:27:02] We have to deal with all the time.
[1:27:04] We never did before.
[1:27:05] Well, I shouldn't say never, but it is increasing.
[1:27:08] and so I personally would like to see this town implement
[1:27:19] building restrictions that
[1:27:24] discourage
[1:27:28] to often the ability to do improved development. But it seems to be all over the map
[1:27:39] In all of Florida, so with your help, well, if my colleagues agree that we want to be the leader in discouraging improved development,
[1:27:57] then we would rely on your help to get us there, because I'm bewildered at them all by the whole thing.
[1:28:04] Again, the last row of that little figure, the control line, I think, is well established
[1:28:09] and certain requirements there, both to protect the building and to protect the environment.
[1:28:17] Interestingly, in that coastal building zone, over the rest of the barrier island, if you look at the statute,
[1:28:21] it also is trying to protect the environment as well as any development in there.
[1:28:27] So I think, you know, you have the mechanisms to define the entire barrier island within
[1:28:33] the state statutes.
[1:28:35] And then the question is, as far as I can see, is what specific statutes you want to
[1:28:39] come up with within that building zone.
[1:28:43] You already have the Florida Building Code and FEMA requirements, which cover up against the
[1:28:50] intercostal.
[1:28:51] You still have that center part of the island, what FEMA calls the exon, which is basically
[1:28:56] the unregulated as far as flood.
[1:29:00] If I could ask, Mayor, so you suggested I believe, so I understand that there are adjacent
[1:29:10] zone regulations that some jurisdictions simply transfer to the ex-zone, is that correct?
[1:29:18] In that coastal building zone, right?
[1:29:21] So, for example, just a lot, I'm aware of a panellist county, they go from the control line
[1:29:27] and then they go 300 feet inland further and they have a special, they call it a Jason Zone
[1:29:34] that they have different requirements and then you have the rest of the area beyond that.
[1:30:19] I was going to interject, that if my colleagues wanted to...
[1:30:26] No, I thought it was very useful. No, I even though I didn't.
[1:30:32] I learned today that we need to get a lot smarter before we start making fancy changes to the LDRs
[1:30:38] about basements and also we really understand this.
[1:30:42] We're going to get sued one way or the other. We'd like to at least get sued for the right reason.
[1:30:46] Well, I can't do anything about someone suing you.
[1:30:52] No, no, but you'd like to get it right soon by doing the right thing, yeah.
[1:30:55] Bring it on.
[1:30:56] Exactly.
[1:31:00] All right.
[1:31:01] We're back in session.
[1:31:02] We are on a particular item five in your local agreement for fire rescue services.
[1:31:09] Yeah, so I can speak to that mayor.
[1:31:13] So this is an in a local agreement between the town
[1:31:19] and Martin County Fire Rescue that we've had for some years, and it's a direct reason why we
[1:31:27] have the current level of service we provide on medical calls and emergencies here on the island,
[1:31:32] including the response time that's quite incredible. The chief can get into more specifics if
[1:31:38] you would like about the operational aspects of it, but the current in a local agreement is a five-year
[1:31:45] agreement that was entered into in 2022, most recently, it's a five-year contract, it
[1:31:52] expires the 10th or 30th of 2027. His language in it that says that it can be renewed
[1:32:00] for an additional five years, but that must be done no later than the 10th or 30th of this month.
[1:32:09] So, I negotiated with the Fire Chief and Accounting Administrator, the terms of the additional
[1:32:16] five year renewal, and that's in the memorandum presented to you.
[1:32:21] But I think you all know how critical this agreement is to the town,
[1:32:28] and so I mean, what
[1:32:29] we're doing is we're asking the commission to approve authorizing the mayor to execute
[1:32:36] said amendment on behalf of the town.
[1:32:39] I think this is the most successful negotiation I've ever heard of.
[1:32:46] We would have been on the hook for another $8,9 million.
[1:32:50] Why a bit?
[1:32:51] Over five years.
[1:32:52] And you got that done.
[1:32:54] Well done.
[1:32:55] That is unbelievable.
[1:32:57] Oh, do I have a motion?
[1:32:59] I don't want to make it.
[1:33:00] I have a motion.
[1:33:00] And that motion is, you want to state the motion.
[1:33:09] I'll make the motion a little bit.
[1:33:12] In the local agreement, as far as services.
[1:33:16] Asking authorizing the mayor to execute set amendment.
[1:33:20] Okay, so we implement and authorize execution of it.
[1:33:26] Motion?
[1:33:27] Yes.
[1:33:27] Second.
[1:33:28] Second.
[1:33:29] further discussion. Well done. Congratulations.
[1:33:34] Thank you. I'd also like to mention that this goes before the county commission for approval at their meeting tomorrow.
[1:33:43] I spoke with commissioner heard on a way out as for her support. It's on the consent agenda for tomorrow.
[1:33:48] So I don't anticipate there being any problems with the county. Thank you.
[1:33:52] I believe what they put on the consent.
[1:33:56] Sorry.
[1:33:57] Now we are on.
[1:34:00] Hi.
[1:34:06] That is item five.
[1:34:09] Six.
[1:34:10] Item six.
[1:34:14] And the first one is what, why don't you present?
[1:34:19] Very good.
[1:34:20] Thank you, thank you.
[1:34:21] Thank you, American listeners.
[1:34:23] So this is, this first item here is
[1:34:27] The renewal for property liability workers compensation on a bill and ancillary insurance
[1:34:34] coverages.
[1:34:35] Most of those are done with the Florida League of Cities of the Florida Municipal Insurance
[1:34:39] Trust.
[1:34:40] The staff works for them each year to receive renewal proposals.
[1:34:45] The quote came in at a 1.26% increase, which is about what staff is anticipating this year.
[1:34:51] property, values or property insurance is pretty much a stable this year, you can see
[1:34:59] as a $14,000 change there in the middle of the presentation there, 14, 14, 7.
[1:35:05] The general liability is up 17 workers' comp up six.
[1:35:09] So again, with all of the insurances, it is a 1.19% increase.
[1:35:14] So staff is happy to answer any questions.
[1:35:16] there was back up in this cover memo in the presentation, in the Commission's agenda, and so
[1:35:24] looking for a recommendation on that.
[1:35:25] Who we have a motion to approve the property liability worker's come and auto insurance
[1:35:31] coverage with Florida Municipal Insurance Trust.
[1:35:36] Oh, move.
[1:35:39] And further.
[1:35:41] And further.
[1:35:42] You will not know.
[1:35:43] Authorize a 10% deductible limit.
[1:35:49] Property win coverage for named storms.
[1:35:51] Approved,cillary, insurance policies with child,
[1:35:54] crumb, and forester, and travelers,
[1:35:56] statutory, accidental death, and dismemberment,
[1:35:59] pollution liability storage tank,
[1:36:01] fiduciary liability.
[1:36:03] Is that part of your motion?
[1:36:05] Yes, it is.
[1:36:06] Do we have a second?
[1:36:07] Second, any discussion? All in favor. Item B is a motion to approve a recommendation for
[1:36:18] a motion to approve employee benefit providers and associated plans for fiscal 202627. Would
[1:36:28] you present that place, Mr. Presence?
[1:36:30] Thank you very much. So as we reported back in July, Bob had mentioned that we were working
[1:36:36] with the gearing group on health insurance renewals for the coming year.
[1:36:41] We were trying to keep it at a 5% max, which we were able to do that for the health insurance portion.
[1:36:46] The total change that we're looking at is a 5.5% increase.
[1:36:51] That includes a change in the dental plan of about $700,000, $700,000 for the year.
[1:36:57] In addition to that, in the middle of the memo, staff recommends increasing the benefit in kind
[1:37:04] dollars at each employee receives from $152 and $8 to $170.
[1:37:10] This amount has been the same for the past 15 years.
[1:37:13] And basically what this does is it's an amount that helps the employee pay for their premiums
[1:37:18] that they have to contribute to.
[1:37:20] So that was something that staff added in.
[1:37:22] So that's why that change goes up from 5% to 5.5.
[1:37:26] But again, all of the chain is allowed to about $124,000.
[1:37:30] Increase. SMRU covers about 40% of all the costs in the town covers the other 60, basically split
[1:37:37] of the employees. So the recommendation is there and happy to answer any questions.
[1:37:42] Any questions for Ms. Anske? Have a motion to approve the employee benefit providers and
[1:37:49] associated plans? Floor to blue, medical dental vision, the standard, short and long term disability
[1:37:56] basic life AD&D, voluntary supplemental life, and new directions,
[1:38:01] BAP and the benefit and kind contribution increase.
[1:38:07] Shall I give it a so moved or go ahead?
[1:38:10] Or do you want me to try and re-gurgitate all that?
[1:38:12] No move, so moved.
[1:38:14] You would just be re-gurgitated by me.
[1:38:15] I would be speaking in tongues, yes.
[1:38:18] Thank you.
[1:38:19] All in favor?
[1:38:19] Any further discussion?
[1:38:22] All in favor?
[1:38:23] five, five, a post, passes, item C.
[1:38:29] Thank you.
[1:38:30] Real quick, on B, I did want to mention that the town is offering a second insurance policy,
[1:38:37] the employee would basically cover all the cost of the buy-up plan, but it was just another option for the employee.
[1:38:42] If they wanted to have a little richer plan, they would have to pay for it.
[1:38:46] So again, it doesn't change the cost of the town, but I do want to mention that as an option.
[1:38:50] All right, item C is from monthly financial report.
[1:39:00] So thank you very much.
[1:39:03] So this is the interim financial reports for August of 26.
[1:39:06] Again, it's kind of the monthly summary of our budget to
[1:39:14] We're at about 104% on the revenue side, about 82% on the expenditure side with a target of 92%.
[1:39:22] So again, as we know, we collect our revenues early in our expenditures kind of, you know, pretty consistent throughout the year.
[1:39:29] Nothing, nothing interesting to report other than what I usually state, which is building permits,
[1:39:35] are up this time of year, had about 151% and miscellaneous revenue is up because of interesting
[1:39:42] come.
[1:39:43] On the expenditure side, everything is trending about where we expected and again, with everything
[1:39:48] known, especially the collective bargaining agreement that I mentioned each time, the PD
[1:39:53] run about 87%, but again, with the 92% target, everything is in line, you can see the total
[1:39:58] expenditures at 82%.
[1:40:01] cash balances where we anticipate them to be and reserves are stable during the year because we don't change those until the end of the year.
[1:40:10] So I have to answer any questions again.
[1:40:11] That's just our monthly report on the financials.
[1:40:15] Any questions on the report?
[1:40:19] All right.
[1:40:20] Item D is request a motion to approve resolution number 954,
[1:40:27] before, amending the general thund budget?
[1:40:35] We have discussed this over the past few months.
[1:40:40] Again, these are the final, hopefully this is the final and only amendment.
[1:40:44] Technically the town could do another amendment before 60 days of the end of the year.
[1:40:49] So we technically have to about the end of November to do that.
[1:40:52] We're comfortable with where we are today.
[1:40:55] I do believe that this memo here where I'm circling up here.
[1:40:58] I believe this may be different on your hand out unless I got out earlier.
[1:41:02] It was just a change in the credit side from interesting to come to 75,000 to unassigned
[1:41:07] fund balance of 15,000.
[1:41:10] But again, these are things that we've talked about during the year, legal fees, lawsuit
[1:41:15] expenses, P5 group external relations lobbying that we did that contract during the middle
[1:41:21] of the year.
[1:41:22] Some unfortunate generator repairs that we had to do, the schoolhouse septic tank, a couple
[1:41:31] AC units, again, just as a matter of course of business throughout the year, we do have
[1:41:36] some changes, so the amendment is for $854,900, this is the resolution here, and then on
[1:41:43] the revenue side you can see $200,000 coming from interest income $654,900 from general reserves, and
[1:41:51] then you can see how it's split out through the expenditures.
[1:41:54] And again, it affects both sides of the budget,
[1:41:57] the revenue and expenditures side,
[1:41:58] and it increases the budget by $854,900.
[1:42:03] Do we have a motion to approve resolution number 954,
[1:42:07] mending the general fund budget?
[1:42:10] It is fiscal year 2526.
[1:42:12] Bill moved.
[1:42:13] Do we have a second?
[1:42:15] Any further discussion?
[1:42:17] Any questions?
[1:42:18] Any comments?
[1:42:19] All in favor?
[1:42:22] Opposed,
[1:42:26] the tentative, item E tentative, annual budget.
[1:42:34] Thank you again, Mayor, commissioners.
[1:42:35] So this is our budget.
[1:42:38] We obviously reviewed this back in July.
[1:42:41] The proposed budget.
[1:42:42] There are a few minor changes.
[1:42:44] Nothing of any grants significance.
[1:42:46] Obviously, we approve the millage rates.
[1:42:48] So the tentative, the proposed intent of milled rates at the July meeting at 2.8259
[1:42:55] mills for the general fund, which is the same milled rate that we currently have, it does
[1:43:00] reflect a 9.89% increase over the rollback rate, which is what we had discussed back in July.
[1:43:08] For the beach district, 0.959, 3 mills, again, the same milled rate that we currently have
[1:43:15] and that represents a 9.91% increase over the rollback rate.
[1:43:20] The electric underground debt will be going from a 0.210.21 millage rate to a 0.11880.
[1:43:32] And that's about a 10.47% increase.
[1:43:36] But I'm sorry, less decrease because the values went up.
[1:43:41] Again, we have discussed the renewals here.
[1:43:43] This was part of what we had talked about in July that we needed to approve these room renewals,
[1:43:48] which we just did.
[1:43:49] Talks about some of the other operating costs, professional services IT and repair maintenance
[1:43:54] costs, which are affecting the proposed budget for 2627.
[1:43:58] On the payroll side, we're looking at just above a 5% increase, which is what we had talked
[1:44:05] about, excuse me, back in July, with that 3.4% cola increase, and then the balance being
[1:44:12] merit increases. Benefits are looking at a point, I'm sorry, 10.4% increase and that's mainly driven by the public safety department's approval of the collective bargaining agreement from last year, which was approved late.
[1:44:25] So again, those numbers weren't in the budget, so they reflect now in this current year's budget.
[1:44:29] Operating expenses at 4.58% increase, again mainly on attorney fees, IT, building vehicle maintenance, consulting engineer, for roads, John's going to do a large road assessment at this coming year.
[1:44:45] The ALS contract, which you all with the commission just approved, and then there's some reductions from the comprehensive plan, because we're doing that now, and then the resiliency consulting, which we had completed this year as well.
[1:44:56] on the capital side of 48% in-
[1:45:00] Crease, proposed major projects include some increases or improvements to the FICA-SLA, and making sure
[1:45:07] that that is got a solid plan going forward. Public safety radios, road improvements, again,
[1:45:13] as I mentioned, and then building improvements in an assessment over the public safety department,
[1:45:18] to see if they're going to construct a new building. And again, that'll come before the commission
[1:45:22] before that gets expanded. New vehicles, and then some department wide expenditures. For the beach district,
[1:45:28] Again, a $4.3 million budget, about 11% increase overall, and no project main projects,
[1:45:36] this coming year, but there are the standard site surveying, turtle, and short bird monitoring,
[1:45:41] things like that.
[1:45:42] I guess the biggest thing really is the technical for the sand deposit that they're researching
[1:45:53] now.
[1:45:54] That'll be part of this next year's budget.
[1:45:56] Electric Underground, we only have a couple more years left, and 27 and 28, those will be paid off by electric fund debt for the next years about $812,000.
[1:46:08] And then we have conservative, the conservation fund, beautification fund, and Christmas fund that we also fund as well.
[1:46:16] Our first public hearing is obviously tonight at 501, where we approve the tentative,
[1:46:21] I've learned village tax rate in the annual budgets.
[1:46:25] Happy to answer any questions about the budget itself.
[1:46:29] Again, kind of went through the highlights there.
[1:46:32] We went through it pretty well, back in July,
[1:46:35] so happy to answer any questions.
[1:46:39] Well, I'm still looking for the elevator speech
[1:46:42] where a resident says, wait a minute,
[1:46:46] if all these values going up, why aren't we
[1:46:51] getting a dividend,
[1:46:54] and it is insufficient for me to say, well, because our expenses have gone
[1:47:00] up to, have they gone up commensurately or so. And I don't expect you to do it. Now if you
[1:47:08] could just have that right before me this evening, because I've had that question several
[1:47:14] times over the summer and I don't feel I'm normally mad points out to areas I mean we you
[1:47:23] know we have basic inflation issues and then we have the annual insurance rate problems which
[1:47:30] everybody's I mean we're we are you know the tides going up and all the boats going up
[1:47:34] at base everything costs more I mean we we spent so much this year on just generator expenses
[1:47:40] trying to keep all of our generators up, you know, he or he just even on the island, not, I mean,
[1:47:45] I mean, talk about SMRU, but nothing, nothing is inexpensive, well, in the probably,
[1:47:51] in the mechanicals, which we're going to have to fix in this building at some point, is a further
[1:47:55] down the pipe you kick at the higher, the expenses.
[1:47:59] So the other thing, if I could imagine, the other piece of this mayor is that, well, would the potential
[1:48:07] tax reform, and the unknown with respect to federal assistance dollars moving forward on beach
[1:48:13] nourishment, it's prudent to put money into reserve, given those unknowns.
[1:48:20] Well, and I think that is a very reasonable answer.
[1:48:25] So, we budgeted over $400,000 in reserves for the coming year and the contingency, so that's
[1:48:31] a part of that.
[1:48:32] That was a good decision.
[1:48:33] I don't see any outrageous spending increases.
[1:48:37] The only, the biggest increase was in the public safety department and that is because
[1:48:42] of the contract, otherwise, everything else is less than 5 percent, which is a call of one.
[1:48:50] So we're doing a good job with this.
[1:48:53] Yeah, you can see right here on the screen itself, I mean, payroll itself, 5.04 percent, again,
[1:49:02] on the public side, on the benefit side,
[1:49:04] that biggest one there at public safety,
[1:49:07] that was coming from last year,
[1:49:09] that was a need, I mean, we needed
[1:49:12] to do something for public safety, and we did.
[1:49:14] So that's there.
[1:49:16] Operating at 4.68% or 580, and then capital,
[1:49:20] capital, or once every couple of your items,
[1:49:25] so next year, maybe we're down 48% from this year.
[1:49:28] But we've got some high ticket items on it.
[1:49:30] We've got $125,000 generator, you know, John's got some road projects in there, public safety
[1:49:36] has new radios that are coming on because the county's changing over radios, we're actually
[1:49:41] going to be on two CAD systems because county's changing CAD, so we have to be on the new one
[1:49:44] and the old one.
[1:49:46] So again, but those are kind of once every fiber, you know, six or eight year items, generally
[1:49:50] speaking.
[1:49:53] So, there's a contingency line right there, the $460,000 contingency up 10%, so again,
[1:49:59] helping to balance the budget. So, up to 1.2 million, 460,000 of it is in contingency of the change.
[1:50:10] Any questions or comments?
[1:50:16] I'm ski.
[1:50:17] Yeah, there's really no recommended motion or anything. At this point, we've approved all the
[1:50:23] insurances that we needed to. Everything else is in line and then we'll have the
[1:50:28] public area tonight at 501.
[1:50:33] What's that?
[1:50:36] All right.
[1:50:37] On to item 7, ordinance number 422.
[1:50:43] A second reading of the ordinance pertaining to requiring house to house solic...
[1:50:51] License from the town.
[1:50:53] Correct.
[1:50:54] That's correct, Mister.
[1:50:56] I'll read it.
[1:50:57] Another record.
[1:50:57] Ordnance number 422.
[1:51:00] And ordinance of the town of Jupiter Island, Florida.
[1:51:02] a mending chapter six article four solicitors of the code of ordinances of the Town of
[1:51:09] Jubilee, Ireland, to require that applicants for a Town solicitor permit, first obtained
[1:51:13] a valid home solicitation sale permit from the clerk of the Circuit Court for Martin County,
[1:51:19] as required by Section 501.022 Florida Statutes, where applicable providing for conformant amendments
[1:51:26] to sections 6-62, 6-63, and 6-67, providing for quantification, providing for conflicts,
[1:51:36] providing for severability and providing for an effective date.
[1:51:41] So, this is the second reading.
[1:51:43] What this LDR does is requires home solicitation sellers to obtain the permit from the county
[1:51:50] clerk.
[1:51:51] With finger printing in the background check, our ordinance never asked for proof of that permit.
[1:51:56] Now, it does.
[1:51:57] I worked with Chief Ewing on drafting this, and it makes four different changes to section 6.
[1:52:04] Our six dash is 62.
[1:52:06] It conditions the town permit on a valid county permit.
[1:52:10] Six dash 63 requires the paperwork, and the new six dash 63.1.
[1:52:15] one can find the towns rolled to verifying the county permit and 67 as county permit
[1:52:22] expiration or revocation as grounds for revoking the permit.
[1:52:26] So we are looking for a motion to approve.
[1:52:35] We're doing all this to get the solicitors there permit. What are the residents know about. All of a sudden, somebody is going to come to their door. Are they informed that this is possible? What do we do here to communicate that?
[1:52:58] So I've already sent out a notice, and I intend to send out another one as a season approaches for the residents who are out of town.
[1:53:07] We've implemented the registration process for the residents to request to be excluded from solicitors.
[1:53:14] That process has already been running.
[1:53:17] Probably had the highest response from residents than anything I've ever put out.
[1:53:23] We've got close to 40 or 50 residents that have already signed up to not have one.
[1:53:27] How did you do it?
[1:53:28] I don't remember.
[1:53:29] On our website, that was sent out as well, and I'm going to have, I'm going to ask the
[1:53:34] residents' association to also include that in their newsletter.
[1:53:38] But I'll send out a reminder, and I can circle back to you afterwards to give you
[1:53:43] direction.
[1:53:44] But it's on our website.
[1:53:45] It's a simple registration process on the website.
[1:53:48] It's on our website.
[1:53:50] The town website.
[1:53:51] Yes, ma'am.
[1:53:51] There's nothing individually sent to every resident.
[1:53:53] I have sent out a public notice to all the residents through email, but I will do that again.
[1:54:00] Not individually, just a public notice by
[1:54:03] Anybody who's registered to receive email, so it residents.
[1:54:11] All right, do we have a motion?
[1:54:13] Oh, to.
[1:54:15] Red it.
[1:54:16] So we're ready to approve it?
[1:54:18] Yes.
[1:54:19] All in favor?
[1:54:20] Aye.
[1:54:21] Opposed?
[1:54:27] The ordinance passes, number eight, ordinance 423,
[1:54:39] moves, this is the residential,
[1:54:42] I mean, the recreation district.
[1:54:46] All right.
[1:54:46] The ordinance of the town commission of the town of Jupiter Island,
[1:54:49] Martin County, Florida.
[1:54:50] Modifying appendix A of the town's code of ordinances,
[1:54:53] comprising the town's land development regulations,
[1:54:55] providing for the text amendment of Article 1 Division 3, Section 3.03 of the Land Development
[1:55:00] Regulations regarding the powers and duties of the town commission to provide for
[1:55:05] town commission review of development and the Recreation Club District, our CD, providing
[1:55:10] for the repeal of ordinances and conflict, providing for several ability, providing for
[1:55:14] codification, providing for and effective date.
[1:55:17] As you noted, Madam Mayor, this was before you in July, it passed on the first reading, this
[1:55:24] this simply brings RCD applications within the Commission's jurisdiction as the
[1:55:33] concerted.
[1:55:33] This clarifies an ambiguity that existed.
[1:55:36] Correct.
[1:55:36] The Commission already has jurisdiction over the public land district related applications
[1:55:41] and any conservation related applications for CPD properties.
[1:55:49] This simply clarifies that RCD is now within your jurisdiction.
[1:55:54] We need a reading of the ordinance.
[1:55:59] I've already read it, so you're good to go.
[1:56:01] I'll do it again.
[1:56:03] I'll do it again.
[1:56:04] I'll do it again if you mind.
[1:56:04] Sorry about that.
[1:56:06] All right.
[1:56:06] I do we have a motion to approve ordinance number 43.
[1:56:11] It's almost.
[1:56:12] Okay.
[1:56:13] All in favor?
[1:56:14] I post.
[1:56:19] So we find ourselves on item nine.
[1:56:23] 9.
[1:56:26] I'll manage your evaluation.
[1:56:33] You have updates or with the hard material passed out on the dice, and so
[1:56:48] this is informational, correct?
[1:56:54] Yes.
[1:56:57] We have the foot
[1:57:04] from, uh,
[1:57:07] we have all commissioners. Yes.
[1:57:11] So, do.
[1:57:13] I see a value as you never ever seen here.
[1:57:16] And it's, and it's...
[1:57:18] Formants, parents.
[1:57:21] And what?
[1:57:34] Please use your microphone.
[1:57:36] Everybody has, has just me.
[1:57:40] The scores here as excellent, there's only one above average, everything else as excellent.
[1:57:47] I mean, what else can you do?
[1:57:49] You are a tremendous town manager.
[1:57:52] I'm more lucky to have you.
[1:57:53] Great.
[1:57:55] I pointed out in my evaluation, which was tardy, and I apologize for that,
[1:58:05] but there's something
[1:58:06] But being asked to evaluate someone who's as good as our town manager just seems to make work.
[1:58:18] But what I pointed out is what I've long known and learned the hard way.
[1:58:24] And that is that the most important thing
[1:58:30] you look for in a town manager is someone you can trust.
[1:58:34] because we can't talk to each other, and he can talk to each and every one of us.
[1:58:40] And the opportunity for mischief is
[1:58:46] frightening, and we are so lucky that we have someone
[1:58:51] that we can trust completely.
[1:58:53] I'd like to just add to this evaluation, isn't just about our town manager.
[1:59:00] And we put this evaluation system together.
[1:59:02] It goes all the way down through all of the departments.
[1:59:05] And it comes back up in their excellent, too, and then it's simply why I'd like to, I'd like to recommend that we give him the annual bonus of 15% of his salary.
[1:59:23] And that's my recommendation.
[1:59:26] Mr.
[1:59:30] Pazansky, is that comp?
[1:59:36] I mean...
[1:59:38] He stepped out.
[1:59:40] Oh, yeah, we did 10% last year.
[1:59:44] And the performance has gone,
[1:59:46] and eventually I think a 15% bonus is adequate.
[1:59:53] I'd like to do 20, but...
[1:59:55] You guys have jumped all over me.
[1:59:56] Is that a motion?
[1:59:57] That's a motion.
[1:59:58] second up.
[2:00:00] Further discussion? All in favour? Aye. Opposed?
[2:00:08] I'd just like to point out, being as it is, budget time and all the rest, that there are
[2:00:18] some decisions we make, which I'm particularly happy about, and this is one, because Bob
[2:00:25] value at it is so whatever this bonus is is largely in consequential compared to the benefit
[2:00:33] we get from having you even you look at I mean if we could spend a little time putting a cash
[2:00:40] number to that interlocal agreement and it's a big number so if anything where we've been
[2:00:49] misperhaps and acknowledging your contributions in a meaningful way like this.
[2:00:56] So I think that would be more than 20%.
[2:01:00] That wouldn't be bothering me at all.
[2:01:02] Do we have a consensus, do we have a consensus to do it at 20%, just on that?
[2:01:08] Is that a vote?
[2:01:09] Yeah, can we amend, can I, can I make a motion to amend to 20% bonus?
[2:01:18] Yes.
[2:01:20] Thank you.
[2:01:21] Further discussion?
[2:01:23] All in favor?
[2:01:24] Hi.
[2:01:25] And if anybody, if there were ever to be pushed back, it could be very easy for us to demonstrate the value added.
[2:01:32] I'll go through a hundred.
[2:01:33] Well, I'm just saying it's very easy to, I mean, this is one of these things that is, it's not something I'm perfectly happy to stand behind this all day long.
[2:01:41] Well, thank all of you, and I just would point out that the obvious, which is it's a team effort,
[2:01:47] and I've got an incredible group of department directors that make me look good every day.
[2:01:53] So, it is the team, but thank you all.
[2:01:56] What plus, if you hiring Matt to get SMR, you turned around, would be worth a lot of time.
[2:02:03] I mean, they suddenly believe it, well, you've done with the people, we're lucky.
[2:02:07] The turnaround specialist.
[2:02:11] All right.
[2:02:14] Let us move along then to
[2:02:19] Development Review Board
[2:02:21] Biggen C.
[2:02:26] The Vice Chair position has not been filled
[2:02:28] needed for
[2:02:31] standing in
[2:02:33] Should the chairman be unavailable
[2:02:36] and
[2:02:40] The development review board is asking or recommending Jennifer Madden for the Vice Chair position and for a motion to that effect.
[2:02:53] I do. I worked with her. I'll make the motion. She's very good at what she does and would be very a great asset to Judy and her.
[2:03:02] The rest of the committee have something written about it before we have to review this.
[2:03:08] Maria, you recommend her. I did. So the motion is made. Do we have a second?
[2:03:13] Thank you. For their discussion. All in favor? Aye.
[2:03:20] Opposed? And could we see that Commissioner Warner gets a copy of the resume that we have on five?
[2:03:28] Yes.
[2:03:33] Number 11.
[2:03:35] Good.
[2:03:38] Comprehensive plan review.
[2:03:40] We've allowed it 40 minutes for this.
[2:03:43] I'm just about to take us to our shaved meeting, but I don't.
[2:03:51] I don't know that we need 45 minutes.
[2:03:54] But let's get underway.
[2:03:57] Yes.
[2:03:57] Good morning again, Mayor commissioners.
[2:03:59] You have two memos.
[2:04:01] One of those prepared by staff, the other by Council Teal, regarding the comprehensive plan.
[2:04:06] And the most recent action in July was the Commission Direction to have the staff update the last four elements of the plan based on the Commission comments, which has been done.
[2:04:17] You've been provided with an updated copy of the comp plan goals of objectives and policies.
[2:04:24] What has happened further is that staff went through this one more time.
[2:04:27] We did have a few highlights and recommendations in there for change, additionally Council Teal providing a separate memo has outlined some things he has proposed recommended to be put into the plan.
[2:04:40] The one that I would suggest that we do discuss is within the town profile, this is to do with population projection.
[2:04:49] Currently, the commission had directed the use of the Florida DOT TAS projection for population.
[2:04:57] This was a number that was higher than what was in the Shimberg and what Kimley Horn had originally proposed.
[2:05:03] Kimley Horn came back with the Florida TAS projection.
[2:05:06] That is a number that is reliant upon a GIS application, so it looks at data sets and then calls down into it.
[2:05:14] So long story short, this wouldn't call a customized data set.
[2:05:19] It is one that the state could question the town staff recommendation is to adopt instead
[2:05:25] what the University of Florida is putting out.
[2:05:27] It is a lower number.
[2:05:29] However, that being said, we're looking at a seasonal population.
[2:05:32] So when we discuss level of service, we're trying to accommodate up to the 3000 number.
[2:05:38] So that's something, obviously, like a further direction from the commission on before
[2:05:43] advance that. How many doors are there on the island? How many front doors? Oh, if we're just talking primary residents,
[2:05:51] 552 homes, 550, yeah, not primer all residents homes. I don't know that that includes say guest houses,
[2:06:01] success restrictions, so just primary homes, not that they're not okay.
[2:06:07] Correct.
[2:06:07] 552.
[2:06:18] So you would like us to adopt the beaver projection.
[2:06:25] Yes, to have the comp plan and also the data analysis, all the backup information that
[2:06:30] looks at population projection.
[2:06:32] And in this case, the number would be 868 projected through 2045.
[2:06:39] Footnote here is that the state may wish for this number to be further updated through 2047 as you're planning horizons are supposed to be 10 and 20 years
[2:06:48] So we would obviously need to get gather from University Florida and update on that number
[2:06:54] But that being proposed and put in here is a readily available accessible accepted source from the state. How far are you going out?
[2:07:03] You need to you're planning horizons to be at 10 years and 20 years
[2:07:05] We're going to redo this comprehensive plan in seven years.
[2:07:10] Yes, every seven years.
[2:07:11] These should be ready.
[2:07:12] Okay, so that's when you're going to make the change.
[2:07:14] We're at that stage now where the year is what triggers us needing to look at 10 years from the data of adoption and 20 years.
[2:07:22] So again, when this process was started back in 2024 and 2025,
[2:07:27] that what we have available are the 2020.
[2:07:30] Five projections, I go to 2045. I don't mean to complicate it, but it's a footnote here. I think accepting that methodology and using beavers numbers in the plan submitted to the state is the way to go.
[2:07:43] And then if we get the comment, we can update the number.
[2:07:49] Do we need a motion to recommend the adoption of-
[2:07:53] No, I don't believe we need a specific in this Kyle.
[2:07:57] If you disagree there, it's a recommendation if you'd want to accept the motion in the back end is to accept all the changes as proposed by staff and council,
[2:08:05] and then direct us to bring forward the document later.
[2:08:08] So if we want to get through any other-
[2:08:10] As far as staff comments are very straightforward,
[2:08:14] there are some other things in here that we're highlighted that are more just corrections as far as references
[2:08:19] to Statute, most of these were caught by Council Teal here and really unless there's any other specific
[2:08:27] questions on what's in the staff memo, I would hand this over to Florida Kyle to kind of
[2:08:32] hit the highlights on what he did find within his review and what his recommendations are.
[2:08:36] Hi, I went through this thing. I mean, I just have one question on 1816 talking about the quality,
[2:08:42] the quantity of water provided to the level of service.
[2:08:49] 600 gallons capital per day.
[2:08:53] The same question.
[2:08:54] The only thing for the people, how many people, right?
[2:08:58] The point is that you get this information from Matt.
[2:09:03] Yes, Matt and Matt Hammond did review this information.
[2:09:06] And 600 gallons is definitely a number that fits what the island need would be.
[2:09:12] It is actually when we change it from 680 that was in there.
[2:09:17] The current comp plan actually has two different sets of numbers that has an inconsistency
[2:09:22] within it later on in the infrastructure element.
[2:09:24] It has 600.
[2:09:26] We're recommending to stay with 600, which is a number that men have and recommends
[2:09:29] is applicable or suitable for the utility for us.
[2:09:32] That was my concern, that he is involved with.
[2:09:38] Right.
[2:09:40] Well, as Mr. Duchic noted, most of my changes were just bringing some of the language into
[2:09:47] conformity with new or existing state statutes.
[2:09:51] There were some antiquated references to departments no longer in existence.
[2:09:55] I think remnants from the Kimlihorn language, and I think overall it's in great shape.
[2:10:01] and I commend Mr. Duchick for his work on this.
[2:10:06] Okay, can you go to page 35?
[2:10:10] The second one down.
[2:10:13] 801-09-418.9.1.
[2:10:20] Is that still relevant?
[2:10:23] No, we have an agreement with Martin County.
[2:10:27] What is the just of it?
[2:10:28] Right away.
[2:10:38] You know what I'm saying, Bob?
[2:10:41] Well, that discussion with the county level was with respect to easements and rights
[2:10:47] of ways that precipitated North Beach Road.
[2:10:51] And there was a verbal agreement that they would endeavor to release any authority over any rights
[2:11:00] of ways on the island. It's not yet been formalized, but I expect it will be.
[2:11:05] How do we address it in this?
[2:11:13] Specific two things that are not formal roads today, which is what we're talking about.
[2:11:19] Right. I think we need to consider that. I'm not sure that it makes it into here.
[2:11:25] What can we horn? And this is the majority of the changes within here. We're just a re-wording
[2:11:32] to retain that there's a joint planning agreement that would address rights of way, et cetera.
[2:11:37] for what they're doing for themselves and doing something.
[2:11:40] I just want to make sure we're not doing something that we already done.
[2:11:45] I can clarify my reading of this policy only concerns the rights of way that are held
[2:11:52] by the county and there's no issue.
[2:11:55] There's no dispute as to who hold it in this case would be the county for those specific
[2:12:00] rights of way.
[2:12:01] Right. And the agreement that Mr. Garlow referenced concerns the
[2:12:07] Ancillary rights of the way that extended from North Beach Road, that are not currently
[2:12:12] maintained and being used.
[2:12:14] Well, I mean, the indication that I got from Martin County was that day are
[2:12:17] willing, and again, this is a management that they're willing to relinquish all
[2:12:23] authority over every right of way within a jurisdictional limits of the town.
[2:12:28] Yeah.
[2:12:29] Okay.
[2:12:32] That's good information.
[2:12:35] Yeah.
[2:12:35] Great information.
[2:12:37] It shouldn't be in here.
[2:12:38] Well, I don't think it needs to be in the comprehensive plan.
[2:12:41] No, that's my point.
[2:12:44] It's tying us in to having more meetings with them for the county.
[2:12:48] Yes.
[2:12:49] It's a work in progress.
[2:12:50] I mean, I expect it'll be formalized, but it has not yet been.
[2:12:58] All right.
[2:12:58] Any further questions, comments,
[2:13:05] so the staff is seeking our approval to update the comprehensive plan and schedule an LPA Transmiddler hearing in November.
[2:13:22] And preparation asks staff to develop an ordinance to transmit the comprehensive plan package to the state and reviewing agencies.
[2:13:36] So, that's our next step in the process.
[2:13:39] Do we have approval to do so?
[2:13:42] We don't need a motion, correct, Mr. Teo?
[2:13:45] I think a motion would be advisable.
[2:13:48] Do we have a motion to approve the updates to the comprehensive plan based on recommendations
[2:13:59] and to request scheduling of the LPA transmittal hearing in November and approve the
[2:14:08] supporting documents and prepare an ordinance to transmit?
[2:14:14] we have such a motion. Yes. All right, Mr. Tateo has made the motion. Do we have a second?
[2:14:22] Second. All in favor? Any well first? Any further discussion? All in favor?
[2:14:29] Aye. Post?
[2:14:33] This is exactly what we need to thank you, Mayor.
[2:14:38] It's been a journey,
[2:14:42] so now
[2:14:47] we have anxious to approve approved development orders.
[2:14:55] This is the after-the-fact issue we've been struggling with.
[2:15:05] Thank you, Mayor. This is the unpermitted work ordinance and the form that you directed in the July meeting.
[2:15:12] It's not yet at first reading that you need direction on some points, and I want to propose a change.
[2:15:19] But going back to the July meeting, the message was loud and clear, zero tolerance to make
[2:15:25] this as tight as possible to prevent folks from doing unpermitted work, which would have
[2:15:32] to be undone, torn up, torn down, whatever, and whatever the fix would be.
[2:15:39] So this draft reflects that, and it's, I think, the aggressive, and there's maybe one
[2:15:45] section, or I think there is one section that is perhaps overly aggressive.
[2:15:51] So it did also capture a due process, component, and the form of an appeal, the appeal
[2:15:59] would be within the jurisdiction of this board, the Commission, sitting quasi-juditially.
[2:16:05] You may affirm reverse on a finding that the work is not permitted or modify the corrective
[2:16:11] action or schedule for the subject construction, looking back over this, I did want to propose
[2:16:18] a change to subsection B, a section 1.04. You'll see how it reads currently. I recommend
[2:16:28] a tweak that wouldn't dull the teeth and this LDR, it would simply remove the focus on
[2:16:34] the building official or staff and put the spotlight squarely on the applicant who did the
[2:16:39] committed work, and what I'm proposing is, and it would also make it more concise, which is
[2:16:45] what I'm endeavoring to do with RLDRs whenever I can.
[2:16:50] It would read, quote, no after the fact approval, a new application for future development,
[2:16:57] maybe filed, if it does not rely on unprimited work, and or the unprimited work has first been
[2:17:04] removed. This section does not apply to plan revisions that may be administratively approved
[2:17:10] before commencement of the applicant's work. So it removes the first sentence which, as I
[2:17:19] stated before, would put the oneness in the spotlight on the building official or town staff,
[2:17:26] instead puts the focus on the action of the applicant who did the unpermitted work.
[2:17:34] I had two comments or two issues that I would like us to consider, and that is on the certificate of occupancy.
[2:17:52] There's a strange, the way this is written, I read it to say that if your landscaping doesn't comply,
[2:18:03] But your house does. You can move in. And I don't think that's what we want. So I think there needs to be clarification there.
[2:18:15] It doesn't that fall near that whole issue of substantial compliance and all that. I mean, I just want to make sure that Kyle is good with that before we go down that road.
[2:18:25] So I know that in discussions with Miss Hardy, you know, on the Florida building code, there are concerns about, you know, with holding a CO based on something related to landscaping.
[2:18:37] If it's involved, if it involves the improvements that are part of the permit, that's fair game.
[2:18:43] I will take a closer look at that and confer with our building director and see if there's some way to do that.
[2:18:52] or if the Florida Building Code is absolute and it's restriction.
[2:18:57] And I'm also wondering if we should consider
[2:19:01] notice to the affected neighbors
[2:19:05] of the impending issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
[2:19:15] And a notice to the neighbors that a private provider
[2:19:19] will be in charge, I think that would be helpful
[2:19:23] to the building department, too, for the neighbors to know.
[2:19:29] You're imposing, you know, new notice requirements.
[2:19:32] I don't see my gut reaction as I don't see an issue with it.
[2:19:36] I do need to check, there are new laws in the books concerning private providers.
[2:19:41] Want to make sure that we're acting in harmony with those.
[2:19:45] Take a look at.
[2:19:46] Do we, is there any, are there any implications of informing somebody about a
[2:19:52] sending a certificate of occupancy that would in any way create a restriction, you know,
[2:20:01] essentially, it's essentially like reopening the concept of an appeal, right, if you're,
[2:20:07] because what are you going to do if you're going to inform the neighbors that you're getting your C of O?
[2:20:11] That's essentially implicit that there is some form of appeal that could come from out that.
[2:20:17] And I'm just curious, you know, especially if it's somebody building a spec house, they're
[2:20:23] going to be trying to keep their profitability obviously as high as they can.
[2:20:29] So I'm always leary of, I don't want us to be a precedent setting case somewhere.
[2:20:35] I would like to get through our tenures here without Jupiter Island being involved in a precedent
[2:20:40] setting case.
[2:20:41] We had this conversation, like Katherine, about withholding the CO, you remember what you told me about that, Katherine, that it's, it's not something you can do lightly.
[2:20:56] I think that goes to substantial compliance, substantial completion, and that's a slippery slope.
[2:21:02] It's the state law dictates that CO cannot be held for site work, only for the building permit,
[2:21:09] what applies at the building permit, the physical structure itself.
[2:21:13] Can you define the site?
[2:21:14] You can't really hold back a CO for site work.
[2:21:18] You can cite it as a code violation, but not withhold a CO.
[2:21:23] So the CO certificate of occupancy does not look at anything other than the structures compliance to the building permit.
[2:21:34] Exactly.
[2:21:37] Which pretty much knocks a teeth out of our whole impact review process.
[2:21:43] Just for reference, when I was getting my CO for 17, it was withheld because of a buffer, a landscaping issue.
[2:21:53] That may be a bit of an inappropriate way.
[2:21:58] But now we know what it is.
[2:22:00] Right now.
[2:22:02] What you can do with the sea on what you can do.
[2:22:05] I'm sorry.
[2:22:07] But you just told us about the sea.
[2:22:09] What was the state law saying just for the structure?
[2:22:15] Can take this right?
[2:22:16] With all the sea out.
[2:22:18] You don't have to put in your driveway but you can move in.
[2:22:21] Yes.
[2:22:22] You can cite it for a code violation, but you can't stop the seal from being issued.
[2:22:28] And a code violation can't imp-
[2:22:30] Ediability of the owner to utilize the structure.
[2:22:34] No. Even if all the landscaping, hard-scaping is incomplete.
[2:22:42] Even if hard-scaping, landscaping
[2:22:44] is incomplete. They're still eligible to get their CL. The CO on the structure, yes. But if
[2:22:52] it doesn't meet the specifications of what the LDR specified in the development order,
[2:22:58] Then we can't issue a code compliance and you move in with a yes, code compliance violation.
[2:23:11] It's a separate way.
[2:23:13] It presents.
[2:23:13] Yeah.
[2:23:14] We look in the tightening this up.
[2:23:17] Well, but these are state regulations.
[2:23:18] It just, I mean, on its face, it seems to pretty much pull the rug out from under
[2:23:23] our whole impact review process really.
[2:23:26] That's why I asked her to say it.
[2:23:28] I think that's important to note what Ms. Harden said that this doesn't preclude you in any way from pursuing the enforcement measures, which I know.
[2:23:37] But it has not done.
[2:23:39] But enforcement measures today, or enforcement measures, can in any way prevent the accused as it were from having the utilization of the property?
[2:23:51] I mean, I'd like to relook at the enforcement because I think it's always been so weak and our
[2:23:58] penalties are laughably small and I'm wondering if rather than a building department to do it,
[2:24:05] I'd rather ask you to do it.
[2:24:07] Or find somebody who you feel comfortable because we need a fresh look at it.
[2:24:11] We've discussed this with Katherine.
[2:24:13] We know her feelings on it.
[2:24:15] I'd like to take a fresh look at enforcement and penalties and see if we can
[2:24:23] I think we understand the issue, Colin, you and I can deal with this.
[2:24:29] I mean, the question and the point to mayor raises is, is you go to a final inspection
[2:24:34] for a certificate of occupancy and there's no driveway and no landscaping, are they allowed
[2:24:38] to unlock the front door and move in?
[2:24:41] Certainly sounds like question.
[2:24:42] I would even suggest that they can, once they have the CO, they can list it on the MLS.
[2:24:48] Yes, what they want.
[2:24:49] Yeah, we'll look at this before and they've got the buyer lined up, which is what happened over here and put the pressure on.
[2:24:58] I'll take a very close look at those laws and make sure that we have it buttoned up.
[2:25:02] I think that some of the severe deficiencies with the LDRs, the cover code enforcement currently,
[2:25:11] They impose too many warnings.
[2:25:14] You've got, I think, a few different warnings that have to go out before you can actually
[2:25:18] cite someone.
[2:25:19] The daily accrual finds is going to be capped by state statute, but we can ensure that those
[2:25:24] are at the maximum allowable amount.
[2:25:27] And of course, it has to observe all the due process requirements, but we can take a look at those
[2:25:32] FLDRs as well.
[2:25:33] As far as this one's concerned, do you think that we're close enough to, with these
[2:25:39] changes that we've discussed with this contingency that, you know, we will nail down the details on the state law concerning the CO, released the CO, or we close enough to bring it on the first reading for next month's agenda, or should we discuss it again?
[2:25:56] Well, for me, as long as you add more notice provisions, and I don't share the concern that, you know, I could call every day, call, and say, this is a public record to request or issuing a CEO yesterday or today or tomorrow, whatever, it's all public records, so.
[2:26:17] The notice, and so I'm clear, the notice would go to immediate neighbors and the mail or how would it.
[2:26:24] I'm curious though to what end, because to me, a notice there should be a point in that, what is that?
[2:26:32] Other than to be purely informative, which is fine.
[2:26:37] I have no issue with just being informative, but I get a notice.
[2:26:41] My neighbor is getting a CFO. I don't have the right of appeal.
[2:26:45] That ship is long sent sailed.
[2:26:51] What's the endgame?
[2:26:52] We can do the CFO or not.
[2:26:53] Yeah, so we can talk better all day long.
[2:26:56] Yeah, no, no, that's what I'm, but I, I think you want to not be prejudicial, because that, again, that's not the direction the state wants to go, so we just want to be careful about those.
[2:27:06] Yeah, the question is whether that additional notice would be more restrictive or burdensome prejudice within the meaning of SB 180.
[2:27:13] Exactly. Yeah.
[2:27:14] We can take a look at it.
[2:27:15] You know, it's another, if you're, if you were a member of the community who is intending to do the right thing, this, you know, none of this bothers you.
[2:27:23] If you are somebody who has an alternative agenda, you also presumably understand litigation well enough to utilize that and are looking for any excuse to get yourself off the hook of something, so that's why I think it's important that you look over this.
[2:27:40] So I don't think it would alter the course, it wouldn't alter the decision-making process
[2:27:46] where the building official would be putting folks on notice, right?
[2:27:50] That's what we're talking about.
[2:27:51] That's our argument.
[2:27:52] The question is, how is it for you?
[2:27:54] Well, it's an important question.
[2:27:57] I'll take a close look.
[2:27:58] All right.
[2:28:00] So, yes, I think the consensus is we're ready to have you come back with the ordinance.
[2:28:05] Okay.
[2:28:06] We need to make substantial revisions, we can always take it to the following meeting, but I think
[2:28:12] we're nearly there.
[2:28:14] Thank you.
[2:28:16] All right.
[2:28:18] We now have the town managers report.
[2:28:22] Make pull this off before we are, uh, shade meeting, I don't believe I had anything that
[2:28:29] had.
[2:28:30] Good.
[2:28:31] But I wasn't trying to suppress your report.
[2:28:35] Yeah.
[2:28:36] town attorney. Mary you might I think there was an item is an item 13 as well
[2:28:42] the appeals. Oh the appeal process. Excuse me, I'm sorry. No, you're all right.
[2:28:52] There you go. Is there anything? Well my notes. Ask you one question. I got fellow
[2:28:58] sleep when I got through page three. Is there any way you can do an overview?
[2:29:07] It's a little long-winded, and it serves as a nice set of, like some water.
[2:29:25] So it's an item that's been before the Commission, at least three times now.
[2:29:30] It would propose an amendment to Article 10, Division 8, and now it pairs with the unpermitted
[2:29:37] work ordinance.
[2:29:38] So the appeal would be initiated by filing that form, submitting the form within 30 days
[2:29:43] of rendition.
[2:29:45] As you directed the form and the fee alone, preserve the appeal, the draft includes an
[2:29:50] expressed substantial compliance standard requiring no citations to LDRs that rely on for
[2:29:55] appeal. They can simply attach. The appellant can just attach.
[2:30:00] The development order, or whatever the instrument is there appealing to their notice, and that would be sufficient.
[2:30:05] The hearing would be held in the early 21 days, in a later than 60 days after filing, which cheers the ambiguity that we discussed in the meeting schedule.
[2:30:14] It keeps the automatic stay in section 8.04, less the commission condition its continuation on a bond or other security with your discretion as to whether a bond would be required.
[2:30:25] So, the new section 8.06 requires the clerk notice the appellants, the applicants, and anyone who requested it, plus a website posting.
[2:30:36] I know that was an issue that was raised, a July's meeting, supplemental electronic notice, may go to public safety database.
[2:30:44] There's opt-in that I can work with Bill on, on, on, on, for affecting that process, but the electronic notice supplements the statutory notice obviously can't replace it.
[2:30:57] So the mailers would have to go out.
[2:30:59] This would be over and above that statutory requirement for notice.
[2:31:07] All right.
[2:31:08] So where would you like to go from here, Mr. Tail, you would like a request to prepare ordinance?
[2:31:17] I think it's ready to go. If you want, we can put it on a agenda for first reading,
[2:31:22] October meeting.
[2:31:25] But suit, everyone?
[2:31:27] Yes. All right.
[2:31:29] Now item 14, applicant, identification, discussion.
[2:31:36] Mr. Teo will talk
[2:31:42] about this one for us.
[2:31:43] But let me say that, since we last met,
[2:31:47] there was a request for a certificate of occupancy, and they asked the building department to sign a non-disclosure agreement,
[2:32:03] looking inside,
[2:32:09] or what they saw inside?
[2:32:11] Well, I don't know. All I know is there was a request for a non-disclosure agreement, and that was...
[2:32:18] Oh, no, we don't do that, but you know,
[2:32:25] you're long past the days.
[2:32:28] And I should say that was brought by the
[2:32:33] an attorney is the agent there,
[2:32:36] who regularly has clients who are LLCs.
[2:32:40] And if you want to hide yourself, you hire this woman.
[2:32:44] So, I don't like it.
[2:32:48] I don't think...
[2:32:50] I'll write it, and I'll
[2:32:56] share your distrust of lawyers of the search.
[2:33:02] So that was absolutely the right call, of course, by the building director, to some
[2:33:08] merely reject the NDA, which as a local government, we can't agree to.
[2:33:15] The item that you asked me to look into, Madam Mayor, we did find other examples of
[2:33:20] of owner affidavits that require, tell us
[2:33:23] through the natural person is of this LLC,
[2:33:25] that is bringing the application for consideration.
[2:33:29] That's something that we've been able to find.
[2:33:31] We haven't found a process that was in place
[2:33:35] or put in place after SB 180.
[2:33:38] So the question becomes, could this be something
[2:33:41] that a challenger, an objector, could argue,
[2:33:45] well, it's more restrictive and more burdensome
[2:33:48] to for me to have to identify myself as the applicant
[2:33:51] rather than my holding company or special purpose entities.
[2:33:56] So, that's an argument that we could and should expect.
[2:34:01] But is it one that I think will win in court?
[2:34:04] It's anyone's guess, a pretty good lawyer,
[2:34:06] I think I could defend the town in such a challenge,
[2:34:09] but we've got to consider those risks.
[2:34:12] Well, and Miami does it, so maybe they join with you.
[2:34:17] Our problem is the ownership of affidavit is essentially a transferable document.
[2:34:21] You can designate anybody who you want, who can have, who can change the designate.
[2:34:26] So I mean, it's, this is a paper tiger.
[2:34:28] This is not something that is going to get you what you want.
[2:34:33] Well, the right to privacy and the end of the day, in most issues in this country, trumps almost
[2:34:39] anything else.
[2:34:40] Unless you happen to be on a government database, like a sex offender database, where there's
[2:34:45] reporting requirement or what have you, and so that's really as far as, in my experience, so far
[2:34:52] as the only thing that I've seen that really is definitive, anything else. I mean, you
[2:34:59] can always, every, I've never seen a residential contract that doesn't have some transferability,
[2:35:05] somewhere along the line, because people always reserve that, whether it's for tax purposes
[2:35:10] or whatever.
[2:35:10] It's a property right, you can always convey your property and anyone who doesn't want to disclose who they are.
[2:35:17] Their identity through the process, if clever enough and takes the time and money to do it could tap the answer around the requirement.
[2:35:23] That's fantastic.
[2:35:24] I would just think it's much much to do about nothing if people really want to retain their,
[2:35:33] whatever privacy they'll do it.
[2:35:35] Well, I don't think there's no tell you about it.
[2:35:40] All right.
[2:35:41] So right now, some people use the LLC because they don't want
[2:35:46] their financial information public.
[2:35:50] And now we're saying we're going to take that away from you.
[2:35:55] And you're going to have to give us your name.
[2:36:00] OK, the question is, OK, what do we do with that name?
[2:36:03] Well, wait a minute, let me just finish because this is unintended consequences to this.
[2:36:11] Well, because then we say, no, you have to, you have to give us your name.
[2:36:15] Then you have this little thing called media, Palm Beach Post,
[2:36:22] and what they've done to us before was something less than that.
[2:36:26] They're going to say, well, what are you going to do with that information?
[2:36:29] are you going to look at the names and then decide something about that?
[2:36:37] If you do it, be prepared, the listeners and reporters will call you up and say, okay,
[2:36:43] you pass this thing.
[2:36:44] What are you going to do with the information?
[2:36:47] Are you going to discriminate against somebody or something like that?
[2:36:51] That's an unintended consequence.
[2:36:54] We don't want that that would be like a harm show here.
[2:36:59] Well, right the media on that,
[2:37:04] you know, we are long past the days when everybody on the island
[2:37:09] knew each other and nothing went on that the jungle drones didn't report. And everything was by name.
[2:37:20] Now we have a bunch of anonymous speculators changing the way we look, the way we feel, the
[2:37:28] quality of life.
[2:37:30] Every day, and you try to find out who they are, they don't have to tell you. So we had a guy come in and say, oh yeah, I want to demolish this house and build a house there that I'm going to live in.
[2:37:46] He was the agent. He was a realtor telling that telling our people under oath that he was going to live there.
[2:37:53] never intended to live there and so who is the real party in interest who sense this guy in
[2:38:00] to purge himself because he was sworn that day. So who is the real party in interest? Why don't they want
[2:38:08] us to know? Maybe because as a privacy issue, I'm never on their part. Don't forget, there's another thing
[2:38:14] besides the media coming in and getting up and arms about that. There's also the legal issue. I think
[2:38:22] We know there is some lawyers here in this area that would love to represent everybody
[2:38:29] who had to put their name in a foreign possible.
[2:38:32] You know, I'm not worried about that.
[2:38:36] Again, what's Miami's experience?
[2:38:39] What is the county's experience?
[2:38:41] Because the county dealt with this and requires designation of the real party in interest.
[2:38:48] And we, Celine Dion didn't have a problem.
[2:38:51] Firewoods doesn't have a problem. John Malone doesn't have a problem. Are you kidding me?
[2:38:58] Who wants a non-disclosure agreement for three-twent? It's insane.
[2:39:02] We just have to be careful because we've already had commissioners and members of boards in the town resigned due to prejudicial behavior.
[2:39:14] But during the whole last litigation people using terms is they're not our kind of people and that will never go away
[2:39:24] So we happen with this absolutely 100 percent
[2:39:27] Not 100 percent
[2:39:29] Can you guarantee this?
[2:39:31] Newspapers aren't going to get involved with this?
[2:39:33] If we are allowed to require the real party in interest to be identified
[2:39:39] You know, I'm for hold the day, they don't have to, but they must be identified.
[2:39:43] You don't get to send there.
[2:39:44] How do you define that?
[2:39:46] I mean, my house is owned by...
[2:39:47] What does Miami do?
[2:39:48] What does it call the other two?
[2:39:50] Usually at least a 10% beneficial interest in the company holding the property is what I've seen
[2:39:57] in other jurisdictions.
[2:39:59] You know, it could be drafted to be facially neutral, where the language itself is not discriminatory,
[2:40:06] But the concerns that commissioners, Tadio, and feel their reasoners that in practice.
[2:40:11] Because we already have a history of doing that.
[2:40:14] Well, not you.
[2:40:15] No, no, not this committee.
[2:40:17] The members of this past commission, who were forced to resign under the dress,
[2:40:22] resigned because of inappropriate text and emails that came to light.
[2:40:26] And the same with committee members on here.
[2:40:28] We just don't need to go around down that road again.
[2:40:30] Because my answer would be, first would be,
[2:40:33] why do you need to know? What's your, what is your justification for needing to know who the owner is?
[2:40:40] Curiosity. I mean, like you have to have a justification that holds up under scrutiny and I just don't think there is one.
[2:40:47] You're going to have to say the legislative intent behind the counties,
[2:40:55] requirement, my ammys,
[2:40:57] requirement, and any other local government in Florida that has such a requirement, I'd be interested to you.
[2:41:04] I understand what you're saying. I don't agree that you're narrative about previous commissioners.
[2:41:12] That's already established back, though.
[2:41:14] No, it's not about the previous one.
[2:41:16] A commissioner did not make any remark.
[2:41:19] I do, yes, they did.
[2:41:21] It was, I mean, we have, we haven't done that talking about commissioners.
[2:41:24] I'm talking about the newspaper asking you,
[2:41:27] each one of us, you do not even have a newspaper.
[2:41:30] You cannot, what happened the last time was,
[2:41:33] get his thing.
[2:41:34] That came out.
[2:41:38] The newspapers are going to say, hey, what are you doing with this,
[2:41:41] with this, you want the first to say?
[2:41:43] Why? What are you going to do with that information? Who is going to look at the information and look at the information?
[2:41:52] Every single person?
[2:41:52] A residential community.
[2:41:55] Which only?
[2:41:56] We ought to know.
[2:41:59] Why?
[2:42:00] What you're saying?
[2:42:01] What safety needs to know who lives.
[2:42:03] But public safety is only right to know.
[2:42:05] They don't need to know either.
[2:42:06] Public safety only has a right to know if somebody is a registered sex offender.
[2:42:11] I think that's the only list so far that you have access to it.
[2:42:14] So other than that, I just think that you're just waving a flag, asking for trouble because
[2:42:21] you have no right to make any action based on that knowledge.
[2:42:26] So you might say I have a divine right to know who it is.
[2:42:28] So I say to what end?
[2:42:31] Well, well, well, what, I mean, like, unless you're, even if they're on a registry, I don't
[2:42:39] know that you can preclude them unless you're too proximal to a school or something like that.
[2:42:43] Does every home on the island have a person who is reachable should something happen to this house,
[2:42:49] whether it's registered as an LLC, but is there an emergency contact person, a manager of the house?
[2:42:55] The chief can speak to that commissioner.
[2:43:01] We maintain a resident file, it's a voluntary resident file, but we encourage every resident to keep
[2:43:08] on file with us, the actual residents on the property managers, you know, pretty much everything
[2:43:16] thing related to that household, which is I would suggest exempt from public record.
[2:43:25] What you're asking for obviously would become a public record so regardless of the reason
[2:43:30] for collecting the property owner's name, it then becomes a public record and has to be
[2:43:35] released.
[2:43:36] What we maintain does not, so that's another element of what you're talking about.
[2:43:41] My concern is directly, somebody is aware of our good friend, Mr. Love, is aware of these proceedings.
[2:43:49] And so his first thing is going to be, why does the mayor want to know who this is?
[2:43:54] If the mayor doesn't like them, is she going to try and use her position to influence the building department to make their process more difficult than it would already be?
[2:44:04] And fundamentally, you're put in a position of having to prove the negative that you didn't do that.
[2:44:10] because the very fact that you that you've asked to know who it is and your position of influence in the town
[2:44:16] it already makes you guilty as far as far as the press is going to be concerned.
[2:44:22] So Mr. Teal, can you report back whether we have right to ask the real party and interest to be?
[2:44:33] You can do that, but you can't force them to say anything.
[2:44:36] You wait and see the newspaper on it.
[2:44:39] Okay, I want legal basis of this.
[2:44:41] I don't want any armchair lawyer in to put this off.
[2:44:45] That armchair lawyer, I guess it's a media.
[2:44:48] What are they going to say?
[2:44:50] First, there are some things you can do by law that are still not a good idea to do.
[2:44:56] Yeah, I've seen this done in other jurisdictions.
[2:45:00] And it's part of the process, I think, you know, it's natural for commissioners to want to know is this, this big construction project you're proposing are going to have you done it before as a developer are going to leave it half built and walk away from the site.
[2:45:16] feel not around to deny a permit, that's the problem.
[2:45:19] That really only comes into things like financing.
[2:45:23] So if you're trying to get financing,
[2:45:25] your track record can be held against you.
[2:45:27] But if you're trying to get a construction permit,
[2:45:29] there's no grounds with holding a construction permit
[2:45:31] based on how many projects you've left half done.
[2:45:34] Right.
[2:45:34] So you're talking about actually in practice
[2:45:36] and how it's used.
[2:45:38] Exactly.
[2:45:38] Now the law on its face.
[2:45:40] It's nice, more carefully when you have a known scoff log,
[2:45:43] but you can't, because everybody's supposed
[2:45:45] to get the same treatment.
[2:45:46] So the very fact that you said more scrutiny again,
[2:45:50] you're now right in the face of 180 and you're right
[2:45:52] against, you bump into all sorts of problems
[2:45:55] because common sense doesn't matter when it deals
[2:45:58] with no matters of the law.
[2:46:00] Any other thing to people in this town feel looking
[2:46:03] at the newspaper talking about the commission,
[2:46:07] maybe discriminating against people?
[2:46:09] What else are you going to do with that information?
[2:46:12] We want to hear, you want to hear outrage.
[2:46:16] I don't think we need to spend any more time on this.
[2:46:20] I think Mr. Teal needs to come back to us with a definitive answer.
[2:46:24] Not about what might happen if we do what we are, what we did back to ever right to do.
[2:46:30] Right. I don't agree with this. This meeting I guarantee you, somebody is going to make it.
[2:46:34] I don't necessarily agree with Marshall's comment about why do we care that they left other projects undone when they come here.
[2:46:41] They shouldn't be discriminated again.
[2:46:42] You can't discriminate them.
[2:46:44] You cannot, that is not, sadly, that's not grounds to deny anything.
[2:46:51] It's with me to, for me, it would be common sense to, right?
[2:46:54] But common sense would be common, common sense in the war,
[2:46:58] not always the same thing.
[2:46:59] So, are you both were talking the same time, what?
[2:47:01] Just to, just to frame this, I think what we're seeing here is,
[2:47:06] what I would consider growing pains, right?
[2:47:08] I mean, to your point, everybody knew everybody,
[2:47:11] times you're changing. We have two houses on South Beach Road on by the same property
[2:47:17] on or don't know who they are, who wanted an NDA to go in and do a final inspection.
[2:47:24] Times are changing, right? And so the question is, legally, that's one piece of it,
[2:47:31] what can be done, and then collectively, the commission is decide what they choose to do about
[2:47:37] it.
[2:47:38] So we'll continue the legal basis first.
[2:47:43] We'll do a more exhaustive search, SB180's relatively new.
[2:47:47] So those types of regulations haven't, the challenges to those types of regulations have not worked their way to the courts.
[2:47:57] We're checking, we'll continue to check, and we'll take a closer look and do a more comprehensive search of similar
[2:48:08] similar regulations and any challenges to those regulations.
[2:48:13] We can't know, there's no way of knowing what happened in the future, the different commission
[2:48:18] in practice, right?
[2:48:20] All I can do is tell you, this is a facially neutral ordinance that we'll pass a muster
[2:48:26] or has a good chance of passing a muster, which is still not known because we don't know
[2:48:32] how SB 180 challenges will play out in that context.
[2:48:35] I can give you a more confident answer on our, on our odds of success if we look into it a little bit longer.
[2:48:47] So we have concluded item 14, it is noon and we must break for our next session.
[2:49:00] And the main manager's report is done.
[2:49:06] No, I think, well, we have to come back for the rest of it.
[2:49:09] So we might as well.
[2:49:11] We said there was nothing to report.
[2:49:13] Okay, then we can consider number 15.
[2:49:16] A accomplished, and we'll come back for the
[2:49:20] town attorney building department, public works, and public safety.
[2:49:25] Then we will do this as a bar you.
[2:49:27] And
[2:50:26] then we're going to do SMRU, it's scheduled for one, and I'm thinking we're going to make it.
[2:50:36] All right.
[2:50:37] So we now have one more chance for the town manager to report on anything that he thinks is important.
[2:50:45] Nothing further.
[2:50:46] Oh, thank you.
[2:50:48] Town attorney.
[2:50:49] So I put together some ideas I had for potential DR amendments that are based on
[2:50:59] HB-399 and HB-803.
[2:51:04] They need workshopping.
[2:51:07] I think.
[2:51:08] Right.
[2:51:09] So those new statutes do a number of things that
[2:51:14] purport to govern or add more controls over local governments,
[2:51:19] review of site plan applications and development applications.
[2:51:24] Among them, you know, for example,
[2:51:25] a local government cannot rely solely on community character or inconsistency with community
[2:51:32] character as a reason for it denying a cyclone application.
[2:51:38] There needs to be written findings supporting a denial.
[2:51:42] There should be an opportunity to the applicant to mitigate any adverse impacts.
[2:51:49] These are all statutory news, statutory requirements.
[2:51:51] things that the building department already does in practice, there is not written into our code
[2:51:59] expressly. So to remove any doubts as to our compliance, you know, I will bring something
[2:52:07] for discussion, I think probably in the October meeting, that will address some potential
[2:52:13] changes.
[2:52:17] I tell I ask he seems determined to turn us into the student council. It's just
[2:52:23] unbelievable. All right, so now we have, oh and I had occasion yesterday.
[2:52:30] Today, to talk to Mr. Teo and preparation for this meeting, and asked if I frequently will take an ordinance or that at the other thing related to the town and run it through chat GPT, just to see what it says, or to get a lead on where to find an answer to a question I might have about.
[2:52:59] process, et cetera, et cetera. And it occurred to me that those chats might be considered
[2:53:09] public records. And so I've asked Mr. Teal to report back to us on whether or not our sessions
[2:53:23] with chat GPT if they in any way involve the town, our public records, and discoverable as such.
[2:53:32] You're looking at yourself, period, not discussing it with us. Just you.
[2:53:37] The chat is you picked up a book.
[2:53:39] When I look into a chat, GPT may say that another commissioner said blah blah blah.
[2:53:43] No, I've never seen that, but anyway, some guidance, please, must see.
[2:53:48] And almost always is going to be a public record with some narrow exceptions to that.
[2:53:54] What I would advise, and I'll give you more detailed analysis on our next meeting,
[2:53:59] but I have looked at the research, and it is something that I'm glad you raised, because
[2:54:05] it is a concern.
[2:54:07] I'm your chatGPT.
[2:54:08] If you have any questions, there are certainly legally related.
[2:54:12] You can always ask me, and that way is-
[2:54:18] That's fair, that's fair, but just be mindful that whatever you're putting into an AI platform
[2:54:26] could very well be fair again.
[2:54:28] Wait a minute, so if I look at, I got perplexity and bang, I use those two.
[2:54:32] Right,
[2:54:40] so he asked about, please use your mic, commissioner, I'm sorry, you know.
[2:54:45] Right, so commissioner Tattoa, you asked about whether if you ask a question to an
[2:54:49] I didn't hear the platforms that you mentioned.
[2:54:52] Herplexity or bank, neither one.
[2:54:54] And that look, I think these are just search engines.
[2:54:57] I don't think that's going to be an issue.
[2:54:59] I can look at that.
[2:55:00] That's a different animal.
[2:55:03] You know, it really occupants on the context.
[2:55:06] If you're researching something that we discussed,
[2:55:11] it could fall under attorney client privilege
[2:55:12] or work product doctrine as an exemption
[2:55:16] to chapter 119 to the Florida Statutes.
[2:55:18] if there's ongoing or threatened litigation.
[2:55:21] But if you're just researching for legislative purposes
[2:55:24] or something like that, it could be the subject
[2:55:27] of a public records request.
[2:55:29] And if you're keeping notes and records,
[2:55:33] those would be produced in response.
[2:55:37] They would be available for production.
[2:55:41] The last thing I asked it was,
[2:55:44] are my talks with you considered public records?
[2:55:47] It's a problem.
[2:55:49] And it said yes?
[2:55:53] It's in as much as you are a Jupiter island commissioner.
[2:56:00] I didn't say I was a commissioner.
[2:56:03] So it keeps a memory.
[2:56:05] Yeah, that's what I think.
[2:56:07] And to push back on your earlier point, Mayor.
[2:56:14] I have a flat fear arrangement for communication with any time representative, right?
[2:56:19] So, you know, use it and abuse it as needed, not a problem.
[2:56:28] We're capped it.
[2:56:29] I think $2,500 for all town communications.
[2:56:32] Even on Sunday, like we did yesterday.
[2:56:35] Always a pleasure.
[2:56:43] Well,
[2:56:46] it's, can't keep up with AI.
[2:56:52] It's a little bit of the answer.
[2:56:53] It'll be different tomorrow.
[2:56:54] You actually talked back and forth about that.
[2:56:58] Well, I just look at that information.
[2:57:02] So yesterday, I said, is a request for an official's telephone records appropriate under Florida
[2:57:09] sunshine lock?
[2:57:10] Do they get to ask you for your phone records?
[2:57:13] And it can be, but it's proper scope is limited.
[2:57:18] Technically, this is governed by blah, blah, and you get all this blah, blah, but my request
[2:57:24] and its answer are a public record.
[2:57:30] And if you have an account and you're paying for that account,
[2:57:32] if it's open AI, those have been hacked many times.
[2:57:37] You'll see hacked conversations coming from anthropic models,
[2:57:43] from open AI models.
[2:57:45] So that's what makes it public?
[2:57:48] But if I just pull out my statute book or my sunshine manual,
[2:57:57] There's no record of that, but if I ask a search engine, that's a record.
[2:58:05] A search engine is a different scenario.
[2:58:09] If you're asking AI, it's a third party, essentially, a third party vendor, you're giving
[2:58:15] information to get information back, right?
[2:58:19] And that exchange under some circumstances has been subject to production under public records
[2:58:29] I'll give you the exact circumstances where we can consider it protected, but better to be safe.
[2:58:39] But I can look up basements on barrier art.
[2:58:43] I mean, that's a research if you may.
[2:58:45] Yeah, they should be good.
[2:58:47] It says not good for barrier art.
[2:58:49] Or it's a barrier island span.
[2:58:51] Whatever you're using your phone for, as long as it's for town business,
[2:58:56] is arguably subject to production in the public record's laws.
[2:59:05] Thanks for asking us.
[2:59:06] For example, I am of asking,
[2:59:11] who's behind this building at sevens out
[2:59:14] with it ignores the laws anyway.
[2:59:18] All right.
[2:59:20] We are moving on to the building department report.
[2:59:24] Anything more, Mr. Taylor?
[2:59:26] That's all.
[2:59:27] Thank you.
[2:59:28] I may have de-rayled us and I want to clap.
[2:59:30] That's an important point.
[2:59:32] Just very quickly, Mayor.
[2:59:34] You have the building department report in front of you.
[2:59:37] It's essentially data.
[2:59:39] There was no development review board meeting this month.
[2:59:42] And we do have one schedule for October.
[2:59:45] But I don't believe we have anything currently scheduled
[2:59:49] on an agenda even for October.
[2:59:53] We spoke about several things that have to do with the building
[2:59:57] Department earlier that we'll be bringing back, you know, obviously.
[3:00:00] It has changed to approve development orders, repeal process, the applicant identification, discussion, all to be continued, but if there's any questions about the report you have in front of you, I'll try to answer or get the answer for you.
[3:00:17] Yeah, I remember asking Catherine if we could get some more information from the building department, and we've gotten too far that way.
[3:00:25] It would look more for some kind of a summary.
[3:00:31] You have the code compliance enforcement.
[3:00:34] I don't need all of this information.
[3:00:40] I'm just trying to get something more summary type.
[3:00:46] I understand commissioner.
[3:00:48] And it's not just, it's all the commissioners.
[3:00:53] We're looking for an executive summary report,
[3:00:57] rather than waiting through the backup material, I get it.
[3:01:01] It applies to SMRU, it applies to the building department and everything else we do.
[3:01:07] So that's the direction we're going in.
[3:01:09] And it helps a lot. You know what you're looking for when or when.
[3:01:15] Yeah, I agree. How do you understand?
[3:01:17] So the building reports that the enforcement summary reports, I find extremely interesting.
[3:01:25] just a suggestion about format, hard to know under the comments, whether the comments
[3:01:35] are a perenn of the address or, for instance, 320 South Beach Road on the first one.
[3:01:49] So, does while inspecting a delivery truck in the roadway without flagging, does that go
[3:01:56] with 320 South Beach road or 318, and that's the non-disclosure people?
[3:02:08] Anyway, so it should be clear where the comments, do you see what I mean at the comments?
[3:02:13] I do. I understand.
[3:02:18] And then this is extremely interesting and that's
[3:02:31] where I put a name over the violation.
[3:02:36] And then on the building department report, the construction revenue, I just, we have numbers,
[3:02:52] but I don't know what context to put it in.
[3:02:56] So a little more context.
[3:02:58] One second, what you just said, is I can do your mic.
[3:03:03] Like to parse this with our attorney.
[3:03:05] And as much as I don't think that we can ask for identities when it comes to applications,
[3:03:12] when it comes to infractions, that's a completely different issue.
[3:03:19] If we want to publish the ownership or what have you, that's a completely different issue
[3:03:25] because that is in response to a violation.
[3:03:29] It's not preemptive.
[3:03:30] Right.
[3:03:31] in non-credgenitual in any way.
[3:03:33] Right, and you're citing the record owner.
[3:03:36] Yeah, which is still not enough for me.
[3:03:38] That to me is the difference for...
[3:03:40] Well, the record owner is an attorney from Palm Beach.
[3:03:44] That's fine.
[3:03:45] That is the case sometimes.
[3:03:48] But that's a place to start.
[3:03:49] There you go.
[3:03:50] What, mayor, what was your point about the revenue?
[3:03:54] I just wish that we have some context.
[3:03:59] So we have permits issued, construction value, building fees, what should I take that to
[3:04:06] represent, what does that tell me? Is it telling me something or it's just...
[3:04:13] Yeah.
[3:04:14] Yeah.
[3:04:15] Well, what am I, now I can't ask AI, what it means?
[3:04:18] Well, in response and come to you, we're looking for a comparison to previous revenue.
[3:04:22] Well, I just did a revenue, but why are we being told this?
[3:04:26] That is what's going on.
[3:04:29] Because we ask for more information.
[3:04:32] Now I'm asking for context for the information that we're getting.
[3:04:37] What would be the context?
[3:04:39] I mean, like, it comes as a versus last year.
[3:04:42] That's way behind the number of houses or whatever.
[3:04:46] Whatever.
[3:04:46] I'm waiting to hear the context being fellow men on the island has really slowed.
[3:04:53] Well, so you were looking for, if you can have a comparison to the last year.
[3:04:58] If you notice that the directly behind that, there is a comprehensive list of building permits issued a look back over.
[3:05:09] Traditions, new residents.
[3:05:11] And then it goes on to be broken down as separates what were demolition, what were additions, what were new residential, what were alterations.
[3:05:19] So, it really does boil it down, but that's not to say that that's has to do with the
[3:05:27] actual revenue collected.
[3:05:30] We can look at adding context to that.
[3:05:34] So, are you talking about the development review board activity?
[3:05:37] No, the permits, the permits issue.
[3:05:41] And by the way, page
[3:05:50] three of those charts, we've got a
[3:05:56] scrivener's error, it says new residents and I looked at it and I thought, well, how do
[3:06:00] we know if they're new residents or not? It's residents, not residents.
[3:06:06] It's a good point, thank you for winning that challenge.
[3:06:12] So, it's not a person.
[3:06:14] What does that mean?
[3:06:16] It's not a person, it's a strong person.
[3:06:22] I like the idea of somebody telling me, listen, the size of the house is this year versus last year has going down.
[3:06:30] It's going up.
[3:06:32] People that want sellers or whatever they want to call it.
[3:06:35] Things like that, over the view of what's happening.
[3:06:39] Trans, and then the code enforcement, the numbers of code enforcement,
[3:06:43] activities, I don't need to know it was on 13, whatever.
[3:06:48] Code enforcement is not going to be as many as ones were.
[3:06:52] I'm sorry.
[3:06:54] Our code enforcement is difficult.
[3:06:58] A lot of things that call for it, and we don't have enough.
[3:07:02] Times for police.
[3:07:03] You know what we're talking?
[3:07:04] there. Yes. Yep. We got it.
[3:07:11] The development review board activity, I shouldn't take up our
[3:07:16] time, but this may be I should just make my suggestions to the town manager, but that's an
[3:07:21] ambiguous layout as well. That, anything further.
[3:07:30] Regarding the building, Department report.
[3:07:40] All right. We are ready for public works.
[3:07:50] Your next.
[3:07:55] Good afternoon. Very brief, public works. The Department report only related to the
[3:08:00] Leathley-Elloing Study, which is ongoing still. We continue to set sticky traps out on the island to look for the insect vector that carries the disease.
[3:08:09] So far, all of our collections to date have only found one location on the island, which is represented in the graphic zone North Beach Road, up on the backside of the Bonnir.
[3:08:20] This is our subdivision.
[3:08:22] We continue to monitor that location, but we have not found any vectors that have tested positive for the disease either.
[3:08:30] So during the October meeting, we would anticipate kind of doing a wrap-up of this study, perhaps inviting Dr. Bader and Brian Fisher to come in and give a little thoughts on that.
[3:08:39] The footnote here is that, you know, the town is discontinued the program, so one of the things
[3:08:45] that we're recommending is get that out publicly to the residents that where they are aware
[3:08:49] of that discontinuation of the treatment if they're so choose to continue it, it can be done
[3:08:53] on a private scale as well.
[3:08:55] So.
[3:08:55] Are you able to look at the palm trees on the Jupiter island club golf course?
[3:09:01] I would have to ask if those, you're requesting that we go sample there.
[3:09:06] I just wondered whether you have, in that vicinity, yes, now, whether it's on the God of this time.
[3:09:12] Thank you.
[3:09:13] Okay, now we'll go do public safety.
[3:09:19] Good afternoon.
[3:09:22] The first item on the agenda for me is related to the recent media and social media activities related to the license plate readers.
[3:09:34] I don't know if you're familiar with the controversy.
[3:09:37] personally, I think this is the single most negative impact to public safety that's come
[3:09:44] along in my career. The ramifications of what's going on right now and I think the fact
[3:09:54] that the state is jumping the gun and not taking a clear look at this before taking action
[3:10:00] is going to have a serious impact. But for clarification sake, I just wanted to let you know
[3:10:07] that the systems that we employ on this island are not the flock camera systems that the
[3:10:13] state is concerned about, flock unfortunately is the target of this activity, but there
[3:10:20] are multiple platforms that perform the same functions that flock does, and the controversy
[3:10:28] associated with this is related to the accessibility of the data that's collected by these
[3:10:35] places, plate raiders. It captures tags. These cameras are deployed all over the country.
[3:10:42] Flock happens to maintain ownership of the data that they collect. They're in the lives
[3:10:48] part of the problem. Most of the other platforms that are available, the departments maintain
[3:10:54] custody of the data. It's not available unless you have an agreement with another agency
[3:10:59] that gives them access to the data.
[3:11:03] To take that one step further for us,
[3:11:05] the camera system that we employ Genetech,
[3:11:08] we own all of the data.
[3:11:10] Nobody else has access to the data
[3:11:12] that we collect on our license plate readers.
[3:11:15] Nobody can log in and search for a tag on our system.
[3:11:22] So the memo that came out from Florida Department
[3:11:24] of Transportation related to the removal of cameras
[3:11:27] on state roads does not apply to us.
[3:11:30] We do not have any state roads out here on the island.
[3:11:34] FDOT has indicated that they identify
[3:11:37] southeast road as a county road so that requirement
[3:11:41] does not apply.
[3:11:43] My intent is to leave our cameras in place.
[3:11:46] I will say that we have a redundant system.
[3:11:49] We also have vigilant cameras on the island.
[3:11:52] Those vigilant cameras haven't function properly
[3:11:54] and probably over a year.
[3:11:56] We've maintained the account with vigilant to give us access to historical data and search criteria in other areas of the state.
[3:12:06] But I've since implemented a request to have those cameras removed.
[3:12:11] We're going to cancel our account with vigilant just in anticipation of what legislation is coming.
[3:12:16] I'm perfectly confident in the agenda tech cameras that we have.
[3:12:20] They provide the security and safety that we need out here on this island.
[3:12:25] And we're going to continue to use them until the legislation changes and force to remove those cameras.
[3:12:33] Just for historical purposes, I will say, I had mentioned before, my first official act is the chief on the island.
[3:12:40] We had a $200,000-dollar Bentley stolen off of this island.
[3:12:43] We would not have recovered that card, $48 had it not been for these platforms that we access.
[3:12:50] murders have been solved, major crimes have been solved, the home invasion robbery that we had
[3:12:55] out here, even though they were prior to a lot of this information, that crime would not
[3:13:01] have been solved.
[3:13:02] That guy would not have been apprehended at it, not been for licensed plate readers throughout
[3:13:07] the state of Florida.
[3:13:09] So, it's a huge impact.
[3:13:10] I know all of the professional associations are looking at this or keeping an eye on it.
[3:13:15] had a conversation with Mr. Prue when we were discussion upcoming legislation, I've asked
[3:13:20] him to keep an eye on anything that comes from the legislation related to licensed plate
[3:13:25] readers.
[3:13:26] I know that Sheriff's Association of Chiefs Association or hosting a summit to discuss
[3:13:31] this specific issue right now, and they're going to propose reasonable legislation.
[3:13:37] I agree.
[3:13:39] I think there needs to be guardrails and boundaries.
[3:13:41] We have other platforms that offer us privacy information that come with built-in guardrails.
[3:13:47] There's no reason why the state can't apply those same guardrails to this data and this technology.
[3:13:53] And I think that's hopefully what we'll see come out of this session.
[3:13:56] Can our drones take pictures of license plates?
[3:14:01] Can they, yes, do they, they do not have license plate reader, you know,
[3:14:07] You know, software built into them, but every camera that we have in every car that we
[3:14:13] patrol with has like that camera has licensed plate reader capabilities.
[3:14:18] The state is not concerned about those for some reason.
[3:14:22] This has been a pet project of the governor's for some reason he's last on to this and is
[3:14:26] buying into the hype from social media, which, you know, personally, I disagree with.
[3:14:32] And I know the associations feel the same way I do, there needs to be guardrails or need to be boundaries related to our access to this information.
[3:14:44] We have a policy in place for our license plate readers.
[3:14:48] It creates those guardrails in place.
[3:14:52] The officers cannot do historical searches for tags on this system without prior approval.
[3:14:58] Supervisors.
[3:15:00] Approval, we built those guardrails into our policy already, and I'm taking steps to strengthen that policy to make it even better, as well.
[3:15:10] I had a request from a resident about our regulations regarding private use of drones.
[3:15:20] It's my impression that we prohibit it, but is it, do we, can we permit it on a limited basis?
[3:15:31] I'm not, I think there is a permit process already in place.
[3:15:35] I know we get, we get requests from realtors specific to doing drone flights over properties that they're going to do listings on.
[3:15:43] I'm not for public use, but for specific properties, but I can look a little harder at that
[3:15:50] ordinance.
[3:15:52] I haven't looked at it in a while.
[3:15:54] I thought you were going to use a drill as for him.
[3:15:57] By the loss with everybody's talk, a couple of used a drone to try to find a lost dog last
[3:16:03] season.
[3:16:04] They just did it.
[3:16:05] I think we're talking about it.
[3:16:06] If I went out and bought a drone myself, and I flew it over to the neighbor's house.
[3:16:13] That would be private in one end.
[3:16:16] It could be, yes, sir.
[3:16:19] It's a matter of what you're recording and what you're viewing.
[3:16:22] The simple act of flying it over may not be about violation,
[3:16:26] but if you're capturing images, then it potentially could be.
[3:16:30] But again, and we have...
[3:16:32] I'm sorry, but I haven't looked at our ordinance in a long time.
[3:16:34] No, but it may be time to get a handle on that.
[3:16:40] because of the public beach in the waterway.
[3:16:43] And as far as I know, we don't have an ordinance
[3:16:45] for stricting the use of drones.
[3:16:47] Public safety does, but private use,
[3:16:51] I don't believe we have any code that restricts it
[3:16:54] other than the FAA rules and regulations.
[3:16:57] So that's something that we could certainly look at.
[3:17:00] Yes, we need to adopt a permitting type ordinance.
[3:17:04] There is current technology available
[3:17:06] for monitoring for drone activity.
[3:17:09] I know the Sheriff's Office is implementing some equipment.
[3:17:13] They've made that available to us.
[3:17:15] If we want to put one out here on the island,
[3:17:17] it would identify any drones that we're flying in the area
[3:17:20] and give us access to that information.
[3:17:22] So that's something that we're looking at.
[3:17:24] But I will certainly look at the ordinance
[3:17:26] and the statute's related to that
[3:17:28] and see if we can strengthen that a little better.
[3:17:30] The other interesting note here is that
[3:17:34] lock was sharing its data with ICE, which is exactly what lit the police, politically,
[3:17:42] media, that's really what started this whole concept.
[3:17:50] Yeah, the way these cameras work, it obviously captures the image when the car passes in front
[3:17:56] of the camera.
[3:17:58] We maintain a database in that system.
[3:18:01] And that information is provided to us from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and it
[3:18:06] identifies any tags that are suspended, any associated driver's license that are suspended,
[3:18:13] any warrants that the state has that they have a tag related to that particular person.
[3:18:20] Those will show up, we call it a hot list.
[3:18:23] That hot list is updated every hour for our Florida criminal information system.
[3:18:28] It's updated every three hours for the national criminal information system.
[3:18:32] So, if we get a potential wanted murder or the drives onto this island,
[3:18:36] this associated with that tag, it will immediately pop up on every control car that has that software running.
[3:18:41] We require them to run that software on their computers, whatever they're on duty.
[3:18:47] So, they're constantly getting these alerts.
[3:18:50] We have a luxury in the patients to look at suspended tags, suspended licenses.
[3:18:55] is, you know, most of the county agencies,
[3:18:58] they don't have the time to be chasing all of those.
[3:19:01] They're looking for stolen cars, stolen tags,
[3:19:05] wanted persons, missing persons related to tags.
[3:19:09] But that's the basis for how we maintain safety out here
[3:19:13] on this island, as we monitor every car that comes out here.
[3:19:15] And if it's in that hot list, it's in that hot list
[3:19:18] because the state put that information in
[3:19:20] and they provided that information to us.
[3:19:23] That's the basis for that whole function
[3:19:26] And to take that away from us, I think it's going to be a huge impact.
[3:19:32] You recommend ring doorbells with cameras to the island residents or not.
[3:19:36] I do absolutely anything that assist you with security and can capture images for your personal safety.
[3:19:44] I think is that help them to kind of think, didn't it?
[3:19:46] I have them on my house, for sure.
[3:19:49] And it helps you keep track of who's coming and going from your house when you're not there.
[3:19:53] So, if there's no other questions related to LPRs, I'll move on to my activity report.
[3:20:00] So I've got both July and August that I provided to you.
[3:20:05] We'll stick with August, 135 calls for service, 38 calls for service in July.
[3:20:12] The one significant crime that we had on the island in August was a grand theft.
[3:20:19] It was from a construction site, it was reported by the contractor.
[3:20:23] He noticed that there were bulk amounts of electrical wire, rolls of electrical wire that
[3:20:29] were missing from the construction site.
[3:20:32] We identified one of the workers, one of the laborers that was working on that construction site.
[3:20:39] We've basically identified that person.
[3:20:43] We've located the material that he was stealing, he was selling to the scrapyards.
[3:20:48] We've got images of him, his fingerprint, so we secure three felony warrants for that individual and we'll be picking him up as soon as those warrants are signed, but that was a good job done by Officer Potsko on that crime.
[3:21:03] That was the only significant crime that we've had. The activity at the beach was relatively consistent for the last two months.
[3:21:20] We had four calls for service in August, eight calls for service in July.
[3:21:26] During the day, we didn't have any at night in August and only two during the day.
[3:21:32] Code enforcement.
[3:21:33] We had 40 violations for parking in the right away and 22 for no flag persons.
[3:21:40] And then one other violation for total of 63 for the month of August, 62 for the month of July.
[3:21:46] And we do provide that information to the building department so that they can keep track
[3:21:51] when they're related to a construction site.
[3:21:55] In 1681 officer patrols for the month of August.
[3:21:59] Our drone flights were down in August, compared to July in the previous months.
[3:22:04] Our officers were in training and on vacation so we had limited drone activity for the month
[3:22:12] of August.
[3:22:13] And that's my report.
[3:22:17] If you would like to see more or less information on that report, I'm happy to adjust it to...
[3:22:28] No, it gives us a good picture of what's thinking.
[3:22:30] Comploys. I've added the, as you requested, Commissioner, the alarms, give you an idea of the response to those.
[3:22:39] Very good. Public Beach sure is active.
[3:22:44] It, summertime, it usually is.
[3:22:48] I don't know other questions, that's my report.
[3:22:51] All right, meeting dates. Do we have to do meeting dates today?
[3:22:56] There we have it.
[3:22:57] can I make a comment about the date? December. Yes. So historically the town on
[3:23:04] at the December Commission meeting ends the meeting relatively early 1130 or so and
[3:23:12] we have the annual employee and volunteer luncheon at the club. So the date that they've given us
[3:23:20] is December 17th for that buffet at the club if that works for the commissioners.
[3:23:26] And we're 17th, yes sir, and that would be the commission meeting followed by the launch
[3:23:33] at the club that typically at noon time.
[3:23:51] Okay.
[3:23:53] And that worked.
[3:23:53] Nothing else on either side of December 17th meeting.
[3:24:01] We usually keep the agenda pretty light because it's a short meeting.
[3:24:06] I'm to the Jupiter, I'm going to go.
[3:24:10] All right, December 17, it is.
[3:24:14] And would you reach SMRU?
[3:24:18] No.
[3:24:19] No, an SMRU will be in November.
[3:24:21] Keeping it light.
[3:24:22] We're keeping it light.
[3:24:23] We're going to turn.
[3:24:25] You may have the Jupiter island club on that day application.
[3:24:32] On the, at the December Commission meeting,
[3:24:35] They hope to bring their application in December to the commission with the golf course.
[3:24:42] I just got an email inviting me to see some virtual view of what they're planning on doing.
[3:24:50] I purposely have not answered any of those questions.
[3:24:56] I understand.
[3:24:58] I said, I trust you to keep me updated and I'm what's going on.
[3:25:01] They're attempting to have another round of individual meetings with commissioners in their architect.
[3:25:08] I talked to Kyle about that since it'll potentially be coming to you in a quasi-judicial venue.
[3:25:15] Is that wise or a good idea?
[3:25:19] And I mean, you could speak to this, Kyle.
[3:25:21] But essentially, it's a required expertise disclosure, right?
[3:25:24] That's right. You're loving to me with any applicants that you want to meet with.
[3:25:29] You don't have to, but it's your prerogative.
[3:25:32] If you do, of course, you're meeting with them individually.
[3:25:39] And you know, there's no, you have to ensure that you keep a list
[3:25:45] of who attended and what you discussed.
[3:25:49] So when the application, if and when it does come
[3:25:52] before the commission for quasi-judicial hearing,
[3:25:55] you can give a full recitation of your expertise.
[3:25:57] If I met with him and this is exactly what we talked about, there you go, I don't have time to do that.
[3:26:06] I've been asked to meet with the president of the Jupiter Island Club to talk about the golf course for the second time.
[3:26:13] And I reported to you that I did meet with him once, but he wants to come back at it again.
[3:26:20] And I just, I don't want to say no, but I don't want to say yes.
[3:26:25] Well, you can do it, but you have to let us know.
[3:26:28] Well, I understand that because I did tell him about the other one.
[3:26:31] But they're also, they're doing town hall meetings virtually next week for, I think, there are three or four separate ones for different,
[3:26:42] for members, members who are close to the club, members who are not close to the club, and non-member residents.
[3:26:52] So they're not serious advice about that because I'm supposed to go to the one on the 22nd for Riverview Road.
[3:26:57] And these are meetings for all the people that are live around the edge of the, and I've been asked to
[3:27:03] speak on the phone before that 22nd meeting. That's what, so those workshops, any time an applicant has a substantial
[3:27:12] application they want to bring, it's common to try to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, you know, public
[3:27:19] support or neighbors support, um, nothing wrong with that. If, if you, if you do attend any of these meetings,
[3:27:25] feel free to give me a call and if you want me to attend,
[3:27:29] we have to attend either in person or virtually,
[3:27:32] especially if they're having council present.
[3:27:34] That's always something that I'm happy to do.
[3:27:39] But it's just part of their lobbying efforts.
[3:27:43] But attending is just something we have to disclose.
[3:27:47] That's right.
[3:27:50] And the easy solution to it is to just forward whatever you get
[3:27:56] to your town, you may have, and then records very easy or too,
[3:28:03] too.
[3:28:03] Right.
[3:28:03] So if they're not going to your town, you may, you can do that.
[3:28:07] That way you have a record of when the meeting occurred, and who was there, and who invited you.
[3:28:14] And in that regard, I think we each got this invitation to the Martin County Fair ground-breaking ceremony.
[3:28:23] He thought you would take.
[3:28:24] And I didn't, I don't know if anyone is planning to go.
[3:28:27] I wouldn't dream of going to this.
[3:28:32] I bet in top of mind, I bet at the town level before that the Martin County Fair Association
[3:28:43] is not all you might assume it to be.
[3:28:51] rents county property for a peppercorn and doesn't have to report to anyone, I don't want anything
[3:29:00] to do with it.
[3:29:01] All right, anything further, any other commissioner comments,
[3:29:08] and we've settled on the December
[3:29:10] date,
[3:29:14] October we can pick January?
[3:29:17] How if you'd like?
[3:29:20] What's your pleasure?
[3:29:21] You want to pick a January date or hold that till October?
[3:29:26] Hold it till October.
[3:29:26] All right, we'll hold till October.
[3:29:29] You're pretty far out there, I'm getting old.
[3:29:32] I don't want to commit the tune.
[3:29:35] You're not a green banana.
[3:29:38] All right, I think that concludes the Commission meeting for September 14.
[3:29:46] And we will now open the South Martin regionals utility meeting.
[3:29:56] All right, well, I'll take a few minutes.
[3:29:58] Thank you.