join us for the invocation, which will be led by Reverend
Anna Singh and followed by the Pledge of Allegiance, which
will be led by Richard Voloshin.
Good morning. Good morning. Thank you for
inviting me. Let's join together in heart, mind and
spirit. Creator of our universe who breathed light and life and
divine love into our lives. Thank you for drawing us
together. Thank you for uniting us as one people. Your people.
Our people. We may come from different places and live in a
variety of ways and exist in varying circumstances. But out
of we who are many, you have made us one. Loving one. As we
begin a new school year, and as we enter a new season of
governance for the people of our beloved Martin County, we
ask for your wisdom, your grace, and your compassion for
all your people in the decisions we face today. You
have commissioned us to look after our future, that is, our
children and our students. You call us to honor our seniors,
those who have helped us to become who we are, and you have
appointed us to serve, to protect, to defend, and to
uphold the very values that bind our community together in
the decisions we make today. May we do all these things to
the very best of our abilities, with the talents that you have
blessed us. Amen. Amen. Thank you, Mr. Olson.
My Richard Olson. Good morning. All right. Thank you. Good
morning. I'm only. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the republic for which it
stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all. God bless America.
And I see that you are a Vietnam veteran. Would you like
to tell us a bit about your Army service, sir?
I was drafted into the Army at the age of 22 years old. If I
finished my apprenticeship as a machinist. And of course, being
a machinist, they made me in military policemen. And, uh, I
refused to be in office. I passed the test and, uh, so I
made me a military policeman at Fort Riley, Kansas. And then
when Vietnam broke out, I was transferred to the first
Infantry Division at Fort Riley, Kansas. And I landed
with the first troops. We went over by troop ship, and we got
there. And the very beginning of October, and I was at the
Michelin rubber plantation at like that was our base camp
next to the camp, right next to the Cambodian border. I've been
in a couple of major battles and, uh, I came home June 30th,
1966, and we ended in San Francisco. And they asked me I
wanted to re-up, and I said no. And they gave me money to go
back to Brooklyn, New York, where I came from. And I landed
in Brooklyn. I went to get my job back at the New York Daily
News. I was hired there two months before I was drafted,
and they told me I didn't finish my probationary period,
again. But the VA had and my union had a little different to
say. So anyway, uh, I got a phone call. I reported to the
New York Times and I worked at the New York Times as a
machinist and a machine shop foreman for 43 years, and I
lived in Brooklyn. I was in Long Island Valley Stream, and
then I went to Milford, Pennsylvania, on the New York
New Jersey border, because we did most of our printing in
Jersey, and I didn't want to pay New York tax, Jersey tax,
and commuting. So I moved to Pennsylvania and I built a home
there, and I was there for 40 years. And then my daughters
lived in Florida, and I moved down here to Palm City, and
here I am at 83 years old now. Fantastic.
And that's basically it. Here you are. Thank you for
your service. Thank you, Mr. Gold.
Sir Richard is a Purple Heart recipient.
And a Purple Heart recipient. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Uh, our agenda this morning
will consist of an additional item. It's consent nine, which
is an adopt a proclamation commending Jacob Crosby and
Parker bestowed upon the achievement of Eagle Scout.
There's one request to withdraw from the agenda, and that's a
public hearing. Quasi judicial. Number two, which is request
for certification of an agricultural enclave pursuant
to sections one, six, 3.31, six two and one six, 3.3164.
Florida Statutes. Um, there are no, uh, agenda pulls. Is there
a motion to approve the agenda, including the consent agenda?
I'll move approval of the agenda and the consent agenda.
Second. Any objections? The motion is
approved. We will begin with proclamations. The first
proclamation is a proclamation. Uh. Declaring Purple Heart Day.
Good morning, commissioners. The Purple Heart is the oldest
military decoration in use today and evolved from the
Badge of Military Merit created by General George Washington in
1782. The Purple Heart is awarded to members of the
United States Armed Forces who have been wounded or died in
combat with the declared enemy of the United States of
America. The board recognizes August 7th as Purple Heart Day
in Martin County, and appreciates the sacrifices our
Purple Heart recipients and all veterans have made in defending
our freedoms and once again, here to accept we have Richard
Voloshin, US Army Vietnam veteran and Purple Heart
recipient. I was wounded while we were
going to an ambush. The jolly, the Viet Cong ambushed a bunch
of men on highway 13, which is nothing but a little blacktop
two lane road that went from Saigon all the way up into next
to Cambodia. They hit them and we were going with the medical
Corps, and we were their escort. I was in a jeep on the
right hand side with an M14 rifle on my lap, and I was
covering the right flank, and it was an explosion. Uh,
shrapnel went through the jeep, passed the sandbags into my
leg, and, uh, I was blown out of the Jeep. I landed on my
right shoulder where I have arthritis now, and, uh,
basically that's it. Medic ran over to me, and you saw the
wound? It was hot shrapnel. It was like being kicked in the
shin with a burning polka. And, uh, he went to rip my pants to
get. And the shrapnel popped out, and he called me the
luckiest S.O.B. he ever met. And, uh, he threw a bandage on
my leg, and he said, can you wiggle your toes? I go, yep.
And he says, can you get up? I go, yep. He says, give me a
hand with the wounded. And we ran over. I limped over, he ran
over, and, uh, we started working on the wounded. I was a
military policeman, so I had more medical training than any
regular GI. And, uh, basically that was it was beginning of
June, and I was supposed to come home, what they called an
early out. And then the early out was canceled. And the
meantime, I took all got signatures of all the men I
served with. And that's all the Vietnamese South Vietnamese
flag, the men I started with, plus my brigade commander,
Colonel William Broad back, who was the best, best military
officer I have ever met. He cared about his men, and he was
a World War Two retread. Now, the one thing I can say about
him, he was very smart. We used to bring when we went on a
search and destroy, we would bring three 105 howitzers by
Chinook helicopter out in the field to set up a set up an
artillery base, and this is long before they ever thought
of doing, uh, little bases with artillery and military police.
We used to be bodyguards for all dignitaries. And him. I was
an Margaret's bodyguard. In January of 66, I was Charles
Kuralt bodyguard, and they had a Christmas special. The only
time in Vietnam we had a truce. It was a Christmas truce from
Christmas Eve to the end of Christmas Day. And he was
there. And it was a TV special, if you ever want to see it, you
go on the computer and you put down Christmas in Vietnam,
1965, and we'll be Charles Kuralt. And that's exactly
where I was at the Michelin rubber plantation. And
basically, that's it. I came home, I married my sweetheart.
We were engaged before I went over, and we've been married
this year, 60 years. Nice.
I'm 60 years. And, uh, I'm still above around. That's
basically it. Thank you. Sir, when I. Well, one other thing.
When I came home from Vietnam. Now I got home. And when you
looked at me, you didn't want to come near me. I had that
what they call the the thousand yard stare. And, uh, I got home
and that was it. I left Vietnam, Vietnam the morning of
June 30th, 1966, at four in the morning. I landed in San in San
Francisco, June 30th, 7:00 in the morning. By 2:00 in the
afternoon, I was out of the Army. That's how fast
everything went. I received this Purple Heart in the mail
with a letter from Colonel William, brought back one of.
You know where the hell I was, he says, I called your name
three times, and I was getting ready to put you down as AWOL.
And then they told me they sent me home. So that's my story,
and I'm sticking to. It. Every story.
Thank you. Thank you for your service.
And I promise. Our next proclamation is a
proclamation congratulating the 50th anniversary of the
Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council in Martin
County, Florida. The Treasure Coast Regional Planning
Council, or RPC, was established on August 19th,
1976, through an interlocal agreement among Indian River
County, Martin County, Palm Beach County, and Saint Lucie
County to address issues of regional importance. TCP has
supported sustainable growth, environmental stewardship,
economic vitality and regional resilience for the benefit of
its member counties and municipalities. The year 2026
marks the 50th anniversary of the Treasure Coast Regional
Planning Council, representing five decades of dedicated
service to the region, and the board commends its longstanding
service to the Treasure Coast region. And here to accept we
have Thomas Lenihan, who's the executive director of the
Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council.
Thank you. Good morning. Um, I don't know if I could say it a
lot better than that proclamation, but, um, it's
absolutely been our our pleasure to serve as your
regional planning council, uh, and undertake all the various
things that we get to do with you all, whether it's, uh,
rewriting CRA codes to make them more, uh, effective, um,
different technical support, first responder hazardous
materials training that we do for your fire department, uh,
economic development activity, all those different things.
It's absolutely been, uh, been a pleasure to be part of all
that. And we look forward to many more happy years together.
So thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Excellent.
Thank you. Thank you so much.
And our last proclamation is a proclamation declaring Florida
Water Professionals Month in Martin County, Florida. Water
industry professionals dedicate themselves to the production
and distribution of safe drinking water, as well as the
proper collection, treatment, reuse, and disposal of
wastewater and stormwater. Water professionals are
essential first responders as defined by Florida statute
during storms and other catastrophic events. Working to
ensure safe drinking water and safe disposal of wastewater for
our communities. The board recognizes August as Florida
Water Professionals Month and asks residents to join us in
thanking all water and wastewater professional staff
for their hard work and dedication, and here to accept
several folks. But David Voisin, whose utilities and
solid waste chief plant operator.
Thank you. Thank you. Good morning, commissioners.
Good morning. It's an honor to be here today
as we recognize the month of August as Florida Water
Professionals Month. Much of the work performed by water
professionals have been out of sight, but never should be out
of mind. 24 hours a day, seven days a week are dedicated. Team
provides safe drinking water and protect the public health
and preserve our environment. Access safe drinking water is
fundamental to a healthy community. These essential
services are often taken for granted because they are
delivered seamlessly every day. Martin County Utilities has a
long standing commitment to operational excellence. Our two
water and wastewater facilities have each earned the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection Operational
Excellence Award on three occasions, recognizing
outstanding operation, maintenance and regulatory
compliance. In addition, the Martin County has won the
American Waterworks Association Region eight Best tasting
Drinking Water competition 11 times, reflecting the
dedication and expertise of our team. While we do not seek
recognition for the work we do, our team quietly serves the
community every day. Our water distribution, wastewater
collection, crews respond to water main breaks, wastewater
collection, sewer line maintains critical
infrastructure and ensures reliable service, often without
the public even knowing the efforts are required. This is a
hallmark to public service. Our department demonstrates
humility through a meaningful work we perform every day. Our
greatest success is that our customers can turn on the tap,
flush the toilet, and trust that these essential services
are always there. And on behalf of our dedicated men and women
of our department. I want to thank you for this proclamation
recognizing Florida Water Professionals Month. We
sincerely appreciate your gratitude.
Thank you. Thank you. These are coins commemorating 50th
anniversary. Treasure Coast Regional Planning.
Next, we will take up public. Comment. You want to give a
speech first? Yes. Last. For those who are making public
comments, since we are in an election season, politicking is
prohibited, which is defined as advocating the election or
defeat of a candidate for public office, either partisan
or non-partisan. This includes the use of words, dates, signs,
props, and or wearing apparel that convey a message of
support for a person or group of persons. You'll have three
minutes to speak. Uh, 15% 15 seconds before your time is up.
Uh, a buzzer will sound you give you 15 seconds to wrap up.
Thank you. The first request to speak
form. I have is from Angela Harrison.
Miss Harrison will be followed by Victoria Blake. Going to
make me nervous. Uh, yeah. Good, good. Good morning.
Everybody. Hello. Morning. Yeah. We're here again. Um, I
really don't have much to say today. I just want to follow up
on what I've been saying. Angela Harrison from Tent City
Helpers. Thank you for always allowing us to speak and for
hearing us and taking into consideration the things that
we do speak about. Um, my main concern is getting us the
Dignity Bus. Um, we are applying for a grant. I think
it's Martin 100. If I'm not mistaken, grant? Um, Gail
actually told me I thought that we were going to apply for the
grant to try to contribute to the dignity bus, but what her
idea was that if you guys could come together, if we could get
the dignity Bus on the agenda, or maybe one of you guys could
go and take a look at it and see what a wonderful idea it
is. She actually thought that it would be an amazing idea to
contribute that 100,000 for salaries, for the Dignity Bus,
because, of course, with the Dignity Bus will need somewhere
to park it. And we will also need, um, of course, people to
take care of it at night when the people are there taking
showers. Um, I guess maintaining, you know, the pets
and whatnot. Um, I think that's really all I have for today.
Um, once again, you guys can follow us on Facebook or come
out with us on Mondays. We actually have a really good
time. It's kind of sad how much fun we have. Um, we had a few
guys get jobs this week and they were really, really proud
of themselves. They were just, you know, I was I do have kind
of a short story of one of our gentlemen that, you know, he
did lose his job recently after being very proud that he did
get a job. And he said to me, he's like, I'm, I'm sorry that
I disappointed you guys. Oh my gosh. And it it absolutely
broke my heart. And I just told him, I said, you could never
disappoint us. We're just so proud of all of you guys for
what you do. You know, there's such good people. They're so
thankful. They're so kind. You know, they tell us to have a
good week. They tell us, you know, they they bless us. And,
um, they're just really amazing people. And. Dignity bus guys.
Dignity bus. Dignity. Dignity bus. We need that for us. And
as always, have a wonderful week. Um, looking forward to
seeing you guys again with any decisions that you have for us.
Thank you. Victoria Blake.
Is next, followed by Larry Cohen.
Good morning everyone. I'm Victoria Blake, representing
tent City Helpers. I volunteer every Monday. We go to six
different locations, um, and feed a warm meal, essential
supplies, sleeping bags, tents, etc. for the unhoused in Martin
County. Um, so we've come and asked to be on the agenda with
no response to date. And Angie and I have talked are going to
talk about some ideas like the Dignity Bus and some other
ideas. We have to raise funding for at least land and or a
shelter. Um, some quick stats. Um, since January of this year,
we have seen 290 individual unhoused. I've personally had
over 13,000 views of when I've spoken here. Awesome. And we've
had over 103,000 views of since when Angie and we have come to
speak in front of the commissioners. Um, so we're
excited about that visibility. And we just reached a 4000
followers on Facebook. Uh, so we have a lot of constituents
and residents in Martin County that do care about our
unhoused. Um, I'll start with some wonderful stories she
mentioned. One, I'm going to change their name to protect
their identity. But, um, Ned finally got a job, and his
demeanor completely changed. He went from being completely
defeated to just proud. You could see the hope in his eyes
and tears. We're just. We're so proud of you. Um. Bobby still
feels blessed. He has his job. Then he goes. He knows I give
him crosses all the time. He goes, do you watch The Chosen?
And we had this conversation about our favorite characters
and disciples on the Chosen. I'm like, this is fantastic.
Um, three unhoused thanked us for the Bibles. We deliver that
Calvary Community Church donated, um, one of our
unhoused has been an immobilized wheelchair for some
time. And Rashawn, that works at Treasure Coast Homeless
Service Council, helped him get up and walk yesterday. There
were tears. It was beautiful. She is an angel. Um, so I'm
going to just state some of this. Um, I'm asking that
people please send letters or call governor DeSantis office.
Um, House Bill 1365 passed the Florida Legislature,
legislature and was signed into law by governor DeSantis on
March 20th, 2024. The law went into effect October 2024. The
bill, 1365 says it is illegal to sleep in public properties.
The law mandates that counties and municipalities designate
specific areas for public camping or sleeping. Yet Martin
County has nowhere. We have nowhere for the unhoused to go.
Governor DeSantis address is 400 South Monroe Street in
Tallahassee. His phone number is on his website. Um, I'm
personally going to be reaching out to some friends of mine at
WPBF and other news media for visibility, requesting action.
Um, also, thank you from our state local grants and local
churches, um, churches, residents and more. I just pray
that you will search your hearts for action. Please.
Action to support Tent City Helpers and our unhoused. Thank
you very much. Thank you. Larry Cohen is next,
followed by Mike the Armed Fisherman. Good morning. Good
morning commissioners. Uh, Larry going. Here for the
Woodlands Owners Association. I have an aerial, but I
understand it's too late to present that to submit this.
The last time this aerial was in this room was 25 years ago
this week. And our concerns are still concerning. I'd like to
speak today about the Cove Road project, a live local project
that purports to build 198 apartments in four different
buildings, each one three stories high. It presents
serious concerns to our residents, which I'd like to
highlight. The first one has to do with surface water runoff,
especially during the 100 year, three day storm events which
seem to be occurring about 4 to 5 times in the last 25 years
since I've been here with this map. As all this water is
routed through the main ditch of the Coral Gardens drainage
basin. You have an alternative. You can route this water to the
south through the improvements that you made 20 years ago, 20
to 25 years ago. Up in the Summerfield area. And I'd like
you to consider that, because the flooding that has occurred
downstream of the Coral Gardens drainage basin is tremendous,
including culminating with 5 to 6ft of water in Fisherman's
Cove some 25 years ago. This aerial map has been all the way
to Tallahassee, and has been in the hands of the governor and
his ombudsman, and 25 years ago. So as an alternative, I hope
you will consider routing a lot of that water to the south and
have your staff really look at drainage. We are also concerned
this project is out of character by its three story
height, and also by its tremendous density, which is in
contrast to the single family residential neighborhood that
is going to be placed in. We are also concerned about
increased need for public safety, which now makes up 60%
of the county's budget. If I'm correct. Traffic impact to Cove
and Willoughby is going to be added. And these roads are
already over capacity. Another concern, especially three times
a day on Willoughby. Another concern is that the impact that
this dense project presents to the schools. Project also
raises concern about concerns for seniors and handicapped
about accessibility. Will this project have elevators to get
to the third floor and I'll stop right here. Except to
point out that these this offers major tax concessions
all the way from sales tax to ad valorem tax. That cannot be
recouped and will only increase residents existing residents
taxes. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Mike, the armed
fisherman is next, followed by Justin Dugas.
Hi, friends. Hello.
All right. I'm going to be as nice as
possible. I have a huge problem with Martin County Sheriff's
Office right now. Currently, I'm under an injunction. I was
out open, carrying and I had just got my guns back. The
court said, hey, you could have your guns. And they came and
they were ready to take me off to jail. They were ready.
That's not the problem, because they were lucky enough to. I
got Ahold of my attorney. He called whoever he had to call
over here. I'm sure it's the the attorney here. My name is
Michael Taylor, by the way. Whoever the attorney is, you
got that phone call? Yeah, well, somebody got that phone
call anyway. And in a nutshell, they were taking me off. They
got a phone call from the attorney or whoever my attorney
talked to, and they drove me back around. But then I did a
records request, a FOIA public records request. Well, guess
what? With the Martin County Sheriff's Office right now, I'm
number as of Thursday of last week, I was number 85. And I
put it in in July. I, I can see where they're at. There are
people that have not received the records request from almost
March. I here we are. I've. My records request has been paid
for and done with. And they're saying, oh, you know, we're
well. Well and and I go by the armed fishermen. And I promise
you, if you look at the next video that I put out, it's
going to be showing you that I went to your to your sheriff's
office. I was like, hey, do you want me to work for you?
Because I'm a YouTuber. I can edit videos all day long, every
day and whatever. I could probably do my job. I could
probably do their job better than they can do their job. But
hey, I'm sitting here waiting. Actually, it's probably been at
this point. It's been two and a half months since I paid for
it, and they just say, oh, you're just in the queue. And
then I keep asking for, all right, the last ten records
that you produced turning, you probably know that anything
that you already produce and I ask for a copy of, I'm allowed
to get it for free. But for some reason they sit on their
hands. I do not want to have to sue this city or this county
over a records request. You know, under the 119 statutes.
And that's exactly what's going to happen if I don't get these
records. So look up Michael Taylor.
Sir, your time is up. The armed fisherman and you all
be the next YouTube stars to.. Thank you, Mr. Taylor. Thank
you. Justin Dukas is next, followed by Jamila. Something.
Good morning. Good morning. Good.
So my name. Is the mic on. Know the
microphone is. All right. All right. My name
is case number two six cv 14065SM and the Southern
District of Florida Federal Court. I now hold a Martin
County record of committing a crime. 678 nights in a row.
What is that crime? That crime is sleeping. House bill 1365
was passed 678 days ago and turned into Florida. Statute
1250125.0231. And basically it says that, uh, you cannot
sleep, um, in public. But we all know that you cannot, uh,
sleep in the woods because that's trespassing. The woods
is owned by somebody. So it basically says that if you are
houseless in Martin County, if you want to go to sleep, you
cannot sleep in Martin County. That, um, is a violation of the
right to travel on top of a few other things. So for about four
months in a row by ten different people, we have, um,
came up here and spoke at this very podium and voiced our
concerns and our needs. And, um, you guys have talked about
a lot of things. Uh, you've talked about train whistles,
you've talked about, um, RV parks, you've talked about a
lot of things, but there has been no mentioning, no
muttering, no, uh, syllable about this civil rights crisis
that's going on right now. Um. So the ship agenda was great,
and that was passed even though we didn't talk about it. It's
great. Thank you for that because we need that. But that
does not address the crisis in which it's going on tonight, in
which I have to commit a crime tonight in order to sleep. So I
called the senator two times and told them to amend the law.
How, uh, amend the law. And of course, they don't listen to me
because I'm just, you know, a constituent. Who am I? Um, and
since I filed this lawsuit, I have been harassed and, um,
pulled over for three times by the Martin County Sheriff's
Office, um, for minor traffic and very minor traffic
infractions, I believe, for the sole purpose of harassing me,
that is, um, retaliation to my First Amendment right. And I
want to let everybody know that, um, everything is being
held accounted for. Um, now, the federal judge ordered me
and the defendants to confer in court in person on August 18th.
Um, if you guys want to show up, it's open to the public.
It's open. Everybody. Um. Spending so much money in, uh,
legal fees instead of addressing the actual problem.
Um, flock cameras. We don't want them take them down. And
please address this, uh, during the public comments, please.
Thank you. Jamilah is next, followed by Candace Callahan.
Good morning. Good morning everyone. How are
you this morning? Good morning.
I just had the. Oh, Taylor. Hold on. My doctor was on the
phone at the same time. My name is Jamie Yang, Escalona,
executive director of Yaya Pobeda. You guys should know my
face already. Let's chat about why I haven't been here since
June. On June 18th, one day before Juneteenth, my
participant, Toni Miller was lynched in Miami. She was what
we call motel homeless. The system failed her. And while we
are still fighting for transparency, unhoused
individuals in Martin County now have to worry about hate
crimes compounded by mass surveillance, aka flock. I want
to publicly thank my friends at Tent City Helpers. They have
shown up to speak to you consistently no matter what.
This shelter line item has been asked for for months without a
single acknowledgment from the commission outside of a
possible visit to La Jolla for land use, which I'm not sure if
that was done or not. I would love to hear some comment on
that. We have all invited you to our fireside chats, our
outreaches. Still no response. It is election season. Might I
add. Remember that for later. Tent City Helpers has
consistently provided evidence jailing unhoused individual
cost taxpayers more than housing them. A transitional
housing facility with wraparound services, employment
access, disability applications, veteran services,
pathways to permanent housing is cheaper than raids and
incarceration, and let's address the age old argument 40
to 60% of unhoused people in the US do have jobs. The whole
get a job excuse that doesn't stand anymore. And I lost my
place. Give me one second. I'm going to lose some time here.
The criminalization of not having a home is metastasizing
cancer across our region. We just had to fight SR four in
Miami, a city ordinance that took away the lead time before
police raids, allowing folks to move and service workers to
connect with them. That model threatens the spread here. But
here is what I saw today. What really breaks my heart. Human
services are the lowest funded department in your entire
budget yet on the Florida Opioid Abatement Fund website,
there is yet another massive award to Martin County
Sheriff's Office under the guise of prevention. Meanwhile,
smaller nonprofits like ours are barely scraping by. The
barriers to access these funds are so high that even when all
of these type of grants can have, we barely cover peer
support, specialist salaries alone. The flock lease expires
next year. Pensacola used opioid abatement funds to
purchase those cameras, a violation of federal usage
standards. I urge this board not to renew. I'm wondering if
we're using those dollars here. We're going to find that out to
the commissioners. My tone deserved better. My tone
deserved better. I hope that this is not happening here,
because we will find out. Thank you. Candace Callahan is
next, and Miss Callahan is the last request to speak for me. I
have. Good morning. On my good.
Hello. Not yet. Are we good? Okay. Um. Good
morning everyone. It's been some time since I've come
before you. I'm Candace Callahan, the executive
director for Stuart Main street. Um, Stuart main Street
is the nonprofit that has been partnering with the City of
Stuart for 40 years to help revitalize them and maintain at
this point, the historic downtown. We serve as a key
economic vitality driver and also of cultural preservation
and community engagement throughout the historic
downtown, functioning as a central economic hub for Martin
County. There's been a lot of discussion recently about
preservation amongst all of our communities, not just downtown
Stuart. So I thought I'd come and share some initiatives that
we have been doing and working on to help O and also some of
our recent accomplishments as well. So we are proud to have
recently helped our CRA received the designation for
the historic downtown, putting the district on the National
Register of Historic Places, and we have just applied for
the historic marker to serve as a permanent symbol of community
identity. We have just been awarded a $50,000 grant to help
the city develop design guidelines to help preserve and
protect our downtown charm that we've become so known for. We
have also applied for a $25,000 grant to help enhance and
develop a new user friendly digital walking and art history
tour to help better engage our youth and promote the
importance of preservation and strengthen local tourism. A few
weeks ago, we recently, um, were recognized from the
Secretary of the state and awarded in four categories
among 70 other Main Street programs across the state. We
received an award for volunteer of the year, Business owner of
the year, board Member of the year, as well as recognition
for our Saving Stuart event, which some of you have
participated in before and come and supported. So thank you for
that. And that was in the category of telling Main Street
Story. We applied for the Great American Main Street Award and
waiting their decision. This week. We are long overdue for
this almost 40 years of proven transformation, national
recognition and tourism attraction. But most
importantly, our resilient public private partnerships
with the City of Stuart and the good folks like you. We will
begin work on a large scale art mural project for Flagler Park,
um, where we host our farmers market every week. And that
should start, I think, next month. And just a friendly
reminder that this is the slowest time of the year for
our small business owners in our downtown. If we don't want
to lose our charm, we need to support our small businesses.
So whether you're grabbing an ice cream or a coffee or having
dinner, coming to Rock and Riverwalk, it all helps. Um,
and we are happy to maintain our weekly events market on
Maine. Our Farmer's Market, Rock and Riverwalk, and our
Summer Car Show series to help boost foot traffic as well. And
we appreciate your support and your partnership, and thank you
all for your service. Thank you. Thank you. Next
comes Commissioner comments. Commissioner Vargas.
, yes, I would like to send a special recognition to the
teachers administration and all of the support professionals
that support our schools. All the other professionals support
our schools and our students. Uh, when this gentleman, uh,
Mr. Voloshin was speaking, I remember being in Lao Cai,
Vietnam and near the Lao border in Cambodia. It's mountainous
and rice paddies tucked right into the mountainous range
right there. I have a couple of questions. This bill, 1365, has
Human Services looked into this. I'm sorry. I'm asking Mister
Donaldson. Miss Alder. Um, yes, we are familiar with
the bill in terms of its actions, and we, um, are fully
aware of all the restrictions it places on the county to
provide them, uh, to not allow public property for the use of,
um, uh, camping, sleeping, etc..
We've spoken about that before. So is there any remedy, any
other pathway? The, um, the remedy requires
this, uh, public stated that the in order for the county to
provide a shelter, they also have to provide all of the, um,
uh, accessory components that goes along with it. So it's not
just about providing the facility. You have to provide,
um, uh, adequate health care and a whole group of other
things that go along with it. So essentially, the bill
requires that if you're going to provide a place for the
homeless, that you have to have a well constructed, well-run
operation that is not, um, simply designating a campground
and with an arrow saying, you can camp here, you have to
provide multiple services in order to provide that. And so
that is a significant expense. And I'm not aware of of any
county in the state that has yet to meet the requirements of
the bill. Yeah, I'm going to look further
into that. Um, with my fellow commissioners from other
counties to see what they've done to get ideas there. The
other thing is, Mr. Taylor was here and he was talking about
the FOIA. Too slow. I've seen it very fast. Is there a
problem in that department addressing his, um, request?
The that would be the sheriff's department. We do not manage
the sheriff. He's a separate elected constitutional officer.
And so, no, we do not provide oversight to that.
Okay. So he hasn't made an application here with this
county? No. Through the sheriff only. Okay. I needed to be sure
about that. Thank you. Mr. Capps.
There's been a lot. Of interest in helping the
unhoused and a lot of comments made, um, for many of our
meetings. And I know there's a lot more that we could probably
do, but something came to mind that doesn't really get
mentioned. And and that is what are we doing now? And there are
some things we're doing now. We have a category of spending in
our budget called grants and Aids. And I thought I would
just mention that we do provide, uh, several of our
grants and Aids that bring benefits to the unhoused. Um,
I'm looking here at a list. One is called Veterans Homeless,
$10,000. Another one is Treasure Coast Homeless
Council, $25,000. Uh, another one is called food Bank.
$20,000. And another one that I think is closely related to
helping the unhoused is one called New Horizons, which is,
um, mental health. It's like a hospital over by Martin South.
That is the one, right? Yeah, that's where it is. New
horizons. Am I getting them mixed up? That's the that's the
name of that one over there by, uh, Martin South, right? Yes. I
took a tour of them. Now that's Coral Shores. Coral shores?
Yes. Anyway, we we, uh, we give, uh, $407,000 to New
Horizons, uh, which is closely related to helping the
unhoused. I don't say that to to say that that's all that we
should do. I know that there's probably other things we can
do, and we really appreciate people coming in to help us to
come up with new ideas on how we can enhance services to the
unhoused. But I wanted to mention that we do some things
now and then. I wanted to mention another thing that I
had the privilege to attend 10 or 12 days ago. I, along with
numerous federal, state and local leaders, had the
privilege of attending the Indian River lagoon South
Milestone celebration at the C23C24 reservoir and stormwater
treatment area up in Fort Pierce and Indian River lagoon
South is a part of the comprehensive Everglades
Restoration Plan and sitting on a huge piece of land, it will
have massive reservoirs of water, uh, containing runoff
from the region that will filter through stormwater
treatment areas that will clean the water before it goes into
Ten Mile Creek and then into the North Fork of the Saint
Lucie River. Uh, there was a very impressive lineup of
federal and state speakers at this event. And I would like to
point out that Commissioner heard was the only local
official who was asked to speak at this event because of her
role in Everglades restoration. From the very beginning. And
Commissioner heard your comments were excellent. You
represented us very well at this event. I appreciate that
very much. And as I learned more about Everglades
restoration, uh, I want to I become more grateful for the
progress that has been made. And I want to put my own
shoulder to the wheel and see what I can do to help, because
the issue of Everglades restoration is very, very
closely related to the health of our own local environment
and our waterways. Another contribution that that
Martin County has made to the, um, to homeless is in, I think,
about 2010, uh, I was asked to contribute substantially to,
uh, the construction of the Miss Butterfly facility in Port
Salerno, new Monrovia. Um, it's a facility for homeless
mothers. And I thought it was a very worthy facility. And I did
contribute substantially to the construction of this project.
It's been a wonderful success since then. So, you know, we
have made inroads. We have addressed, uh, homeless and we
haven't done enough, but we certainly keep moving in that
direction to make sure that we provide the best quality of
life for all the residents of Martin County, and also, I just
wanted to mention the agenda item that's been withdrawn from
the agenda today, and that's public hearing, quasi judicial.
Number two, I just wanted to say that, uh, Gina Nabi was the
staff person who prepared the staff report, and I want to say
that it's the best staff report I have ever read. Uh, the
proofing that she did on this extremely complex, complicated
issue was remarkable. It was so professional. It was it was a a
pleasure to see our staff. Uh, solve this very, very complex,
uh, challenge. So thank you, Miss Nabi. Commissioner Candy.
Thank you very much. Um, a week from today will be election
day. Uh, we have the election and the. And the opportunity
for voting has already begun. We are in our early voting. Uh,
window. It started on Saturday. Uh, also, if you had requested
a vote by mail ballot and have yet to turn it in, uh, you
still can. You can either drop it off at the supervisor of
elections office or mail it in. Uh, I know I'm serving on the
canvassing board with Commissioner Vargas. Uh, and
that supervisor of elections, Vicki Davis, had said she sent
out approximately 15 or 16,000 ballots, and only about 6000
have returned, which is a pretty low percentage even in
an off year election. You can vote early in Hobe Sound. You
can vote early in Indian Town, and you can vote early in the
Martin Luther King on Martin Luther King and Stuart from 9
to 5, I think, until this weekend. So, uh, the 15th, uh,
and then of course, a week from today, August 18th, is Election
day. Uh, this election for all of the local seats, the local
positions will be decided during this primary. A lot of
folks that think that, hey, I will not vote during the August
primary, I will wait and vote in November. The local
positions will be decided during the primary. So I know
that some people after the fact are frustrated. Um, who you
vote for is obviously your prerogative, but it is
important to vote. I would tell you, I think this will be a
historically low voter turnout. Uh, it's also an opportunity
for people to vote for the positions that really, I think,
have some of the most relevance to your day to day life. School
board commissioners, city commissioners, village
commissioners. So the opportunity to have a say in
that is now, uh, so I appreciate that. And in regard.
And let me add that all voters, regardless of your political
affiliation, are eligible to vote in all of the local
elections this year, which is kind of unusual.
Yes, true. Sometimes if you are a one party affiliation or
another, the ballot would be specific, but all seats are
available for every. As Commissioner Heard said, every
whatever your political party affiliation is, you can vote
for all of the seats. Except, of course, if you're in an
unincorporated Martin County, you don't vote in the city of
Stuart, you're not voting in Indian Town. But for all of the
seats that are available for you to select, you can, in
regards to the unhoused situation that's been discussed
quite a bit. Uh, I had a conversation with the ladies
that spoke this morning several weeks ago, and I was very
intrigued by the Dignity Bus and have reached out to the
folks up north that have won and have planned to go and see
it, because I think to hear about it is one thing, but to
see it and to understand how they are able to do it, I think
is an opportunity that might be the closest, uh, way that we
can assist at a higher level without getting ourselves too
much into a legal or a logistical quagmire. It's being
done. From what I understand, successfully. Just to our
north. So I will tell you that I'm heading up to see it and to
speak to the folks that are doing it. And when I do, I will
come back and give you my impression.
Okay, good. Commissioner Hetherington.
I look forward to learning more about the Dignity Bus. And then
I just came back from, um, American Water Resources
Association meeting, which is one of my favorite meetings of
the year. Uh, several years ago at this meeting, on the way to
the meeting, we were in our district two. We were having an
issue with Monterey Subdivision and contaminated wells, as
cited by the Health department. Um, I remember Drew Bartlett
was just moving from the department. Uh, the DEP over to
director of the South Florida Water Management, and I want to
thank him again because, uh, because of his actions in
connecting district to our office with DEP, we were able
to mobilize within weeks. Um, and those folks were getting
bottled water, and he was able to connect us with the right
people at DEP. And we were able to partner with the city of
Stewart to get those folks onto sewer. We received. I want to
say it was about a $1.8 million grant at the time, and it was
almost 100% funded. Moving those folks from contaminated
wells to sewer. So and it was a great partnership between DEP,
the district two office, the city of Stewart. I want to say
this was again five years ago, and it was a result of being at
that, a meeting and talking with the right people at the
right time, and that they were on water within 18 months,
which I would say the at the speed of government. It was a
really good partnership. So that meeting, it always has a
special place in my heart. And then as I sat there and listen,
there were panels throughout the two days. We had Army Corps
talking about and South Florida water management talking about
Everglades restoration. Uh, Colonel Bowman was there. Major
Bell uh, we had Drew Bartlett and all five water management
districts around the state, and, uh, there were panels on
biosolids. And I sat there very proud representing Martin
County, because as they started to talk about biosolids and
land application and emerging technology around the state,
that was, um, really addressing how we manage biosolids. I
wanted to raise my hand and say, yes, we're the poster
child. And they did mention Martin County, you know, in the
halls, because we are a leading example in the state of how we
manage our biosolids, how we partner with Everglades
restoration, and even the example of the site where we're
going to eventually store muck dredged out of the Indian River
lagoon is a very good example. I was very proud to represent
Martin County and to listen to all the accomplishments and
hear all these people from around the state of Florida,
from the Panhandle, all the way to the keys, and the
recognition that we get for and Martin County for being leaders
in water restoration. Everglades restoration and
water policy. So it was my pleasure to attend. And again,
I came back very proud of Martin County and the things
that we've done over the past ten years.
Very nice. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Donaldson. Miss elder.
Okay, in that case, let's proceed. We'll take up public
hearing, quasi judicial number one, which is a public hearing
to request approval of the major final site plan for
southwest 96th Street. Mono pine. Wireless
telecommunications facility tower. This is quasi judicial.
Any ex-parte disclosures Mr.. Vargas I have none. The form
has been filed. Commissioner Capps.
If I have any. They have been filed.
I don't have any. And they've been filed. Commissioner Campi.
I don't have any. And that's been filed.
And Commissioner Hetherington. I don't have any and they've
been filed. Mr. Sinnott, have you filed all
of your required things with the clerk?
I'm turning a copy of my work history and the agenda item to
be filed as exhibit one, and the applicant submitted their
affidavit of mailers at this past Thursday's LPA hearing.
Is the applicant here? Yes. Anyone who's going to be
providing sworn testimony, please stand up, raise your
Right hand and be sworn in. Do you swear or.
Affirm the evidence you're about to give will be the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so help
you God. I do.
Please proceed, Mr. Sinnott. Thank you, Madam Chair. Good
morning, commissioners. I'm John Sennett, principal planner
with growth management. This is a request by United Commercial
Telecom on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Fazlul and Zarina Ahmed
for major final site plan approval to construct a 120
foot stealth design monoplane. Wireless telecommunications
facility and associated infrastructure. The subject
site is a portion of an approximately 1.7 acre parcel
located on the south side of southwest 96th Street,
approximately 230ft west of the intersection of southwest 96th
Street and Southwest Corner Highway and Stuart included as
a request for Certificate of Public Facilities exemption.
There are no interviewers for this application. The subject
site is just west of the intersection of 96th and
Kanner, to the east of the site is an existing Sunoco gas
station, right at the corner. The subject site is located
within the LC limited Limited Commercial zoning district. The
adjacent properties to the west and the south are also within
the LC zoning district. The gas station property to the east is
within the R-3 zoning district, with a covenant to GC. The
future land use designation of the subject site is limited.
Commercial. The adjacent properties to the west and
south are also within the limited commercial future land
use designation. The gas station property to the east is
within the general commercial future. Land use. The closest
existing cell tower is 1.5 miles to the east. Located on
the northern end of the South Fork High School property. The
proposed 96th Street Tower is a 120 foot stealth design
monoplane. Wireless telecommunications facility to
accommodate four wireless carriers. It will be within a
1600 square foot lease area within an overall 1.7 acre
parent parcel. A separate application has been approved
for the development of a one story, 9472 square foot
convenience store retail building on the parent parcel.
The tower relies on infrastructure that will be
constructed as part of the development of the convenience
store. The proposal complies with the requirements of
Division 18, article four, Land Development Regulations. Martin
County Code. There are no existing structures of
sufficient height in the area, which could support co-location
of antennas and provide equivalent improvements to
service within a three quarter mile search ring. The subject
property owners were the only responsive landowners based on
coordination with information Technology Services, the
Sheriff's department and emergency management. The
proposed tower is not expected to interfere with existing
public safety. Telecommunications facilities,
as part of the application review process. Martin County
retained an independent technical consultant for
Unwired 4G. Unwired confirmed that no existing tower within a
reasonable distance can provide equivalent improvements due to
spacing constraints, height limitations, and propagation
characteristics. 4G Unwired verified the proposed tower
would materially improve service quality and reliability
for users in this area of the county. We do have present with
us today, Mr. Mark Nygren of 4G on Wired. He available to
answer any technical questions. This is the proposed final site
plan. The tower is located east of the proposed convenience
store on the parcel. The tower relies on a driveway,
stormwater facilities and landscaping that will be
installed as part of the development of the convenience
store. As part of the approved convenience store development
order. There is also a preserve area established on the
southern portion of the property. That area shown in
the the hatching to the south of the convenience store. This
is a profile view of the 120 foot mono pine cell tower. Is a
photo simulation of the proposed tower as viewed from
the adjacent property to the west. Just under 500ft west of
the tower, there's another photo simulation as viewed from
Kanner Highway, roughly 450ft south of the tower. And there's
a photo simulation as viewed from Pratt Whitney Road,
approaching the intersection with Kanner Highway. This
application was heard before the local planning agency this
past Thursday, August 6th. The LPA voted 4 to 0, recommending
approval, with one member being absent. Development review
staff have found the United Commercial Telecom application
to comply with all applicable regulations in the
Comprehensive Growth Management Plan, as detailed in the staff
report. Staff recommendation is to move that the board receive
and file the agenda item and its attachments, including the
staff report, as exhibit one and move to the board. Adopt
the resolution approving the final site plan for the
southwest 96th Street Pine Tower project. That concludes
my presentation. Questions for staff. Mr. Kamps.
How tall are these towers? Usually, is this common? 120ft.
I'd have to defer to the applicant for common heights,
but this one is 120. And that's that's permitted per Division
18 of our land development regulations. But I'm sure the
applicant could could address that as well.
Thanks. Is this a major or minor
development? The tower application is a
major. How about the development order
for the convenience store? That was a minor development.
And that was approved in January of this year.
So that was approved by staff. Yes. That was a separate
application that did not include the scope of the tower.
That is the convenience store, the preserve area, stormwater
facilities and parking and driveways.
So if I'm not mistaken, there is an existing convenience
store gas station that's next door.
Next door on the adjacent property. Yes, to the east.
How on earth do we permit these things next to each other?
Paul Schilling, growth Management Director for the
record. Thank you, Commissioner. Um, so there is a
Sunoco fueling station on the corner. I believe that's the
the brand name that includes a smaller convenience store. This
project, as I recall, which I approved, was, um, potentially
other commercial uses, meaning other retail, if I'm not
mistaken. So it's not a it's not a whole wholly developed
convenience store there. There will be other retail uses, such
as a dry cleaner. Um, um, those types of uses. A mailbox place,
something like that. Okay. And, um, this application
is the tower separation setbacks and fall zone criteria
of our land development regulations shall not apply to
any stealth tower. Why not? That's the criteria. As you
indicated within Division 18. So it would if it wasn't a
stealth tower. Those the fall zone and setbacks and tower
separations would apply. Correct.
Can you explain why? I mean, just because it's disguised as
a pine tree? Um, why is it not subject to fall zone
protections? Uh, as John indicated, Paul
Schilling for the record. So, as John indicated, Division 18
guides this process of the land development regulations and has
for many years. Um, so the stealth tower is the is the
appearance of it. Um, the requirements for it to blend
into the neighborhood, for lack of a better term, but also more
importantly, is the engineering involved. Uh, the towers are
engineered to, in essence, and I'm sure the applicant or
consultant could talk about this, but our engineered to
fall within their own footprint. So the footprint of
that leased area or right around that area, as opposed to
having guy wires and other components of a traditional
radio antenna. So they are designed I'm not aware of the
research I've done of any of these ever failing, but they
have at times had some, um, issues, maybe with a branch or
two that need to be replaced from time to time. But they are
engineered substantially, and I'm sure the applicant could
talk about that. But that's the essence of of the requirement.
Okay. Thank you.
Thank you. With the applicant, like to
make a presentation. I'm happy to answer any
questions. If you guys would like me to come up and answer
at least. Okay. Sure. Tell us about the
fall zone protections. My name is Kevin Wright. I'm
the director of operations for United Commercial Telecom. And
thank you for having me. Uh, so fall zone, first and foremost,
Paul is correct. Uh, the towers are designed typically to
collapse on themselves. They design a break point. So towers
don't fall like this. They fall like this on top, on top of
themselves, like he said. So. So that fall on for this
particular tower would fall within the footprint of our
lease area. That's the way they're designed nowadays. I
mean, maybe back in the day before my time they weren't,
but that most all towers are designed to collapse on
themselves. Into a 1600 square foot lease.
Correct. So they would have multiple break points on the
tower that if a section were to fail, it would fold over onto
the tower, not fall off to the side.
Okay. And I see that there was a consultant who was hired to
do the, um, I don't know what you call it. The. Yes. So who
paid for that consultant. Mark Kent.
Johnson, for the record. And that is being reimbursed by
the. Yes. Have we been I see that there's
an outstanding balance. Yes. That is we've been
reimbursed for most of the balance. The outstanding
balance is to have Mr. Seagram present with us today. That
balance will be payable, uh, during the post approval
process for this. Okay. Thank you. Any further
questions? I wish it was an American flag.
I wish it was an American flag. I think the pine trees, you
know, I get that it's stealth, but I.
Mean. They look like. cheap
artificial Christmas trees. I guess the flag wouldn't be
stealth. So then they'd have to. They'd have to fly with the
fall zones. No, it's stealth as a cell
phone tower. It's obviously like, for instance, in Palm
City, they a long time ago, they put one on a church
property and it was a cross. Yes, sir. Uh, I like, you know,
obviously if you see a flag on a massive flagpole, you
understand it's a cell phone tower. I just think. Or even
the one that we have that's right around the corner over
here is just a monopole. That's not stealth. I guess.
That's itself. Is all internal, correct? Yes.
I just think that that sort of you just your eye erases that.
Whereas when you see these large artificial pine trees
that are way taller and I get why they have to be that tall
than the surrounding landscape, they just look sort of
ridiculous. But I guess that's falls within the definition of
stealth. I just like the concept of a really large
American flag would be more appropriate than a cheesy, for
lack of a better word. Uh, pine.
Tree. But that's just a personal
opinion and won't affect my decision making.
Mr. Capps. So, uh, the the 120 foot height
is a common height for such towers.
It is? Yes, sir. I mean, we we build them much taller than
that as well. Uh, 200 foot, uh, keeping it under the 200 foot
threshold keeps with the FAA from having to light the tower.
That's the requirement with the FAA. But also, if you're in a
flight plan, we would like the tower. We're not in this
particular area, but 120 foot is a standard, a standard
height pole in Florida, built a lot of towers in Florida. I've
built a lot, 120 foot poles in Florida. Yes, sir.
Okay. And I have one question. Broward County Attorney, how
this issue of of towers and Martin County has been an issue
in the past where people have wanted the county commission to
intervene and perhaps prevent a tower, uh, from being located
somewhere. I think there was one. And right in a
neighborhood that created a stir.
A sidewalk. So those towers are a little
bit different. Those are towers that are not even towers. Those
are, um, communications that are installed in our right of
way by like AT&T, a company, and they have the right to do
that. So we can't intervene in this. This is a different
situation. This is on private property and it's 120 foot
stealth tower. So it's a different situation. But when
the utility when the utility companies want to install in
our right of way, we don't have a say in that. That's the
circumstance that came up with the sidewalk with the residents
and their house. So it's a little bit of a different
situation. Okay.
So our level of discretion would just be the general
principles of judicial decisions. Competent,
substantial evidence in the record.
Correct. So we have land development regulations that
govern these towers. And as long as like any other site
plan, if they meet the land development regulations, then
ideally it would be approved based on the competent,
substantial evidence proven that they met those land
development regulations. Further questions. This is a
public hearing. Would anyone from the public like to address
us? Thank you. I don't see any back to the board. Or is there
a recommendation? Move staff's recommendation.
Second. There's a motion and a second.
All those in favor? I opposed that motion passes unanimously.
Thank you commissioners. Thank you. We will now move on
to, uh, department quasi judicial number one, which is a
article ten appeal consideration of an article ten
appeal by Corey Beaton regarding denial of building
permit number so-and-so for the construction of a single family
residence. This is quasi judicial. Commissioners.
Commissioner Vargas, any quasi judicial disclosures?
Ex-parte disclosures. Okay, okay.
Um, I do not have any that, uh, form has been filed.
Commissioner Capps. If I have any. They have been
filed. I don't have any. And they've
been filed. Commissioner Campi. I don't have any. And that's
been filed. Commissioner.
If any. They've been filed. All right.
Uh. Let's see. So, commissioners,
this is the, uh, procedure for this is unique. Um, follow
along on page 335. We will now have the summary of an
introduction of appeal by staff.
So, Commissioner, we need to have everybody sworn in first.
I don't think that's happened. Has it?
So I thought that we didn't have to have people sworn in
because we're not accepting any new evidence.
We're not accepting new evidence, but it would be ideal
to just wear it in for this, for the appeal, just in the
abundance of caution. So. Do you swear or affirm the
evidence you're about to give will be the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth. So help you God?
I do.. Okay, so, commissioners, um,
Elise Elder, County Attorney, I'm just going to give an
overview of this process. It doesn't come before the board
very often. This is an article 12. I mean, our article ten
appeal. What that means is Mr. Beaton filed for a building
permit. It was denied by staff. He appealed that decision to
the county administrator, who held an administrative review
meeting to go over the building permit. Mr. Beaton was given an
opportunity to speak and present his case at the
administrative review meeting. Mr. Donaldson, um, issued a
opinion or a ruling upholding the denial of the building
permit. Mr. Beaton appealed that decision to this board. So
your your view today or your role today is a little bit
limited. As Commissioner Heard said, that there are quasi
judicial procedures in the agenda item. So what happens is
I'm giving you this quick overview. Mr. Beaton will have
20 minutes to present his case. Once he is done, the board will
have the opportunity to ask him questions. Once the questions
are over, staff will have an opportunity to present their
case. We will have 20 minutes. Um, the board can, um, ask
questions of staff, and then you deliberate and make a
ruling. So just to point out that the standard for your
review is limited. So the three questions you need to decide is
whether the county administrator accorded
procedural due process, whether the county administrator
adhered to the essential requirements of law, and
whether the final action by the county administrator was based
on competent, substantial evidence in the agenda item.
Those three different areas are defined so the procedural due
process just means that the board must decide whether the
county administrator's review of the building permit was
conducted fairly and impartially, according to all
of our land development regulations and our procedures,
to see if the essential requirements of law were filed,
the board must decide whether the Mr. Donaldson applied the
correct provisions of the applicable law and code when
making his decision, including state statute and the Land
Development Regulations and the county's code, and he did not
abuse his legal authority in the process, and the final
determination is whether the decision is based on competent,
substantial evidence that Mr. Donaldson received during the
Administrative Review hearing. Um, that's the board's
standard. So if you don't have any questions, we can have Mr.
Beaton come up and give his initial, uh.
Side questions for Miss Elder before we turn it over to Mr.
Beaton. Please. Okay.
Miss elder, so based on what you just told us, we are
deciding on those three criteria, not necessarily on
whether or not we feel that it's a legitimate project.
Correct. So you're not supposed to sub your substitute your
decision for the county administrator. If he made his
decision based on evidence presented at the review
meeting, you should uphold it. Even though there might be
evidence on the other side to substantiate Mr. Beaton's side
of the story. As long as Mr. Donaldson's was decided based
on the competent, substantial evidence, your role is to
uphold that, not to substitute your judgment for his. So
that's the standard in an appeal.
So, in other words, to decide if we felt that the technical
process was followed correctly. Yes. And there was evidence to
support his name. Not if we agree that it was a
good project or a bad project. Correct?
Correct. Final question. What would the applicant's, uh. What
could he do if he's unhappy? What's the recourse of based on
today's decision? Is there no. What's the next step in the
process for him. To follow up? Probably file a
lawsuit. If he was, if he chose to, um, to appeal your
decision, basically. Thank you.
Commissioner Vargas. So, um, and I understand
everything you've said, and I've looked at this before I
came to this meeting and had a lot of questions. So in the
event that the applicant is unhappy, file a lawsuit against
whom? The county. They would file a
lawsuit challenging the denial of a building permit with, um,
the circuit court. Okay. It was my understanding
that he can get a building permit. However, there's a
little bit difference in so far as the land mass he was going
to be building on. And it has to do with something dealing
with the, uh, regulations going back to the 1980s. Is this
correct? So he was denied a building
permit, so he cannot build any house at this time. And that is
what he's appealing. And he will provide you with his his
facts. And then we'll give you the county side.
So now we take what the vote dealing with Mr. Donaldson's.
At the end of. The activity.
Okay. At the end of this meeting, this agenda item,
you'll vote. Mr. Beaton, you'll have 20
minutes to to, uh, talk with us.
All. Good morning. Good morning.
Morning, chair and commissioners. Uh, my name is
Corey Beaton. I'm the appellant and the property owner at 18250
Southeast Box at River road, Jupiter, Florida. Um, just want
to thank you guys for your time and the opportunity to be here
today. Um, what I'm asking is for the board to reverse the
county administrator's decision, uh, and the denial of
my building permit application. So, uh, before I explain how we
got here, I think it's critically important to
identify and define what this case is and what it is not. Um,
this is not title action. I hold recorded title to the
property contained within my legal description. If another
party believes it has a competing ownership interest,
there's a judicial process for resolving that dispute. This
administrative appeal is not that process. Um, the questions
before this board are much narrower. Miss elder, uh, kind
of explained them. It's it's whether I was afforded
procedural due process, whether the county administrator
observed the essential requirements of law. And was
the decision supported by competent, substantial evidence
contained in the record. And I respectfully submit that the
answer to all three of those is no. Um, so I'd like to start
with kind of how we got here. Uh, before I purchased this
property, I contacted the Martin County Zoning
Department. My point of contact was Amy Offenbach. Um, I had
extensive conversations with Miss Offenbach, and at the
time, the property appraiser was showing the property to be
1.69 acres. Uh, the property boundary line had been moved to
the mean high water line. Um, contrary to what the legal
description actually called for, the boundary of the
property extends into the water. Um, so she explained
that a one zoning required two acres and that the acreage
discrepancy needed to be addressed. She gave me a
roadmap of everything that I would need to do before I
purchased the property. And, um, I performed extensive due
diligence before I, before I actually bought it, I hired a
professional license surveyor. I retained legal counsel, and I
researched the the property's history and chain of title. I
went through a lot of old documents and documentation on
it, and figured out exactly how it came to be and why it was
what it was. Um, so I specifically asked her if I'm
able to get the property boundary moved back out to its
rightful location, and the property appraiser then
reflects two acres, will that suffice? And she said yes. So
at the same time, I was closely watching a neighboring property
who was going through the permitting process. Um, his
property was strikingly similar to mine. It was 1.7 acres of
dry land and it was two acres total. It was also a non-legal
lot of record, and he had applied for a building permit.
Um, ultimately, the county approved his permit. So, uh,
this was not an isolated incident. Uh, instant. There
was three other properties within the same neighborhood
that the county staff had approved development on, under
the same exact circumstances. The first was in 1984, two
years after the comp plan. The people that knew it better than
anyone else, um, than another in 2016, and then this 1 in
2023. The county staff has now attempted to dismiss all of
those approvals by characterizing all of them as
mistakes. Um, but I feel that 40 years of county action, um,
does not erase those approvals. Those happen. These were
separate properties, separate applications, separate county
reviews and and separate growth management staff that that
reviewed these, um, most importantly, the most recent
and comparable property was actively being permitted while
I was performing my due diligence on this property. So
from everything reasonably available to me, uh, the county
staff guidance, the surveying, the appraisal records, the
historical county approvals, and a neighboring building
permit actively being built, I had every reason to believe
this property was buildable. I relied upon that information
when I purchased this property, and after closing, I presented
all of my evidence to the property appraiser and was able
to get the boundary moved back out to its rightful location,
which then reflected that the property was 2.01 acres, uh,
exceeding the two acre requirement. I contacted miss,
uh, Miss Offenbach. I contacted her back. Uh, I presented her
with everything. She confirmed that, yes, the property on her
end was now shown two acres. She confirmed that a single
family residence, uh, that I was eligible to put a single
family residence on the property. And, um, at my
request, she followed up in writing, defining, um, the
applicable zoning and setback requirements, and did verify
that a single family residence was an allowable use for this
property. So as a landowner, I that was it. I had everything
that I needed to to proceed with development. Um, I relied
upon that representation. I hired an architect, I hired
engineers, I got environmental studies, done, surveys, site
plans, core borings, uh, soil samples, testing everything
that was needed to prepare a building application. I spent
tens of thousands of dollars. I sold a ton of assets off a
truck, tractor buggies, farm equipment, vacant land,
everything to make sure I would have enough funding to finance
this build. Uh, ultimately, I sold my home that my family had
lived in for 15 years. Uh, to make sure we'd have enough
money to build this house. Um, sacrifice. That's what I told
my wife. It'll all be worth it in the end. Uh, you know, we'll
be able to build on this, and it's going to be all worth it.
Um, these were enormous decisions that I made, but I
made them because I had done my due diligence. I relied upon
the information, uh, that was available to me, including the
information that Martin County staff gave me. So fast forward
several months. Um, I submit my permit application. Uh, the
review process was moving forward, and then a staff
comment was added to my building, uh, file that said
lot size incorrect. Uh, staff cited comp plan policy 4.14 and
took the position that the submerged portion of the
property could not be counted towards the two acre
requirement. Uh, I discussed this extensively with staff and
with senior Assistant County Attorney Sebastian Fox. Um, Mr.
Fox made it very clear we're not disputing your property
boundary. We're not disputing the fact that you have. And you
own a two acre tract of land. We're just saying that because
of this policy, you can't use the submerged land portions of
it. So the problem was, is policy 4.14 does not say that I
can't use my submerged lands. It specifically defines exactly
a boundary. The boundary line, as where the submerged lands be
excluded. And that's to stop people from being able to use
riparian rights and try to claim land that's not theirs.
Um, that was the basis for the permit denial that that is
consistent on the conditions report. Um, that's precisely
why I filed the article ten appeal, because I needed Mr.
Donaldson to look at policy 4.1 for the actual reason the
permit was denied. Based upon the facts and the evidence that
was available at the time of permit denial. Uh, Miss Elder
stated that it's based upon the evidence presented in the
hearing. It is not an article ten appeal is specific. It's
the facts that we're in the in the the facts in the evidence
established at the exact time of permit denial. Um, his job
is to put himself in the shoes of the decision maker that had
the information available to look at it and figure out if
they made the right decision. But that unfortunately, policy
4.14, that question was never decided. Instead, the basis for
the denial changed. Uh, and this transformed into, uh, that
I hadn't conclusively established ownership of the
submerged portion of my parcel. Um.
At that time, the record included my recorded legal
description and unbroken chain of title extending more than 60
years. Two professional boundary surveys, not one, but
two professional licensed surveyors that are authorized
to conduct boundary surveys in this state. Uh, a letter from
my survey or written statement, uh, reiterating that this is my
property, uh, property appraiser records that are
recognizing is it a two as a 2.01 acre parcel? Decades of
taxation and historical evidence concerning the
property. Yet the administrator's decision
states, and I quote, following the administrative review
meeting, the county received confirmation from the state of
Florida that it claims ownership of the submerged
lands in question. Those five words are extremely important.
Following the administrative review hearing, the
administrator then relied upon that information to conclude
that I did not own the submerged lands and declared
the other issues of remaining the other remaining issues
moot. Um, the administrator never decided the issue that I
actually appealed. I was never given a meaningful opportunity
to examine or respond to the new information upon which
decision upon which that decision was based. The basis
for a governmental decision cannot become a moving target
after a hearing is over. Uh, that is a due process problem.
I had requested Miss Amy Offenbach be present during the
administrative review hearing. She was my point of contact at
the county. She knew this better than anyone else. She's
who I dealt with primarily. I was told by Miss Elder that the
administrative review process is limited to the county
administrator, the county attorney, and the growth
management director. And Miss Amy Offenbach would not be
present. And she wasn't. And instead, this county
substituted and didn't abide by their own code and brought
three extra people into the administrative review hearing
that had no business being there. That all had input, and
I was deprived of my procedural due process rights. Um, now the
essential requirements of law, the administrator was to review
the facts established at the time of denial. I presented a
recorded deed in a legal description, a chain of title
two boundary surveyors, a surveyors written statement,
property appraiser and tax records and historical evidence
concerning the property. So what legal authority authorized
the administrator to disregard this evidence? I found nothing
in article ten or Martin County Code or applicable law that
authorizes the county administrator while reviewing a
building permit denial to disregard those documents and
substitute an adjudicated ownership claim in his place.
He is he is not to adjudicate, completing competing claims of
real to real property. He is not authorized to disregard my
recorded title and professional surveys, and he is not
authorized to obtain new information. After the
administrative review meeting and use it against me without
an opportunity to respond. So the essential requirements of
law were not afforded to me as far as Depp's claim, uh, at
some point I just have to say this plainly. Uh, an
administrative building permit appeal is not a quiet title
action. I don't care what Depp claims to own. A claim is not
title. A claim is not evidence of conveyance, and a claim is
certainly not a court judgment. I hold the recorded title. I
have the legal description. I have an unbroken chain of title
spanning more than 60 years. I have boundary surveys and I
have Martin County has assessed and taxed this property and
treated it as buildable for decades. The county has
collected $269,000 on this property in the last 25 years,
and are going to try to say that it's unbelievable. I don't
think that that is fair. Yet somehow my entire interest in
this property is supposed to just disappear because Depp is
making a claim. I think everyone understands that
sometimes government agencies can be wrong. And I think
Jonathan Dickinson was a great example of that. With Depp. Um,
everyone remembers what happened there. Uh, Depp is not
a court. Martin County is not a court. And this article ten
proceeding is not quite title action. Um, if Depp believes it
owns property contained within my recorded legal description,
then they have every right to bring that claim into a proper
judicial forum and prove it. There's a process for that. But
until that happens, I'm not going to voluntarily surrender
my property that I purchased. I physically purchased this
property with my own money. I pay taxes on it, and it's been
delineated by a surveyor to to show his mine. And if they have
an issue with that, then there's there's another avenue
for that. But this, this proceeding is not that. So most
importantly, uh, the reason for today's appeal, um, this was
not the reason that the permit was even denied. Mr. Donaldson
violated the essential requirements of law by relying
upon post hearing information, disregarding my legal
description and boundary survey, and attempting to
adjudicate title to lands which is well beyond his legal
authority. And in an administrative hearing. Um,
finally, as far as competent, substantial evidence during the
administrative review, there were references to state TIF
deeds, leases and other documents, supposedly in the
record are supposedly, uh, that have been recorded. Not a
single document establishing that the state owns the
property contained within my legal description was
introduced for me to examine or rebut. Not a single document.
The documentary documentary evidence before the
administrator supporting my position included my deed,
legal description, chain of title, survey, surveyor
statement, property appraiser records, tax records,
historical evidence, and decades of county treatment of
similar situated properties. That was the actual evidence. I
was not presented with a single piece of evidence to say
otherwise. I public record requested any emails or
correspondence that Mr. Donaldson had with Depp.
Following the administrative review process. There was none.
He relied upon a verbal claim to make his decision. That is
not substantial evidence whatsoever. In conclusion, I'm
not asking for special treatment. I'm asking for the
code to be interpreted and applied to my property the same
way it's been applied for the last four decades in this
county. The permit was denied based upon policy 4.14. The
administrator never decided whether that interpretation was
correct. The citizens must be able to rely upon the recorded
deeds, legal descriptions, boundary surveys, property
records, and decades of taxation. Unless a court of
competent jurisdiction determines otherwise. Think
about what an alternative means. If somebody can simply
make a claim against property that a citizen holds recorded
title to, and has paid taxes on for decades, and the county can
disregard that citizens deed and surveys merely because of
that claim, then what exactly does property ownership mean in
Martin County? I'm asking to build a single family home on
my own property. For my family, my property surrounded on three
sides by four houses. I respectfully asked this board
to reverse the county administrator's decision,
reverse the permit denial, and direct staff to process my
building permit consistent with the property's recorded legal
description and the applicable provisions of the Martin County
Comp Plan and Land Development Regulations. Thank you. Any
questions? Thank you. Questions for Mr.
Beaton. We'll have to ask him.
Yeah. Thank you. Thank you sir. Um, just as an
aside, what do you do for a living?
Uh, firefighter. Interesting.
You did a nice presentation. Uh, second question. Um, am I
allowed to just generally ask questions just for background?
Like, what did you pay for your property and when did you
purchase it? I purchased it, uh, 2023. I
paid 1.3 million. 2023.
1.3. At the time, it was assessed at
1.1. On the property appraiser role.
It's a two acre is the criteria for being allowed to have the
building permit correct? Two eight, two acres or more. And
what is that? I'm just doing this for reiteration. What is
the what is the county saying that you what is their
interpretation of the amount of property that you have? Uh.
1.7 of dry land, 2.01 acres. Total, 1.7. 2.2.01. So that's
the little extra is what's in the water just.
Yes. Correct. Thank you.
Mr. Vargas. You know, um, having been in
real estate for many years, I really admire the lengths you
went to. I would do the same thing as you. Uh, if I were
planning on moving my family, my homestead, my last home, I
think forever home to this piece of property. You
certainly have spent a lot of money, uh, looking into. Is
this the right move for my family? And then also to sell
your homestead? Yeah.
That's admirable to me. When I have been involved with the
county, not this county, but another county. Uh, and looking
at property, I, too, had to rely on what staff said, uh,
because that's the only way I can say. Well, you know, this
is this is a good avenue to take or. No, I really should do
something else. But you've done the other something else in
addition to that, policies here should not be floating and
should not, you know, be constructed as situations come
up. Um, we're talking about three other properties, 1984,
2016, 2023, which were labeled as mistakes. They could have
been. However, you're basing your argument on the fact that
these are similar properties, correct?
Identical. Identical. Um, so having said
that, we're talking about submerged lands, riparian
rights. And this is this is the key component. Is that correct?
Correct. To be able to allow you to go
forward. Okay. Um, but you certainly have the landmass
without interfering with, um, conservation areas. That would
be unbelievable. Correct? Okay. Um, so having said that, I
understood that what you're looking for, I understand what
you've done to to spend $1.3 million, um, is a chunk of
change. And as I say, it's very hard to to remake that again.
Okay. Um, I just wanted to clarify. I think a report was
was thorough, complete. It was very understandable. We don't
need to go through all the facts again. It's already
recorded. Thank you. Thank you.
Any further questions? Would staff like to give a
presentation? Yes.
Thank you. Chair. Uh, Pete Walden, deputy growth
management director, and I do have a copy of the agenda with
some, uh, exhibits. I threw l which did not make it into the
formal agenda that is included. And I believe those were
provided on the DS for the commissioners. So I'm going to
go through a brief history of the events that led up and the
timeline that led up to this, and then I'll give it back to
the county attorney and administrator to follow through
about process and the decisions made. So this is a synopsis of
the property and the timeline that is the subject of the
quasi judicial appeal before you today. According to deeds
shown on the property, Appraisers website in April of
2000, lot one, River's Edge and unrecorded subdivision was
divided and sold. This created the parcel that Mr. Beaton now
owns. In January of 2016, a zoning letter was issued to Mr.
McNicholas of McCarthy, summers, Bob Co wood, Norman
Bass and MLBPA regarding the subject site. The letter stated
the zoning district of A-1 Small Farms District, the land
use of rural density, both required a minimum lot size of
two acres, and the development setbacks of the parcel. The
letter also called into question the lot size,
indicating that the property appraisers website described
the lot area as 1.69 acres. While the survey showed two
acres, including submerged lands. In October of 2023,
McCarthy summers submitted an application for a future land
use amendment and concurrent zoning district change for the
subject property. The amendment was to change the existing land
use of rural density to one unit per two acres to a state
density one unit per acre, and the concurrent A-1 Small Farms
District to one re dash one, a residential estate district. In
December of 2023, the application was formally
withdrawn. Of note, staff supported the land use changes
and was prepared to take it forward to the Board of County
Commissioners on August 7th of 2025. Mr. Beaton applied for a
building permit to construct a single family residence on
April 24th of 2026. The Martin County Building official
emailed a conditions report to Mr. Beaton, stating the
building permit could not be issued due to the inability to
meet zoning requirements. On May 14th, 2026, the county
administrator received a notice of appeal regarding the denial
of building permit build 2025 080317 for the construction of
a single family residence at 1802 50 Southeast Loxahatchee
River road. Mr. Beaton's property. On June 17th, 2026,
Don Donaldson conducted an administrative review of the
permit application. Mr. Beaton and county staff attended on
June 30th, 2026. Mr. Donaldson sent a determination to Mr.
Beaton that the denial of the permit was appropriate. On July
10th, 2026, the county received a Notice of Appeal to the BCC
for the subject parcel and building permit. Staff prepared
the earliest appropriate hearing regarding the matter
for today's agenda, and with that, I'll give it back to the
county attorney and Mr. Donaldson to follow through
with the process and the decisions made.
So I'm just going to summarize some of the facts that Mr.
Waldon, um, just told the board and that what were discussed at
the article ten appeal review meeting that Mr. Beaton
neglected to tell the board. So in 2001, like Mr. Waldon said,
Mr. Beaton's property was created by an illegal lot
split. Um, this was, uh, told to the previous owner who hired
Terry McCarthy's firm to do a land use and a zoning change
because they needed that change in order to build a house on
the property. Because the current zoning said you have to
have two acre lots, and they only had 1.74. So they went
through the entire application process, and it was teed up to
come to the board for a land use and zoning change, to
change the land use and zoning for one acre parcels. Because
the predecessor understood that Mr. Beaton's property did not
qualify for a building permit, as it was currently situated,
given it was an illegal lot split. Mr. Beaton bought the
property and withdrew that application. It was Mr. Beaton
who knew about the application. Staff explained the
implications of it. He withdrew the application so after he, um
applied for the building permit, I was involved in that
process as well. I spoke to Mr. Beaton. I've emailed Mr.
Beaton, I've had, um, meetings with Mr. Beaton and I
questioned the ownership of the submerged land because it's
very unique in Florida for anybody to own submerged lands.
So I did some independent research during that time. I
found tiff deeds that, um, the DEP in the state had over his
property, and it might show he has ownership of that property.
But if you have a Tiff deed over that, the state is
claiming an interest in it and it's not really your property.
So I explained that to Mr. Beaton and I asked him, can you
write to the state? You can write to DEP and you can get a
letter from DEP that they're not claiming any ownership in
the land. Mr. Beaton refused to do that through the process. So
this was something that I raised throughout the process
for Mr. Beaton to get this letter from DEP or some proof
that he owned the land, he insisted he had a legal
description and a boundary survey. So he owned the land
and he didn't need to do anything further. The building
permit was denied. We had the article ten appeal with Mr.
Donaldson. During the article ten appeal, I raised the issue
again. I told Mr. Donaldson that there was a question of
ownership of the submerged lands, that dep that the state
had some tiff deeds over these back from the 60s, and it was
in the whole area where his house was. So this issue was
raised during the article ten appeal. The other issue is that
even if Mr. Beaton owned the land in Martin County, based on
the comprehensive plan, you cannot use submerged lands
towards your lot density. That is a strict policy in Martin
County. Any applicant who's been before this board,
including prior developments, have followed that. And I'm
going to let Mr. Schilling talk about that for a second,
because that's an important aspect of this. Even if you own
the land, he wouldn't be able to have his building permit.
Uh. Thank you, Paul Schilling,
growth management director, for the record. So, um, yes. So the
1967 zoning code, which is the A-1, requires two acre lots.
Um, fast forward to today. Um, there's still that provision.
That provision is in place with the with the category C and the
land use appropriate to this. Um, that does not talk about
submerged land. It talks about lot area. In fact, um, it's
crystal clear says shall not be less than two acres. Um, that
has been the case since 1967. This lot was carved out of a
piece, as were multiple lots within this unrecorded
subdivision. Um, some met the lot size, some may not have.
But this one in particular was created in the year 2000 or
thereabouts. It does not qualify for any reduction in
shoreline protection zones, so it has a 75 foot shoreline
protection zone, which, as you may recall, was a matter that
was debated substantially. We've met with this gentleman,
um, multiple times throughout throughout this whole process.
Um, uh, the facts that he mentioned with a member of my
staff, um, are, are I would argue I would, uh, say that are
not accurate. Um, certainly, uh, he had his own opinion. Um,
he requested one of our members of staff withdraw that
application vehemently, uh, for the land use change. That that
Miss Alder just mentioned. So regardless of of of of a lot of
things, quite frankly, um, I, the board no one in this agency
has the has the jurisdiction to violate the comprehensive plan,
um, or the or the zoning district. Um, and what I was
getting at earlier, had this lot been created prior to the
zoning code, then it may have been a different matter. Uh,
but we have never allocated submerged land for creating a
buildable lot in that manner. We do have a couple down the
street, one in particular that Mr. Beaton mentioned. Um, it
was an application to redevelop that site. It had been a lot
split. I think that was in 2023 or thereabouts. Uh, and a
member of my staff and I missed that. Um, that was a survey
that indicated, uh, the water within the boundary, but also
the upland, which clearly did not meet it. I missed it, um,
but that does not give me jurisdiction. Uh, or the
ability to violate the comprehensive plan in the
zoning code and continue to do that. So have there been things
that have happened throughout the county within the last 40
years? Certainly. Uh, we're not perfect. We do our best. Uh,
fast forward to 2023 and certainly the last 15 years,
uh, our processes, we've got much more refined. We have the
tools to to make decisions instantly. But, um, the way
that was characterized is not necessarily accurate. Um. Any
other questions? Maybe I'll extrapolate a little
bit more on, uh, the comprehensive plan and what it
says. It basically goes in 4.18 states that we count the upland
areas from the mean high water line upland.
No it doesn't. So.
Um. So it's been our policy, at
least in the last ten years that I've been working with
Development Review, that all developments that get approved
in any sites have to meet the density of the upland area. So
that's that's been what we do. We even have when the
development comes in, we have the DEP certified, the mean
high water line. So we make an accurate determination as to
the upland area. So that is something that the county has
done thoroughly. And yes, there have been some mistakes in the
permit review process. Uh, like Paul said, but uh,
substantially throughout our history, we count the upland
area for density purposes. So the last thing I want to
touch base is the administrative review meeting.
And Mister Donaldson's decision. Mr.. Um, Schilling
was there, Mister Walden was there but didn't speak. And
Mr.. Um Dougherty was there. They're the department heads
that were responsible for the denial. So they were there. So
there was no no other testimony except for me. And then,
mister, if you read the letter, which is part of the record, it
says, after reviewing the record and considering the
information presented during the administrative review
meeting, I have determined that the denial of the above
referenced building permit was appropriate because you did not
conclusively demonstrate that you own the submerged lands at
issue. That was an issue raised during the hearing. It was an
issue addressed by staff, and that's what Mr. Donaldson based
his his decision on. Down below, there's a sentence that
says, in addition, Deb told us they are claiming an interest
to the land that did not go into Mr. Donaldson's decision.
As you can see, the way the letter is written, that was
just an FYI. We want to let you know that Mr. Donaldson found
this, but we also found out from DEP later, after he made
his decision, because Mr. Donaldson made his decision
relatively quickly that DEP agreed. So that was just for
informational purposes. It had nothing to do with Mr.
Donaldson's decision. He had no contact with DEP. So I'm going
to ask Mr. Donaldson to explain to you what he based his
decision on. So, there, uh, again, um, Mr.
Beaton's, uh, issue was, uh, uh, the two, as he's mentioned
about the, uh, interpretation of the code related to total
land area. And then it was, um, principally with his surveys
and his legal descriptions, as he has, saying that that that
was evidence that he owned the land. And reading the surveyors
note, if there is, uh, it simply has a boundary survey of
the legal description that was recorded in the courthouse or
that he had from the lot split. Um, and there was no testimony
to assert that they actually owned submerged lands. I think
it is a boundary survey. It is a survey of the legal
description that he has. But it's but there was no testimony
or evidence to say that this boundary survey, uh, meets and
bound survey, um, had, uh, ownership of, of the submerged
lands and in the state of Florida, you know, when we
became a state in all of the submerged lands to the mean
high water line are owned by the state, except for a few
areas where prior kings of Spain or England donated or
conveyed properties under um, uh, that so so that portion of
property is complicated, and I'm, I'm not, uh, testifying to
be an expert on it, but we've come across it with county
owned property, um, in various properties that we either own
or purchased, and it may have a boundary description that shows
out into the water, but we actually don't own it. And in
some cases we do. In Jensen Beach, there's some areas that
we actually have tiff deeds. Uh, and so that, that, that,
that, uh, it is complicated. All I said was that looking at
Mr. Beaton's survey, that he presented, it was certainly a
boundary survey. Uh, and the surveyors note, uh, which is, I
think one of the exhibits in here, he simply surveyed the
boundaries that were provided by Mr. Beaton and that what
they found that that were recorded, um, and and you can
record as was done in this property a lot split. You can
go in and split your property. Um, and create divided into
pieces the, the issues. When you divide it into pieces, you
may be legally able to do that. Um, and the I think the term of
art that we used as an a legal law split doesn't mean it was
done. Um, uh, you know, you know, it when, when you do a
lot split, it just means that it may not comply with the
county codes for building purposes. So a lot split that
would be considered, um, under the zoning code as a lot split,
like when Palm City Farms, you convey a ten acre lot could be
split into two, five acre lots. You can go and do that and
record it without even talking to the county at all. When it's
provided as evidence to the staff for a building permit.
Then they check to see doesn't meet the zoning codes. So those
are you can do lots of things in recording in the courthouse
of, of uh, conveyance of properties. Farmers do it all
the time to split out pieces of property that they farm
different pieces, but it doesn't mean it's eligible for
a building permit. So in this particular case, I specifically
looked at there was a lot of discussion on on. And as you
can tell about ownership of the entire parcel, I'm sure that's
what Mr. Beaton was conveyed, uh, from the prior property
owner, uh, the surveyor simply plotted out as a a boundary
survey, but I didn't feel that there was any substantial
evidence to actually affirm that the, um. And the surveyor
did not state that. It just simply said they they they they
did a boundary survey based upon was a recorded. So, uh,
other than Mr. Beaton's testimony that it had been
dredged from uplands, uh, in the past and, um, and the
assertion that that and other parcels of the property were,
were actually, um, privately owned, based upon the sequence
of events, um, under his opinion, I didn't find any
other substantial, competent evidence from from other
experts to affirm his, his, his claim on the submerged land.
And so that was basis of my decision. And then following
that decision, um, Miss Elder is correct. They did reach out
to DEP to find out if there was any, um, claim, because this is
on the Loxahatchee River, a wild and scenic river which has
a lot of, um, interest from the state. Um, and um, as well as
our Indian River lagoon and other areas. So it's a that
that portion of the of property rights is complicated and, and,
and given the what I had received, that was the basis of
my decision. I don't I don't have any
further questions. So under the board's rules, now is the time
for the board to ask questions to staff and then it's board
deliberation. Right.
Commissioner Hetherington. I have a couple questions. I
might have some more. So the lot was split prior to your
ownership? Yes. Okay. And then you started to go into this,
Pete and and Paul, you you mentioned the comprehensive
plan. I think it was 4.1 E. How do you defined in that policy
what is owned it. That's where the two acre requirement is.
What defines in that policy. Uh. Substantiates a lot ownership.
Well the policy from a simplicity standpoint, from our
regulatory role is we're regulating what is from mean
high water upland. Um, so the comprehensive plan is talking
about some other things, but generally, um, it is the, the,
um, uh, measurement of lot size from the mean high water line.
So like I said earlier, for example, the shoreline
protection zone that is not taken from a boundary out in
the Loxahatchee River. It is taking from the shoreline where
the mangroves are and so forth. You pull that provision up. So
I could see how it reads. Sure. And then while you're doing
that, Mr. Beaton, you said when when Mr. Schilling had said
reference 4.1 e you said it does not say that. What's your
interpretation of what it says? 4.14 is very clear. It's very
specific. It can be broken down in Webster's dictionary. It has
two legs to it. The first says the boundary must be delineated
as per the state statutes, which is having a professional
license boundary survey performed. It's based upon the
legal description of the parcel of land. That's the first leg
of the policy. The second says no submerged land areas, water.
Word of that boundary line can be used. So I keep hearing
staff's talking about the mean high water line. There's
nothing in there that references mean high water line
whatsoever. It's the boundary line is what's specifically
referenced. If no submerged land areas could be used
towards density, the policy could be this clear. It could
say no submerged land areas can be used towards density period.
It doesn't say that it says water word of the boundary
line. So when you're standing on the land looking out over
the water, the boundary line for this parcel is unique. It's
further out. You have to walk out to the boundary line and no
submerged lands, water, word or outside of that boundary line
can be used, which would stop me from using then riparian
rights which all waterfront properties have a right to go.
Access onto the state lands at that point. And that's what
this policy prevents. So if you turn around standing now,
that's your landward direction. The policy does not exclude my
privately owned submerged lands from being used towards my
density. It's part of my legal description. I pay taxes on it,
I'm assessed on it, and it's part of the lot area. He says
he spoke about the lot area, that the lot area is only 1.7.
That's that's wrong. The lot area is 2.1 acres, 2.01 acres.
That is the lot area. Um, it's uplands or submerged lands. It
doesn't matter. I own the river bottom there. Uh, Miss elder
speaks about tiff deeds. I keep hearing tiff deeds. Deeds?
There is no Divest me or my predecessors in
the chain of title from the ownership of this property. You
never presented one deed. You didn't give me anything. I
asked for it. Where?
Where you didn't ask for anything.
Okay, well, the decision is whether his decision was based
upon substantial evidence. There was none. I did ask you
for it. I did ask you for it. I said where? Show me a deed.
Give me something. There was nothing..
Any further questions, Commissioner Harris?
Are there deeds that we presented?
There are deeds and declarations that exist that I
have. But what were they?
He didn't ask for them, so I did not give them to him. But
they do exist. And I did bring them up to him, and asked him
to get a letter of the state, because we found them during
this process. So they exist. But he didn't ask me for them.
I mean, I've had him at meetings with him. but I was
never asked. And you're saying that
specifically his reference in the title to my property? Is
that what you're. Saying there? Referenced their
deeds and declarations that reference your the area of your
property. Area around my property.
Correct. Including your submerged.
Lands, including mine. For the record, my submerged lands.
That's what you're saying. That's that's what the. Yes.
All right, let's get back to the procedure here,
Commissioner Vargas. Okay, uh, just a couple of
comments. Um, did a realtor sell this parcel to you, or was
this a for sale by owner? I purchased it directly to the
owner. Okay. Did you take title
insurance out? I did, okay. You may want to pull out that
policy. Uh, because there was some question about the
ownership and it was divided. Just just a suggestion. You can
consult an attorney about this. A real estate attorney. Pull
the policy. Commissioner Campi.
Thank you. Staff had made testimony, I guess, uh, that
there was an application from the previous owner to change
this and that you withdrew that application? Why?
Yes, sir. So before I purchased the property, the error was
evident in the future land use in the flume. The error was
evident everywhere, all over it. 1.69 acres. Conversion of a
1.69 acre parcel to a one unit per acre. They were only trying
to rezone this because it wasn't two acres. That was it.
Um, the formal zoning verification letter that Pete
Walden issued for this parcel, he made a mistake. And instead
of owning the mistake, he he tried to just just. We're going
down the rabbit hole still right now. We're still going
down the rabbit hole. And he's trying to to defend his
position. He had a survey, the formal zoning inquiry letter is
very clear. It says property appraiser indicates the
property is 1.69 acres, while a private survey shows two acres
and submerged lands. Please verify that the lot complies.
Do you have a copy of that letter?
Yes, sir, I do. And I asked Miss Amy Offenbach. I said, did
the landowner ever just take the simple step of verifying
that it was two acres? And she said, no, they didn't. Instead
they were going to go for the rezone because the rezone would
have then allowed one unit per acre, and she wanted to split
it anyways, but she couldn't split it again. They called it
an illegal lot split. It wasn't illegal. State um, allows a lot
split on these parcels, but they they wanted to further
subdivide it into two parcels an acre and an acre. That was
the intention from. Madam Chair. May I just, uh,
just to clarify, throughout this entire last three years,
this applicant could have had he not agreed with that zoning
letter that was issued in 2016, which has been
mischaracterized, um, I may add, that was signed by my
predecessor. Had he not agreed of the with the contents of
that letter, he in and of himself could have prior to
purchasing this property, could have requested a zoning letter
to answer all those questions and make certain assumptions.
So I just wanted to. I spoke directly.
With staff. I'm asking questions. Thank you. Uh, next
question. I had heard testimony that said you could have
contacted the DEP, yet you chose not to. Did you ever
reach out to the state DEP or anybody at the state level?
Absolutely not. Just a hypothetical scenario. If you
own property, right. Everyone here lives in Martin County,
owns property. Uh, let's say you wanted to put a a mother in
law suite or build a pool in your backyard so you get a
survey done, you put it on the site plan, you present it to
the county, your neighbor goes, you can't build that right
there. That's my property. Okay.
Thank you. What do you say to that?
Um. The applicant had said this is to staff. The applicant had
said that there have been other homes built in the same area
where all of those lot sizes, two acres or more, or any of
them less actual homes that are currently existing there now,
are there homes on property that's less than two acres, or
are they utilizing water as to get to two acres?
The one in particular in which I don't recall the the name of
the property owner that was fairly recent that we missed,
that I acknowledged, um, in fact took portions of a small
tributary canal, if you will. Uh, certainly not the
Loxahatchee River, but it did have, um, it did have a lot
size less than two acres. Yes, sir. Now, I would point out a
lot. Split is a private action. So, um, as Mr. Donaldson
indicated, there can be property scattered throughout
the county that took it that that utilized that process. But
when it comes for a building permit is when that comes in.
There can also be certain there are, uh, almost infinite, um,
variables with these properties. When they were
made, what the particulars are, what the ownership. Um, so, um,
each one is unique in and of itself. But yes, sir, there are
at least one out there that does not meet the minimum lot
size of, of. At least one potentially more.
Correct. Yes. Um. Thank you. Uh, I heard
testimony that said that there were approvals in 1984, 2016,
2023, and then now, are those the approvals that you're
speaking of? Mr. Schilling? Those are, uh, I believe the
applicant had mentioned those those, um, I mean, we're
talking about the period of of almost 50 years or whatever.
Um, but as I indicated, certainly, um, there are some
things out there that probably don't. However, um, I have not
done a deep analysis of those properties back from the 80s
because, number one, I wasn't here. And number two, there may
be limited, limited records. I understand I'm just trying to
run through the points that I had heard from staff's
presentation in the applicant's presentation. These are things
that caused me to write a note down. Uh, I had heard that at
the hearing that you conducted, Mr. Donaldson, that there were
only supposed to be the administrator, the attorney,
and the head of the growth management department with the
three people that was supposed to participate in that.
However, there were six people at the meeting. We heard that
it was Mr. Walden. We heard that it was Mr. Doherty who was
the. Who was the other person? Uh, Mr. Dolan was also there at
my request. He did have interactions with the applicant
at some point in time. Now, when it's supposed to be
only three. Is that so? It's it's not only three, it's
the department director. So we did have Mr. Schilling and Mr.
Doherty who was giving all the testimony, um, to Mr.
Donaldson. So they were both supposed to be there. And then
Mr. Schilling, if he had questions, had Mr. Walden and
Mr.. Uh, Doolan if he if Mr. Schilling. But he gave the
presentation. Understood. But is there any
requirement that it only be department heads? Is there any
requirement that it only be three people.
Know there's a requirement that the people who are
participating speaking during the review are the department
heads, the county attorney and the administrator.
However, we're hearing now that Mr. Dolan did speak.
To miss. No, no. He. spoke just for the record,
Mr. Dolan did, in fact, speak. I believe what the applicant
prior to his purchase regarding the withdrawal of.
The. Loan, I'm talking only at the
meeting. No, he did not. Just Mr.
Schilling and then Mr.. Did you speak?
Clyde may have had a few words at the meeting. Yes.
Sir. Right. So, Mr. Walden, you did not
participate. Uh, was there I might have
spoken on 1 or 2 instances, but I don't recall.
Okay. Uh, some other questions. The
roadmap that the applicant spoke of, that in the beginning
of your presentation. Sir, you said that during your due
diligence, you did what most people, smart, savvy people
that are about to make a more than $1 million investment
would do due diligence. You said that you spoke to. And
what I liked is a lot of people would tell the commissioners, I
spoke to someone at the county who'd you speak to? I don't
know, makes it much more challenging. You do know you
said during this testimony that you stood up and swore that you
would tell us the truth, that you basically, in your word,
was you received a roadmap on what you would need to do prior
to you purchasing, closing on the property, correct?
Correct. For Mrs.. From Miss Offenbach.
Uh, was that a verbal roadmap or a document?
It started as a verbal and, uh, it evolved into a written
document from Miss Offenbach. After getting everything fixed,
she did confirm all the usage and I was very specific in the
email chain with Miss Offenbach.
Okay, so did was those email that email chain or this your
words roadmap? Um, was that presented to staff and to Mr.
Donaldson so that we'd have a better understanding of how you
got to where you were? Yes. Yes, sir.
Was. Um. I heard from our chair and
from Miss Elder what the procedure of today's agenda
item is meant to be, that we weren't going to necessarily be
hearing additional testimony, even though to me, this sounds
like testimony. Um, that being said, why isn't Miss Offenbach
and Mr. Fox here? Are they not allowed to participate in this?
She seems to be integral in the process that he decided to make
this investment, and even post closing would have been his at
least guide through the process. It doesn't get to Mr.
Schilling. It doesn't get to Miss Elder, and it doesn't get
to Mr. Donaldson. It goes through a process on the levels
of employment. Why aren't they here?
So they didn't participate in the article ten appeal hearing.
So that's why they're not at this meeting today. They
weren't at the article ten meeting because you only have
higher level management department directors that
participate in that. Except for Mr. Walton.
Well, their division heads within the growth management
department. So I think that's why they were there. But you
usually don't have staff level in there. Um, for article ten
appeals. It's just not what you do.
I'm not asking why they were not at that meeting. I'm asking
why they're not here. Because they didn't participate
in the administrative review meeting.
But a lot of what we're discussing is hearsay from
staff and from the applicant. Their names have been mentioned
several times. So the board shouldn't consider
new, should only consider what was presented at the
administrative review meeting, which is what staff has been
talking about. That's all that the board should consider in
this. So those people were not included.
Believe it or not, I actually can differentiate and discern
between the two. If so, to me there's really two
conversations happening at the same time. And from the
applicant's point of view, it's mostly about hey, I looked at
this property that I would tell me that I could purchase. Uh,
and build a single family home, not a neighborhood. One house
on one piece of property. And it was a 1.7 with a two wet,
1.7 dry to get him to the two. I can imagine the
conversations. Any of us can put our own, put ourselves into
that same circumstance and say, do we buy this? Can we build a
house on it? No one is buying a piece of property. You know,
knowingly, that can have a house on it. You're not buying
parkland, you're not buying a lot. Um, but that being said,
if I can separate all of like, hey, how did we get here? To
the process, Miss Elder. To the process. This that was sitting
on the dais this morning. This these documents, um, BCC public
hearing agenda item DPC one exhibits I through l attached
documents were inadvertently left off the board item left
off the board item by who? We did. Yes, sir. Our office
with the rendering of the PDF. Um.
So we're only getting to see this right now. This morning.
They were not part of the PDF. Yes, sir. That's my fault.
If I'm going to do a process of specifically, did the process
work itself. Out?
This wasn't part of it. We did have an admission that mistakes
had potentially been made in the past. Mr. Donaldson, um,
who I obviously hold in very high regard, I was one of the
people that voted to make him have the position that he had
when when commission Chair Hurd asked us if we had any ex-parte
communications, I said none. And that's been filed. Now,
that's not just because I had not spoken with you ever or
anyone that represented you. I hadn't spoken to staff either
about this particular item. Now there's the agendas come every
two weeks and there's lots and there's certain things that I
need to have assistance and hear more deeply on that. I
would reach out to staff and say, hey, I need to know more
about this. And then there's times where staff will schedule
and request to meet with me and say, hey, look, we have an
agenda item that's coming up. It's going to have this and
this and this and this. I didn't do that either. I didn't
hear from them and I didn't ask them. But now all of a sudden
I'm here with a pretty complicated agenda item. And
it's funny because when I read the item, the agenda, we all
look and say, how many items are here, how many pages is it?
How long is the day going to. Be?
This looks like a short agenda, but there's no such thing
because it could be a two agenda, two item agenda, and it
could take all day. I am finding, and I've been up here
a while. I'm finding this to be pretty complicated. I'm finding
that the stakes are remarkably high for you. Remarkably high
because. And for us, because one of the first questions I
asked, which I wasn't trying to foretell the future, is what
would your next step be if you don't get a decision that you
like today? And our attorney, who I hold in very high regard
because I also helped her get that job, um, is you would sue
us now as a commissioner. All five of us. We are not, um,
we're not looking for lawsuits. A lot of people say, well, you
shouldn't be afraid of a lawsuit. And I always tell
people the same thing. I'm not afraid of a lawsuit. I'm afraid
of losing a lawsuit. I'm afraid of entering into a legal battle
where going in? I sort of feel nervous. Like it might not go
our way. Then I try to figure out that these are not only
professional colleagues of mine. I'll be perfectly honest
with you, they're friends. These are friends of mine. So
while I'm listening to you speak, that's why I asked you,
what do you do for a living? And you said firefighter. I
thought for sure you were going to tell me. Attorney. Because
that was, in my opinion, a very well presented appeal. Very
well done, you know, and I'm thinking, wow, this guy sharp,
he's got the details. He's he's not reading really from notes.
He knows his topic. You've also afforded yourself of the
process of what you could and could not do. Some people would
have just taken the punch and said, oh man, I'm screwed.
Excuse my language. You have it. So now I have to. I'm not
going to guess that you would sue us, but boy, the stakes are
high for you because otherwise you own a piece of property
that everyone will know will be nearly impossible for anyone
else to do anything with. So it's not like you could sell it
off. And I know I'm talking much longer than I chose to,
but I really want to lay this out, and I know that I'm also
speaking on the record that could my words could come up
again in the future. So in my personal opinion, there's some
gray areas here. This was not a absolutely you were wrong and
staff was right. It's not an absolute that the staff was
wrong and you were right. That's why this process, as far
as I know, this third step, you appealed it and then you
appealed it again to Mr. Donaldson, and then you
appealed it to us, is designed so that the five of us can use
our opinions, our life experiences, to decide if we
agree or not. I would never want to be known for as much as
I like Mr. Donaldson to be his rubber stamp, I'm certainly not
a rubber stamp. I don't believe any of the five of us up here
are going to be rubber stamps. So in my particular opinion,
enough has happened here that this is not a a an agreement
with Mr. Donaldson's opinion. I don't know what the what the
negotiated outcome could be versus it's just a simply a yes
or a no. But if that's the case, I think that you did what
I would assume you should have done before you purchased the
property. Once you purchased the property, the two questions
I had that Miss Elder brought up, which I thought were very
valid, is why did you withdraw the application when you would?
This would never have happened had you left. But you said that
was a split to make it to one acre buildable lot. So instead
of having a single home on this property, it could have been
two. And you didn't want to do that. Okay. And then the other
question was why didn't you personally contact the DEP? And
since I'm being as honest as possible, I didn't really love
your answer that you just didn't want to. That could have
been the end of it, potentially, but you weren't
mandated to. So I'm giving you a pass on. Why didn't you
contact the DEP? And then on our side, there's been a couple
of things. I mean, these are very great professional people
that have to deal with hundreds and hundreds of issues every
year. And in this particular case, especially if I were you,
when I hear that someone was able to do this and I thought
Mr. Schilling was very honest, that's his way. I mean, I think
he's one of the greatest growth management professionals in the
state of Florida. And he was honest. He could have sort of
danced around and said, hey, I don't know what happened. He
was very honest. And he said, look, we made a mistake in my
mind, that means something to you. It has happened. Someone
else got to do this. And I get that. That doesn't. That
mistake doesn't mean that we've just opened the floodgates and
now it's a precedent. But in this particular case, I would
make a motion to disagree with Mr. Donaldson's opinion.
Commissioner Hetherington. Yes, I echo much of what you
said, and I won't repeat it, except for the fact that I
don't think it was your responsibility to reach out to
DEP to, um, substantiate what your survey and, everything
claimed. I think your title, your survey actually was
evidence enough. And, um, I think there's enough reasonable
doubt. Well, we have tremendous, um, staff. There's
enough reasonable doubt to me that at least one of the three
criteria, one is due process. Um, fairly applicable. I have
questions about how the 4.1 e four, um, either was
interpreted versus what it says on the document, and I think
that you presented evidence. So I'm going to second the motion
commissioners. I'm looking at the, uh,
supplemental memo that was given to us this morning. And
it's it's a copy of an email correspondence from Amy, often
back to Cary Beaton. And among the things that it says is, um,
zoning, a1 future land use, rural density. And I'll read
from comprehensive plan the minimum lot size for
development required by the zoning and future land use is
two acres. Furthermore, it says there's a 75 foot shoreline
protection zone from mean high water line, wet side of seawall
or backside of mangroves exceeds rear setback. So she's
quoting the comprehensive plan and the and the development
regulations and saying you have to have two acres and you also
have to provide for a 75 foot shoreline protection zone from
mean high water line. And Mr. Beaton knew that he didn't have
two acres, and he also knew where the mean high water line
was, and also were the boundary. So I caution you, uh,
in this motion, that is it is an an admission that you don't
have to have two acres in order to get a building permit. So I.
Am. Are you asking me for.
My. I'm really. Really nervous about proceeding
with because you then say it's okay to not comply with the
Comprehensive Plan requirements.
Well, I think the only difference, Madam Chair,
respectfully, would be that he. You said he knew that he didn't
have two acres, and I think his testimony today was the the
argument here is that he believes that he does. That's
the point. I'm not agreeing that, you know, it's to roughly
two acres to build. It's he had 1.7 dry and 2.01 wet. The
question is, is that portion that's wet able to be part of
the calculation or not? He's not saying, hey, I thought I
had 1.7 and that's what I want. He's the argument that I'm
hearing is that he believes that he does. So when you say
he said he knew that he didn't, I don't believe that he knew
that he didn't. I think he even to this moment, he believes
that he does because I agree with you. I don't want people
to think, well, it's two or thereabouts. It's two. But what
we can't figure out right at this moment is, is it
legitimately two? But he's not saying 1.7. He's saying two.
May I, but I disagree. He knew that his boundary was two and
he knew that his dry land was 1.69. And he also knew or he
should have known because Amy Offenbach wrote to him and said
that you also have a shoreline protection zone from the mean
high water line, and you knew that there was a difference
between mean high water and boundary. You knew that that
was a 3/10 of an acre difference. May I know
Commissioner Vargas? Yeah. My question is, are we
ready to take a vote? You had enough evidence.
Commissioner Capps would like to make a comment. Commissioner
Capps.. So, uh, there are two big
issues at hand here. Um, the first one is, uh, policy 4.1 e
four, which basically, according to our staff and our
county attorney, means that we do not count submerged lands.
Uh, and lot size. And then there's the issue of whether
you own the submerged lands. And I heard the county attorney
say earlier that even if it were determined that you did
own the submerged lands, that's some future date. Uh, we do we
still do not count submerged lands toward lot size, and I
I'm gathering that that is an important, uh, precedent and
policy in our comprehensive plan. Um, and I am I am
satisfied with the county attorney's analysis and the
county administrator's decision. And I'm going to make
a substitute motion. You can't. We have a motion
and. A second.
You got a vote. On it.
Okay? We just have to vote on it. Yeah.
Okay. Any further comments? There's a
motion. So just to be clear, are we
going to issue the building permit or is the board not
agreeing with Mr. Donaldson and requiring the administrative
review hearing to be done again to analyze the different
policies? What's the direction? So we're clear because I'm
unclear with the motion. I know you disagree with Mr.
Donaldson, but what is the outcome that the board is
looking for? So we're clear. We can send it back to Mr.
Donaldson for another administrative review meeting.
You can say, based on the interpretation of the code, we
can issue the building permit. So we need to know what the
ultimate decision is. Was that outline coming into
this hearing? It's just based on your whether
you agree with Mr. Donaldson. But we need to know what the
next step would be. Can we go to the agenda item
and see what the recommendation was? Because from what I
understood of the presentation, introduction was that we were
to decide if we felt that the process of those three criteria
was met. Uh, not approving necessarily the building
permit, because what I'm hearing from my colleague,
Commissioner Capps, what I'm hearing from staff, this
gentleman is obviously very capable of making his. Let me
finish, please. He's capable of making his presentation. Um, I
was making my determination on not whether or not I think he
should be allowed to build his house on his property. It's.
Was he given a fair process through this? And I'm not
saying it was a travesty. I'm just saying that there was
enough that would tip it my way and then give him the
opportunity to do it, look into it a little further. But on the
other hand, just as a caution, this is not meant to just put
him back to the starting line for the same outcome I want.
And I know our staff can do. Let's work with this applicant.
Let's figure out a way if if it can't be that it's the the
point, whatever, uh, is wet and it can't be used in the
calculation. Let's help this gentleman and his family build
a house on his property, because otherwise we're
basically telling him it's worthless because no one's
going to buy it from him. If they can't build. I don't know
if splitting it into two lots so that you'd put two houses.
That probably is not really even the the feel, the the
nature of the neighborhood. Let's help them out. So my
motion is that I disagreed with Mr. Donaldson's decision based
on the process, and that he would have to go back and work
with staff fairly and, uh, accurately to create an
opportunity. Okay.
So the alternative recommendation, I just wanted
to clarify that because it was unclear.
Okay. Mr. Walden, can.
You remind me? I just want to point out that a path forward
was presented to the applicant to rezone and reclassify the
land use on the property. Uh, Mr. Beaton's made the assertion
that that, uh, land use and zoning change was to make two
lots. That's not the case. That was to make it whole and
buildable. So you have a disagreement between staff and
Mr. Beaton as to the intent of that land use change? We saw it
from a competent land use attorney that they wanted to
make the lot buildable. Staff complied with that and was
going to take it forward. Understood. But now he's
hitting the reset button. He he thought that he had a different
path forward. It ended up right here in front of us. I know
that our staff will be professional and non unbiased
in helping him go forward. We can't tell him what to do. He
might just as readily say I'm hiring an attorney and suing
us. I hope that's not the case, but he's hitting the reset
button. So what I would recommend for all parties
concerned is that whatever has happened in the past remain in
the past, and we take what you've heard from us today and
we don't even know what the decision will be. Um, move
forward, because I'm assuming your ultimate goal for you. I'm
sure, for your wife, is to get this settled and build the
house. Sir.
Commissioner Hetherington. I've lost my train of thought.
Except for I did want to chime in that I believe that there's
a private property. Rights are so very important to me, and I
think there's enough doubt here that I lean into, um, having
this resolved. And for you to be able to build your family's
home, maintain my second. What's what? What is the
motion? So there's an alternative.
Sorry. There's an alternate alternate recommendation in the
agenda item. So I was just clarifying if that was the
motion made by Commissioner Campi. So it just means that
you are going to adopt a resolution reversing the county
administrator's decision, remanding the building permit
back to staff for further review.
Correct. Does that mean that that's he's
going to be receiving a building permit?
It means staff will work with him like we have to see if
there's an alternate way forward. Um, with the goal of
trying to work it out with them. But there's no guarantee.
Okay. Commissioner Vargas.
Okay. So, um, I've heard everybody's comments here from
the Dei, and of course, the department. Um, and I work with
them. Last year and a half, and I think they're wonderful. Uh,
they're inconsistencies here. We have to do the right thing.
I disagree with Mr. Donaldson. I want to follow along and go
ahead and approve the motion that was made by Commissioner
Campi and seconded by Commissioner Hetherington to
move forward. We want to do the right thing with you. You've
done a lot of homework. I understand.
Thank you. Mr. Donaldson.
So, following the remanding back to staff to review it, it
comes back to the two, um, just to say what our decisions will
be based upon. It comes back to the two fundamental questions
that Mr. Beaton brought up, which is one, the do you
include the entire lot boundary in the analysis for the zoning
district? And number two, the evidence of whether or not the
property owner owns that property could only be based
upon what was submitted and not any post evidentiary evidence
that's been supplied. That's my understanding of what staff's
job would be to do right now. Is that just remanded back for
further review? Anyway, limited.
So yeah, I want to make sure that that's not the case. It's
not just a review. The information that has already
been done. I want the more of a robust review. Mr. Waldon said
that there was some possibilities to, uh, work
something out that can have a house built on the property. I
would also, um, ask staff to go back and review the Largo
approvals decision. Those were inland waters. It's
not the same. I understand, but it was when
we were counting. I remember the debate of whether or not
those lot sizes would count water. I get that it's not the
Loxahatchee, but I'm just trying to create a situation.
Look, I'm trying to be very respectful of staff and not say
that the board or three of the board would approve a building
permit for this gentleman. That's not our job. That's not
what we even asked to do here today. I could make an
alternative motion to just grant him a building permit,
but I have always said that I value the professional
experience and and education of our staff. I'm asking that I
trust our staff to work with this gentleman who's obviously
capable to create an opportunity where he can build
a house on his property. I know that if we brainstorm and when
I say we, I don't mean me. I mean you all brainstorm to give
an opportunity to build a house here. If you need to come back
and, and it needs to have some kind of, uh, decision made by
staff for some change. The goal here is to help our residents
and landowners build on their property. That's as simple as
it could possibly be. And I know that our staff is trying
to do that. Madam chair, madam chair, may
I, Paul Schilling, for the record. So, um, that very
avenue or similar was presented about a year ago to the
applicant of, of ensuing or taking that land use change.
We've we've analyzed this property for many, many hours.
Um, and in fact, the only conclusion that I've come to
personally is that a land use change and rezoning would be
necessary. So, um, as did the previous owner. So, um, that,
that in theory would take out the ownership issue of the
submerged land, um, and so. Let me ask you a question on
that then, because basically our decision is to agree with
that or not at this point. Um, what will that entitle for him?
He's got to go all the way back to the drawing board.
Uh, it depends on your definition of drawing board,
but that would be the mechanism that would. We already have.
Uh, we've analyzed that application several years ago.
We could, uh, reevaluate it and then bring it back to the be a
small scale change, uh, land use change.
It would be decided by you. Decided by you.
Okay. Does it still come back to us?
Yes, sir. Sir. You heard?
That's fair. What are you thinking about? That.
Um. That was the proposal that
staff gave me originally. Um, is is to to do a land use
change. Uh, the neighborhood is highly against the land use
change. It's a very unique neighborhood. All the lots are
two acre lots. No one in that neighborhood. They were going
to come with pitchforks to the meeting. They had said staff
approved it, and they did. They they was going through the
process and staff was going to recommend it to the board. But
the neighborhood is extremely against a rezone. They're all
two acre tracts of land. People like it the way that it is.
They don't want to start seeing these lots get split into
different densities, and it doesn't need to be there. There
does not need to be a land use change for it. Um, the
ownership issue keeps coming up. There is no ownership
issue. This was something that was created by Mr. Donaldson.
If DEP has an issue, they can take me to court.
They can. Okay, so let's do this because I think we need to
wrap this up. I hear your point about splitting it. And if I
lived in that neighborhood and it's a two acre neighborhood, I
don't know if I would want because how many vacant lots
are still there? Uh, there's a handful, and
they're all less than two acres, so. Okay. Dry land.
So this. Is so let let that be somebody
else's problem. You're going to try to figure out a way that
says the two acres, your combined two acres of what?
You've been paying taxes on all this time. That's the that's
the avenue you're going to have to take. But I'm just saying
that my motion is that you and staff go back and try to work
that. Out.
I'm just fearful they're going to say the same thing. Well,
you can't use your submerged lands and you.
Have to. I don't I won't.
Reassure you that this is a group that they're not
vindictive. Uh, the five of us will be watching. This is a
professional group. I have the highest regard for, uh. They
hurt us. They sat right here. Um, I'm looking at Mr. Dolan,
Mr. Schilling and Mr. Walden. Um, you're going to be in good
hands. They heard from us that we want you to be able to build
a house on the property. So short of you being over at the
courthouse. Let's see if we can't work this out, because it
doesn't do any of us any good. You or the county taxpayers, to
let this go to the next level of a lawsuit for a judge to
figure it out. So try to work with DEP, try to figure out if
your scenario is accurate, then it's accurate.
Mr. Donaldson. This, as you said, this is a
difficult one. And the challenge by your I believe I
understand the the direction you want us to do. Obviously.
And, um, you know, certainly staff felt in their prior
recommendations to the previous property owner and to Mr.
Beaton that that was a, an a process by which we could get
to the end. And certainly we recognize that you can have
disagreements by neighborhoods, but in this case we would we
still felt that it was appropriate next door. Jason
Subdivision has a similar estate density. It would be
matching that. Actually more dense.
More so I think, um, and then your direction today is for an
expedient report review and, and work with Mr. Beaton so
that he can actually get a building permit without having
to come back to this board or through a lengthy process.
Ultimately, the the you've heard the challenges here, and
I just want you to understand that, um, your motion. While it
remits it back to a process, throws it back into the gray.
So it all I'm suggesting is we can take it like that, or you
can be more directive and and. This.
Today, the building. Permit.
Okay. I make a motion that directs
staff to create a building permit for this gentleman on
his. Property.
And second. amend my. Oh, was that the original
motion? Yeah, I was changing.
My amending. So you have a second..
A building permit in violation of the elders and the
Comprehensive Plan. Okay. Is there a second.
Second? Any further discussion?
No. All those in favor?
Aye, aye. Opposed?
Opposed. That motion passes 3 to 2 with
commissioners Heard and Capps dissenting. Uh, let's take a
ten minute break. Thank you.
We are back taking up Department one, which is the
Office of Management and Budget items, which require board
approval. Miss Murley. Good afternoon, Commissioner
Stephanie Murley, the director of the Office of Management and
Budget, here to present ten items today. Yeah. Um, item
number one is a permission to apply for the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection, or FDP, for the
bathtub beach sale. Sailfish Point beach joint nourishment
project. Our public works is requesting a grant. Award of
$1,575,380, um, for the construction and feasibility
funds for the bathtub, Beach and Sailfish. Sailfish Point
Beach restoration project. There is a grant match of
approximately 2.6 million, which is budgeted within the FY
27 Bathtub Beach CIP sheet. Item number two is a permission
to apply for FDP Saint Lucie Inlet Management project.
Public works is requesting application of 5.9 million for
design costs for the bypassing south at the Saint Lucie Inlet
State Park. There is a grant match of 5.9 million, which is
programmed in the FY 27 Saint Lucie Inlet Management Plan.
CIP shape. This is. The coastal show, by the way.
Today. Item number three is a
permission to apply for the local government funding or the
GFR from FDP for the shore protection project. Public
works is requesting application for $206,865 for monitoring
funds for the Martin County Hutchinson Island Shore
Protection Project. There is a grant match of $243,135, which
is programmed with the FY 27 Coastal Beach management CIP.
Item number four is a permission to apply for the FY
2728 FDP, l for for MacArthur Boulevard Dune project. Um. Our
public works is requesting application of 2.2 million for
design, construction and immediate post construction
monitoring funds for the MacArthur Boulevard Dune Beach
project. There is a grant match of 2.2 million, which is
programmed within the FY 27 coastal MacArthur Boulevard
project. CIP sheet. Item number five is a permission to accept
the Florida Department of State, Division of Library and
Information Services, State Aid to Libraries grant funds. Our
library is receiving $81,448. That helps fund a full time
library specialist with our Martin County Library System.
There is no no local grant match required on that one.
Item number six is a permission to accept the centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, or CDC Drug-Free communities
grant, um, our Health and Human Services Department is
requesting the acceptance of 125,000 for year six of funding
that helps expand and support local efforts that aim to
reduce and prevent youth substance abuse. There is a
grant match required of 125,000, but that is provided
through in-kind match dollars through Martin County Staff
time and coalition member time. Item number seven is a
permission to accept the FDP Saint Lucie Inlet Management
Plan Implementation Project grant. This is requesting
acceptance of 3.4 million for permit required sediment
sediment bypass monitoring cost. There is a $3.4 million
match that is programmed with the current FY 26 CIP. Saint
Lucie Inlet management budget. Item number eight is a
permission to accept amendment number two for the FDP Saint
Lucie Inlet Management Plan Implementation Project. This is
amendment number two. That's increasing the FDP share by
425,000, and will also be utilized for permit required
monitoring. There is additional grant match of 425,000, which
is programmed with the FY 27. Saint Lucie Inlet Management
Plan, CIP sheet. Item number nine is a permission to accept
amendment number three for FDP for the Martin County Shore
Protection Project. This is the Third Amendment that will
increase the FDP share by $206,865 for permit required
monitoring. There is an additional match of $243,135
that is programmed within the FY 27 beach management CIP
budget, and item number ten is adjustments to the FY 26
budget. Um, our Martin County Fire Rescue Department is in
receipt of additional grant funds from the um, Florida
Department of Health, Emergency Medical Services, or EMS grant
in the amount of $3,539, which is used for operating expenses
in small non-capital equipment needs within the Fire rescue
department. And this is just OMB requesting a budget
resolution to accept those funds.
Questions for Miss Murley. Is there a motion to approve?
So moved. Second, there's a motion. And a
second. All those in favor? Aye, aye. Opposed. That motion
passes unanimously. Will take up Department two, which is
contracts that meet the threshold for board approval of
$1 million or greater. Miss Brotherton.
Good afternoon, Christy Brotherton, your chief
procurement officer. I have several contracts for your
consideration. The first one is a pre-positioned contract for
disaster related debris removal. And this contract has
a maximum not to exceed value of $3 million, with the maximum
not to exceed term of five years. And staff is
recommending that the board award the contract to the three
highest scoring ranked firms, which is Serra's Environmental
Services, DRC Emergency Services and Ash Britt and move
that the board authorize the county administrator, or
designee to execute all documents related to this
request. Next, we have a contract for the Sailfish Sands
Golf Course Pump Station replacement project, and staff
is recommending that the board award the contract to the
highest scoring, responsive and responsible proposer. Centroid
diversified in the amount of $1,569,068.47 and move that the
board authorize the County administrator, or designee, to
execute all documents related to this request. Uh, number
three, we have another continuing services agreement
for household hazardous waste collection, transportation and
disposal services. Uh, this contract has a maximum not to
exceed value of $1 million and a maximum not to exceed term of
five years. And staff is recommending that the board
award the contract to the lowest responsive and
responsible bidder, which is Republic Services, doing
business as US ecology Tampa. And move that the board
authorize the county administrator or designee to
execute all documents related to this request. Number four is
a continuing services agreement for landscape maintenance for
utilities and solid waste facilities. This contract has a
maximum not to exceed value of 1.5 million, and a maximum not
to exceed term of five years. And staff is recommending that
the board award the contract to the lowest responsive and
responsible bidder, which is Treasure Coast Lawn and
Landscape, and move that the board authorize the County
administrator or designee to execute all documents related
to this request. And last, we have the Floridan Aquifer
supply wells. North Jensen row five, and Tropical Farms Row
eight projects and staff is recommending that the board
award the contract to the lowest responsive and
responsible bidder, which is all Webbs enterprises, in the
amount of $7,492,300. This includes the base bid and
alternates. Um, move that the board approve a budget transfer
from the utilities capital reserves in the amount of
$3,681,500 to the well TFR zero eight project and $1,910,800
for, well, Naro five project and $299,937 for the related
construction phase engineering services for well TFR zero
eight and move that the board authorize the county
Administrator or designee to execute all documents related
to this request done. Thank you. Questions for Mr.
Perry. Well presented motion to accept
that. beautiful work. Second. Oh, come on, Mr. Vargas.
Yes, I have a question. The. Excuse me, 3 million 681 500.
You're transferring from the capital reserve. So how is that
going to be replenished? Um, let me.
Pass that over. And then you want.
To the. It was put there specifically for this project.
So it's not to be replenished. You have capital reserves that
the utility department is holding funds for these
projects. And then we're pulling it out. So it's not a.
It's it's. Your, your your microphone.
So the funds and the capital reserve, um, are um, were
specifically placed in there for these for, for capital
projects like this. So the point is, is that there isn't
the, the replenishment comes over time based upon the
utilities department or putting in funds to, um, into the
capital fund for future expenditures. So it is a
reserve specifically for capital construction. Um, and
its replenishment is is only needed for future capital
projects as defined in the CIP or um, in the in the
department's budget. Okay. I was trying to clarify
this is not an additional, um, expense to our taxpayers,
correct. To replenish that account.
No, it is not. So if you look at the fiscal impact, it says
funding for this project will be provided through utilities,
CFC funds. That's capital facilities charges. So, um,
that's their equivalent of impact fees. So every time a
building permit is provided or a development is done, they
they provide capital facility charges, they go into the
capital reserve budget of the utilities department. Um, and
it's earmarked it can only stay for utilities. And then as the
utilities needs to do plan expansions or other things,
those monies get moved out of that capital facility's charge.
Um, uh, reserve fund, uh, and then moved into the CIP. Uh,
through actions like this. So the board has authorized the
use of CFCs, which is a revenue. It goes into the, um,
and you also recognize that a revenue in your budget and, uh,
and then it can't be spent until it's moved out of reserve
fund into the project fund, as we're doing here.
Um. This is not something that
we're borrowing funds for. I think you and I had a
discussion about. Yeah, this is not a borrowing
action. This is simply taking funds that have been, uh, built
up over time. This is a pay as you go project, if you will.
Um, if there is a borrowing action that will have a, um,
one will have a larger audience of consultants and bond counsel
here, uh, going through that and uh, um, which the utilities
department does on occasion for significant project upgrades.
Just wanted to be certain about that, because you and I spoke
about another matter, I think, that dealt with, uh, borrowing
funds. There is nothing that's being
borrowed on this particular project.
Today. Uh huh. Okay. Any further questions? There's
a motion and a second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed.
That motion passes unanimously. Thank you. We will now take up
Department three, which is adoption of a resolution
updating the list of county owned properties appropriate
for affordable housing under resolution number 24. Dash
6.15, adopted on June 18th, 2024, and authorizing the sale
of such properties through public auction. Miss Segura,
good afternoon, Carlos Segura, road property manager, um, as
you discuss. This, um, current resolution
that we have directed staff to sell two county owned surplus
affordable housing properties through the request for
proposal process to nonprofit organizations, affordable
housing communities or land trusts, um, and other
associated facilities. Um the resolution also required that
each property remain unsold until the completion of the
related infrastructure improvements for each of their
projects. The new Monrovia had the water and sewer project,
and the Camino Trail had, uh, that project, uh, the Golden
Gate is what I meant to say. Sorry. Um, the proposed
resolution would instead authorize staff to market and
sell these properties through the county's contracted public
auction process. The public auctions have proven to be more
effective method for selling county owned properties by
expanding public participation and creating a more competitive
sales process. The two properties are. One is the
parcel on 47th Avenue in New Monrovia, and the other one is
between. It's in Golden Gate, between Hawthorne and Irish
streets, um, where the Camino Trail is running through. Both
properties have already been presented to their appropriate
Cras, and the agencies have received the required
authorization to move forward with those. Um staff is
requesting that the board consider one of the following
actions. Rescind the resolution and adopt the proposed
resolution. Updating the county surplus affordable housing
properties in accordance with section one, 25379. Florida
Statutes, and authorize staff to market and sell both
properties through the county's contracted public auction
process for affordable housing. Or we did a supplemental memo
where we would sell the, um, residential property in New
Monrovia through the auction process and possibly just
donate the property in Golden Gate to the Community Land
Trust. Um, we also would like the, um, board to authorize
staff to revise the language within the proposed resolution
to mirror the recommendation and authorize the chair to
execute any documents necessary to complete the transaction. If
there's any questions. Questions for staff.
Public comment. Would anyone from the public
like to address this? First, Commissioner Vargas.
Okay, so I'm understanding as to sell both parcels via
auction or the other is sell one parcel and then donate it
to a land trust. Is that correct? Correct.
Mr. Ranieri, would you like to to address this?
Yes. Thank you. Commissioner Rob Ranieri, CEO for House of
Hope, also a board member for the Martin County Community
Land Trust. Uh, here today to ask you to, uh, act on the
second request from staff to donate the Golden Gate parcels
to the Martin County Land Trust. We have an opportunity,
uh, working jointly with House of Hope, the county staff and
the land trust to potentially develop some affordable, um,
transitional housing in the Golden Gate community to be
used to help residents that are, in challenging times, to have
an affordable roof over their head. While House of Hope
provides wraparound services to those individuals or families
to help them move forward. Commissioner Campi.
Thank you. I think that that's a great idea for several
reasons. One, we, uh, constantly speak about how
we're trying to address affordable housing and and
transitional housing for our residents. This will be a
concrete step to show that we're actually trying. It's not
massive, but it's a step. It's like a sale. It's like a
starfish. Um, and then also we went through a tremendous
amount of effort, both on the private side and the county
employees, to create the land trust. And if all we do is
create it and then just let it wither on its own, then we
haven't accomplished much. So this is a step in the right
direction to show that we are legitimately interested in
creating a robust land trust. Uh, so I would make a motion to
accept the second recommendation.
Commissioner Vargas. Yes. Um, Mr. Ranieri, who would
be building this housing? Uh, the Martin County Land
Trust would be responsible for the construction, maintenance,
um, property management of of any facilities that are built
on the on the parcels. So, so in perpetuity, we'd be
responsible for this. How much money is in the land trust
right now. So the land trust is in its
early stages. It's a newer nonprofit to the community. Um,
we're waiting for some other land that the county had
authorized previously to provide to the land trust down
in Hope sound. Um, so we're beginning our fundraising and
development efforts. We've built a pretty strong board,
um, to navigate the land trust. And now we're trying to move
forward with some projects to actually utilize land for the
common purpose of creating affordable housing in
perpetuity across the community.
Commissioner Hetherington. Yes. Um.
I think that this. Has been something that the
Golden Gate community has, um, looked at.
For years.. And, um. I would like to see it
sometime in the near future because community, the land
trust, um, has been effective, it seems, in hopes and I would
love to have a presentation on, um, sort of the status and the
success, because I know Commissioner Jenkins and
Commissioner Capps are very, um, very intricate level
involved, um, in the land trust. But I will support this.
But I would like to see the community land trust, sort of a
presentation in the near future on where they're at and where
their vision is and where they hope to go.
Sure. Thank you. Mr. Capps.
This by way of review about what a land trust is for those
who may not know, uh, the land trust owns the land and the the
occupants of the housing on their, uh, house or their unit
in the apartment building or condo building or whatever you
want to call it. And and this enables them to stabilize their
housing costs and to build equity. Right. Those are the
purposes. Yes. So that would be, um, the
purpose for any, uh, any parcel that the, the construction on
it, the housing put on, it was going to be up for sale for
residential and not keeps the price affordable for the buyer,
but also again keeps that unit in affordable housing in
perpetuity. Um, for these lots, we've been discussing the
opportunity for transitional housing so that housing would
be maintained and owned by the land trust in addition to the
land and the land trust would charge a nominal rent, uh, to
the person or persons that are living in the homes. Um, and
then again, like, uh, like I mentioned, the part of the it's
a, it's a full transitional housing project that we want to
develop. So the residents would be working with House of Hope.
Um, and whatever areas of need they have, career coaching. Um,
medical assistants, um, case management, family centered
coaching, all different programs and services available
through House of Hope to help to elevate those residents to a
higher plateau so that by the end of the transitional period,
they're either, um, financially ready to purchase a home,
potentially through the land trust or habitat or the general
market, or they move on to another rental opportunity. And
then that transitional home that they had lived in, uh,
becomes available for the next person or family that may need
that support. And also, this is just another
example of a partnership that we're creating. Um, and in
order to protect Martin County's interest, we will, of
course, have development agreements and contracts that
will provide protection to the county.
That's what. I'm asking for. The
contribution that the county is making in perpetuity. So these
we've done them. We've we've done them with habitat. We've
done them with Miss Butterfly. They're they're different. The
legal department makes sure that, that our interests are
protected. That guy right there is going
to make sure. Those three.
So there's a motion and a second. Right? Yes. All in
favor I opposed that motion passes unanimously. Wonderful.
Thank you very much, commissioners. Good luck.
Great. Have a great day. Thanks.
We are now at the end of our meeting. Mr. Erler, would you
like to speak to us? This is the end of our meeting. Okay. I
don't see anybody else who needs to speak to us.
Commissioner Hetherington, any further comments?
All set today. How about you, Commissioner
Campi? You talked out yet? Mm.
Yeah. No such thing. Uh. Oh, gosh.
But I have. Nothing to add currently.
Thank you. Commissioner Capps. I'm good.
And, Commissioner Vargas. Thank you so much.
How about you, Mr. Donaldson? And Miss Zelda?
Yeah, right. We are adjourned.