[0:03] We wanted everyone, let me welcome all of you to the Orange County Board of County Commission meeting of August 25, 2026.

[0:10] As we began this morning, I'm going to call on Commissioner Myra Rebae to introduce her guests who will be bringing the invocation.

[0:19] And then after the invocation, I'm going to ask Commissioner Rebae if she will lead us in the pledge of allegiance.

[0:25] After the pledge, our communications division directed Dr. Jeffery Williamson will come forward and

[0:32] read proclamations, recognize and run, fetal alcohol spectrum disorders, awareness day, and

[0:39] two hunger action month, and then he'll introduce the government fleet, leading fleets of

[0:45] award, and we'll have staff come forward for that presentation.

[0:51] And with that commissioner, you'll re-be your recognized at this time.

[0:54] Great. Thank you, Mayor. I can barely see you guys over those new desk. Good morning everyone and good morning colleagues

[1:01] It is my honor to introduce father Derek Santana who's a priest of the Catholic Dices of Orlando has serves as pastor St. Thomas Aquini's parish and school in St. Cloud and

[1:15] St. Francis Xavier Cabrini parish and Lake Nona. Father Derek was born and raised in India

[1:23] where he obtained a bachelor's degree in business, worked in the IT industry for a few years.

[1:29] He migrated, he immigrated with his family, T. and I did states in 2009, and received his

[1:35] master's degree in educational administration from the Franciscan University of Stuponville in Ohio.

[1:42] He entered seminarian to become a Catholic priest and was ordained the priest in May 25, 2019

[1:49] at St. James Cathedral in Orlando. He has served at St. John B. Andy Parish in Orlando,

[1:56] my parish and anunciation parish in Altsamon Springs before taking charge in his

[2:02] current assignment where he leads people in their faith journey and in the practice of works

[2:07] of mercy.

[2:10] In his free time, Father Derek enjoys reading, especially about history, politics,

[2:16] and economics. And he really does love politics. And if you're fancier

[2:20] self-unfacebook, he enjoys being on there. I am honored to have him here as my

[2:25] guest as he's been a leader in our parish and a close friend to our family. So

[2:29] with that, please, here's Father Derek.

[2:40] Let us bow our heads in prayer.

[2:46] Heavenly

[2:46] Father, we give you thanks and praise for this new day. We thank you for all the

[2:51] sings you pour out on us on our communities and in a special way on our county. We pray

[2:58] today for an outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon our county leaders, upon our mayor and

[3:06] the commissioners in a special way. Grant them wisdom, fortitude and right judgment in their

[3:14] decision-making and governance. May they always work to uplift the dignity of every person

[3:21] and work for the common good. We pray for unity and understanding during this meeting. May our

[3:29] work give glory to your name and build your kingdom. May peace reign in our hearts and may peace

[3:37] reign in our world. We ask this in your most precious name, Amen.

[3:46] I pledge allegiance to the flag

[3:49] of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God in the visible, with liberty and justice for all.

[4:54] All right. Thank you very much. Commissioner, thank you, Mayor.

[4:57] As the mayor said, there are two proclamations for today.

[5:00] First one is for fetal alcohol spectrum disorders, awareness month, FASD awareness month.

[5:09] The proclamation reads, whereas fetal alcohol spectrum disorders is the umbrella term that describes

[5:14] the range of effects that can occur to an individual who is exposed to alcohol before birth.

[5:20] And whereas according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, it is estimated

[5:23] that 14 to 15% of pregnant women aged 18 to 44 reported using alcohol during pregnancy, which

[5:32] can cause lifelong impairments preventing individuals from living independently.

[5:37] And, whereas, according to a study published in the Journal of American Medical Association,

[5:42] FASDs affects one in 20 children in the United States, and whereas, it is estimated that

[5:47] over 90% of children with FASD will develop comorbid mental health conditions, and where

[5:53] Our study suggests that as many as 60% of adolescents and adults with an FASD have contact

[6:00] with the criminal justice system array 30 times higher than the general population.

[6:05] Whereas early screening, identification and treatment of affected individuals can improve

[6:09] the child's overall development and raising awareness of FASD can potentially prevent

[6:15] physical, behavioral, and learning disabilities.

[6:18] And we're after refraining from all types of alcohol in any amount is recognized by medical

[6:22] professionals as a fundamental element in preventing and preventing infants against FASDs and

[6:29] whereas it is important to increase awareness of how an FASD may present an individual's

[6:33] across their lifespan and the ongoing need for services and support.

[6:38] Now therefore, Jerry O' Demings by virtue of the authority vested in him as the Orange County

[6:41] mayor, does yet by proclaim the month of September, 2026, as fetal alcohol spectrum disorders

[6:47] awareness month in Orange County, Florida, and invite residents to show their support for those

[6:52] impacted by a prenatal alcoholic exposure by wearing red shoes or clothing on Wednesday, September

[6:58] 9th, 2026, in observance of this day. Then at order of this 25th day of August, 2026, signed by

[7:05] the mayor and all six members of the Board of County Commissioners. Accepting the proclamation

[7:10] is a champion for this call. Please welcome Mr. Spencer months from the law firm of Vulgan months

[7:16] months.

[7:26] It's okay. This is a sensitive topic to us, but I'd like to turn the time over to my wife to just say a few things.

[7:34] And I apologize ahead of time. I am going to read when you're a disability parent. If you know,

[7:39] you may have gotten zero sleep or maybe an hour or two. So to spare us all, I'm going to read. So I don't ramble.

[7:46] Mayor Demings, commissioners. Thank you again for recognizing September as FST Awareness Month for Orange County.

[7:53] For several years, we've had the privilege of coming before this very board to raise awareness about this disability, five years ago, much of our challenge was simply making an often invisible disability visible, since then, thanks to you guys and many others, we've seen real progress, Orlando now has dedicated FASD diagnostic services, Florida has created a statewide FASD program, Orange County as a part of that.

[8:22] Health Care professionals are receiving more training to recognize and respond to FASD.

[8:27] I'm also working with the University of Florida on a multi-year study supported by an NIH grant.

[8:34] The FASD community is so thankful.

[8:37] Thanks in part to the mayor and Orange County's continued support.

[8:41] Florida is becoming a leader in this cause, but the work is far from finished.

[8:46] Years ago, I was a struggling mother desperately searching for answers for my children.

[8:51] And we were fortunate enough to find them after many years of struggling.

[8:56] But many families don't find that relief.

[8:58] They don't find the answers.

[9:00] Most individuals with an FST go completely miss or undiagnosed.

[9:06] Leaving families in survival mode without even knowing why or how to get out of it.

[9:12] This is why awareness matters.

[9:14] In matters for prevention, early diagnosis, appropriate services, acceptance and dignity

[9:19] for the FASD community.

[9:21] When we better understand the brain,

[9:23] we can better support the individual.

[9:25] Orange County, thank you for your helping us

[9:28] keep this conversation visible year after year.

[9:31] Around the world, Red Shoes have become a symbol

[9:33] for FASD awareness through the Rockier Red Shoes movement.

[9:37] On September 9th, people around the entire world

[9:39] put on their Red Shoes to start a conversation

[9:42] and to show support for our community

[9:44] that is impacted by FASD.

[9:46] And that brings us to these shoes.

[9:51] Mayor Demings, on behalf of the local FASC community,

[9:55] we'd like to present you with these red sneakers.

[9:58] So you, too, can rock the red.

[10:00] This set 10th or 9th.

[10:08] As a mother, I am asking everyone to take action where your Red Shoes start the conversation or simply take the time to learn about FASD.

[10:19] chances are with the statistics we all know someone impacted by an FASD. Together we can

[10:26] continue to make the invisible visible and help support them. Thank you for continuing to stand

[10:32] and literally walk with us in your Red Shoes with the FASD community.

[10:58] During the photo is Dr.

[10:59] Tom Hall from our drug free office here in Orange County. You will hear what you

[11:08] all don't know

[11:09] is the mayor has a pretty mean jump shot.

[11:11] So he may be able to use those sneakers.

[11:32] All right, thank you very much, my family.

[11:33] Thank you very much, Mayor.

[11:34] Our second and final proclamation is for hunger action month.

[11:38] Hunger action month and the proclamation reads,

[11:40] whereas hunger and poverty are issues of vital concern

[11:42] in Orange County with 15.3 people, 15.3% of people

[11:47] experiencing food insecurity and uncertainty

[11:49] about their next meal.

[11:51] And whereas Orange County is committed

[11:52] to working with second harvest food,

[11:54] Bank of Central Florida, a member of the feeding

[11:56] American nationwide network of food banks to educate people about the critical role of food

[12:01] banks in addressing hunger and raising awareness of the need to develop more resources and

[12:06] attention to hunger issues. And where our second harvest food make of central Florida and its

[12:11] 305 partner agencies have distributed more than 32 million meals to individuals in Orange County

[12:18] in 2025. And where our second harvest food make of central Florida distributes 300,000 meals

[12:23] every single day throughout its seven county service area in central Florida, through its network

[12:29] of food pantries, soup kitchen, shelters, and other community organizations, where I said

[12:34] timber is designated as hunger action month to bring attention to food insecurity in our communities

[12:39] and to at least the public in the movement to end hunger by taking action including volunteering,

[12:46] social media shares, and donations to ensure every community has the food they need to thrive

[12:52] And whereas food banks across the country, including Second Harvest Food Bank of Central Florida,

[12:56] and as partner agency network, will host numerous events throughout the month of September

[13:00] to raise awareness and help end hunger in their local communities.

[13:04] Now, therefore, Javier O'Demmings, by virtue of the authority vested in him as Orange County Mayor,

[13:09] does he above proclaim September 2026 as hunger action month in Orange County,

[13:14] and encourage all residents to work together to put an end to hunger in our area.

[13:18] done in order this 25th day of August, 2026, signed by the mayor and all six members of the Board of County Commissioners.

[13:25] Accepting the proclamation is Derek Chubbs, Mr. Chubbs is the president and CEO of Second Harvest Food Bank of Central Florida, Mr. Chubbs.

[13:41] Good morning.

[13:43] And my Florida allergies are getting the best of me this morning. So bear with me as I grow through this.

[13:49] Thank you, Mayor Demings, and members of the County Commission for this recognition.

[13:54] But, more importantly, for your continued partnership and addressing hunger in our community.

[14:00] As you've just heard last year through our network of over 300 partner agencies,

[14:05] second harvest distributed more than 32 million meals to residents of Orange County.

[14:11] Across our seven county service area, that number rose to 84 million meals.

[14:16] You know, changes in our broader environment made it increasingly difficult for many of our neighbors

[14:24] to access the assistance that they need at a time when 1 in 7 central Floridians face uncertainty

[14:31] around where the next meal is going to come from.

[14:34] And a large percentage of those happen to be our children.

[14:38] That's why partnerships like this that we have with our county means so much and are so important

[14:44] to us. This county is consistently invested in our neighbors and in other organizations like us

[14:51] working every day to serve them. Last year alone, the county's commitment to second harvest

[14:57] and to our partner agency network provided more.

[15:00] More than 3.1 million meals to Orange County residents. But your commitment doesn't stop there. It goes beyond financial support.

[15:10] Mayor Demings and Commissioner, you have personally shown up to our distributions and worked organizing these distributions, working on Saturdays, working on holidays, you've shown up, and I will tell you that's the type of leadership that really matters.

[15:28] On behalf of Second Harvest Food Bank, our partner agencies and most importantly, the neighbors

[15:33] who depend on our services every single day.

[15:36] I want to collectively thank you for your continued partnership and unwavering support to

[15:43] our calls.

[15:44] We are so proud to stand alongside you in this war, I guess, Tonguear.

[15:49] Thank you very much.

[16:28] Thank you, Mr. Chubs, for all the hard work you do with Second Harvest Food Bank.

[16:37] And we have one last very special presentation, a very special award and recognition today.

[16:45] The government fleet leading fleets award.

[16:48] We have one of the best fleet managers in the country that works for us.

[16:52] I'm going to call on Brian Lucas, the manager of Orange County's Management Division to

[16:57] come forward and tell us a little bit more about this award.

[16:59] Mr. Lucas.

[17:06] Good morning.

[17:08] Thank you, Mayor.

[17:08] Commissioners, Administrative Books, Brooks, for taking the few minutes to recognize our team.

[17:14] This is another top 20 finish for our team this year in 2026.

[17:19] It's a fourth one since 2020.

[17:22] So, what we're very proud of that with all of our challenges in problems that we have.

[17:28] Government fleets are unique operations and differ from commercial fleets for many reasons.

[17:34] It's a challenge keeping a diverse fleet of well over 4,000 county vehicles and heavy equipment

[17:40] assets moving and in service so that our customers and departments and divisions of the county can serve the citizens.

[17:49] This award recognizes our team's dedication to getting that job done well.

[17:55] We are very proud of this recognition because this is a pure judge award.

[17:59] Other fleet managers, many of them are former number one winners of this award.

[18:03] are the ones judging it and voting on this.

[18:08] This is the fourth time, like I said,

[18:10] that we've won this award since 2020,

[18:12] and in the top 20 since 2020,

[18:15] we are far from perfect.

[18:17] We have many challenges,

[18:19] but this recognition shows that Orange County fleet

[18:22] continues to follow industry best practices

[18:25] to overcome those challenges now and in the future.

[18:30] More importantly,

[18:30] This award recognizes our team's hard work and we have a few of them here today. We couldn't bring everybody

[18:36] Unfortunately, but we have a small portion of our team. They are the ones taking care of our customers day-end day-out

[18:43] It's their hard work day-and-night all types of weather our shops are not air conditioned

[18:49] So it's pretty miserable out there the last few months

[18:53] And then all different other types of conditions that make this a word possible. They are the ones who do the hard work and they're the ones out there

[18:59] taking care of it. We can't bring, like I said, we couldn't bring the whole team, but this

[19:04] is a small representation of all the areas of our shop operations. Again, thank you for

[19:09] your time, and thank you for taking a few moments to recognize our team for this award.

[19:13] We do appreciate it. Thank you.

[19:23] I do want to say a few words and recognitions of our fleet

[19:28] management division and the leader Brian Lucas. I want to recognize the best dressed

[19:35] fleet manager in all of America in the 45-plus years of my public service. I've had

[19:44] the privilege of working with a number of fleet managers and by far he dressed as

[19:50] better than any of the ones that I have worked with and he talked about the fact that

[19:55] And there's over 4,000 specific counting people.

[20:01] He manages one of those is my government vehicle, and I've had to call him sometimes in my vehicle, stop don't be in various places, and he got me back up and running, so I'm very grateful to the work that you're doing with over 3,000 plus counties in the United States of America, being recognized among the nation's leading government fleets, is a tremendous accomplishment.

[20:28] As Brian has said, this award marks a fourth time since 2020 that our county,

[20:35] a fleet management had been ranked among the top 20 leading fleets.

[20:39] The leading fleets award is open to government fleets throughout the United States and Canada.

[20:47] This period judged award as a value-weighted by government fleet professionals

[20:51] who recognize organizations that demonstrate excellence in efficiency, leadership,

[20:57] innovation, future vision, and the ability to overcome challenges. To be recognized,

[21:04] repeatedly at this level, speaks volumes about the talent, dedication, and forward-thinking

[21:11] approach of our fleet management team. So congratulations to Brian and his entire fleet

[21:16] management division for earning the respect of your industry peers and for continuing

[21:22] to set the standard for innovation, leadership and excellence in fleet operations.

[21:30] It is now my pleasure to present the leading fleet award and the award reads, government

[21:38] fleet leading fleets, presented to Orange County fleet management for recognition as number

[21:45] In 2017, a fleet in 2026, congratulations and please come forward and be happy

[22:55] to see you.

[23:44] All right, now we'll all to a great start this morning with the swearing-in of Commissioner

[23:50] Michael Crab, a brand new commissioner who was joined us on the day of this is his first

[23:55] Board of County Commission meeting, won't be the last however, so as we move forward this

[24:01] morning, we're going to move to the next item on our agenda, and this is the public comment period

[24:06] time, we're going to invite members of the public to come forward for topics of interest

[24:12] of concern that are within this board's authority, however there are certain matters which

[24:17] are not appropriate for public discussion during this public comment period. With the exception

[24:22] of the contract award for traffic infraction detectors, these matters would include pending procurement

[24:30] on land use issues or concerns that should be properly brought to another board. Also we will of course

[24:36] solicit public input during each public hearing a schedule for this afternoon. With that

[24:42] Mr. Thamulo, do we have members of the public present who should be here this morning?

[24:47] We do, Mayor, and my my quirks. We have 57 speakers this morning.

[24:52] Okay, with that, I'm going to advise all speakers this morning that you will have...

[25:00] One minute, by which to plead your case, you can do it.

[25:08] Who will experience now? I know it can be done. So stay within the one minute, a period of time, and we invite you to come forward.

[25:19] We do have a full agenda this morning. That's why we do have to, we want to be heard, but we also have other items on the agenda.

[25:28] and we want all of those for those I and also be heard.

[25:32] So with that, I'm Sophia Mula, perhaps we'll begin in the autumn,

[25:35] which you have received the request to speak.

[25:39] Thank you, Mayor.

[25:40] All right, folks, I'm going to call your names in batches.

[25:43] When I do, please line up along the back wall

[25:45] of Perch the podium in the order called,

[25:47] when you do Perch the podium, please be with your name

[25:49] and address for the record.

[25:51] Our first speaker this morning is going to be Joseph Anthony

[25:55] Let me just check and see if there are any elected officials here this morning who want to speak.

[26:06] If so, we'll give elected officials some grace in their comments.

[26:14] I know I saw a few layers, Matt, Matt Johnson stepped out, Matt Critton, I know he was here earlier, okay,

[26:28] okay, if you a former commissioner or a former elected official, I'll even give you some grace, but we'll start with the current ones.

[26:37] Dr. Jim Moya, were you intended to say anything this morning?

[26:44] Do you want to come in?

[26:46] No, okay.

[26:48] So, Dr. Moya, you out first.

[27:05] Good morning, Mayor.

[27:06] Commissioner.

[27:08] My name's Dr. Jim Moyer.

[27:12] And as always, I'm here speaking on behalf of

[27:16] I'm still in water conservation district to and myself alone.

[27:23] Congratulations, Mayor Crab.

[27:25] Congratulations on a beautiful new day as it looks gorgeous.

[27:32] If I can, here, saving.

[27:37] It's as easy as one, two, three.

[27:39] Save a few drops and save some money.

[27:41] stop a few pollutants, and together we can make a big difference.

[27:49] The purpose of soil and water conservation districts is to work in conjunction with other

[27:55] government entities like Orange County in implementing land and water resource protection practices

[28:01] by assisting guiding and educating the public.

[28:08] I've been honored to have the opportunity to have monthly office hours in the community,

[28:14] including Eatville, Zellwood, Apoptia, and Acau.

[28:20] At these office hours, I'll provide one-on-one assistance for a personal plan to conserve

[28:28] water and prevent pollution, water pollution,

[28:32] discuss conservation tips and how everyone

[28:35] to save money and suggesting for how to stop

[28:39] and prevent pollution of Northwest Orange

[28:42] Lates and water bodies.

[28:46] I've been promoting what I call three seas,

[28:51] change your habits, conserve water use,

[28:54] and clean water bodies.

[28:58] So, if I'm here at the Orange County, thank you Mayor and commissioners for allowing me to have sell wood monthly office hours on Willow Street and in Zellwood and thank you so much and God bless all of you for everything you do.

[29:17] Thank you, Donna Moya. We'll move to our next speaker, please.

[29:20] Alright, for speaker again, it's going to be Joseph Anthony Cresanelsky, followed by Casey

[29:27] Gourlich, Cole Neesmith, Alan Levi,

[29:36] Sana Hafiz,

[29:39] Tom Norrett,

[29:43] Amaya Burrell.

[29:49] It looks like some of the names not be here, so first name to the podium may begin.

[30:01] Good morning, my name is Alan Levi, I live at 535 East Harding Street, Orlando, Florida, that's district tree.

[30:11] Thank you. Thank you, commissioners, welcome Commissioner Crab. Good morning, Commissioner.

[30:17] Compholar Diamond. Thank you for all your efforts and your upcoming votes to ensure that the least of us are most vulnerable.

[30:27] Those experiencing homelessness are supported.

[30:33] That is a blessing for us all.

[30:35] This is a reminder that those experiencing homelessness

[30:38] are less likely to commit violent crimes than housed individuals.

[30:43] Most arrest involves sleeping, just sleeping outdoors.

[30:49] Living on the streets is extremely dangerous.

[30:52] You're exposed to weather, to violence, to illness.

[30:55] But you need to sleep, you need to eat, and you need access to those basic needs that becomes

[31:02] your whole day.

[31:03] In the end, making life affordable, getting everyone shelter for the least of us, promotes

[31:11] a better life for all of us.

[31:13] Thank you.

[31:15] All right.

[31:15] Thank you for your comments.

[31:16] Next week, please.

[31:20] Hi, Cole Neesmith, 1312 North Furn Creek Avenue, Orlando, 3203, on behalf of

[31:28] Orlando's artists, I want to say thank you for the county's ongoing support of art and

[31:33] culture.

[31:34] I know that we all believe in the power of art and culture and that is why immerse

[31:38] art communities and you will performing in interactive arts, destination, festival, started

[31:43] 14 years ago as a group of artists who believe that artists have the power to transform

[31:47] our community for the better.

[31:49] And here is a little message from about 200 of those artists.

[32:11] So that's about 200 artists from here in Orange County who say thank you for your support

[32:15] of support of art and culture and for a nurse specifically as you consider that today.

[32:20] Thank you.

[32:22] Thank you, Mr. Nesmas.

[32:24] We'll move to the next speaker, please.

[32:32] Hello, my name is Casey Gallagher, Good Morning Commissioners Mayor.

[32:36] 3, 2, 4, 4, 9, 8, Magnolia Ridge Drive, 3, 4, 7, 4, 6.

[32:41] My name is Casey Gallagher, I'm an artist producer and someone who is quite literally grown up alongside the Dr. Phillips Center.

[32:47] The Orange County Canvas Cultural Plan calls for greater access for the arts and stronger support for our local creative workforce.

[32:53] I believe the Doctor Phillips Master Plan can make that vision a reality I know it because I've lived it.

[32:59] In 2014 I was hired at the Walt Disney Theatre to open it.

[33:03] My first professional job in 2015 I was a part of the very first applause award in event that has now grown the Walt Disney Theatre.

[33:09] In 2024, I performed at the opening of Jetsons Live in in 2026, I'm returning to Jetsons Live to perform my own show.

[33:16] I don't share those things to boast, honestly, I'm feeling incredibly blessed that I've continued to find myself at the right place at the right time.

[33:22] But I share those things because I grew up in this place.

[33:25] The Doctor Phillips Center gave me a professional environment that helped shape the artist and the professional that I am today.

[33:30] That's why the proposed 750 seat theater means so much to me.

[33:39] not just about tourism, it's about shaping the artists here at home. Thank you.

[33:45] All right, thank you for coming. Okay,

[33:51] to everyone present, this will be the only one

[33:54] and you will have. Okay, while we're in these proceedings, you cannot, I will make noise of any

[34:01] type, shout, clap, do any of those things. If you support, you can wave your hands, you can do various

[34:09] things but do not make noise. This is your only warning. Otherwise, I'm going to ask that you

[34:15] be escorted out. Okay. I'll weekly.

[34:21] Thank you very much. Next speaker.

[34:25] Thank you. I figured

[34:26] a picture is worth a thousand words. I only have a minute. I guess I'm done. But Tom Naret,

[34:32] 1, 4, 6, 2, 0, Joe, Sarah, drive Orlando, Florida. 3, 2, 8, 2, 6. I'm here to speak about

[34:37] Senate Bill 686 along with a fair number of other speakers will be very concise today.

[34:44] I've given you a handout there with a checklist if you will on the back.

[34:47] So I think the picture really speaks to things very clearly.

[34:51] We are in dire straits and we need all of you here.

[34:55] My simple request as well as the others is for legal analysis outside.

[35:00] Under the county here, to really look at Senate Bill 686. If you look at that second draft, it's the checklist, if you will. I don't care if you're concerned about costs or proper local land use authority, et cetera.

[35:14] Run down the list. It's not a single item. It's almost every item on the list. We need your help. We appreciate the fact that you guys have helped us shut down the high density request from Lake Pickett North.

[35:29] or susten them on two, maybe three occasions before.

[35:34] So again, we appreciate the request for outside council.

[35:38] Thank you.

[35:38] All right, I got a Tom, what was your last name?

[35:41] Narett, NARUT.

[35:43] Thank you.

[35:44] Thank you.

[35:47] All right, we'll move to the next week of please.

[35:57] Good morning, Mayor.

[35:58] Good morning, commissioners.

[35:59] My name is Amaya Burrell.

[36:01] 535, Creekside Park Avenue 32811.

[36:05] I am here on behalf of the Dr. Phillips Center

[36:07] Department of Education. I believe that their master plan gives students a lot of students

[36:13] a unique opportunity to grow and learn as artists. I'm a former Broadway performer,

[36:18] I perform with a Lion King National Tour for 11 years, and I, if I had the unique opportunity

[36:22] since I moved here to Orlando to work with the Dr. Phillips Center on various projects, such

[36:27] as the applause award and some are intensive workshops. And so I've seen firsthand the

[36:32] impact that the Doctor Phillips Center Department of Education has on the community and on

[36:38] students.

[36:39] I love seeing the students look on their faces when they are performing and so I believe

[36:44] that giving them the opportunity to grow and giving them more space to grow is going

[36:48] to be vital and essential to allowing these students the opportunity to find themselves as performers.

[36:57] I first hand, I was a performer, I grew up within the arts, I had that opportunity within

[37:01] the community. And so giving them that space to do that is so important. Thank you.

[37:06] All right. Thank you very much. We'll move to the next speaker please.

[37:13] Last two names in

[37:14] that bunch. Joseph and then Sana Hefiz barring those. The next speaker is going to be Zachary

[37:21] mold off followed by Ben McCarney, Liz Conner, Maria Fernanda,

[37:30] Syvietra, Hope, Bellamy, and Nelson Batoncourt.

[37:40] Salam Leico, Sana Hafiz, 3-2-8-1.

[37:43] I attended the meeting on the 12th regarding Timber's scan with Neighborhood Services Division

[37:47] Manager Jason Reynolds and later Commissioner Mike Scott.

[37:50] Jason reiterated, again and again, how Orange County had already invested $3.5 million in

[37:55] Timmer's scan, as if to defend the county against the fact that these residents had been

[38:00] underserved. In the same breath, Jason stated how the conditions of Timmer's scan were

[38:04] irredeemable and unsafe. He stated that the county and I quote, couldn't keep investing

[38:10] tax dollars into Timmer's scan because it isn't fair to the rest of Orange County residents.

[38:15] Interesting words to say to a community of almost 60 families facing displacement after

[38:19] years of neglect.

[38:21] None of the lengthy PowerPoint presentation

[38:22] answered the legitimate questions residents had.

[38:26] One, what concrete protections will there be

[38:28] so that the roughly 60 families in term of scan

[38:30] will be guaranteed equivalent housing in Orange County?

[38:33] We all know that providing case workers alone,

[38:35] who are already overburdened, will not say families

[38:37] from homelessness.

[38:39] We know this.

[38:39] Band-Aids do not help when a clinic is needed.

[38:43] Two, what assessments have been made regarding the cost

[38:46] effectiveness of demolition versus preserving and repairing?

[38:48] Who conducted these assessments if completed and when?

[38:52] I asked these questions on the 12th and still do not have answers.

[38:56] Three.

[38:57] Other residents raised questions about how proceeds from the sale will be distributed.

[39:01] And if debt owed to Orange County would be taken off the top prior.

[39:04] Commissioner Scott mentioned.

[39:07] No problem.

[39:07] I urge you to table the vote until an audit has been completed.

[39:11] And please think of the rising homelessness crisis.

[39:13] Thank you.

[39:13] All right.

[39:14] Thank you for your comments.

[39:15] We're moved to the next speaker.

[39:21] We have a new system, and this is the first time that this system has been used in the public.

[39:32] So we're still getting used to how it operates, so I'm sorry for that.

[39:38] All right, yes, sir.

[39:39] Good morning, Ben McCartney, 1606 Park Lake Street, Orlando Florida 3 2 803, the morning mayor

[39:48] and commissioners. I am the General Manager of Grand Boheem in Orlando, soon to be Hotel

[39:54] Bowden. And I'm here to speak on the Downtown Initiative's Dr. Phil.

[40:00] Hello, it's performing our center in the master plan. As somebody first hand, that is in the hospitality

[40:06] industry, I see the impact that it has on our revenue, our ability to employ people of the city.

[40:16] It's been a great impact so far. Dr. Phillips, annually, brings in over 910,000 guests to

[40:26] theaters with 175,000 coming from out of town. That impacted $12.9 million to hotels directly

[40:34] in the city. The 800 seat event center will help drive more economy to our downtown facility

[40:45] from that standpoint. So I strongly urge the support of Dr. Phillips performing our center

[40:51] and also the partied rise for the four-to-sister sports.

[40:55] All right, thank you for your comments.

[40:56] We'll move to the next speaker, please.

[41:04] Ladies and gentlemen, good morning,

[41:07] I'm Mayor and County Commissioners.

[41:10] My name is Maria Fernanda Sabeda.

[41:12] I am an independent artist community leader

[41:15] and artistic director of California, Colombia,

[41:19] for dances here in Central Korea.

[41:21] My journey with these,

[41:23] I'm gonna be talking on behalf of Inmers.

[41:26] My journey with this festival began in 2015 when it was part of the Creative Sea project later evolved into what we know now is in Mary's.

[41:38] I have the privilege of witnessing the growth transformation firsthand.

[41:45] Through in Mary's, I have been able to bring normally Colombians in my community, but also collaborate with artists from different groups representing Mexico's pain,

[41:55] Venezuela, Panama, Puerto Rico and other communities.

[41:58] For an independent artist, opportunities like this matter,

[42:03] in MERS had provided local artists with a professional platform

[42:08] to perform rich new audiences showcase their work

[42:12] and build meaningful artistic opportunities.

[42:15] As someone who has spent more than 35 years in the arts

[42:18] and has built an unlit and artistic organization,

[42:22] I understand how difficulties to create.

[42:26] All right, thank you, Ms. Paul.

[42:27] I have a big organization.

[42:30] We really need to first see what's like in Mary's.

[42:32] Thank you.

[42:33] Thank you very much.

[42:34] We'll move to the next speaker.

[42:45] Good morning, commissioners, mayor, staff.

[42:47] On a part of me, I'm a little bit extra burden today.

[42:50] Some extra Kyoto time.

[42:56] I appreciate the opportunity to come down here and address you all.

[42:59] It's now like four years.

[43:01] I've been coming down here.

[43:02] And I feel like you've all had the opportunity to see me grow and change in this community.

[43:08] After running for, I can pause so you can start that timer.

[43:13] You just started naming that.

[43:14] My bad.

[43:16] My name is Zach Moldoff.

[43:18] My full address is in the written record.

[43:20] My zip code is 32792.

[43:23] I reside in district five.

[43:26] You know, when I ran for a election,

[43:29] I knew to expect some unexpected things.

[43:31] But what I did not expect was for local elected officials to use rhetoric from national politicians that put minorities in our community at risk.

[43:43] And unfortunately, when I brought this to the attention of elected officials who are championed in this community as heroes for justice and freedom,

[43:51] they told me that they didn't know what I was talking about.

[43:54] They pretended that it wasn't happening.

[43:59] Those champions claim that the minorities who are suffering simply don't matter in this community.

[44:07] I'm just here today to remind everyone that being a Democrat doesn't mean that hate is justified.

[44:12] Doesn't mean that anything you choose to do is okay.

[44:14] Democrats can still be wrong.

[44:16] Democrats can still hurt people.

[44:18] Democrats can still be the reason why people in this community are denied their humanity.

[44:24] Thank you.

[44:26] All right. Thank you. Next speaker, please.

[44:28] Good

[44:47] morning, Mayor and Commissioners.

[44:48] My name is Liz Conner.

[44:49] I live in District 5.

[44:50] We're Land of Florida 32820.

[44:52] I'm here to speak today about agricultural enclaves in the cost of urban sprawl.

[44:57] Based on the urban 3 presentation you received last year on...

[45:01] Subtimer 30th. As you already know, Orange County is sitting at a net negative of $200 million net per acre.

[45:08] Mayor, I cannot agree with you more on that day. You said that I quote residents deserve to know the facts. The community deserves to know the facts.

[45:16] Our community deserves to know the truth and is up to you, the board, to help communicate that. Another speaker from staff also said that we will eventually share with you, the board, whether or not,

[45:29] particular proposals are a positive or negative in physical impact.

[45:33] I'm here asking use of taxpayer, we deserve to know the negative costs associated with

[45:38] developments, especially giant mega developments in East Orange County such as LPN.

[45:44] So I would just ask that we be able to see what this would look like in the future and cost

[45:49] inflation included.

[45:50] So thank you for your time and always denying this in the past.

[45:53] Thank you.

[45:54] All right.

[45:54] Thank you very much.

[45:55] So next week, please.

[46:03] My name is Nelson Bettencourt, 5350,

[46:06] in Scaly Street, Orlando, Florida, 32812.

[46:13] The TTT task force did not agree to fund

[46:16] the expansion of the Convention Center

[46:17] or the construction of the baseball stadium.

[46:21] The government is not just a cost center

[46:23] that collects taxes and then hands these dollars

[46:25] to private enterprises.

[46:28] When we developed non-tax revenue streams,

[46:31] we can also create a shield to protect us

[46:33] from unforeseen and autocratic measures.

[46:37] Orange County has a great opportunity now to take better control

[46:40] of its finances, public services and environmental stewardship,

[46:45] regardless of the impending repercussions of the November vote

[46:47] on property taxes.

[46:49] By using TDT funds to finance a public enterprise

[46:53] in the construction of a publicly own hotel

[46:56] on the 35 acres of land considered for the construction

[46:59] of a wasteful stadium.

[47:02] The hotel complex would create an unbeatable synergy with the Convention Center using the 523

[47:08] million or readily requested to expand the Convention Center.

[47:13] Thank you.

[47:14] Thank you, Mr. Van Gogh, or next speaker please.

[47:22] I'm one of everyone, hope, Bellamy, 1704, Desri, Coif, Florida, one minute, and I already

[47:29] talk fast.

[47:30] That's the main possible.

[47:31] What are they have a chance to email Mary Council and it's time for everyone and so

[47:38] Based on here to speak about nine years of being ignored prior to

[47:44] Individuals here now get on board and then last eight

[47:48] I have brought innovation here eight years ago

[47:52] Now nine years later. We have an innovation center. I was ignored

[47:57] FIM initiative I was ignored. Now what we have in the innovation center LSD screen as I said about that four years ago

[48:06] Ons County we're eight nine years behind in tech

[48:10] Grand Open was great but when they ended that day the equipment left a lot of manufacturers are using our software

[48:17] That we're building right here in Orlando. We have to do better to keep up. We're nine years behind in tech

[48:24] All right, thank you

[48:26] next speaker please.

[48:30] I folks, I next batch of speakers is going to start with Rick

[48:33] Bayard, followed by Brittney Rutherford,

[48:40] Bahia Meroon,

[48:44] Kristen Paul,

[48:47] Katherine

[48:48] Phillip,

[48:51] and Deborah Green.

[49:07] Morning commissioner. My name is Rick Bayard. I live at 5

[49:10] 4 2 6-terview and driver land of Florida. Rick Bayard and still work for Orange County. I'm

[49:19] tourist development tax force, recommendations, and project

[49:23] rankings.

[49:24] The Orange Audub on Natural History Museum,

[49:27] at Lake Apopt, the Burning Park will be renovated,

[49:30] a renovated truck repair shop, and will

[49:32] be the foundation of a museum reflecting the entire natural

[49:36] and cultural history of Lake Apopt and the communities

[49:39] that have grown up around it on the north shore of Lake

[49:42] Apopt.

[49:43] And I would like to urge you to consider

[49:45] Seriously, the recommendations and rankings provided by the Pass Force and Mayor Chapina that groups that a great job

[49:54] They cover a wide variety of interest groups. They took all of them.

[50:00] All the interested letters heard re-presentations from them, and we're asking detailed questions from them and subjected them to a rubric ranking that clearly laid out conditions for acceptance by the broader community for PDT money.

[50:15] Thank you very much.

[50:16] Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Next speaker, please.

[50:22] Hi, good morning. My name is Brett Rutherford, 552 to Autumn Ridge Road.

[50:26] So, Dr. Phillips recently requested 750 million to move forward with a variety of projects, including

[50:32] on-site parking, new theaters, and a large banquet-invent venue, where supporters describe

[50:36] these investments as enriching and enhancing additions to Central Florida.

[50:40] It's important to consider the impact these projects will have on the workers who will

[50:43] staff and sustain these venues.

[50:45] Facilities like the Dr. Phillips Center can create employment opportunities, but those jobs

[50:48] come with low wages, unveritipped pooling practices, limited access to health care and benefits,

[50:53] and few opportunities to obtain stable, full-time employment.

[50:56] As a result, workers are forced to take on multiple additional jobs to achieve a reasonable

[51:00] level of financial security and central Florida's economy.

[51:03] In one case, I personally encountered a worker had seven additional jobs within this industry

[51:07] just to make ends meet.

[51:09] I urge you to look beyond the physical infrastructure and consider the people who will make

[51:12] these venues possible.

[51:13] Public investment should not only enrich and enhance central Florida's entertainment and

[51:17] tourism offerings, it should also create dignified reliable jobs that provide workers with

[51:21] Fair compensation, meaningful benefits, and a genuine opportunity for stability.

[51:25] Workers in Central Florida, this is a better, one job should be enough.

[51:29] All right. Thank you. Next week of please.

[51:34] Well, I'm Kristen Schuillapal. I'm at 1-4-4-8 Whitridge Drive,

[51:38] winner-garden Florida 3-4-7-8-7, and I am speaking on behalf of support

[51:43] in the Dr. Phillips Center's Master Plan.

[51:46] I was actually an actor in the very first show produced professionally

[51:49] by Dr. Phillips Center in 2024 in the Pew Theater.

[51:52] And this year, I'm really proud to say that I was just the director for into the wood

[51:56] starring Jodie Benson, surrounded by an entirely Orlando-based cast.

[52:00] This was the first sign that something was produced by Dr. Phillips Center in Simon's Hall,

[52:04] so it was a real big honor to be a part of that.

[52:06] We noticed immediately that this space has kind of become outgrown, not only as Dr. Phillips

[52:12] Center become a really important part of the city's culture and entertainment and tourism,

[52:16] but also the educational department.

[52:18] And the Education Department has become so big and so important to so many young performers

[52:23] hoping to become professional in this industry, and they just need more space, so I'm

[52:28] in full support of that.

[52:29] Thank you.

[52:30] All right.

[52:30] Thank you.

[52:31] Next speaker.

[52:36] Good morning.

[52:37] Deborah Green, orange adabon, PO box 274, Apapca Florida, and I'd just like to thank the commissioners

[52:46] pushed for wider opportunities in TTT funding and Mayor Demings for assembling the task force.

[52:55] It was a great experience for us to present. And our project, the Orange Audubon Natural History

[53:03] Museum at the Apoca Burning Park, is perfect for tourism. We are adjacent to the Lake Apoca

[53:11] wildlife drive, which gets almost over a quarter million visitors a year, and these visitors

[53:17] are adding that on to their stay at the attractions. So it's benefiting not only West Orange

[53:23] County, but the tourist district by extended days, and we appreciate your consideration.

[53:31] Well, thank you for your comments. Next.

[53:38] Good morning, Mayor.

[53:39] commissioners. My name is Dr. Bihiam Maroon Castleberry Florida 32707. The Eatonville Museum

[53:47] of Culture and History led by Dr. Phillips Charities is the right project at the right time

[53:54] to achieve a positive tourism impact for Eatonville and Orange County. For more than a decade, Eatonville

[54:02] residents have been clear. There needs to be a museum celebrating all of Eatonville's legacy

[54:08] and there needs to be wheel action. Members of the Eatonville Initiative Advisory Committee,

[54:14] including myself, have been consistent in engaging Eatonville residents and the feedback

[54:19] about the hunger for its site on which the Eatonville Museum will sit, is consistent. Eaton

[54:25] Villains want the campus to be of service to the community. Today, I am here to put a spotlight

[54:33] on the many Eatonville residents who support Dr. Phillips Charities and the Eatonville Museum

[54:39] of Culture and History because the time is now for this local gem to become a cherished

[54:46] national treasure.

[54:49] All right.

[54:49] Thank you.

[54:50] Is it Dr. Maroon?

[54:52] Is that Maroon you have?

[54:59] All right.

[55:03] Good morning, Catherine Feld, 911, Weber Street, 3203. I'm a local researcher and practitioner who focuses

[55:12] on youth development and community education. I'm here today because I'm participating in a new

[55:17] national initiative to connect researchers like myself with local policymakers. This project covers

[55:25] any child and family policy challenge that you're facing here in Orange County. The process

[55:31] is easy, after today's meeting I'll follow up via email, and further describe the initiative

[55:37] including a way to sign up to meet with me. You may also share it with any other individuals

[55:42] who work on children and family issues in the county. For those interested, we'll have a short

[55:48] meeting to learn about the challenges that you're facing and where research might be helpful.

[55:53] Based on that, I will create a short summary of existing research to help guide your decision making,

[55:59] share it with you and talk through it with you.

[56:02] All of this is at no charge to you.

[56:05] Thank you, I'll be happy to answer questions

[56:07] and follow up.

[56:09] Okay, I'll look to the County Administrative.

[56:13] Who do we have on point that's going to follow up

[56:16] with as a Ms. Phil?

[56:20] Okay, got it.

[56:22] Yes, we have our folks from the Community and Family Service

[56:24] who I know have reached out to you.

[56:25] As a better way to contact as a conduit

[56:29] for doing that work.

[56:30] So I know they have your number, they're spoken, oh, there she is, I just see you then.

[56:36] So she'll follow with you.

[56:38] Okay.

[56:39] Thank you.

[56:41] We'll move to the next group of speakers.

[56:44] All right.

[56:44] Folks, next speaker is going to start with Pamela Sybel.

[56:48] Followed by Bradley Renner.

[56:51] Terry Olson.

[56:54] Amaria Smith.

[56:57] Lisa Lopez.

[56:59] and Curtis Gellidge senior.

[57:06] All right, Miss Sanville.

[57:07] Good morning, everyone.

[57:08] It's good to be back here.

[57:09] And this looks really nice.

[57:12] And as a homeowner, taxpayer, residing east of the East of the E.

[57:15] Kind of real boundary, just South Lake Picket Study, I and others are very concerned about this

[57:20] Lake Picket North application, and the negative implications, including financial to us, the taxpayers

[57:25] in the county.

[57:27] Therefore myself and others are grateful to the staff for the recommendation for denial

[57:30] for the LPN application.

[57:33] We have been communication with numerous organizations

[57:35] that attorneys and they found multiple reasons why.

[57:38] This application does not meet the criteria.

[57:40] We are concerned the county staff has only listed one reason

[57:45] for denial when we feel there should be multiple reasons.

[57:50] Whew, can we please get a legal analysis

[57:51] before this application comes back?

[57:53] Before the Board of County Commissioners

[57:55] since the bill preempts our constitutional rights.

[57:59] Even though applicant withdrew their application with their long history, they will be back.

[58:04] Appreciate denial of this high-density development in the past by you.

[58:09] Please stand up for us your constituents and have a legal analysis conducted.

[58:14] Thank you.

[58:15] And a reminder, rural boundary and fiscal sustainability.

[58:18] We're past.

[58:19] All right.

[58:19] Thank you.

[58:20] Thank you.

[58:22] All right, and just the county attorney's office is doing legal analysis.

[58:27] we are ready in litigation. So we will brief the board of kind of commissioners and an appropriate

[58:35] time as well as a member of the public regarding that litigation of current state law.

[58:44] Next speaker. Good morning Mayor Demings and Commissioners,

[58:48] Bradley Renner, Executive Director at Orlando Ballet, 600 North Lake for most of the drive in Orlando,

[58:55] 32803. In 2018 Orlando Ballet became the first recipient of Orange Counties Arc program, receiving

[59:01] a $4 million TTT investment for Harriet's Orlando Ballet Center. That public investment

[59:08] leveraged an additional $7 million from Harriet Lake, propelling us to become a world-class

[59:14] cultural asset. Orlando Ballet reaches more than 130,000 audience members through performances

[59:20] an educational programming annually. Our experience demonstrates that public investment in arts

[59:26] infrastructure generates measurable returns through economic activity, tourism, and private philanthropy.

[59:34] I respectfully urge you to support the task force recommendations, including $100 million for

[59:39] arc and increasing funding for arts and cultural affairs to 7%. These investments will address the need

[59:46] the cultural facilities identified through the Canvas Plan and ensure multiple organizations

[59:51] throughout Orange County have the resources to serve our community and advance our reputation

[59:56] as a world-class destination.

[59:58] Thank you.

[59:59] All right.

[1:00:00] And thank you for your comments. We're moved to the next speaker, please.

[1:00:05] Mr. Terry Olsen.

[1:00:07] That's my name, Terry Olsen. Our tinsigate. Now I'm on one note, shine.

[1:00:12] The curious says the upon a mischaracter in the highly rated TV show Ted Lasso.

[1:00:17] Curiosity brings tens of thousands of tourists to Central Florida. Curiosity also inspires creativity. To the natural resources we have in Orange County are great weather in a large community of creative.

[1:00:29] this brought here by primarily about the theme parks,

[1:00:32] creative city projects, immerse, capitalize on both the weather

[1:00:35] and that creative culture.

[1:00:38] More than one orange county plan has emphasized the value

[1:00:40] of having a creative blockbuster event

[1:00:42] and of celebrating the many facets of humanity

[1:00:44] found in our community.

[1:00:46] Fusion Fest and immerse started the path towards that end.

[1:00:49] We can build great buildings and we do,

[1:00:52] but it is creative experiences that touch the hearts of people

[1:00:55] and create lasting memories.

[1:00:56] I encourage you to support immerse to be the world-renowned creative event it can be.

[1:01:02] I'm curious to see what creative experiences they will bring us.

[1:01:05] These creative experiences are why I'm glad to live in Orange County.

[1:01:10] All right, thank you, Mr. Olson. Next week of please.

[1:01:21] Good morning, Mr. Mayor and members of the Board. My name is Amaria 321.

[1:01:26] I'm here today not to plead for empathy but to place a matter of fact assessment of legal and financial liability on the record ahead of today's vote.

[1:01:32] Since 2014, Orange County has allocated $3.5 million to timber scan, the fact that

[1:01:38] substandard living conditions persist is not a justification for demolition that will instantly

[1:01:42] displace 60 families into historically overburdened mental market, and it is an indictment

[1:01:47] of the county's administrative management.

[1:01:49] A vote to demolish is complex without a legally Bonnie fully funded one to one housing

[1:01:53] replacement guarantee exposes this county to severe liability.

[1:01:57] Reliant on standard case worker relocation is a administrative failure in weighting.

[1:02:02] As the county has yet to present online item budget showing where these 60 families can legally

[1:02:06] and afford a baby house.

[1:02:07] If this board votes for demolition today without an immediate alternative rehabilitation plan,

[1:02:11] it is a confession of municipal mismanagement.

[1:02:14] To the mayoral candidates and current board members seeking an election,

[1:02:17] the public is no longer listening to your rhetoric.

[1:02:19] We are tracking the data.

[1:02:20] We are tracking the 3.5 million already spent and we will track the exact economic and human

[1:02:24] cost of the displacement you're about to off the rise. I urge this board to table today's

[1:02:28] vote into a comprehensive independent audit of the $3.5 million is made public and illegally

[1:02:33] binding housing for its protection plan for these 60 families is codified. Thank you.

[1:02:37] Okay, Ms. Amaria, are you a resident of Timmer's scan? No, I'm not. I'm a concerned citizen.

[1:02:42] That doesn't think that this is right. What we're doing. Okay. Thank you very much.

[1:02:45] Thank you. All right. Next speaker please.

[1:02:52] Good morning, Mayor Demings and

[1:02:54] commissioners. Lisa Lopez, 2,500, maintenance center Parkway, 3,2751, and I'm the vice president

[1:03:01] at non-perl Institute, which is a post-secondary program providing technical skills, work readiness, training,

[1:03:07] and social stills, trainings for adults with autism. A couple of those classes involve community

[1:03:12] and culture and valuing the community. And through Dr. Phillips Center, community give back

[1:03:17] program our students have had the opportunity to experience the arts, connect with their community

[1:03:22] beyond the classroom. For our students these experiences are much more than attending a performance.

[1:03:29] There are opportunities to navigate new environment, build confidence, share experiences with others,

[1:03:35] and most importantly they feel that they belong in the community in which they live.

[1:03:39] That is why the Master Plan matters.

[1:03:42] So expanding access will create more opportunities for people up all abilities

[1:03:46] to participate, connect, and experience everything our community has to offer.

[1:03:52] I strongly support Dr. Phillips Center, Master Plan, and we're expectably encourage and

[1:03:56] hope that you guys will support that as well.

[1:03:58] Thank you so much for your time today.

[1:04:01] All right.

[1:04:01] Thank you.

[1:04:02] Next speaker, please.

[1:04:06] Good morning, Mayor Demings and Commissioners.

[1:04:08] My name is Curtis Gullich, 4498, McMillian Ridge Court, Cassidy Florida.

[1:04:13] I am super excited to be here to represent Dr. Phillips in the need for the expansion.

[1:04:19] I am a proud parent of one Casey Galluch who was earlier and he has made me a proud parent

[1:04:25] these past 15 years and doing all of the work that he has done at Dr. Phillips.

[1:04:29] We need more proud parents like myself to represent and I think it will be a great addition

[1:04:33] to our wonderful community.

[1:04:35] Thank you.

[1:04:36] All right.

[1:04:41] Alright folks next batch of speakers is going to start with Alston Philips followed by Sean

[1:04:48] Welcome,

[1:04:50] Christopher Q, Matteo Schulti, David Siegel.

[1:05:00] In Cynthia Clayton.

[1:05:07] Good morning, Mayor.

[1:05:08] Good morning, Mr. Mings.

[1:05:09] Commissioner, my name is Alson Phillips.

[1:05:11] My address is 9438 whispering, metals, laying in the landlord of 32.825.

[1:05:16] My name is Alson Phillips. I'm a medically retired U.S. Army combat veteran who

[1:05:20] participates in Dr. Phillips Center Arts Hold on this program.

[1:05:23] I can personally tell you how meaningful these programs are to the veterans like myself.

[1:05:27] They give us a place to connect, create build relationships and simply feel like we belong.

[1:05:32] Dr. Phillips Center Master Plan would expand opportunities for arts wellness and community

[1:05:35] program it. What excites me most is the opportunity to reach more veterans throughout the community,

[1:05:39] to community who could benefit from these programs, but may not have found their way.

[1:05:44] Dr. Phillips, Senator's already serving our community in an incredible scale and this master plan

[1:05:48] will expand that impact making sure that more people, including veterans like me,

[1:05:52] have a place at that table. On behalf of the veteran community, I strongly support the master plan,

[1:05:57] because I've experienced this impact personally and want more veterans to have that same opportunity.

[1:06:01] The arts are not a luxury, there are essential pillar of public health, education, and economic vitality by approving this plan.

[1:06:07] You're expanding hope, healing, and opportunity for every resident and space and for those who live served this country.

[1:06:13] So I strongly encourage you to support it, and I thank you for the time.

[1:06:16] All right, thank you, Mr. Phillips. Next speaker.

[1:06:22] Good morning Mayor, commissioners.

[1:06:25] My name is Sean Welcome, address 4625, Tinsley Drive, or Land of Florida 32839.

[1:06:30] Earlier this year, we hosted the 34th Annual Southern Pride Poetry Slam Festival, the largest

[1:06:37] spoken word poetry competition in the country. Across five days, we hosted 250 poets

[1:06:43] from across 44 cities around the United States and a celebration of literary arts through

[1:06:49] performances, workshops, and community events. Visitors experience our museums, libraries,

[1:06:56] restaurants and hotels while discovering all the cultural assets that make Central Florida

[1:07:02] unique. We demonstrated how arts and culture drive cultural tourism and elevate Orange County

[1:07:09] on a national stage. As a growing nonprofit literary arts council of Central Florida,

[1:07:15] we see tremendous opportunity to expand cultural tourism. I respectfully ask for your support

[1:07:21] of the funding recommendations from arts and cultural affairs to strengthen our region's cultural

[1:07:27] and economic success. Thank you. All right, thank you, Mr. Welcome. Next, we can please.

[1:07:36] My name is David Seagull, a 1-8-6-8 corner of the Elaine Orlando, Florida.

[1:07:41] Can't tell my joke. I'm Mayor Glad to see you back here looking, I feel okay. I also want

[1:07:46] to compliment you on the E-bike defense. You won't have any kids trying to run you over.

[1:07:53] That's a very good.

[1:07:55] I thought as anti-terrorist shield side, good job.

[1:07:58] I want to address a brief of the issue of the TTT.

[1:08:03] I was looking at communities and municipalities,

[1:08:06] that we're getting funding.

[1:08:08] And I'm just saying, it might be something

[1:08:09] to take a look at when you're funding one community of 2,000 people,

[1:08:14] 82 and a half million dollars.

[1:08:16] And it comes up to $35,000 a person.

[1:08:19] And then you look at an apca that's got $66,000.

[1:08:22] if you factored it, they'd get like 2.1 billion.

[1:08:26] This is kind of an interesting thing, and I know it evolves.

[1:08:30] But no one speaks for the people being taxed that pay that fee.

[1:08:34] So it's great to sit up here and say, here's this money, and everyone just say to you,

[1:08:38] oh, I deserve it.

[1:08:40] But I think you need to just really take a look at the fund for yourselves and not just

[1:08:47] kind of rubber stamp.

[1:08:48] Thank you.

[1:08:49] All right.

[1:08:49] Thank you.

[1:08:55] May your and commissioners good morning, my name is Chris Kiyo, 1-2-5 East Pine, I had a short walk this morning.

[1:09:03] As you consider the TTT Task Force recommendations today, I want to share a personal example of what an investment in immerse can create.

[1:09:12] The Orlando Vocal Collective did not exist before Orlando before immerse gave us a platform that opportunity helped turn an idea into an arts organization.

[1:09:22] And earlier this month, OVC President sold out concerts right here in downtown Orlando.

[1:09:28] Two guests, I met, one from Portland, Oregon and the other from Columbus, Georgia.

[1:09:33] Discovered us at a nurse for the first time.

[1:09:35] And they returned to Orlando for this festival.

[1:09:38] And then traveled here again specifically to see our shows these past couple weeks.

[1:09:43] That is cultural tourism.

[1:09:45] Immersis creating artists, jobs, audiences, experiences, and reasons for visitors to return to Orange County.

[1:09:52] I'm living proof that it's impact exists beyond the festival weekend.

[1:09:57] I ask for your continued support of a nurse.

[1:10:00] As this process moves forward. Thank you.

[1:10:03] All right, thank you.

[1:10:07] Next.

[1:10:11] Good morning, commissioners and mayor. My name is Cynthia Clator. I live at 2.529, skin court in Orlando, Florida,

[1:10:18] 3.2839. And I'm here to speak on behalf of the people in Timbscan or myself and my neighbor,

[1:10:24] friend and neighbor, Janet Ellery. We are both Ellery people in the community. And we were here a month ago,

[1:10:32] speaking how we are tired, we're ready to go.

[1:10:35] Timber's scan has not been treated like a real community.

[1:10:38] It's been treated more like a dumping ground.

[1:10:40] We've got people come from the outside

[1:10:42] that keep continually dump, party,

[1:10:44] and do other things that's making it very uncomfortable

[1:10:46] to live there anymore.

[1:10:48] I got it meant that about a year ago when we opposed this,

[1:10:51] we get a valid effort to try and fix Timber's scan.

[1:10:55] And the Flores brothers did everything they could

[1:10:57] to try and improve the community.

[1:10:59] However, it just isn't possible.

[1:11:02] We tried everything in everything failed.

[1:11:05] So as at this point, that we think that it's time,

[1:11:07] and we're just tired, it's just time for us to move on.

[1:11:10] We're old enough, and I'm smart enough to know

[1:11:13] that you just get sometimes you just gotta say,

[1:11:15] hey, we're done, and that's where we're at now.

[1:11:18] We just ask that when this does get approved,

[1:11:21] that you do it expediently, thank you.

[1:11:23] So Ms. Clayton, since you're here, how old are you?

[1:11:27] And I was sent to you too.

[1:11:30] All right.

[1:11:30] And you live there.

[1:11:32] I do live in Tiberskand.

[1:11:33] It's my primary residence.

[1:11:34] And what is the sentiment of the majority of the people who live there?

[1:11:40] It's mixed.

[1:11:41] It's mixed right now.

[1:11:42] A lot of us are really tired of it because we've tried to stop the dumping.

[1:11:46] We've tried to stop the party and we have a hard time getting the police in there.

[1:11:49] We can't get cable in there.

[1:11:51] They've refused to come in.

[1:11:52] Our mail can't even be delivered in there.

[1:11:54] It's at this point that it's.

[1:11:56] people are are starting to get tired and some of them are there because they have no place

[1:12:00] else to go so that's why some of them are a little hesitant and a lot of them are no longer

[1:12:06] live in there and they are just collecting rent and those are the ones that are called like

[1:12:11] to keep it there but the ones that are actually live in there are ready to go.

[1:12:16] All right thank you ma'am for your candor thank you. Next speaker please.

[1:12:24] All right next speaker

[1:12:24] is going to be Kara Blanco, followed by Johnny Stanley, Miguel Flores,

[1:12:35] Trini Keros,

[1:12:39] Melinda Sinclair,

[1:12:43] and Dana Hutchinson.

[1:12:57] You're welcome.

[1:13:05] Good morning, Mayor.

[1:13:06] Good morning.

[1:13:07] Good morning.

[1:13:07] Kara Blanca, the 66-16 Montelcourt, Orlando 320, and this is actually

[1:13:13] So we're going to be a geared for Commissioner Crab.

[1:13:17] Welcome.

[1:13:21] Hopefully I'll get him to watch this.

[1:13:22] We can start in the plot.

[1:13:27] And with the people of Clark Conocoli, one of at least five community groups.

[1:13:32] We and the people of Clark Cart became nonprofit.

[1:13:34] All formed under the tutelage of Commissioner Christie, more in her amazing staff.

[1:13:39] I read that Commissioner Crab.

[1:13:40] you graduated from Evans, so he knows our area, its charm and its challenges, his 30 years

[1:13:48] in law enforcement have given him, like Mayor Demings, a unique boots on the ground perspective

[1:13:53] of how local government plays a critical role in the well-being of his residence. As

[1:13:58] commissioner, he is now part of the decision-making process ranging from public safety, infrastructure,

[1:14:05] protecting the Clark County rule of settlement, business development, environmental protection,

[1:14:10] animal services to defending voter-approved charter amendments.

[1:14:15] He is our new voice, our group wishes him God's speed and strength as he takes on his new

[1:14:20] responsibilities representing our communities in district 2.

[1:14:24] Thank you.

[1:14:26] All right.

[1:14:26] Thank you.

[1:14:27] Next week, please.

[1:14:33] Good morning Mayor and Board.

[1:14:35] My name is John Stanley, and I live at 1813, Karen, and Drive.

[1:14:38] Just for the record, I'd like to state that the county was involved in litigation, but I believe that was on SB 180, and that was concluded by a judge.

[1:14:48] So I want to thank the board for denying custody in the past and meant the world to us.

[1:14:53] We are so grateful for your support.

[1:14:57] Speaking on S Senate Bill 686, we're...

[1:15:00] I'm asking for a legal analysis on 686 and for the county to get behind that and really do it in-depth

[1:15:07] dive. I want to understand how the county is working for us and how it's going to protect us from

[1:15:16] the unfunded state mandate which the disdevelopment would bring with late-picket north-sustony.

[1:15:22] Is it even legal to preempt our comprehensive land use plan? If it is, how are we going to be reimbursed

[1:15:28] as a community. We have the BCC to do the legal analysis and to get behind us like we

[1:15:39] can support you. Thank you.

[1:15:41] All right, thank you. Next week, please.

[1:15:52] Take me close, 2000 hill, Chris Orlando. Tax payers since 2023 up to now, 2026, have

[1:16:01] We requested a TTT funds be used for more than entertainment.

[1:16:06] There are human lies that are suffering and all of this suffering falls in death years from

[1:16:13] the people that are elected and swore to serve them.

[1:16:19] Romas, Romans, enjoy these circles and what happened to the victims and we seem to be having

[1:16:27] 2,000 years after the fact the same padding.

[1:16:32] The agenda today is 21 pages full of information as to where and who will gain more of a tax dollars.

[1:16:43] Remember, the people perished for lack of knowledge and the knowledge is in those who you elect.

[1:16:51] Judge them for what they do.

[1:16:53] All right. Thank you. Next.

[1:17:03] Morning Commissioner. Mayor. My name is Miguel Flores. I am

[1:17:07] owner of Timberscan Section 2 and I've been assigned by the HOA Board to be the

[1:17:14] communicator. Mainly in written form. We are not opposing termination, but what we are

[1:17:28] of parcels get compensated.

[1:17:32] According to what they own,

[1:17:34] this individuals that spend money

[1:17:36] in fixing their condos,

[1:17:37] this individual's own a parcels,

[1:17:39] this individuals that have not fixed their condos

[1:17:44] and where we're asking for,

[1:17:45] rather than just giving individuals

[1:17:46] just where exhibit old framework

[1:17:49] in addition to that,

[1:17:51] provides some type of

[1:17:54] God rails, like such as Chapter 718.117, that gives us some protections for homeowners that the only ones that have standing units from sections 1, 2, and 3.

[1:18:07] We just want equal treatment based on the current situation and a true assessment of what's going on.

[1:18:15] Thank you.

[1:18:16] So, Mr. Flores, do you live there on units?

[1:18:20] I own units. I was living there with my brother. Now I have a cousin of my living in there.

[1:18:26] Do some emergencies. My brother still resized there.

[1:18:30] Okay. All right. Thank you so much.

[1:18:33] All right. Next week.

[1:18:38] Hello.

[1:18:39] Hello.

[1:18:40] Good morning, Mayor and commissioners.

[1:18:42] Well, first, my name is Nguyen Distance Claire.

[1:18:46] My address is on record.

[1:18:48] Good morning, Mayor and commissioners.

[1:18:50] Our last meeting showed exactly why Orange County should not make a final decision about

[1:18:54] timber scan yet.

[1:18:56] That meeting brought important issues to like questions about assessments on county owned

[1:19:00] properties that may have may have may not have been paid to the associations, where the

[1:19:06] leans connected to the buildings that were demolished can be removed or resolved, and where

[1:19:11] the redevelopment can occur in phases instead of this place, this place in an entire community

[1:19:16] at once. Those are not minor questions. They should, that could directly affect temperature

[1:19:21] and finances and the redevelopment are alternative available to us. Yet, temperature

[1:19:26] as an entire community has had very few opportunities to sit down with Orange County

[1:19:31] and fully discuss its future without severe time limitations. Before you decide on

[1:19:37] receivership, give us the opportunity where the opportunity, we are asking for formal

[1:19:41] working meetings between Orange County, all three associations, owners and residents, not just separate conversations with individuals.

[1:19:50] We cannot solve the case of problems in three-minute speeches.

[1:19:54] Before you decide our future, give us the time at the table to help us plan it.

[1:19:58] Thank you.

[1:20:01] Do you live on property or do you own property there?

[1:20:05] Well, own property and I will be living back on property.

[1:20:11] I'm confused. Do you live there now?

[1:20:13] Well, not right now.

[1:20:15] That's the question.

[1:20:17] Thank you very much.

[1:20:21] All right, we're going to move to the next speaker.

[1:20:24] Good morning.

[1:20:26] data Hutchinson 19246 lands down 32833. I'm here to talk about SB 686. Orange County

[1:20:37] voters overwhelmingly passed charter amendment for fiscal sustainability analysis. Orange

[1:20:43] County spent taxpayer money to develop the fiscal sustainability tool. I'm asking

[1:20:49] you to proactively use that tool to determine the true cost of the SB 686 developments.

[1:20:55] If the analysis shows that these developments are going to cost the county money, this

[1:21:01] could be a way to challenge this law.

[1:21:04] I ask that you do a legal analysis now.

[1:21:07] As to whether this would be considered an unfunded state mandate, which the Florida Constitution

[1:21:12] prohibits.

[1:21:14] You have denied custody in the past, and we appreciate that so much.

[1:21:18] Find a way to do so again before they return.

[1:21:21] Thank you.

[1:21:22] Okay, thank you for your comments and again, we are doing a legal analysis, we've been

[1:21:28] involved in litigation over this matter for some time now, we're going to continue

[1:21:34] along that path, okay, all right, next speaker please.

[1:21:39] All right, folks, next batch of speakers is going to start with James Hunter, followed by

[1:21:45] Sam Stark, Carl Speak, Christopher Stalder, Kim Buckeye, and Shared Crop.

[1:22:02] All right, yes.

[1:22:03] Good morning, Mayor.

[1:22:04] I'm James Hunter.

[1:22:05] I live at 93-27 Dull Circle with the mayor.

[1:22:09] And I've been a long-term volunteer with four to such sports,

[1:22:12] and I'm currently serving as President of FCS.

[1:22:14] I'm asking for your support of the Camping World Campus Expansion Project.

[1:22:20] There's a number of exciting things happening on the campus right now with the renovation

[1:22:24] of the stadium, but also the construction of a new events center.

[1:22:29] That's going to bring about a hundred events to the campus that we haven't had before.

[1:22:34] And a lot of families are going to be coming.

[1:22:36] The biggest efficiency from the the current project that was identified the last time

[1:22:41] It went before TDT was the lack of adequate parking, and this project will fulfill, at least

[1:22:49] make a step in that direction by increasing parking capacity, make a very convenient to the

[1:22:53] event center and the stadium, as well as provide some other facilities that will greatly enhance

[1:22:59] the campus.

[1:23:00] So, I appreciate your support.

[1:23:02] Thank you.

[1:23:02] Thank you, Mr. Hunter.

[1:23:04] Next speaker, please.

[1:23:13] I want to express my gratitude to Mayor Chapin and Eddie Morton and the task force for the citizens and the TDT review.

[1:23:23] I may not know much about much, but I do know something about tourism and specifically sports tourism.

[1:23:29] This county has made a great deal of progress as it relates to the camping world stadium over the years and there has been progress in many ways.

[1:23:38] though to some of us a little slower than we would like for the economic impact and return

[1:23:44] that we know is there.

[1:23:45] But a critical next step is in front of you, and that is the funding for and construction

[1:23:49] of the parking structure proposed by and partially funded by the Florida Citrus Sports.

[1:23:55] The stadium has a much greater potential for much greater economic and community impact, and

[1:24:03] though not very sexy, this garage is critical.

[1:24:06] So, please continue to fund and enhance the stadiums, so Florida Citrus Sports, Go Sports, Orlando, Orlando City and Orlando City Soccer and the City can bring more major events in ROI in New York community.

[1:24:18] Thank you.

[1:24:19] All right.

[1:24:19] Thank you.

[1:24:20] Next speaker.

[1:24:26] Good morning.

[1:24:26] Mayor and commissioners.

[1:24:28] On Christopher Stalder, 5102 Saint Germain Avenue, Bellow, Florida 32812.

[1:24:34] And I'm here as an advocate for the homeless with support Orlando shelters.

[1:24:38] And I'm excited about the pathway to permanent housing, the Golden Rod project, and I also

[1:24:45] am hopeful about the purchase of the county of the hotel 200 rooms near the 33rd Street Project.

[1:24:54] And I was speaking with a city council member at the mayor's Highland.

[1:25:00] Light of the city address a couple of Fridays ago and he said the city is also looking to purchase a motel to help people with the pathways to permanent housing and also to be permanent support of housing for those with disabilities and limited income.

[1:25:16] And I'm hoping that they get something soon. They're already viewing something and they only have 2 million but they need six. So hopefully they'll help encourage partnership elsewhere.

[1:25:28] And thank you for all you do to help our most vulnerable neighbors.

[1:25:33] All right, thank you.

[1:25:35] Next speaker, please.

[1:25:42] Good morning, everybody.

[1:25:43] If you need to stretch, stand up and do it.

[1:25:46] Kim Buckeye, 6,500 Swain Road, Apapa.

[1:25:50] Welcome Commissioner Crab.

[1:25:52] So far, you are a big improvement over an empty chair.

[1:25:55] And I wrote that before you were out on break.

[1:25:57] So that's a ha-ha-ha-l-o-l.

[1:25:59] But I look forward to working with you on matters of health, well-being and safety for the people of District 2.

[1:26:05] I recently served on the TTT Task Force as a representative for City of Apopkin.

[1:26:11] I want to thank Mayor Demings for his forethought and including all of the municipalities and everybody you included in that group.

[1:26:19] Because it made a very diverse group and I think it improved the product.

[1:26:23] were very proud of what came out of that task force and I stand behind it as published.

[1:26:30] We also need to look forward, there's much room to improve Florida statutes and county

[1:26:39] code to further expand the uses of TDT.

[1:26:44] I think there's a full agreement on that, so let's work on that.

[1:26:48] I'm not necessarily volunteering, but I do have a hard time saying no.

[1:26:53] Ha ha, hello, hello, not really.

[1:26:56] All right, thank you, Ms. Buckeye. Next speaker.

[1:27:05] My name is Karl of Speaks. I'll leave at 18, 8, 32, Jackson Avenue, Orlando, Florida.

[1:27:13] I have some questions about Senate Bill 686.

[1:27:17] And what it could mean for taxpayers in our community.

[1:27:23] These new developments are going to need services and

[1:27:28] infrastructures.

[1:27:30] We know that the taxpayers end up paying for this,

[1:27:36] not the developer, how can the state require

[1:27:41] county to approve that are going to cost the county money. How is that legal and arms

[1:27:56] county looking into this? I hope so. I asked you taxpayers that you are doing everything

[1:28:08] possible to protect from those COVID.

[1:28:14] Thank you, Paul.

[1:28:15] Thank you, Mr. Minks.

[1:28:17] Next speaker, please.

[1:28:23] Good morning, Mayor and commissioners.

[1:28:25] Good morning.

[1:28:25] My name is Shared Crop.

[1:28:27] Unite here at local 737, zip code 32809.

[1:28:31] TDT dollars are created by the work of tour guys,

[1:28:36] front desk agents, ride operators.

[1:28:39] The people who work those jobs don't benefit enough.

[1:28:41] They are struggling with high costs, long commutes, and low wages.

[1:28:46] You have many options in front of you.

[1:28:48] But none of these big projects are considered

[1:28:51] that will change these big problems.

[1:28:55] But a project that will create a large number

[1:28:57] of good tourism jobs would make a difference,

[1:29:00] and find a ways to unlock spending

[1:29:02] to help workers would make a difference.

[1:29:05] If you spend all the funds available now,

[1:29:08] you will close options in the future.

[1:29:10] On August 18, the TDC voted to approve the final TTT Task Force report, but there's an issue.

[1:29:18] The report apparently wasn't final until last week.

[1:29:22] So what exactly did they approve?

[1:29:25] Public oversight shouldn't be a rubber stamp, the workers who power tourism economy and the taxpayers deserve better.

[1:29:33] Thank you.

[1:29:34] All right, Mr. Redwood, would you spell your last name for me if you don't mind?

[1:29:38] Yes, c-r-o-p-p crop.

[1:29:42] All right.

[1:29:42] Thank you very much.

[1:29:45] Next week, please.

[1:29:48] Our next speaker is going to be Maria Martinez.

[1:29:52] Followed by Sarah Meyer.

[1:29:56] Eugene Stacardo.

[1:29:59] Dave.

[1:30:00] Bucklers, and Nicholas Natali.

[1:30:17] Good morning, members of the Orange County Board of Commission and Mayor Demings. Congratulations on overcoming your recent health concerns. We all continue to pray for you.

[1:30:27] Very much, thank you. My name is Maria Martinez, my addresses in the record.

[1:30:32] I don't believe any of you sitting here today on the DS are here because you wanted to have Tallahassee take over all local decisions and make the decisions for us.

[1:30:41] rather I think that you ran for office and got elected because you wanted to have a voice in this

[1:30:46] community that you love and care about so deeply.

[1:30:51] You have helped us to feed the lake pick

[1:30:52] at North Project multiple times in the past has been said here already this morning, but big money

[1:30:57] interests are relentless. The latest assault on hometown rule is Senate Bill 686, which once again

[1:31:03] bypasses the ability of this body to determine what's best for our local community.

[1:31:09] Mayor Demings and what may be the twilight of your incredible career.

[1:31:14] I heard you say earlier that you have committed resources to assessing this matter legally.

[1:31:19] We hope and pray that extends beyond the recent litigation that was concluded by the judge.

[1:31:24] And that you commit to continuing to all available resources into assessing how you can reassert local authority.

[1:31:32] On this latest assault on hometown rule and government over regions Senate Bill 66.

[1:31:37] All right. Thank you. Next speaker, please.

[1:31:44] Good morning. Mayor and commissioners. My name is David Buckles. I live at 967, Glenview Circle

[1:31:49] when I'm garden. I'm here as a board member of eight waves in the executive vice chair for

[1:31:56] the I am Children's Museum. I will apologize for the emails you may have received your inbox

[1:32:02] might have been full from our support from around the county. But what I'm going to talk to you

[1:32:07] is some of you may remember Sarah Myers, who will be speaking next,

[1:32:11] our executive director, speaking about a little girl on the plane,

[1:32:15] towing the hand, heading home after her family visit to Orange County.

[1:32:20] I think that image is powerful, but I want to build on it for just a moment.

[1:32:24] That little girl represents the kind of family visitors we're talking about,

[1:32:27] that come to Orange County for the attractions. They already know,

[1:32:30] but I am children's museum gives them another reason to stay longer,

[1:32:33] spend another day here, eat another meal, experience something meaningful, and unique Orange County

[1:32:40] experience of watching this clock. Every peer city that's closed the gap, Indianapolis, Houston,

[1:32:46] Tampa, Charlotte, Pittsburgh, not Orange County. We have a History Museum of Science Museum,

[1:32:50] but not eight children's Museum. I'd ask that you consider pushing through the Children's Museum.

[1:32:55] Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Balkos. Next week of please.

[1:33:02] Good morning. My name is Sarah Meyer.

[1:33:04] I live at 1, 0, 8, 3, 0, crescent lane, Claremont, Florida.

[1:33:10] I am just so honored to be here with you all and have just a few seconds to share with

[1:33:15] the missing gap of not having a children's museum in Orange County.

[1:33:20] It doesn't just affect culturally people visiting, but it actually affects the local children

[1:33:25] that live here.

[1:33:27] Having that early childhood education kindergarten readiness exposure, able to play, create

[1:33:33] art. Also the eco education opportunities through our two miles of outdoor trails as well as

[1:33:41] is all the incredible exhibits that will be built under a weather-proofed exhibit covering.

[1:33:48] But I just wanted to stop and say, what does that all bring together that it brings a return

[1:33:53] and an investment back to Orange County, that families that fly here can visit and have something

[1:34:00] accessible to get off the 429 and spend, you know, two hours. I think it's an incredible investment of 40 million per year regional impact.

[1:34:09] Thank you so much.

[1:34:11] All right. Thank you, Ms. Myers.

[1:34:13] Next speaker.

[1:34:19] Good morning.

[1:34:21] Eugene Stacardo, 331, Roswell Avenue.

[1:34:26] The core has issued a opinion on Lake Pickett's study area. Not good for the community.

[1:34:29] who's been fighting for over 15 years against this sprawl.

[1:34:33] I see Black clouds with a recent court opinion in SP686.

[1:34:38] Please, Mayor of Commissioners, direct the county attorney into study options now.

[1:34:42] We have a fight in the near future.

[1:34:43] Other counties are doing the same.

[1:34:45] 2024 citizens overwhelmingly pass the charter amendments

[1:34:48] protecting the rural areas and enacting fiscal analysis tools.

[1:34:52] Urban 3 tools clearly shows development like Sassina does not pay for itself.

[1:34:57] Plus the county hasn't even updated

[1:35:00] The impact fees for developers. If the county fails to defeat this fall, taxpayers will make up the difference. November

[1:35:06] the taxpayers face a question about property taxes. Yes, no. To protect local government from

[1:35:11] tallyhassie. Please vote to direct the county attorney to do this research to defend against this

[1:35:17] Thank you.

[1:35:19] Thank you, Mrs. Toccaru.

[1:35:22] Next week.

[1:35:29] Hello.

[1:35:30] To missioners.

[1:35:31] My name is Nicholas Natali.

[1:35:33] I live at free 283 sits in District 1.

[1:35:36] I am here as part of Sunrise Movement Orlando.

[1:35:40] And promoting the star plan.

[1:35:42] But here specifically, I am talking in regards to Senate Bill 686.

[1:35:47] I request the board to do not only do illegal analysis of

[1:35:51] to on-play is but made that information public because a

[1:35:55] expensive sprawl is a tossy burden to us all.

[1:35:59] And in regards to TDT, I urge the board to accept task force

[1:36:03] recommendation number 11 to explore alternative uses the TDT

[1:36:07] that caplanded a recent study in which 70 sets of the

[1:36:09] respondents wanted TDT to do transportation.

[1:36:13] And I think we should reevaluate the 40% threshold for

[1:36:16] marketing, maybe that money to be used to promote specific

[1:36:19] events or to provide wraparound ads on buses. Also, we should investigate the county's

[1:36:25] exposure to bonds and debt due to TDT projects, especially with interest rates so high

[1:36:30] right now. Thank you for your time, and I look forward to working with you. Star is on the

[1:36:35] agenda September 29th. Thank you. Thank you. Next week.

[1:36:44] All right, and this is going to be our last

[1:36:46] batch of speakers this morning, starting with Maria Trisgari, followed by Angela Emerson,

[1:36:54] Monty Sullivan, and Giancarlo Rodriguez.

[1:37:12] Good morning, Mayor, commissioners.

[1:37:13] Come forward.

[1:37:14] I am a administrator byron Brooks.

[1:37:17] I am a reachiscarry president and CEO of the International Drive Resort Area Chamber of Commerce,

[1:37:21] 71512, Dr. Phillips Boulevard.

[1:37:23] Our Chamber represents over 54,000 hotel rooms, hundreds of restaurants, attractions, seven major theme parks and more than a hundred thousand employees.

[1:37:31] As you review the TTT Task Force recommendations today, we ask that you look closely at the economic analysis presented through this process.

[1:37:39] The Georgia State University analysis, the county's independent analysis, the Convention Center's economic assets, assessments clearly demonstrates the tremendous economic return generated by the Orange County Convention Center.

[1:37:52] The Convention Center received the top ROI score, it ranked number one in job creation, and

[1:37:58] it received the top tax estimate score.

[1:38:00] These findings demonstrate the Convention Center provides the strongest economic return

[1:38:04] to Orange County and generates major benefits throughout our county through job creation,

[1:38:09] Advilerum tax return, TTT tax return, and continued economic growth.

[1:38:14] With such strong results and given very close vote by the task force, we respectfully

[1:38:18] We ask that the Board of County Commissioners to take the necessary time to fully review and analyze the evaluation, the scoring, and the economic data before any final decision.

[1:38:29] This is an important decision for our future.

[1:38:31] Thank you for your consideration.

[1:38:34] Thank you, Mr. Scarry.

[1:38:36] We'll move to the next speaker.

[1:38:40] Good morning, Mayor and Commissioners.

[1:38:41] I'm here on my own personal time as a resident.

[1:38:44] I live in the community of Eastwood at 1-4-7-29,

[1:38:50] Balthus Road Drive, Orlando, Florida.

[1:38:53] In 2020, the DRC recommended approval of a substantial change to the Eastwood PD,

[1:38:58] without realizing that major conditions of a 1986 approval remain unmet.

[1:39:03] These weren't minor oversized but foundational requirements tied to flood protection,

[1:39:08] wetland conservation, and federal clean water act permitting.

[1:39:10] Army Corps permits condition remain unmet today, including wetlands required to be placed

[1:39:16] in perpetual conservation.

[1:39:18] Since 2020 residents continue filing complaints as the basin appears to be losing function

[1:39:23] and capacity with deferred maintenance.

[1:39:27] A substantial PD amendment is a moment the county reopens the original approval, but before

[1:39:32] recommending anything the DRC is a duty to verify basics.

[1:39:35] The status of all conditions of approval that as those for the drainage system exist

[1:39:40] and match what was approved and that no EPD holds remain outstanding. None of this was confirmed

[1:39:45] in 2020. Commissioners voted no, but the flawed DRC recommendation created a risk likely

[1:39:52] for any resulting litigation. Public safety demands that these verifications be mandatory. Thank you.

[1:40:00] All right, thank you, Ms. Emerson. Next speaker.

[1:40:10] Marty Sullivan, 91 Georgia Avenue, Winter Park, Orange County District 5. I ask that you exhaust and continue

[1:40:21] to exhaust every legal avenue, fighting the proposed sustenance development. It is not merely an unneeded

[1:40:31] high density subdivision in a fragile rural ecosystem.

[1:40:37] Sustony is a direct hostile attack on home rule

[1:40:42] and the democratic rights of Orange County citizens.

[1:40:49] Senate Bill 180 is explicitly intended for her

[1:40:52] came disaster relief and not urban density.

[1:40:56] This is illegal multiple uses of a single bill

[1:40:59] It is absolutely mockery of the law to force 1800 suburban homes into the protected

[1:41:06] economy had she river basin.

[1:41:09] In addition, oppose the Senate Bill 686 intent for agriculture on-clave.

[1:41:18] Stand with the 73% of Orange County voters who elected you to protect our community, preserve

[1:41:26] our home rule and say an absolutely no to assassinate. Thank you.

[1:41:31] All right. Thank you, Mr. Sullivan. We'll move to the next speaker.

[1:41:37] Good morning. Orange County Board of Commissioners. My name is John Carlos Rodriguez. I live

[1:41:41] at 3203 and I'm here on behalf of the Sunrise of the Morelando, a youth flat organization

[1:41:46] fighting for a more affordable Orlando. We are excited for the star up at Transit Plan to go in front

[1:41:50] of the board on September 29th. Stars of real solutions to invest in public transit and address

[1:41:55] our transportation and affordability crisis, and we encourage the Commission to vote yes.

[1:42:00] But there are also actions you can take now to fight for a common vision for an affordable

[1:42:04] Orange County.

[1:42:05] First, please move forward with the TDT Task Force recommendation number 11 and have the

[1:42:09] county doing assessment of the amount of money being spent on destination marketing.

[1:42:13] We may already meet the 40% threshold considering modern forms of marketing and may be able

[1:42:17] to use tourism dollars for transportation now.

[1:42:20] Second, the county needs to conduct a legal analysis on whether Orange County has a legal position

[1:42:24] in the fight against SP686, agricultural enclaves.

[1:42:28] Agricultural enclaves encourage the expensive sprawl

[1:42:30] that have made Orlando one of the most rent burdened

[1:42:33] metrics in the country, worsening traffic,

[1:42:35] all while destroying our environment.

[1:42:37] Let's work together to continue fighting for our community

[1:42:39] and deliver the Orange County we know our residents deserve.

[1:42:42] Thank you.

[1:42:43] All right, thank you Mr. Rodriguez.

[1:42:46] All right, do we have other speakers?

[1:42:48] Mayor, that was our last registered speaker.

[1:42:51] Okay, if there are no other persons present who wish to be heard during the public comment period

[1:42:57] at this time, I do remind you that this afternoon we do have public hearings, we've got

[1:43:04] a land use matters and there will be opportunities for public comment at that time.

[1:43:09] So I'm going to close the public comment period while there were a number of persons who

[1:43:16] came for this morning to speak about timber scan and some invoke the name of

[1:43:25] Commissioner Michael Scott. He has asked I'm going to give him a few moments to

[1:43:32] make some statements and with that Commissioner Scott you recognized.

[1:43:50] If you will. Oh, okay. All right. Good morning and thank you, Mayor. I wanted to address

[1:43:57] of a number of things relative to timber scan for those who may not be aware and the residents

[1:44:02] there. First, we had a community meeting approximately a week ago at Catalina Elementary.

[1:44:11] Prior to that meeting, I went to every door in that community by myself. Prior to today's meeting,

[1:44:18] again, I went to every door in that community by myself. I have zero concerns as it relates to

[1:44:25] safety for the members there and I know that staff is going to continue to make efforts to reach

[1:44:31] them via phone, via email, via in-person contact to make sure that they are aware.

[1:44:37] What happens today with the item one that can send to agenda relative to receivership

[1:44:42] is to start the process to ask the questions.

[1:44:47] For several years we've talked about the Timberscan community, the counties investment, in

[1:44:52] community relative to its investment in other communities that are simply situated.

[1:44:57] With respect to the resources in time.

[1:45:00] Item that the county has put in and the staff has put in. I have been incredibly grateful. What I want the members of that community to know is that this just starts a conversation. Nothing will happen fast, nothing will happen quick, and nothing will happen without your input.

[1:45:16] It is important to me that you will be involved in the process and that we will make sure that whatever transition happens even if it results in the termination of that community that you are made whole in a way that makes sense for your

[1:45:29] family. There are several different family makeup, seniors, those who have disabilities, but

[1:45:35] I just want you to know that this is not going to be a quick decision and there's a possibility

[1:45:40] that what does happen may outlive my time on this board. But please know that myself, my fellow

[1:45:48] commissioners, the mayor and the county staff will not put you in a situation where someone

[1:45:54] saying get out and you have no place to go. And so I want to make sure that's clear to the members

[1:45:58] of that community, cleared to those who are watching them and not understand what's happening

[1:46:02] in timber scan. And I invite anybody who would like to be a part of the process to join me,

[1:46:08] for a tour or a meeting or a conversation to my knowledge. No one has approached the county

[1:46:15] with any development proposals. There is no money to turn it into luxury condominiums or anything

[1:46:21] like that. We are just formally and officially empowering the County Attorney's Office, the

[1:46:29] County staff, and whoever may be hired in this process to formally explore what will happen

[1:46:37] with that community. Mayor, thank you for allowing me to speak prior to consent. And I'm

[1:46:42] good.

[1:46:46] Commissioner Severan.

[1:46:53] Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. And it's it's really wonderful to see

[1:46:57] back congratulations. So I have a question just for the residents that came, they drove almost

[1:47:03] an hour here, paid tolls, you know, took a day off of where coming from the east side of

[1:47:07] Orange County. And I just wanted to make sure that I'm clear when I speak to them. The litigation

[1:47:16] that you were referencing, I just want to make sure because there was an existing lawsuit

[1:47:19] pertaining to the removal of Lake Pickett North from the Lake Pickett Study area. And last week,

[1:47:25] That was when the judge made a determination on that case.

[1:47:29] To my knowledge, there is no case that's or a litigation or anything that's pertaining to Senate Bill's 686.

[1:47:36] And that's what they're specifically asking for.

[1:47:40] So I'm trying to understand the link so that I can be helpful to them in how they're trying to navigate this process.

[1:47:47] Well, obviously, the 686, 680, those are kind of overlapping issues and so when the county

[1:47:56] attorney's office does their analysis, it has to look broadly and likely because we already

[1:48:04] engaged in litigation that's on the periphery of this some very similar issue, their analysis

[1:48:12] this will encompass whatever strategies that we will move forward with.

[1:48:18] Obviously, if we end up in litigation, if litigation is imminent or existing, there may

[1:48:27] be opportunities for the Board of County Commission to meet in the shade to discuss our

[1:48:34] strategy. If not, then those conversations, some of those conversations may occur in the

[1:48:42] sunshine, but until they do their work and come back to the board, we won't make any

[1:48:51] definitive decisions today, obviously. And the item that was on their agenda for this

[1:48:58] have a new regarding Lake Pickin' North, of course, the applicant on that item, withdrew

[1:49:05] that item, and I'm sure that they have legal representation,

[1:49:14] and they will look at

[1:49:16] their legal options.

[1:49:18] We'll look at our legal options, especially as it relates to legislation that telehensives

[1:49:25] already passed.

[1:49:26] And so we will have to have those conversations

[1:49:29] about how we move forward with protecting our home room,

[1:49:37] protecting our rights, the rights of our citizens,

[1:49:40] and that's a bit premature at this point

[1:49:45] to without briefing you as commissioners,

[1:49:49] and then even brief in the public.

[1:49:51] So this is Evala, OK?

[1:49:54] Great, thank you for the clarification, Mary.

[1:49:56] Thank you.

[1:49:58] And with that, I'm going to move.

[1:50:00] Go to the county administrator to present the consent agenda on the stand there's item that may need to be pulled.

[1:50:10] Thank you, Mayor. From the consent agenda and pull two items. First is I-7, under planning and environmental and development services.

[1:50:19] This item has to do with the mobile tuber over an ice shelter, it will be considered this afternoon concurrently with public hearing K-14.

[1:50:31] So again, moving I7 to be heard or considered this afternoon with public hearing K-14.

[1:50:37] The second item is K-1 under utilities.

[1:50:39] It's regarding the conserved agreement, the budget with what it in the current need to pull

[1:50:49] that item for a separate action by the board so that Commissioner Crap can make its appropriate

[1:50:55] statement.

[1:50:57] That was K-K-1, K-1, okay, so with that Mayor pulling I-7 for this afternoon K-1 to be considered

[1:51:07] immediately following this discussion or this action on the

[1:51:11] Senate agenda, and a staff submissive the remainder of the

[1:51:14] consent agenda for board consideration.

[1:51:19] With the exception of item K1, is the motion?

[1:51:24] Do you repeat the second scar?

[1:51:27] And I, and I, seven.

[1:51:29] Okay.

[1:51:30] Yes, I, seven, and K1 being pulled.

[1:51:35] I, seven, will be heard this afternoon with K-14, so we're pulling an I-7 for this afternoon,

[1:51:42] K-1 will be pulled also, and we'll take up that vote separately.

[1:51:48] I will do have a motion by Commissioner Yeree Bay, the second by Commissioner Gomez

[1:51:53] Gooddero, all in favor of the motion that it may not be saying aye, opposed no, a motion

[1:52:01] passes and it is unanimous.

[1:52:04] And now the item K1 that was full, I have the county

[1:52:10] on the administrative address that issue.

[1:52:13] So that matter is a pool of funding agreement

[1:52:16] at the Orange County Institute of Orlando regarding water

[1:52:19] conserve to joint facilities as the budget

[1:52:23] with watered and current and commissioner

[1:52:26] Crab needs to make his statement on that item.

[1:52:31] Commissioner Crab.

[1:52:40] There goes.

[1:52:40] All right.

[1:52:42] All right.

[1:52:42] Thank you.

[1:52:44] The Wooden Kern is a customer mine for the shirts up USA.

[1:52:46] So I'm pulling that to make sure there is no conflict.

[1:52:49] And I filed the form with the clerk.

[1:52:51] All right.

[1:52:52] Any questions for Commissioner Crab?

[1:52:55] Okay.

[1:52:55] There'll be a motion.

[1:52:59] Motion for approval of item K1.

[1:53:02] Okay, one, a second by Commissioner Scott,

[1:53:08] it is okay, one, okay, and all in favor of the

[1:53:14] motion that we normally say, I oppose no, all right, the motion passes and it is the unanimous.

[1:53:22] Okay, and Commissioner, minus minus, the Irish little vote, Commissioner Crab abstaining

[1:53:32] from vote for the conflict that he has apparently filed at this point.

[1:53:38] With that.

[1:53:39] And Mayor, yes, the machine calls me for 20 seconds for a comment on.

[1:53:43] We will.

[1:53:44] All right, I appreciate that.

[1:53:45] You may or may not know, but notice some today's agenda,

[1:53:48] but there was information regarding a street name change

[1:53:50] by the city of Orlando.

[1:53:52] I'm a steward of history, and I appreciate history.

[1:53:56] They are changing their name and honor of George Stewart's senior.

[1:53:58] So the new name will be George Stewart Place.

[1:54:02] George Stewart Senior was an influential community leader who believed that if a community

[1:54:06] provides a living for you and your family, you're obligated to get back.

[1:54:11] He co-founded the Tangerine Bowl, now Citrus Bowl, the Orlando Union Rescue Mission,

[1:54:15] the Christian Service Center and the Central Florida Capital Fund Commission.

[1:54:19] It was also the owner of George Stewart Inc., which was the largest office supply department store

[1:54:23] at the time.

[1:54:24] Well, George Stewart Senior passed in 1976, his legacy of public service continued through his children and grandchildren, including George Stewart Junior, Jacob Stewart Senior, Charlie Stewart, Robert Stewart Senior, there's several more, but they all have worked hard in our community as well and I'm honored to share this information with you to appreciate the lasting contributions by George Stewart Senior.

[1:54:48] Thank you, Mayor.

[1:54:48] All right. Thank you, Commissioner Crab. Let me also with the motion that

[1:54:55] pass regarding the remainder of the consent agenda. I want to highlight a few things.

[1:55:00] Just for the public benefit, I'd like to first the International Association of Five Fighters, a memorandum of agreement on today's consent agenda, addresses an additional modification to the approved contract between Orange County and the IFF Local 257, which represents our firefighters, our paramedics, dispatches, and other fighters.

[1:55:29] risk group personnel. As you will recall, the Board approved our collective bargaining agreement

[1:55:37] with the IAF of local 257 at the May 19th, 2026 Board meeting. I'm pleased to share that our

[1:55:47] firefighters who remain actively employed with Orange County receive the retroactive

[1:55:53] payments provided under the agreement in their paychecks, this past Friday, August 21.

[1:56:03] So congratulations, firefighters.

[1:56:05] Don't spend it all in one place.

[1:56:08] As we continue implementing the agreement, the county management and the union remain engaged

[1:56:15] and discussions regarding certain impacts of the negotiated agreement, including potential

[1:56:22] salary and version affecting some employees that weren't further discussion.

[1:56:29] Through those continued discussions, the county and the union worked together to reach

[1:56:35] the memorandum of agreement before the board today, which further addresses those impacts

[1:56:42] and provides for appropriate salary placement for affected employees.

[1:56:48] this board has consistently prioritized public safety and approval of this agreement

[1:56:56] continues that commitment by investing in the workforce that serves and protects our

[1:57:02] community. 24 hours a day, seven days a week. This morning, the board also

[1:57:10] agree to pay $5 million to cover state mandated department of juvenile justice calls, allocated

[1:57:22] to Orange County, and increase over approximately $1 million over last year.

[1:57:31] Again, this is based on Florida Statue when juveniles are arrested and they are booked

[1:57:37] into the juvenile system, the state mandates that Orange County

[1:57:43] contributes to the detention of the juveniles in the juvenile system.

[1:57:50] Now, we do have seven juveniles who are not being prosecuted as juveniles.

[1:57:58] They are being prosecuted as adults, and they're incarcerated at the Orange County.

[1:58:05] jail. They have to be separated, segregated, away from the adults, but they are in the Orange County jail.

[1:58:15] This particular contract is relative to those, all those other juveniles who are being held in juvenile detention.

[1:58:24] Also this morning, I believe

[1:58:29] that part, Orange County with the juvenile detention, Orange County is required to pay 50% of the state's calls for juvenile detention.

[1:58:40] Again, this is an example of how we use our general phone and property taxes to meet state mandates.

[1:58:50] Next, I'm going to help the homelessness division is renewing two contracts with a non-profits coalition from homeless and rise community solutions.

[1:59:01] A $1.029 million contract with the RIS Community Solutions funds the Breakthrough Program, which

[1:59:10] provides family peer support services, caregiver education, and support for those families.

[1:59:19] A 522,000 dollar contract with the coalition for the homeless will provide emergency shelter

[1:59:30] housing focused case management.

[1:59:34] We heard from a number of individuals today who are advocates for shelter for the homeless.

[1:59:43] Through a 1.261 million dollar contract,

[1:59:47] the Citizens Commission for Children will partner with the Florida Department of Health

[1:59:51] to offer free physical examinations for Orange County U ages zero.

[2:00:00] roll through 18. That means infancy through 18. For more than two decades, the timber scan community

[2:00:12] has experienced a steady decline despite the countenance investment of more than $3.5 million in

[2:00:20] stabilization efforts. That is far above any ownership groups or owners who have invested

[2:00:31] in that same property. Today the Board took an important step towards addressing these conditions

[2:00:40] by initiating the process to terminate the condominium associations and transition the property.

[2:00:50] Our priority is the people who live there and we will work with each impacted resident to provide resources and support throughout this transition.

[2:01:06] This is the start of a long process and count a staff or commit it to continuing to engage residents and keeping them informed.

[2:01:23] That also means some of those property owners who are not residents who are wrong property.

[2:01:30] We also have a responsibility for bringing about the change that is needed and that dilapidated property.

[2:01:40] They have a responsibility as well to make sure that the residents and some cases their tenants are receiving adequate and healthy above standard living conditions.

[2:01:59] All right.

[2:02:01] The consent agenda included two items related to the Orange County and Citadel Orlando

[2:02:08] ongoing collaboration that will support the continuing expansion and operation of the

[2:02:13] region's retlaying water system.

[2:02:18] 2026 marks the 40th anniversary of the Joint Concert Two Project, which today has processed

[2:02:29] over 375 billion gallons of reclaimed water for beneficial uses in lastly.

[2:02:44] Onchcount is somewhat unique from the standpoint that we are able to proactively and responsibly.

[2:02:53] Utilize 100% of our treated retlaying water as reuse for purposes such as irrigation, aquifer, recharge, industrial cooling for power generation,

[2:03:07] and for this charges that provide environment of benefit, such as maintaining and rehydrating

[2:03:16] wetlands, reusing water helps to conserve, floorless fresh water resources and facilitates

[2:03:26] the protection of our vibrant ecosystems. Along with responsible conservation, water reuse

[2:03:36] We'll continue to play a very necessary and vital role in the water supply planing process for all of Orange County.

[2:03:46] So a lot happened with the approval of the various consent agenda items this morning.

[2:03:53] I wanted to highlight those.

[2:03:56] With that, we're going to move forward now to our discussion agenda.

[2:04:00] I'm going to call on this Tracy at the NACIO the assistant manager of the procurement division

[2:04:08] to present the procurement committee recommendation regarding the selection of one firm and

[2:04:13] two ranked alternatives to provide design and engineering services for the I4.

[2:04:19] San Lake Road interchange gateway improvements and the request for proposals

[2:04:25] via 26-0808-G-O. For that, you are recognized.

[2:04:34] The Morning Mayor Commissioner's Controller Diamond, the procurement committee has evaluated proposals for design

[2:04:41] and engineering services for I-4 San Lake Road interchange gateway improvements.

[2:04:46] I am requesting board selection of one firm and two-ringed alternates

[2:04:54] as well as requested action.

[2:04:56] Commissioner Samrad was assigned to the procurement committee.

[2:05:00] All right. With that commission, Senator, do you have a potential motion?

[2:05:13] Yes, Mayor, I do. I move for this election of Kimley Horn and Associates being 334.50 points, with metric,

[2:05:22] engineering, ink, 317 points, and the nays, handgun, brustling, ink, 271.17 points, as the ranked

[2:05:31] alternatives, as well as the requested action on the screen. Thank you.

[2:05:34] All right, we have a motion in the second is by

[2:05:41] So it didn't come up to the screen

[2:05:45] This is a new technology we got

[2:06:08] Second oh, okay

[2:06:17] We're trying to

[2:06:19] I'll put it up on the screen.

[2:06:29] Okay.

[2:06:30] It's considered the agenda.

[2:06:31] Okay, there we go.

[2:06:33] That's a requested action.

[2:06:34] We do have a motion in a second.

[2:06:36] All in favor, let it be known by saying, I opposed no motion passes, and it is unanimous.

[2:06:43] Let the record flag, the commissioner, your rebate was not present for that particular vote.

[2:06:48] With that, now we're moving forward to item A2.

[2:06:52] And we're going to have Ms. Atenasio frame the sign of Ms. Will.

[2:07:01] The procurement committee has evaluated proposals for construction, engineering, and inspection

[2:07:06] CEI services for the Reigns Road Winding Project. I am requesting board selection of one firm

[2:07:12] and two-ringed alternate as well as a requested action on the screen. Commissioner Scott was assigned

[2:07:18] to the procurement committee.

[2:07:21] All right, with that commissioner Scott, do you have a potential motion?

[2:07:26] A word.

[2:07:27] I move for the selection of civil-site engineering incorporated with 281.67 points.

[2:07:33] With GAI consultants with 263.3 points and CDM Smith incorporated with 262.67 points as the ranked

[2:07:42] alternate as well as the requested action on the screen.

[2:07:47] Okay, I did hear a second of the Commission of Crab.

[2:07:54] It was a second on the motion I heard first and we'll get these microphones together.

[2:08:01] With that on the favor that it would be known by saying, I oppose no motion passes and it is unanimous.

[2:08:11] also let a record reflect the commissioner,

[2:08:13] your rebate was not present for that vote as well.

[2:08:17] And now we're going to move forward.

[2:08:19] Thank you, Ms. Atonazio.

[2:08:21] We are going to move to a work session on the item.

[2:08:25] And I'm going to call on Mayor Linda Chapin,

[2:08:30] and Mr. Eddie Morten.

[2:08:31] The co-chairs from our Orange County citizens

[2:08:35] to a development tax development citizen task force.

[2:08:43] All right, Mayor, it's open.

[2:08:46] Good morning, Mayor, Comfort Audiment, Commissioners,

[2:08:51] Task Force members, and certainly citizens.

[2:08:55] I want to acknowledge my co-chair, who is,

[2:09:00] I'm here to kick this off, he's going to finish it up.

[2:09:03] And we are grateful for the time that you are giving us.

[2:09:10] Mayor Deming set up this task force with two particular goals in mind.

[2:09:16] One was to get wide input from citizens across Orange County.

[2:09:23] The second was to assist in evaluating applications for TDT funding

[2:09:31] that fall within the current statute, we wiggled a little bit on that one.

[2:09:39] But I appreciate very much the fact that the mayor did decide to expose a lot of people

[2:09:49] to this process.

[2:09:51] I am particularly impressed with how many people have told me they watched it on Orange TV

[2:09:57] and want to thank those folks because

[2:10:00] It is always effective for citizens to get a better idea of what tourism means to our community.

[2:10:10] What it does for our community, the benefits and challenges that it offers.

[2:10:16] And I think that we can believe as task force members that we did advance that understanding.

[2:10:25] I understand that someone has described our process as messy.

[2:10:32] Well, I would not disagree with that.

[2:10:35] It was a very large group of people.

[2:10:40] Maybe two large, although I would not sacrifice a single one of them.

[2:10:45] Some were longtime friends.

[2:10:48] The others have become new friends.

[2:10:50] And so, I really appreciated the time and the effort and the work that they put in and

[2:10:58] if there are task force members in the audience, they might be taking a break from county

[2:11:04] work today.

[2:11:05] But if there are some in the audience, please stand up.

[2:11:12] Thank you.

[2:11:14] Thank you.

[2:11:18] These folks attended long meetings, they took time away from work.

[2:11:22] They had a variety of disparate interests, which, of course, was the goal.

[2:11:32] But when they disagreed, they did so with extreme civility and often, or sometimes humor.

[2:11:41] And we're careful to observe the sunshine law.

[2:11:44] We had lots of discussions during break about the weather.

[2:11:48] And, although we could not, of course, come to total agreement on many issues, I do believe

[2:11:59] that we achieved a degree of consensus that will serve the Board of County Commissioners

[2:12:06] well as they move forward.

[2:12:10] Consensus is never easy to achieve, I'm sure you have experienced that yourselves, but

[2:12:16] We hope that we have assisted in the work that you have before you.

[2:12:22] Let me be perfectly clear so that the audience members understand.

[2:12:28] We as task force members are not here to ask the Board of County Commissioners to endorse

[2:12:36] our recommendations.

[2:12:38] We are here as part of a process to ask the Board of County Commissioners to recognize the work and to accept the final report of the task force, which was the action that the tourist development council took when we presented to them.

[2:13:01] And so we know that they will want to do a lot of their own work.

[2:13:10] They may well wish to hear presentations from applicants.

[2:13:15] They will debate among themselves.

[2:13:18] So those of you who presented to us and worked with us have yet more work to do.

[2:13:25] And so does our Board of County Commissioners.

[2:13:27] I also want to particularly commend the staff that worked with us under very stringent and difficult conditions at a time when, as all of you know, and you all better than any, there is an awful lot going on in Orange County.

[2:13:50] And so we appreciated the nights and the weekends that they gave to us and I feel that

[2:13:59] I learned a lot about current Orange County government.

[2:14:04] I will now turn this over to Rosanne Harrington, Chief Demings Chief of Staff, who will

[2:14:09] begin walking us all through the final report and those who participated in it.

[2:14:17] Thank you.

[2:14:20] Thank you, Mayor Chapin.

[2:14:23] It's been a long time since I've been called Chief Dennis.

[2:14:27] We got two of those in my household.

[2:14:32] Yeah, neither case.

[2:14:34] Good morning, Mayor.

[2:14:35] Come to a diamond and commissioners.

[2:14:37] It's my pleasure to be here to update you on the work of the TDTE

[2:14:42] Citizens Advisory Task Force.

[2:14:44] And I want to thank, personally, Mayor Chapin and Eddie Morton for their dedication to this process.

[2:14:52] They were very involved throughout the entire process, helping to make decisions and move things along, and a really pretty...

[2:15:00] We appreciate their efforts, along with the committee. We would try to be flexible and accommodate everybody's requests for how they wanted to see things done or compiled.

[2:15:10] And so I'm proud of the work that they did and the staff and everybody involved.

[2:15:16] So with that, I'm going to now kick off the presentation.

[2:15:19] Today, we're going to be going over a task force overview, the economic analysis, survey

[2:15:26] results, TTT, citizen advisory task force recommendations, and then you're going to

[2:15:31] see a capacity presentation, and then we'll have questions, and then a requested action.

[2:15:37] So as Mayor Chiepe and so eloquently said, that Mayor Dunnings put together a task force that

[2:15:43] being on July 21st, comprised of 34 individuals from all over Orange County.

[2:15:51] We had 11 municipalities represented from each of the commission districts, the mayor appointed

[2:16:00] two chairs, and then we also had veterans, labor, and representatives from chambers.

[2:16:09] Special thanks to our co-chairs.

[2:16:12] And then here's the individual list of all of our members and as you can see, it's a very diverse list and we are very grateful for the time and efforts they put into this.

[2:16:22] I think they were living together for about five days. They were working from nine to five and we really appreciate it.

[2:16:29] I do want to mention that all of the meetings were live-streamed and then the tapes was put

[2:16:36] on our website along with all meeting materials so that there was access for anybody he wanted

[2:16:43] to keep track of the process. My mother included. She watched every one of them. So the first meeting

[2:16:49] was July 21st and in that meeting we had a stench of education on the TTT and I think everybody

[2:16:57] benefited from that, and special thanks to Danielle Philippe, Assistant Manager of Financial and

[2:17:04] Physical and Business Services, and also to Comptroller Diamond, and to Assistant Senior

[2:17:10] County Attorney Whitney Evers, for educating us on the statute, the History of TDT, and

[2:17:17] then Sunshine Law. The next three meetings we had presentations, and in the last meeting we

[2:17:23] survey results and recommendations.

[2:17:27] Now there were 24 interest indicators that the application

[2:17:31] process actually started before their first meeting and this was that so that we could give

[2:17:36] them more time to review the applications. The process started at June 30th and all the applications

[2:17:42] were put together by July 16th and then at the first meeting they were given to every task force

[2:17:48] number. So the 24 interest indicator applicants representing over three billion dollars in funding

[2:17:54] requests.

[2:17:56] 20 applicants were selected to advance, two were deemed in eligible and two applicants which

[2:18:02] were each had 15 minutes to do a presentation and 15 minutes of questions. And then we had

[2:18:09] Dr. Peter Bluston of Georgia State University who at the end on August 11th did an overview

[2:18:16] of his economic analysis, and the County Attorney's Office provided initial legal review

[2:18:22] of applicants for compliance.

[2:18:26] So here's the schedule, and you can see we saw a lot of presentations, and we spent a

[2:18:31] lot of time getting to know these projects over these three days.

[2:18:38] And now with that, it's my pleasure to introduce Dr. Peter Bluestone, Associate Director of

[2:18:44] State University Center for Local Finance. He was selected to do an economic analysis. It was

[2:18:50] important that we tried to find somebody outside the area who is not involved with any

[2:18:55] applicants coming before the task force. So Dr. Blueston, I'm going to turn it over to you now.

[2:19:05] Welcome, Dr. Blueston. Thank you. Welcome. Good to be here with you all today.

[2:19:09] Air and commissioners. Some of you guys have already seen me from some of the earlier presentations.

[2:19:20] Let's see, there we are, okay, so this is the economic impact analysis of selected TDD projects.

[2:19:29] So I'm going to talk about the data availability.

[2:19:33] A little bit about the condensed time frame,

[2:19:35] then we're going to go into the economic impact analysis of the selected projects,

[2:19:40] estimate of TDD modified ROI and modified spending ROI.

[2:19:45] I'm bringing this to the top of the VA agenda, there is a lot of interest in this, and so I want to kind of get time to talk about it rather than at the end.

[2:19:54] Job supported, total output due to new spending, and again this is all due to the using the implant model.

[2:20:01] A construction impacts and estimates of taxes collected. I'll brief talk about those last. There are really linearly related to the amount of spending on the project, so there's not a lot of things to understand there that are not really directly driven by how much money is flowing through the project.

[2:20:21] I did leave time for questions at the end, but it looks like we're going to take questions all at the end, so I'll just finish up.

[2:20:28] Okay, I want to give this some context about the challenges of doing this kind of economic

[2:20:35] and economic analysis.

[2:20:37] And I want to use this little illustration here about some trips that I took as our

[2:20:41] family took.

[2:20:42] The last time I was actually in Orlando was with my family, going to Universal.

[2:20:48] And we spent a bunch of time and money and we got up early.

[2:20:51] My kids are big Harry Potter fans.

[2:20:53] And so we were there early in the morning and got the lawns and all that stuff.

[2:20:57] We have the fast passes, and my wife is a big enthusiast.

[2:21:00] So we weren't allowed to leave to like your son was down.

[2:21:04] And so we spent, you know, on average, about there's four of us, two kids, and my wife and

[2:21:08] I, about $500 per person over those three nights.

[2:21:12] For a total of about $6,000, and it's real clear from that little story that I can

[2:21:17] am impact for the Orlando community was due to the Universal Studio theme park, right?

[2:21:24] That was why we were there.

[2:21:26] The second trip on my kids were older, and so they could appreciate the nuances of New York City.

[2:21:32] So we went around Christmas time, and it was cold, but we did a lot of interesting things.

[2:21:37] We wanted to skate at Rockefeller Center.

[2:21:41] That was your busy swim in the Washington Square Park.

[2:21:43] And you can see I put these things that we wanted to do in some of the things that we actually did do.

[2:21:47] Just to illustrate that when you're going to visit some place, you may go there to do something and you have that in mind.

[2:21:54] But you do something else.

[2:21:56] And so again, we spent about three nights, again, $500 per person,

[2:22:01] in New York City, that's easy to do.

[2:22:03] And again, for $6,000.

[2:22:05] So the trick here is, though, you can see all those things,

[2:22:07] how do we allocate that spending to each event?

[2:22:11] What do we attribute to the statute of liberty?

[2:22:13] What do we attribute to Chinatown or going to the top of the rock?

[2:22:17] So that's the tricky part here.

[2:22:20] And when we go through these examples and projects,

[2:22:22] we think about economic impact, the key thing is to allocate that spending to the project.

[2:22:28] And the other thing to remind, keep in mind, is that this has to be new spending, right?

[2:22:33] I'm not from New York, I don't live in Orlando, I live in Atlanta, right?

[2:22:37] So I am that tourist, right?

[2:22:39] So again, this is all new spending from somebody coming from outside the region, and how do we estimate that?

[2:22:48] Okay.

[2:22:50] So, again, I just kind of highlighted that the key thing here is the number of out-of-MSA visitors

[2:22:56] to the project, and this was all provided by the applicants, right?

[2:23:00] I'll show you, you know, we have an application page, and we asked them that question.

[2:23:06] And we also asked them the estimated length of stay due to the project.

[2:23:10] And again, we realized this is hard to estimate, but we wanted to know what that was.

[2:23:13] And this is important for feeding into the economic impact model in plan.

[2:23:19] And in plan it's this industry-standard model.

[2:23:22] It's input output model, it uses state and local data to calibrate the model.

[2:23:26] It provides estimates of jobs, output, and tax collections.

[2:23:30] And you know, when you think about the multiplier affecting people talk about, you know,

[2:23:33] it generates this many jobs, 1.8, 1.7.

[2:23:36] That's what this model is.

[2:23:37] That's what they're thinking about.

[2:23:39] And one of the things we wanted to do, again, to try to get a sense of how much, again, these

[2:23:46] are all self-reported figures from the applicants, we wanted to develop a baseline model

[2:23:52] that we could look to see.

[2:23:53] Is this a reasonable number?

[2:23:54] It just makes sense.

[2:23:56] So we used the experiences that we have doing a lot of work with the Georgia World Congress Center,

[2:24:01] that's a big convention center in Atlanta.

[2:24:03] We also used the Savannah Convention Center, which recently did an expansion that is similar

[2:24:08] in size and scope to the one being pitched by the Convention Center here.

[2:24:14] Mercedes-Benz is a lot of events, concerts and things like that, so we could get a sense of visitors and what they spend there.

[2:24:21] And we also look to the empirical literature to see what are reasonable estimates.

[2:24:28] Okay, so obviously, as we're example, there were a lot of applications.

[2:24:35] And you know, we went through them.

[2:24:36] The key thing we were trying to figure out are the applicants suitable for a full analysis.

[2:24:41] And so what we did was we first looked at the project meet the statutory program criteria.

[2:24:47] The second was, was the project sufficiently far along its planning process that it could be realistically

[2:24:52] realistically reelistically completed as described.

[2:24:56] Was this project, we didn't want to think it was too speculative.

[2:25:00] We did the applicant provide sufficient data and a causal nexus to attracting new out of region visitors. Again, this is key.

[2:25:08] We actually had to have some numbers. We couldn't just say, take your word for it.

[2:25:12] And some of these make a lot of sense. You might get new visitors.

[2:25:16] But we had to have some estimates of what those were.

[2:25:19] And finally, is there a request from a separate grant-making entity? The idea that they are being, right?

[2:25:24] We don't know what those grants are going to be, so how can we estimate the economic impact?

[2:25:29] And for some of these findings, there is a technical report that hopefully you got that I submitted yesterday to the staff.

[2:25:40] Okay, some themes during the presentation, right?

[2:25:43] Again, as I mentioned, this data is coming from the applicants.

[2:25:46] So there is a good deal of uncertainty in it.

[2:25:49] This was a condensed process.

[2:25:52] And so the applicants did not have a lot of some of them not a lot of time.

[2:25:56] And so we want to keep that in mind when we're looking at this analysis.

[2:26:00] The second is how project scale relates to economic impact and the ROI measures, right?

[2:26:06] ROI is essentially a ratio, so you can get a great ratio, but you know, how much

[2:26:12] actual with the level of economic impact, how many jobs are we talking about, how much new

[2:26:17] money is flowing through the economy?

[2:26:19] Second, actually the ROI measures here, so these are measures that I use that are

[2:26:31] But there are helpful to compare across the different projects because they're consistent for this work.

[2:26:39] And so we'll talk about those.

[2:26:41] For the textbook definition of ROI, there's just a lot of data constraints.

[2:26:46] We just don't have the ability to collect all what we think will be the expected revenue over the lifetime of the project, all of the expected costs,

[2:26:54] and expected costs and revenue to whom, right?

[2:26:58] You know, these projects are seeking public dollars,

[2:27:00] but these projects aren't owned by the county.

[2:27:03] So it's much more challenging.

[2:27:05] It's a very, it's a difficult process.

[2:27:07] Also, these projects have to do it again,

[2:27:08] public good components, which is why they're coming

[2:27:10] to the county for money.

[2:27:14] Okay, so this is that page I mentioned,

[2:27:16] which asks the applicants for that information,

[2:27:21] again, self-reported, so there's a high degree

[2:27:23] of, you know, a bit of uncertainty here.

[2:27:25] And finally, there were three applications that

[2:27:28] described a very similar history museum for the town of Inveil.

[2:27:32] So we looked at those together and picked out the elements

[2:27:36] from each one that helped us create sort of a representative

[2:27:40] history museum that we could use to plug into in-plan

[2:27:43] that would give an economic impact that we felt was reasonable.

[2:27:46] And I'll show you about how we did that later, and so these slides.

[2:27:52] OK, so here is a summary of the projects analyzed.

[2:27:56] Essentially, there were five of them when you, you know, you'd again do the representative history museum.

[2:28:01] And the thing to bear in mind here is there are two that are really, really large, the convention center,

[2:28:07] and Dr. Phillips Center Master Plan, and then the others are roughly the similar magnitudes, they're small.

[2:28:14] They're all, but the immersive festival have construction involved, so these things aren't coming online right away.

[2:28:21] You know, probably four or five years out, you know, you know, with construction properly five, you know, and then the other thing is upon there is this is again

[2:28:30] report by the applicant is feasibility without TDT, so all but the convention center is was claimed to be feasible without TDT funding.

[2:28:42] So I'm going to go through these next slides a little bit quickly. These are just summaries that go into the ROI estimate. So this direct spending is what we put into

[2:28:49] this is our estimate of the new visitor spending, right?

[2:28:52] This is how much new money is coming into this project.

[2:28:55] The output, that's again, what comes out at the end of

[2:28:58] Implan that takes into account all those additional

[2:29:01] multiplier effects.

[2:29:05] So, here is what we estimate for what I'm using as two

[2:29:11] measures of ROI.

[2:29:13] The first is a TDT ROI.

[2:29:16] This is the return to the of TDT

[2:29:20] by the amount of TDT that the project is requesting.

[2:29:25] So you can see the Convention Center is estimated to generate

[2:29:29] about $6 million in new hotel revenue.

[2:29:32] This is again based on their operations.

[2:29:35] This is not taken to account construction.

[2:29:37] This is the one's the project is finished.

[2:29:40] And so they're asking for roughly 500 million in TDT funding,

[2:29:44] So that generates a percentage of 1.2%.

[2:29:50] You contrast that with Dr. Phillips.

[2:29:54] They have an estimated total economic output that is on par with their...

[2:30:00] Other smaller projects. And this again, these figures came from Dr. Phillips. It's really based on their estimates

[2:30:10] of new visitors from out of the region of 50,000, and their new estimates of overnight visitors of 30,000.

[2:30:20] And so, but because, in their application, they ask for a considerable amount of TDT funding, you know, roughly 700,000 million.

[2:30:28] That ratio of that percentage is much smaller, but it's just a function of how much TDT revenue they're asking for.

[2:30:37] The others come out a little bit higher, and you can see the history museum and the merge festival are in the 60s.

[2:30:45] I mean, excuse me, that children's museum and the merge festival are in the 60s.

[2:30:49] They're at 1% and 1.5% and the history museum is 0.3.

[2:30:53] The last one is the total spend ROI, and this is the idea that how much per me, how much total

[2:31:05] economic activity, and that's the total economic output economic output that I showed you

[2:31:11] is directed from the news visitor spending. So this is the total benefit to the Orange County

[2:31:17] region, the 4 County region, how much money is being spent in the restaurants, how much money is

[2:31:22] spent, you know, going out to, you know, other things, doing other things, you know, buying groceries,

[2:31:29] dry cleaning, all the stuff that you do. And so this, and then this is, for, then we divide

[2:31:36] that by the amount of the project cost, right? This is, this is the actual total project cost.

[2:31:42] And for some of these projects, again, that's a pretty decent return, right? Particularly when

[2:31:46] you think about the total output for the convention center, right? We have a really large output

[2:31:51] of over $330 million annually divided by their estimated project cost over $500 million,

[2:31:58] and that's where you get that 62 percent. Again, for the Children of the Museum and the

[2:32:02] Immersed Festival, it's similar. And here again, Dr. Phillips is lower because, again, their

[2:32:10] construction cost is $1.4 billion. It's just a lot more. And again, their total economic

[2:32:19] output is on par with some of these smaller projects.

[2:32:22] And again, these are all based on the numbers they provided.

[2:32:29] But one thing I do want to come back to.

[2:32:31] So, when I'm talking about scale, as you can see,

[2:32:33] the immersive festival does quite well on these returns

[2:32:36] on these measures, and it's a very interesting project,

[2:32:42] but it's one weekend, right?

[2:32:44] And so, when we think about, you know,

[2:32:45] can we make this bigger, can we grow it,

[2:32:47] whenever it's, that's kind of hard, right?

[2:32:49] So, again, when so these other projects that have more

[2:32:52] scale to them, you know, that you actually get a higher level of economic activity, even though

[2:32:58] maybe the ROI isn't quite as good on these metrics.

[2:33:04] Okay, so this is the nuts and bolts of how we kind of got to some of these numbers.

[2:33:09] And so this is where we're looking at, again, we have the three history museums.

[2:33:13] And I, one of the presenters showed this very interesting slide about Orlando average tendons at various types

[2:33:20] of vets, and so that 2.9 is from museums, 2.9 million, these are the annual out of reach

[2:33:25] and visitors.

[2:33:27] And so I'm trying to get a sense of, you know, what's a good estimate, right?

[2:33:30] And so you can see like for some of these, like the first one for about 34,000 visitors,

[2:33:34] right, that's 1% increase in museum attendance for out-of-state visitors.

[2:33:39] And when you look at the project from Representative Antone, that would increase in tens

[2:33:45] about 17%. So that's seem to be an outlier. 1% seem to be at the right number. Again for

[2:33:51] the children's museum, even though it's 2% right, that's 100% more than 1%. So again, that

[2:33:57] seems to be a bit of an outlier.

[2:34:02] This is another cut at those numbers. And when we can see again,

[2:34:06] the share of a total new visitors from the MSA, again, Dr. Phillips has 5% and 3% in terms of

[2:34:17] the children's museum has that would be 25% and so when we think about the new visitors from outside

[2:34:25] of the MSA of over 62,000 and the overnight visitors of 22,000, if we ran those numbers

[2:34:33] through implant that museum asked the cost of $40 million would have a greater economic impact

[2:34:40] than the Dr Phillips project spending $1.4 billion. So there's something not we had to make

[2:34:47] adjustments there. So we adjusted that figure down to be more representative of the 62,000 to make it more of a 1% level than a 2% level and we kept the overnight visitors the same.

[2:35:00] Again, just to keep the scaling right, it just seemed to be, again, a little bit out of the mound of

[2:35:06] reasons there.

[2:35:10] So in terms of, so this is where we actually come up with a amount of spending

[2:35:15] per visitor. And so when we looked at the application for the Convention Center, their total spending

[2:35:21] for visitor was very similar to our baseline model, but they didn't actually have a breakdown by sector.

[2:35:26] And it's important to break this down by sector because that's how we get generate where the jobs go, right,

[2:35:31] can't plug it all into one category. You don't get a breakdown of jobs. And so we use the

[2:35:38] shares that we have from the Georgia World Congress Center and the Semana Convention Center

[2:35:41] to allocate that spending by lodging, transportation, etc. We looked at a lot of the applications

[2:35:49] again for the History Museums and the Immersed Festival and Dr. Philips Master Plan. Dr.

[2:36:00] Philips

[2:36:00] in a lot like what we had in terms of Georgia, and also in terms of what average spending

[2:36:06] that the Visitor Orlando had. So we used that as the benchmark and we just let kind

[2:36:11] of give everybody the same level of spending. Again, we don't want to say, okay, if you go

[2:36:15] to the History Museum, we're only spending $159 per night, right? We want to try to keep

[2:36:20] it consistent. Again, so the impact is generated by how many visitors, right? Because we don't

[2:36:30] up using that level of spending for all the other projects.

[2:36:34] The Convention Center had one distribution of spending, the other projects had the other.

[2:36:43] And so when you multiply, for instance, at the Convention Center, that roughly $350 per

[2:36:49] visitor, times the number of visitors, new visitors, $150,000, spending four nights, and again

[2:36:55] that coincided with what we've seen in Atlanta, that is pretty much what they spend.

[2:36:59] you end up with that $187 million, that's the annual average spending for the new visitors for the convention center project.

[2:37:08] And when you run the breakdown through each of the sectors to implant, you end up with that output of $334 million annually.

[2:37:16] And that's, again, an including the indirect, which are the suppliers to the hotels and all those things.

[2:37:22] And then the induced, right, is, again, where everybody spends the money on groceries and doing the things that they do in Orlando.

[2:37:28] And that supports a total of 2,207 jobs in the metro area.

[2:37:34] And you can see the breakdowns of the others.

[2:37:37] They're substantial, but not of that magnitude.

[2:37:44] So here is a list of the actual top 10 new jobs per sector.

[2:37:51] And again, that's the benefit of using that spending.

[2:37:53] And you can see the top 5 jobs, or all where we had direct inputs to spending.

[2:38:01] surprisingly, that you see transit and ground passenger transportation is generating the

[2:38:06] most jobs across all the categories, and this was not the highest level of spending,

[2:38:11] but it again it shows how different industries you have a different mix of labor and capital

[2:38:16] right, the top spending was hotels, but hotels have a different mix of labor and capital

[2:38:21] right, and so you spend a lot of money to stay in a hotel, but it doesn't employ quite as many

[2:38:26] people for that spending, right?

[2:38:27] And that's kind of one of the good things that the models help you see, right?

[2:38:31] When you spend money in one place, how many jobs you get for that,

[2:38:34] we're just spending money in some place else.

[2:38:39] And at the bottom, we have the new jobs that are estimated from the applicants for their actual project.

[2:38:44] And you can see when you look at the top, even at just the top five,

[2:38:48] that jobs generated throughout the economy, because of the new visitor spending,

[2:38:53] it's considered really larger than the individual facilities.

[2:38:58] Okay, so this is construction, and as I mentioned, construction is really just a function of how much money is being spent, right?

[2:39:04] We just ran this to the one industry sector of commercial construction.

[2:39:09] And so when you spend a lot of money, for instance, Dr. Phillips is spending 1.4 billion.

[2:39:13] You end up with an impact of almost 2.5 billion.

[2:39:18] You get a lot of jobs, but those are just those are the annual average jobs.

[2:39:22] And when that construction spending goes away, those jobs go away.

[2:39:26] And the other thing to remember for construction spending is you can't actually sum them.

[2:39:31] They actually occur only as the spending goes, right?

[2:39:34] You only have so many workers on site at a time.

[2:39:37] And so that is what that is.

[2:39:43] Okay, and finally, these are the taxes estimated to be collected.

[2:39:46] And you have to be a little bit cautious here.

[2:39:50] Implant does not have all the statutory code and exemptions that you all might have.

[2:39:57] like Princeton, Georgia, the state taxes.

[2:40:00] Has an exemption for groceries on our sales tax, but the locals don't. And so if you're thinking you're going to do something with groceries and you're running that through implant and you're thinking you're at local state sales tax, you're not. You're only getting local sales tax.

[2:40:14] But implant does kind of have a basket of relevant taxes and applies all the economic spending that goes into the projects, filters it through that.

[2:40:24] And so you've got a rough idea of the magnitude of the taxes.

[2:40:28] And again, this is driven by the level of economic activity

[2:40:31] where you have the Convention Center collecting quite

[2:40:33] a bit of operational taxes.

[2:40:35] And the other projects collecting roughly a silmo amount,

[2:40:38] a little bit from a few, you know,

[2:40:41] anywhere between, you know, roughly 700,000 annually

[2:40:44] to 1.1 million.

[2:40:47] And construction is just to, again, a linear function

[2:40:49] of how much is being spent.

[2:40:50] Dr. Phillips is spending a lot more.

[2:40:52] They're collecting a generate a lot more tax revenue.

[2:40:54] And then the convention standard spent a little bit less and the other ones smaller and for the immerse festival

[2:41:00] There's no construction, so that's zero

[2:41:02] So that is the end of my presentation and I'll turn it over to Dr. Beers

[2:41:19] Okay, I'm sorry. Let's go.

[2:41:27] Mayer. Okay. Thank you. Dr. Beers. Thank you for your presentation. So mayer

[2:41:33] again

[2:41:35] I'm trying to follow this process and I know we will ask questions towards the end right

[2:41:39] However, as this stuff is being presented, it's laying a foundation for the conversation that proceeds toward the end.

[2:41:46] I wonder if you might not entertain, for me, or for all the commissioners, to allow one question,

[2:41:53] no were buttold, no fall up, just so we can understand.

[2:41:55] And the reason why I said that, Mayor, is because these numbers that were presented are different from the numbers that were presented in the plan,

[2:42:02] and different from the two different reports I've seen this morning.

[2:42:05] So my head is spinning trying to keep up, but also understand.

[2:42:08] Specifically, the presentation had 58% for their children's museum at TDT, but the report that I have

[2:42:16] says 66% and then on the history museum, it had it at 27%, and now it's 31%, so I just, I want to, I'm trying to follow this, and I'm getting confused.

[2:42:30] And then we received, you know, this is that we should read one presentation last week, and then a new presentation is morning.

[2:42:34] So I would just ask if each commissioner would be allowed to ask,

[2:42:39] get just one question of him.

[2:42:43] This will be understand before we add more on top.

[2:42:45] Because again, I'm a lot.

[2:42:47] Okay. Okay.

[2:42:48] We're going to try to get through it.

[2:42:51] So I'll deal with it first.

[2:42:53] My apologies on the version changes.

[2:42:55] There were small adjustments as we went through as we checked the numbers

[2:42:58] and made sure everything was right.

[2:43:01] And we checked different methodologies and made sure that there

[2:43:03] consistent across the presentations. This was all done very quickly, and so as we had to

[2:43:09] be ready for the fifth, that was the first presentation, so we did change some things slightly,

[2:43:15] but the orders of magnitude are really pretty much the same.

[2:43:20] Okay, Mayor. I'm good. I'm good for now.

[2:43:23] I know. It might be clear as mud right now, but we'll come back and try to, I'm sorry,

[2:43:31] anything else?

[2:43:32] I just want to make sure I have a flow because I'm looking at your presentation in four different

[2:43:36] documents I'm trying to follow along and I did change some of the style of the slides and

[2:43:43] everything and moved some in different orders. But yes I do apologize. Some of the things did change

[2:43:49] a little bit over time. Thank you sir and thank you. Commissioner Simran. Thank you Mayor. So I have a

[2:43:54] question pertaining to Dr. Police Don. Thank you so much and I followed your methodology I use

[2:43:59] and plan as well. It's a good model, so there's, but I want to understand from Rosanne. I did

[2:44:05] did this economic report meet the scope of what we thought we were going to be getting to

[2:44:12] analyze because when you effectively have the overwhelming majority amount of projects that are not

[2:44:19] within the comparative analysis because of either lack of data or whatever the case may be,

[2:44:26] It doesn't mean that because we are devoid of an implanted analysis, that we are devoid

[2:44:32] of economic activity, economic synergy, or public benefit, and so I expected a much

[2:44:38] different result out of this report, and I just wanted to understand if this met the

[2:44:43] scope of our expectations of what we were going to be getting.

[2:44:47] Thank you.

[2:44:48] So Commissioner, let me step back into 2023 when we had this task force, we had four groups that advanced to the board.

[2:45:00] And so when we were selecting somebody this time, we thought, well, it should be somewhere around that number. And so the most cost effective thing to do was in our request was to ask for an analysis of maybe five or six projects with the ability for whoever was contracted to do more analysis.

[2:45:21] And we worked with the Controllers Office to identify somebody, Georgia State University, as opposed to contracting for 10, and then maybe only having five groups move forward.

[2:45:35] So we knew that he, Dr. Blueston, had the ability to do more.

[2:45:40] As we move through the process and he looked at all the data and I do want to say that he set through every meeting, he set through every presentation,

[2:45:48] and he read every application, and after that,

[2:45:52] and we asked him, do you need, how many do you think

[2:45:56] that you can do an analysis on,

[2:45:59] and this is what he came back with,

[2:46:01] and I think he's gonna talk about some of the reasons

[2:46:04] why the others, and that one page questionnaire that you see,

[2:46:09] they provided data, but it might have been more related

[2:46:13] to their overall large scale project,

[2:46:17] not necessarily what they were asking us for.

[2:46:20] And so he could only go by what was in the application

[2:46:26] because otherwise then we'd have to let everybody else

[2:46:29] update their information.

[2:46:30] So Dr. Luston, is that correct?

[2:46:33] Yeah, and I can speak a little bit.

[2:46:34] But we'll just one second, because there's only five projects

[2:46:37] out of how many were there, 20, 24.

[2:46:41] But when you consider that you have the three museums,

[2:46:44] Okay, that brings us up to eight, but you're absolutely right, the others, we do not have an analysis on, and he can give you the reasons.

[2:46:51] No, and I understand all the reasons.

[2:46:53] I understand, I use the implant model.

[2:46:55] I get it.

[2:46:56] I know that there are limitations to the data, but what I am concerned about is fairness.

[2:47:01] And so, when you have applicants that all submit, and only five or eight can be actually assessed,

[2:47:09] When you're trying to do a comparative analysis and you don't have the same documentation for every applicant

[2:47:15] it raises questions of fairness and that's where I'm struggling and with regard to this report

[2:47:22] I mean I would like to

[2:47:25] There are other economic models that we can use that that you know you can deviate from implant

[2:47:30] I know it's the traditional one and it's a good one. I use it, but this is an issue of we only have five

[2:47:36] to look at, yet we're either dismissing or including others that didn't have it.

[2:47:44] And that's a struggle for me.

[2:47:48] I understand, Commissioner, and some of these projects are smaller,

[2:47:53] and because we didn't have any funding in ARC, probably would not have applied to this program

[2:47:59] if we would have had funding in ARC, and that would probably eliminate a large number of these

[2:48:04] that do need more time to finalize some details on their project and prepare for a more thorough analysis.

[2:48:14] But it is an option Dr. Blueston has offered that if the board wants to see presentations

[2:48:20] and if there's other groups that they would like to see an analysis done on, he has offered to do that.

[2:48:26] Okay, I would like to just, you know, say to my fellow board members,

[2:48:30] that an absence of an implant analysis is not an indication of a lack or an absence of public

[2:48:37] value or economic value. So the lack of it is, you know, in terms of fairness, I just want to

[2:48:43] say, you know, if it's not there, it doesn't mean it has no economic value or public value,

[2:48:47] and I hope we consider that moving forward, because we only have five to actually comparatively

[2:48:52] in Alice, in Alice.

[2:48:54] Thank you.

[2:48:55] All right, Dr. Bluston, I know you wanted to respond.

[2:48:59] So we're going to try to get on the test and get through the season.

[2:49:03] So another thing to bear in mind is, and I forgot exactly,

[2:49:06] how many of these were applicants for future grant-making programs.

[2:49:09] So those were not, there was four, OK, great.

[2:49:13] And so again, the key designation that we were looking at

[2:49:17] is the new economic activity,

[2:49:22] right?

[2:49:22] from the applicant that showed that.

[2:49:25] And again, it's possible that again,

[2:49:27] they can point out that it was there.

[2:49:30] It's just they didn't show it to us.

[2:49:32] I understand that Dr. Bluestone,

[2:49:34] new economic activity is not permanent economic activity.

[2:49:37] When you have a billion dollar application,

[2:49:38] you generate construction output that is not permanent jobs.

[2:49:42] So when we talk about a comparative analysis

[2:49:44] of the implant across the projects,

[2:49:46] we have to understand that the economic activity generated

[2:49:49] it is in a large part, temporary during the construction.

[2:49:52] And so that's why I'm just emphasizing

[2:49:54] that a lack of an implant analysis does not

[2:49:57] make it devoid or absent of economic value.

[2:50:01] And I think that's a very important distinction to make as we consider all of the projects. Thank you.

[2:50:08] Yes, that's correct.

[2:50:10] Okay.

[2:50:11] Commissioner, I would like to say to your point, and that's why the task force was compelled to advance

[2:50:16] some of these smaller projects, because they felt like just because they didn't have a thorough economic analysis, didn't mean that they weren't valuable.

[2:50:25] I mean, this was the first time that we have had projects from all over Orange County touched every district from all over Orange County and so that's why the task force had this exact discussion and said,

[2:50:39] we still want to move it ahead because we feel like it has merit.

[2:50:43] Totally appreciate all of it, Roseanne.

[2:50:45] I just wanted to put it on public record that, you know.

[2:50:50] Dr. Bluestone, I think you know, had the data that he worked with the data that he could,

[2:50:54] but I just wanted to make sure that we understood that only five have that, and it was us.

[2:50:58] Thank you, Dr. Eram. Mayor, thank you.

[2:51:00] Let me see if we can get to, we have two other commissioners indicated a desire to speak

[2:51:05] commissioner, you rebate and commissioner Wilson. This is on the subject, and then I want to get back

[2:51:10] to the presentation to Dr. Bears and let them finish the presentation. Commissioner, you rebate.

[2:51:27] Okay, again, I actually, I have a hot mess here because I've got like all of these reports going on, and my concern is, one, we're only looking at a few, and I can't, you can only feasibly do whatever you're directed, you know, we hired you to kind of take these.

[2:51:45] Something that's taking over me is we've got the Convention Center at Play, which was clearly never forwarded.

[2:51:52] Secondly, I do have a concern on jobs because when you talk about employment, there's a difference between permanent employment, temporary employment, seasonal employment, wage type of employment.

[2:52:06] So I look at Calibers of Employment 2.

[2:52:09] And then lastly, and I guess this is for Rosanne,

[2:52:14] there's projects here that from your original list

[2:52:18] that I would have liked to have seen.

[2:52:20] I mean, we clearly approved UCF in the past,

[2:52:23] but we're not even seeing them right now.

[2:52:26] And they have clearly shown that they were shovel ready,

[2:52:28] and they were moving forward.

[2:52:30] And there's other programs here.

[2:52:32] But what was interesting on my briefings

[2:52:35] with a few folks have reached out.

[2:52:37] I had never heard of any of these.

[2:52:39] It's kind of like selective few came to us.

[2:52:42] And here we're being bombarded with decision-making.

[2:52:45] And I don't think we're being very true

[2:52:47] to the comparison, either when I looked at your.

[2:52:50] And I've heard of your analysis format.

[2:52:53] But I also see you've got convention sign

[2:52:56] or singularly.

[2:52:57] And then you've grouped other things, immerse museums and so forth.

[2:53:02] And are they really that way to value

[2:53:04] because our youth, let's just put it like this,

[2:53:07] is convention center universal in New York,

[2:53:10] the other one that you're weighing in and just very brief

[2:53:15] kind of summary where it was a multiple hit task

[2:53:18] to come up with that rate of rate of investment?

[2:53:23] Yeah, that's a good way to think about it.

[2:53:26] When we think about why is somebody visiting,

[2:53:28] can we allocate their spending, again,

[2:53:31] just that New York versus universal example.

[2:53:35] Can we allocate their spending reasonably

[2:53:36] to a certain project or theme, right?

[2:53:41] And so when we think about the Convention Center,

[2:53:44] there's good data out there that says, yes, we can do that.

[2:53:49] When we think about some of these other projects,

[2:53:51] do we really believe that somebody's just

[2:53:54] going to spend three days in Orlando

[2:53:55] and the only reason they're there is for just one of these things.

[2:53:59] We think that it's much more like the New York City trip.

[2:54:03] They're doing a lot of things.

[2:54:04] They may spend a day in a park, right?

[2:54:06] They only have one day.

[2:54:07] And they may spend some time at the police.

[2:54:10] I was trying to figure out your number there.

[2:54:14] The other concern is how are we proving those to be beds and heads,

[2:54:18] also for those particular things.

[2:54:22] And then my only other, I feel like we're not getting,

[2:54:27] I guess a fair analysis and everyone that submitted.

[2:54:31] When I think of these organizations that we're used to dealing with, you know, and

[2:54:35] seeing tourism dot or TDT dollars, and then one thing you said, you said, immerse, right?

[2:54:41] Very very popular festival here, yes, it's one weekend.

[2:54:45] I look at our sports funding being part of visit or land on so far.

[2:54:50] Why couldn't this festival be put there as opposed to having to be a separate one weekend

[2:54:57] event as opposed to when I look at everything else.

[2:55:01] It's a construction investment, but a merge seems like a logical one hit every week and it's going to be what it is, but you're just hoping to grow it.

[2:55:10] So it's for thought for conversation for my colleagues.

[2:55:13] Thanks.

[2:55:19] Commissioner Wilson.

[2:55:20] And my, wow, that's amazing. You know, you guys know the old system I had a downpad.

[2:55:26] I was like playing trivial pursuit over here just hitting them.

[2:55:30] So, I am grateful for, I believe, you know, the interest obviously from our community, but I want to start, I want to rewind and start by saying that I'm incredibly grateful for the co-chairs and every single member that was

[2:55:46] paneled on this task force for the amount of time and effort.

[2:55:50] My colleagues and myself, we worked hard to figure out who would be good representatives.

[2:55:55] The cities all participated in this.

[2:55:57] It was a cross-section and I'm the greatest skeptic out there when we start working on these things to make sure that everything is being done the right way.

[2:56:06] But it was a great cross-section of our presentation.

[2:56:09] And so, what I wanted to ask of, not maybe not you, but Rosanne, and, and potentially, my colleagues

[2:56:16] is shouldn't we be framing this information as part of the question about the task force findings.

[2:56:24] This was one tool when I believe was a very extensive analysis that they utilized.

[2:56:32] And to the point of being able to read through their concerns, and some of them aligned with your concerns,

[2:56:38] but do we reinvent the process from the get-go based on the fact that they identified

[2:56:46] some of these concerns as task force members, they were passed, passed, passed, passed,

[2:56:51] tough questions, many of them did. And so I felt like that was encompassed to some degree

[2:56:56] in the dialogue of the report if not the actual percentages that were allocated to some

[2:57:02] of these things. So I guess my question in my call is that I don't only have a question

[2:57:09] I'm just wondering if they are

[2:57:10] We're in the middle of their presentation.

[2:57:12] So.

[2:57:13] Okay.

[2:57:13] I just want to make sure that we're safe so

[2:57:15] because on that.

[2:57:17] Just process.

[2:57:18] Let us get through.

[2:57:20] Let Dr. Beer's finish.

[2:57:21] We'll come back.

[2:57:22] I think.

[2:57:23] That's the right.

[2:57:23] I just want to make that.

[2:57:24] But it's.

[2:57:26] It's.

[2:57:27] Interjected in the middle of their presentation.

[2:57:29] So I'm trying to get them up and down.

[2:57:31] And 100% realized that we're trying to be between now

[2:57:34] and this afternoon's public hearings

[2:57:35] can dance what you guys did in weeks.

[2:57:37] So that's just for us to come back.

[2:57:39] Let's come back to that.

[2:57:41] OK.

[2:57:41] Let me try to get them completed.

[2:57:44] Commissioner Gomez Cadero was your question

[2:57:49] about what Dr. Bluston had presented.

[2:57:53] This is why I took the Pauls to try to respond

[2:57:58] to something that he specifically said

[2:58:00] before we move to the general kinds of questions.

[2:58:05] Okay.

[2:58:09] Talk, yes, thank you.

[2:58:11] Okay, and thank you everyone for being here today

[2:58:14] and all the team, a tax force.

[2:58:18] It means Dr. Bluston, I have a question

[2:58:20] in regards to the slide number 18,

[2:58:23] the summary of projects analyzed.

[2:58:25] I want to, can you clarify,

[2:58:27] you said that the convention center is visible

[2:58:31] on not visible to TTT funding.

[2:58:32] I want you to clarify that, please. Thank you.

[2:58:36] Yes, so that line is strictly taken from the application where it says it asks the applicant

[2:58:41] What you be feasible if you did not receive the amount of TDP funding requested and so on the convention center they said no

[2:58:47] Everybody else said yes

[2:58:50] Okay, thank you

[2:58:55] Okay, Dr.

[2:59:00] Bees

[2:59:01] Hey, good afternoon. Thank you mayor Demings and commissioners and thank you again to the mayor and the mayor's office

[2:59:07] staff for the opportunity to present here today. I'm Ryan Nickenbeer's research status

[2:59:12] session with Orange County Corrections Department and today I'll be presenting the results

[2:59:16] of the survey of task force members.

[2:59:25] On the survey, task force members were asked to use the

[2:59:28] following materials to evaluate applicants, including the interest indicator applications,

[2:59:41] the

[2:59:41] meeting notes,

[2:59:46] and so for the ARC matrix that has criteria where applicants are evaluated

[2:59:50] on tourism expansion, project soundness, and anticipated return on investment, including

[2:59:56] the workforce and community impact.

[3:00:00] And this is the archmatrix for your reference.

[3:00:07] And so based on task force feedback, the survey was simplified to two questions per applicant, rather than separate questions on every criteria.

[3:00:18] The first question was a multiple choice question asking for respondent support of the funding requests, and it had eight options.

[3:00:26] If the respondent selected strongly support, support, somewhat supported, do not support, that was considered ready for consideration.

[3:00:33] If they selected refer to another grant program too soon for consideration or does not qualify for TTT funding that was not ready for consideration and there's also an option to abstain due to a conflict of interest

[3:00:46] The second question for each applicant asked for any comment and this was optional and then the last question on the survey asked for any recommendations or comments to the task force and this was also optional

[3:01:01] The survey was sent out after presentations on August 5th, and it was completed between August 5th and August 8th, and 32 out of 34 task members completed the survey.

[3:01:13] There were 41 questions on the survey with an average amount of times spent on the survey about about 60 minutes.

[3:01:22] And I just want to mention that that does not necessarily include the time task force members reviewing all the materials beforehand.

[3:01:28] The task force members met on August 11 to discuss the survey results and provide recommendations.

[3:01:37] And we'll now present the 20 applicants in the order they presented and their survey results.

[3:01:43] So our first applicant was the TD application review committee and they were requesting $75 million to $100 million to replenish the TTR grant programs.

[3:01:54] And we'll focus on the numbers on the left, throughout the presentation, the solid support and average

[3:01:59] sentiment.

[3:02:00] But we can see on the right, the number and percentage of respondents who selected each option.

[3:02:07] When we originally presented this to the task force, we just presented the overall support

[3:02:11] to the task force, which was a total percentage of strongly support, support and somewhat

[3:02:15] support.

[3:02:16] However, during the meeting, they asked just to see the solid support, which is just the percentage

[3:02:21] of strongly support and support.

[3:02:24] So in this case, the solid support was 91% and that's made up of the 66% strongly support

[3:02:29] and 25% support.

[3:02:32] The task force also asked about the average sentiment, which is just the average of those

[3:02:37] who considered the project ready for consideration, assigning zero for do not support.

[3:02:42] One for somewhat support, two for support and three for strongly support.

[3:02:46] And the main idea with the sentiment is that if it's closer to three, there's a lot

[3:02:50] strong support, closer to zero, a lot of do not support. In this case, the average

[3:02:55] sentiment was 2.6 out of 3, and that's on the higher end of the range from 0 to 3.

[3:03:01] And the right, it shows the full results of respondents. In this case, 66% of respondents

[3:03:07] select as strong as support, 25% support, 6% somewhat support, and then 3% too soon for

[3:03:13] consideration. Abstentions were zero, unless otherwise noted, and comments are not shown

[3:03:19] to time, but these are available to you and when they were presented to the task force, they were also grouped into themes.

[3:03:29] So our next applicant was the Orange County Arts and Cultural Affairs.

[3:03:33] They were requesting an additional 1% to 2% of the first four cents annually for new and increased grant programs for arts and cultural organizations.

[3:03:42] They currently received 5% of the first four cents annually.

[3:03:46] There is 72% solid support for this project with an average sentiment of 2.2.

[3:03:51] 50% of respondents selected strongly support, 22% support, 90% somewhat support, 6% do not support, and 3% refer to another grant program.

[3:04:04] An example can was the Orange County Ecotorism Grant program.

[3:04:07] They were requesting $5 million to $10 million per year over a 10 year period to establish Orange County Ecotorism Grant program.

[3:04:16] There was 72% saw support for this project with an average sentiment of 2.2, 41% of respondents selected strongly support, 31% support, 16% somewhat support and 3% did not support, 9% referred it to another grant program.

[3:04:34] Next applicant was the Orange County Natural Resource Tourism Infrastructure Grant Program.

[3:04:38] They were requesting $5 million per year over a 10-year period to establish the Orange County Natural Resource Tourism Infrastructure Grant Program.

[3:04:46] There were 72 percent solid support for this project with an average sentiment of 2.3.

[3:04:53] 41 percent of respondents selected strongly support, 31 percent support, 16 percent somewhat support, and 12 percent refer to another group.

[3:05:00] Program.

[3:05:04] Our next applicant was afford a citrus sports and greater Orlando sports commission. They were requesting $25 million for the establishment of a dedicated major events fund.

[3:05:14] There was 41% solos of pour for this project with the average sentiment of 1.5, 22% of respondents selected strongly support, 19% support, 34% somewhat support and 16% did not support, 6% refer to another grant program and 3% did not qualify for TDT funding.

[3:05:33] The next applicant was the Orange County Convention Center.

[3:05:37] They were requesting $523 million for Project 5B to construct a multi-purpose hall at the existing North South building.

[3:05:45] There was 50% solos of poor for this project with an average sentiment of 1.5, 22%, strongly supported the project, 28% support, 16% somewhat support, 25% did not support, 3% refer to another grant program and 6% too soon for consideration.

[3:06:01] Our

[3:06:04] next applicant was Alcros Capital.

[3:06:06] They were requesting $48 million for the Florida Freshwater Discovery Center.

[3:06:11] There was 13% solos support for this project with an average sentiment of 0.9.

[3:06:17] 9% of respondents selected strongly support, 3% support, 6% somewhat support, and 28% did not support,

[3:06:23] 3% referred to another grant program, 47% too soon for consideration, and 3% does not qualify for TDT funding.

[3:06:33] Our next applicant was the association to preserve the Edenville community.

[3:06:38] They were requesting $53 million for the Zora Neal Hirsten International Museum of Arts,

[3:06:43] Heritage and Culture.

[3:06:44] There was 44% saw support for this project with an average sentiment of 1.7.

[3:06:49] 25% of respondents selected strongly support, 19% support, 13% somewhat support, and 16% did not support.

[3:06:57] 6% referred it to another grant program and 22% considered it too soon for consideration.

[3:07:05] Example Kim was forward to citrus sports, they were requesting $54 million to construct a multi-level parking structure on the camping-world stadium campus.

[3:07:14] There was 47% solid support for this project with an average sentiment of 1.5.

[3:07:19] 22 percent of respondents selected strongly support, 25 percent support, 98 percent somewhat

[3:07:24] support, and 25 percent did not support.

[3:07:27] 3 percent referred it to another grant program, 3 percent too soon for consideration, and

[3:07:31] 3 percent did not qualify for TTT funding.

[3:07:37] Next, applicant was the Orange Audubon Society.

[3:07:40] They were requesting $20 million for the Orange Audubon Natural History Museum.

[3:07:44] There was 38 percent solid support for this project with an average sentiment of 1.9, 16 percent

[3:07:50] of response is selected strongly support 22% support,

[3:07:53] 19% somewhat support, 41% are further to another grant program

[3:07:58] with 3% too soon for consideration.

[3:08:03] Our next applicant was the Creative City Project.

[3:08:05] They were requesting $22.5 million

[3:08:08] for the immersive festival.

[3:08:10] There was 45% solace of support for this project

[3:08:12] with an average sentiment of 2.1, 32% of respondents

[3:08:16] selected strongly support, 13% support, 10% somewhat support,

[3:08:20] 10% did not support, 32% referred to another grant program and 3% does not qualify for TTT funding.

[3:08:29] And there was one abstention on this project and so the percentages are out of 31 instead

[3:08:33] of 32 in this case.

[3:08:38] Our next applicant was the Ford Museum of History.

[3:08:40] They were requesting $30 million to $50 million for the Ford Museum of History.

[3:08:46] There were 16% saw support for this project with an average sentiment of 1.1.

[3:08:50] 30% of response is selected strongly support, 3% support, 6% somewhat support, and 25% did not support.

[3:08:58] 9% refer to another grant program, 41% to sue for consideration, and 3% did not qualify for TDT funding.

[3:09:08] Our next applicant was the Doctor Phillips Center for the Performing Arts.

[3:09:11] They were requesting $750 million to advance a portion of the four separate master plan projects.

[3:09:17] There was 55% solos support for this project with an average sentiment of 1.6, 90% of

[3:09:24] respondents selected strongly support, 35% support, 23% somewhat support, 90% did not support,

[3:09:31] 3% referred it to another grant program and there was one abstention.

[3:09:38] Our next applicant was the University of Central Florida.

[3:09:41] They were requesting $119 million to advance the three complementary capital projects.

[3:09:46] There were 35% saw as a poor for this project with an average sentiment of 1.1.

[3:09:51] 16% of respondents selected strongly support,

[3:09:54] 19% support, 13% somewhat support, and 42% did not support.

[3:10:00] 1% refer to another grant program in 3% that it did not qualify for TTT funding, and there was one abstention.

[3:10:11] An example came with Dr. Phil Opsink, and they were requesting $16 million for the Eatonville Museum of Culture and History.

[3:10:18] There was 63% saw as a support for this project with an average sentiment of 2.1.

[3:10:23] 41% of respondents selected strongly support, 22% support, 16% somewhat support, in 99% do not support,

[3:10:31] 6% refer to another grant program and 6% to assume for consideration.

[3:10:39] Our next applicant is Orlando City Baseball Dreamers.

[3:10:42] They were requesting $975 million for a major league baseball stadium.

[3:10:47] There was 13% saw support for this project with an average sentiment of 0.9.

[3:10:53] 13% of respondents selected strongly support, 16% somewhat support, 29% did not support.

[3:10:59] 42% consider the project too soon for consideration and there was one abstention.

[3:11:09] Our next applicant was the E Wape's Corporation.

[3:11:11] They were requesting $25 million for the IM Children's Museum.

[3:11:16] There is 50% saw a support for this project with an average sentiment of 2.0, 22% of respondents

[3:11:22] selected strongly support, 28% support, 25% somewhat support, 25% refer to another grant program.

[3:11:33] The next applicant was the town of the Invil community redevelopment agency.

[3:11:38] They were requesting $22.5 million for the Invil Heritage Tourism District.

[3:11:43] There was 22% saw support for this project with an average sentiment of 1.4.

[3:11:48] 9% of respondents selected strongly support, 13% support, 13% sum was support and 13% did not support.

[3:11:55] 22% referred to another grant program, 28% too soon for consideration and 3% does not qualify for TDT funding.

[3:12:07] Our next applicant was a city of Okoi with 30 million dollars for the expansion of the forest like golf club.

[3:12:15] There was 34% solid support for this project with an average sentiment of 1.4.

[3:12:20] 16% of respondents selected strongly support,

[3:12:23] 19% support, 19% somewhat support,

[3:12:26] and 19% did not support,

[3:12:28] 22% referred it to another grant program,

[3:12:30] and 6% does not qualify for TDT funding.

[3:12:36] Our last applicant was the Orange County Public Schools.

[3:12:39] They were requesting $20 million

[3:12:41] for the School of Arts and Entertainment at Cherokee.

[3:12:44] There was 19% solid support for this project

[3:12:47] with an average sentiment of 0.8.

[3:12:50] 9% of respondents selected strongest support, 9% support, 6% somewhat support, and 41% did not support,

[3:12:58] 28% referred it to another grant program, and 6% does not qualify for TDT funding.

[3:13:06] And so the last question on the survey is for comments or recommendations to task force members, and this was optional,

[3:13:14] And each recommendation or a partial comment was separated and grouped into themes and the full comments are available to you.

[3:13:22] There was 19 respondents to this question.

[3:13:25] And so we had eight comments which related to each of broader uses of TDT funds, projects to support and TDT accounting review.

[3:13:34] There are also three comments relating to each of process statutory reduction.

[3:13:39] Thank you and visit Orlando and there was one related to new tax.

[3:13:46] And this is an applicant summary sorted by sentiment with a range from 0.8 to 2.6 and I'll just mention that whether the applicants were rated or were sorted by overall support.

[3:14:03] All three lists had the same four applicants at the top and the same four applicants at the bottom.

[3:14:09] So the same four applicants at the top were the TDT application review committee.

[3:14:13] The Orange County Natural Resource Tourism Infrastructure Grant Program,

[3:14:17] the Orange County Ecotourism Grant Program, and Orange County Arts and Cultural Affairs.

[3:14:21] And the same four that they're at the bottom were Florida Museum of History,

[3:14:26] Orlando City Baseball Dreamers, Alchrist Capital, Orange County Public Schools.

[3:14:31] And so this is again, a summary of the applicant sorted by sentiment, and so I'll now turn it over to Task Force Co-Chair any more to present recommendations.

[3:14:44] Thank you.

[3:14:48] All right.

[3:14:48] Thank you, Donna Beers.

[3:14:50] Thank you, Dr. Beers.

[3:14:51] Good afternoon.

[3:14:53] Mayor.

[3:14:53] Comfortable diamond commissioners.

[3:14:55] Thank you for your time.

[3:14:56] Really everyone in the room.

[3:14:59] It's really a pleasure.

[3:15:00] Chairman and honoured to finally present this report to pass this on to you for the work that you have ahead. I will try to be a succinct as possible to get us through this presentation. I must say, first of all, it was impressive to work with my colleagues on the committee who balance the tension between a commitment to steward these dollars for the very things that fuel TDT, and though that we have to be good stewards of being able to continue to generate this resource in our region, what an incredible bounty we have that we get to have conversations like this one.

[3:15:28] With the very, very well-known sentiment of our wider community members of this body, of that we have other needs as a community that would make us better at hosting the rest of the world, and a desire to really address those, along with the hope to see more of these dollars benefit more than the usual cast of characters to see more of its spread around the region.

[3:15:48] And the end result is this report that you're now receiving.

[3:15:51] Whatever versions you have seen in the process,

[3:15:53] what you are receiving today is the final recommendation by this body.

[3:15:58] The committee is seeking to provide you with the benefit of our input.

[3:16:02] Here's what the public citizen reads,

[3:16:05] thinks about these projects, what we recommend.

[3:16:07] We have combined that with an economic impact study for all of its flaws.

[3:16:12] The best that we were able to assemble with the expertise of Dr. Bluestone,

[3:16:16] so that you have that input and with the survey that we just walked you through all of these

[3:16:21] are simply inputs. Final decisions will be made by you. Our hope is that this is helpful

[3:16:26] for you as you evaluate and then make final decisions on each of these projects. I'll share our

[3:16:31] recommendations and for your benefit we've also added a few visuals for each of these recommendation

[3:16:36] number one advances the top four projects in the highest score and this was an interesting

[3:16:42] and great to see endorsement by the committee of these ideas.

[3:16:47] We knew that as Rosanne mentioned, some of these projects really should have gone directly

[3:16:52] to some of these programs if they had known these programs were already funded and active

[3:16:56] for them to do so, but ended up coming to the TDT committee.

[3:16:59] Others were new ideas that seem long overdue and welcomed by the committee overall.

[3:17:04] These include TDT application review committee, ARC, Arts and Cultural Affairs, Equal Tourism,

[3:17:10] natural resource tourism infrastructure program so here there are with a little bit more detail on each of those

[3:17:17] This the arc request that this grant program be replenished with 75 to 100 million dollars over a five-year period

[3:17:26] The Orange County Natural Resource Tourism Infrastructure Program request that the county would like to request 10 million of

[3:17:34] for the creation of a tourism focus, Lake and River Restoration Program,

[3:17:40] to help preserve publicly accessible water resource destinations,

[3:17:44] improve and expand visitor access,

[3:17:46] and continually strengthen the quality for visitor recreation experiences.

[3:17:53] Orange County Equal Tourism Grant Program,

[3:17:56] this request is for $5 million of TDT funds per year for 10 years

[3:18:00] for the creation of a nature based tourism network showcasing the wide variety of

[3:18:06] recreational and learning options that exist throughout our county.

[3:18:14] And the arts and cultural affairs request that funding from 5% of the first four cents

[3:18:22] to six or seven percent.

[3:18:29] Our second recommendation really looked at those ranking towards the bottom of the list

[3:18:33] when the TTT committee members evaluated the criteria and what things we could recommend

[3:18:39] forward. These were the ones that ended up in that category. Number one is the Florida Museum

[3:18:45] of History, Orlando City Baseball Dreamers, all-Crest Capital and Orange County Public Schools

[3:18:52] Project. These were not recommended to advance forward. These are some visuals for those.

[3:18:57] The Metropolitan Museum of History for $50 million, Orlando Dreamers for $975 million.

[3:19:03] All-Crest Capital or the Freshwater Discovery Center for $48 million in Orange County Public

[3:19:08] schools, school of arts and entertainment at Cherokee for $20 million.

[3:19:17] Our third recommendation was to advance these are the two projects in Eatonville that

[3:19:23] survived the process to move forward to advance specifically Dr. Phillips' charities project

[3:19:30] and refer the association to preserve the Eatonville community to another committee.

[3:19:35] Here are some visuals on that particular project where Dr. Phillips was requesting $60 million

[3:19:41] of an approximately $85 million total project which they seek to then fund the difference.

[3:19:48] And the Zorad Niel Hurston International Museum of Arts, this is the Project by Association

[3:19:53] to Preservee in the Ill Community, asking for $53 million being recommended for another committee.

[3:20:01] Recommendation number 4 is to advance the creative city project for $2.5 million a year for five years.

[3:20:10] We've heard plenty about this project today, popularly celebrated by members of the committee and the wider community as well.

[3:20:19] Recommendations 5 through 10 advanced the following projects. Eight waves, children's museum, orange Autobots society, Dr. Phillips Center for the Performing Arts,

[3:20:29] For the Citrus Sports Parking Garage, City of Okoi, Forest Lake golf course, and Town of

[3:20:35] the Inville, CRA historic district. The Eight Wades Children Museum presented here with their

[3:20:42] funny requests, visual visuals, and breakdown of both the groundwork and vertical construction

[3:20:48] estimates that they present.

[3:20:53] The Orange Audubon National History Museum at Apopka-Birding Park

[3:21:01] and obviously the Dr. Phillips Center master plan.

[3:21:05] We've heard you marks on this today in that particular project,

[3:21:10] specifically their north block.

[3:21:15] Campy Road State and Campus Extension, this is related to the already funding funded new venue

[3:21:21] being developed and already funded at Campy Road Stadium.

[3:21:25] As an extension of that program is this parking garage project as presented there.

[3:21:30] The request is for $54 million on this project.

[3:21:38] Forced Lake Conference, hospitality, sports tourism campus,

[3:21:41] the applicant is the city of Okoi for these two capital projects.

[3:21:48] And the Heritage Tourism District Project,

[3:21:51] the request of $22.5 million by the town of E.M.

[3:21:55] Bill CRA.

[3:22:01] The following did not advance through this process,

[3:22:05] and these include Orange County Convention Center,

[3:22:08] Florida Citrus Sports and Greater Orlando Sports Commission made your events fund and the University of Central Florida.

[3:22:17] These are visuals for each of these projects, the Orange County Convention Centers project 5B, the Grove was for 523 million dollars.

[3:22:26] Florida Citrus Sports, Greater Orlando Sports Commission made your events fund was for 25 million dollars.

[3:22:32] And the University of Central Florida's athletic tourism infrastructure investments at 119 million dollars.

[3:22:39] Other recommendations by the Citizen Advisory Committee included number 11 that the county commission

[3:22:46] explore every avenue to advance alternative uses of the tax, including but not limited to transportation

[3:22:52] and affordable housing, or add additional pennies, or lower the 40% for tourism promotion,

[3:22:59] and make it a legislative priority.

[3:23:02] Recommendation number 12 is that the ARC grant program expand opportunities for special events

[3:23:07] and small projects.

[3:23:12] I'm going to hand it over now to Daniel Filippe,

[3:23:15] Assistant Manager, Fiscal, and Business Services

[3:23:17] to follow me in this presentation.

[3:23:30] Good afternoon, Mayor, commissioners, and control a diamond.

[3:23:35] So today I will be presenting six scenarios

[3:23:37] which were prepared by Fiscal and Business Services

[3:23:40] and the County's Financial Advisor PFM.

[3:23:43] These scenarios illustrate the potential impact

[3:23:46] of the county reserves, a funding all or a portion of the proposed projects advanced by the task force.

[3:23:53] The goal is to provide you with an overall view of the county's overall funding capacity.

[3:24:04] I will begin with presenting some key assumptions.

[3:24:09] Then we will look at two funding scenarios assessing the county's capacity to fund the projects as recommended.

[3:24:16] followed by force scenarios illustrating the county's estimated available capacity.

[3:24:23] Finally, we'll conclude with some key takeaways.

[3:24:31] When reviewing the scenarios, it is important to remember on these key assumptions.

[3:24:37] All scenarios assume a revenue growth of 8% in fiscal year 2026 and 2% annually thereafter for the TTT revenue growth.

[3:24:47] There is no debt issuance by the county for any of the proposed projects.

[3:24:54] All current plan priorities and commitments are assumed as paid in accordance with existing payment schedule.

[3:25:00] Project cash flows in the first four scenarios reflect the timing requested by each applicant in their application.

[3:25:09] The Dr. Phillips Center for the Performing Art Project is the only project currently anticipated to be financed through long-term debt.

[3:25:17] Financing is assumed to be finalized in fiscal year 28, which allows time to draft the inexecute the funding agreement and to structure the financing.

[3:25:26] The first debt service payment is assumed to begin in fiscal year 29 and then we are assuming

[3:25:33] a 6% interest rate and a 30-year-level debt service and that is consistent with the financing

[3:25:39] use for the camping work project in 2024.

[3:25:47] With these in mind, we will look at the two scenarios

[3:25:49] assessing capacity for the recommended projects.

[3:25:56] This start outlines all of the projects recommended

[3:25:59] by the task force and includes a total amount requested for all applicants.

[3:26:04] The only exception is the Creative City Project, which the task force recommended funding

[3:26:09] for five years instead of the ten years requested.

[3:26:13] This scenario includes the lower requested amounts for the TDC application review committee,

[3:26:19] the ecotourism, and the arts and cultural affairs programs, so that's the 15,000,000,000

[3:26:24] and 1% for arts.

[3:26:28] The first row outlines the current estimated excess revenues, which projected annually after the current plant priorities are accounted for.

[3:26:38] Then listed are the projects expected to be funded annually.

[3:26:42] The first row highlighted in blue is the total estimated annual program funding, which reflects the combined funding request of all the recommended projects.

[3:26:53] The real right be low that is the estimated debt service for the Dr. Phyllis Performing Arts Center Project.

[3:27:02] This amount is based on 825 million total financing requirements, which consists of 750 million and project costs as requested and 75 million in estimated debt service reserve and cost of issuance.

[3:27:18] The next row highlighted in blue shows the total proposed additional expenses for all the recommended projects.

[3:27:27] Next is the estimated access revenues after additional expenses, which calculates excess revenues when all the proposed projects annual costs are considered.

[3:27:37] Following this is estimated interest, earnings on the renewal and replacement reserve account.

[3:27:42] And last, which is the most important role for this analysis, is the estimated unallocated

[3:27:48] cash on hand, which provides the projected balance in their renewal and replacement reserve

[3:27:53] account at the end of each fiscal year.

[3:27:56] As many of you are aware, the controller recommends maintaining a target balance of 300 million.

[3:28:05] So, as indicated and read under the scenario, county reserve is estimated to fall below the target

[3:28:12] level in fiscal year 2029, and will remain below target for an extended period of time.

[3:28:20] This indicates that the county does not have sufficient capacity to sustain these projects

[3:28:25] at their requested timing and level.

[3:28:29] If we include the higher requested amounts for the three grant programs, the balance would

[3:28:33] fall below the target level even more.

[3:28:40] So next, we will assess the capacity to fund the top nine ranked projects at the funding level and timing requested.

[3:28:48] This scenario considers funding projects in the order ranked by sentiment and considers the lower funding request for ARC, ART and the Equatorism programs.

[3:28:59] As illustrated, county reserves, again, is estimated to follow below the target level in fiscal year 2030,

[3:29:06] And we'll also remain below target for an extended period of time.

[3:29:11] And so again, this just demonstrates that there is not sufficient capacity to fund

[3:29:18] these projects at the level and at the timing being requested.

[3:29:30] So now we will look at four funding scenarios illustrating what the county could sustainably

[3:29:35] fund within its current capacity.

[3:29:38] This first scenario reflects the lower funding request for the granting organizations, while

[3:29:44] limiting funding for the Dr. Phyllis Reform Narts project to 590 million.

[3:29:51] Under this scenario, county reserved is estimated to remain above or near the target level

[3:29:56] throughout the forecast period, would access revenues beginning to emerge.

[3:30:01] So,

[3:30:07] this scenario is similar to the previous, but it accounts for funding the grant programs at their higher

[3:30:14] request. And in this scenario, the doctor-fillist performance arts project costs is limited to 320 million.

[3:30:23] As illustrated, again, by the bottom line, county reserve is estimated to remain above or near the target level throughout

[3:30:30] forecast period with excess revenues beginning to emerge in 2032.

[3:30:39] Now the board does have

[3:30:40] some flexibility in how it approaches funding, which can affect overall capacity, including

[3:30:46] adjusting timing of funding. So when project funding is allocated and how those cost are distributed

[3:30:52] across fiscal year, we can also adjust annual funding level, which changes to the amount ultimately

[3:31:00] approved for each project, also duration of funding, spreading the project costs or for

[3:31:06] rare current programs over more years. And lastly, the board can also consider funding

[3:31:12] eligible project through established grant programs such as ARC.

[3:31:19] And so with this in mind,

[3:31:20] we will look at two additional scenarios to illustrate how timing, duration, and amount of funding

[3:31:26] can affect overall capacity.

[3:31:31] In this adjusted scenario, funding for ARC has been shifted to begin in fiscal year 29.

[3:31:37] As ARC was previously funded for fiscal year 24 to 2028.

[3:31:42] Funding for the equal tourism in the infrastructure programs has been shifted to begin

[3:31:46] in fiscal year 28, allowing time for those programs to develop.

[3:31:51] And the funding for E-MERS in fiscal year 27 was reduced by 1.25 million to account for

[3:31:58] funding they are already receiving in this fiscal year from arts and cultural affairs blockbuster

[3:32:04] program.

[3:32:06] These changes increases the capacity to fund the Dr. Phyllis Reform and Arts program from

[3:32:12] 590 million in the previous scenario to 730 million.

[3:32:18] County reserves is estimated to remain above or near the target level throughout the forecast

[3:32:22] period would access revenues now emerging in 2034 instead of 2032.

[3:32:33] If we consider the request for our ecoturism and art at the higher capacity,

[3:32:42] this increases

[3:32:44] the amount for the Dr. Philist, performing arts projects from 320 million from the previous

[3:32:53] scenario presented to 530 million. Again, as you can see in the bottom line, county reserve

[3:33:00] is estimated to remain above or near the target level throughout the forecast period with

[3:33:04] excess revenues now emerging in 2034.

[3:33:11] In conclusion, funding all the projects at the levels

[3:33:14] recommended by the TTT task force and according to the timing requested by the applicants

[3:33:19] is not within the county's SNA capacity while maintaining the target reserve level.

[3:33:24] As illustrated, change in the project, cash flows, timing, duration, or findings in terms

[3:33:30] can significantly affect the county's overall capacity to fund the recommended projects.

[3:33:35] Final funding capacity will depend on the project's ultimately approved by the board,

[3:33:40] the board's direction on funding amounts, timing, and duration, as well as the financing

[3:33:45] terms for the project's funded with long term debt.

[3:33:48] please.

[3:33:51] I'll be available for questions.

[3:33:57] All right.

[3:33:58] We'll open it up for questions by members of the board.

[3:34:07] As you can see, I think there are some basic assumptions we have to make here.

[3:34:15] And as we have this discussion,

[3:34:19] in my humble opinion, it is not an option, but us to follow

[3:34:25] the law, the control is recommended cash reserve balance of 300 million dollars.

[3:34:31] So we start there, we know that we're going to have to adjust, you know, what we make

[3:34:44] ultimately do as a Board of County Commission,

[3:34:50] adjusting the timing of funding across

[3:34:54] fiscal years, I believe, would be a fiscal improvement for us to do.

[3:35:00] Staff was taken a noble look at projected revenue streams and capacity and meeting the controls

[3:35:14] recommendation for a minimum cash balance. So if we all agree with some of these basic

[3:35:23] concepts that we've laid out now, we can have a conversation about the board, whether to

[3:35:34] go today is to accept the recommendations by the task force, but ultimately whatever financial

[3:35:47] So the decisions that we may will require staff to go back and

[3:35:55] delve into the details.

[3:35:58] We will have to have specific conversations with some of the potential funding requesters

[3:36:09] with the details there if we modify periods of time, again they get their projects done

[3:36:17] and not, and that will require some additional

[3:36:21] conversations and discussions.

[3:36:24] So I'll open it up.

[3:36:25] Excuse me, sir.

[3:36:27] Yes?

[3:36:28] Might I take just a moment?

[3:36:29] Perhaps a loop.

[3:36:31] Engineers address their probably complex questions,

[3:36:36] because I'd like to speak for a moment

[3:36:39] so that all of you can understand a little bit better,

[3:36:43] just what the task force itself was faced with.

[3:36:48] And those are some difficulties that you all may have a higher level of understanding,

[3:36:54] but they are still things that we had to deal with.

[3:36:57] One of them, of course, is timing.

[3:37:00] Now, would we have liked to have three months instead of three weeks?

[3:37:06] Perhaps you would not have had us leading the task force.

[3:37:10] But that might have been preferable, who knows.

[3:37:15] Secondly, I think that one of the great questions

[3:37:19] that the public has that I have often heard spoken to

[3:37:24] is what have other counties done to enable the expenditure

[3:37:30] of TTT funding on more things that affect the community.

[3:37:36] And when you look at the terms that we have used today, I think you're going to see that we have now introduced, perhaps not introduced, but we have referred frequently to two important terms, cultural tourism and ecotourism.

[3:37:58] Those are ways in which those TD funds, TDT funds, may attract a new and different kind of visitor,

[3:38:08] and also provide access to community organizations.

[3:38:15] Thirdly, I think that we were all grappling with questions of size and scope and schedule.

[3:38:26] Imagine, and you will find this yourselves when you buckled down to work.

[3:38:34] Imagine comparing the Convention Center and their application and their ability to provide

[3:38:41] information to Orange Audubon.

[3:38:46] Totally volunteer, driven.

[3:38:48] We would not have asked them to go higher in economic analysis to be done, but we hope

[3:38:57] we hope that by presenting them to you, you would find a way in order to advance such a project.

[3:39:06] Imagine having to compare a brand new project, the Children's Museum, with an established

[3:39:17] project, like the Performing Arts Center.

[3:39:21] I mean, how can you imagine a brand new project, compared with one that has existed

[3:39:27] for 15 years, and that offers opportunities in this community every single night?

[3:39:34] Except Christmas, I think.

[3:39:35] And so, the scheduling of, again, building,

[3:39:44] financing, all of those issues are very hard

[3:39:48] for light people to deal with, and none of these folks were getting paid to do this work.

[3:39:55] I do believe also that the mayor is...

[3:40:00] Large, that we look at opportunities for citizen input for cities to have their say was very useful. Every member

[3:40:13] of the task force played an important role. And as I said to the tourist development council who

[3:40:21] decided after some thought to simply accept our report, not to endorse it, but accept it.

[3:40:29] I believe that by studying tourism, by having ordinary citizens like us, study tourism

[3:40:40] and discuss it in public meetings and on our TV, and that the recommendations that we

[3:40:48] decided to put in our final report, not for your endorsement, but for your acceptance.

[3:40:55] Really have established some goodwill in this community.

[3:41:01] Fortourism.

[3:41:02] I think people understand it better.

[3:41:05] I think that they are more inclined to recognize the benefits that tourism has brought

[3:41:11] to us and we all acknowledge those and appreciate those.

[3:41:16] but also to understand the process a bit better.

[3:41:21] Finally, I hope that you will ask the comptroller

[3:41:24] to discuss perhaps again with you his slide on the buckets.

[3:41:30] Because that is an issue that is very complex.

[3:41:35] You all have worked with it before.

[3:41:38] We had not, but I think that it is important going forward

[3:41:42] to understand exactly how these funds flow, and how the capacity to do some of this work

[3:41:51] is certainly available.

[3:41:53] Thank you, our politics.

[3:41:58] Mr. Moreton, any comments?

[3:42:01] Well, I just say that I could not echo more the sentiments of my co-chair, and I cannot

[3:42:06] thank you enough mayor for the privilege of being able to have this opportunity, particularly

[3:42:10] with my co-chair.

[3:42:11] It's been such an honor to serve with her.

[3:42:13] I think the tensions that I mentioned at the beginning of my

[3:42:17] review marks are represented in these final choices.

[3:42:19] People were really trying to steward,

[3:42:21] what is the actual job of this committee?

[3:42:23] And one of the things we'd like to see happen in our community.

[3:42:26] And the product are some very carefully thought

[3:42:30] through and discuss choices that are being put forth

[3:42:33] for this board.

[3:42:34] And our hope is submitted.

[3:42:35] That would be available to you as you make these decisions.

[3:42:38] some of these projects were very straightforward,

[3:42:42] and sometimes they still didn't survive.

[3:42:44] And some were a bit more nuanced and atypical,

[3:42:47] but felt like they merited an opportunity,

[3:42:49] a moment to shine in the sun.

[3:42:52] And each of you have constituents across this community.

[3:42:54] You probably have people that are happy with you

[3:42:56] that are not happy with you on how they feel,

[3:42:58] but they report overall.

[3:43:00] But the goal is to try to make the best choices

[3:43:01] for this moment in time.

[3:43:03] That certainly is your charge.

[3:43:05] Our hope is to provide the best input

[3:43:08] that the public could provide to this process in being helpful to you.

[3:43:11] So thank you.

[3:43:14] All right.

[3:43:15] Thank you.

[3:43:18] You all can have a seat for both or moment.

[3:43:21] As we kind of open it up for questions, but let me say this.

[3:43:29] Out of these recommendations, the part about expanding our investments in equal tourism and cultural tourism.

[3:43:41] I'm most excited about those two expansions, to the extent that we can afford it.

[3:43:49] And on a third issue is going to the legislature to lobby for expanded eligible uses.

[3:44:01] And that could take on,

[3:44:08] I think, the possibility of using TDT, expanding additional pinings

[3:44:15] to do other things, that could perhaps address issues like transportation challenges with

[3:44:24] that our community or other challenges that we have.

[3:44:27] Today, we're still limited by the current statute, but I believe that it will take political persistence across the state of Florida.

[3:44:45] We will have to bring some additional counties and local governments.

[3:44:49] I think into the possibilities of what that could do for their communities, as well as our communities, if we were able to.

[3:45:00] Opinia, we'll have you to do some expanded things. That conversation has to continue. It has to be

[3:45:10] nurtured with partners, community partners as well as other local governments who will see them

[3:45:21] similarly situated, as benefiting, if that happened. So that's going to take some work

[3:45:29] quite frankly to get done. But even within the current eligible uses, we could do the

[3:45:39] equal tourism. We could do the expanded cultural tourism investments. We can do those things

[3:45:49] to the benefit of a man of our community based organizations and I'm going to

[3:45:53] know some palettes who gave a lot of input and organizations came forward so I'm

[3:46:01] going to open it up for questions so far.

[3:46:07] Mayors, we do that. Mayors, we've already marked on the way you just said.

[3:46:10] Yes, exactly. There's an overarching theme of reflection for us as a community about

[3:46:15] This could not agree more, I think there was a lot of shared excitement about the eco tourism

[3:46:20] and that we have so much to offer between all of the natural features of living in central

[3:46:26] Florida that are just fantastic but are kind of under-selebrated and for people who might,

[3:46:31] you know, we have young people who need to go live in Colorado or be close to the mountains

[3:46:35] and we have a lot of great things here, how wonderful would it be to have people want to be here

[3:46:39] because the natural resources we have become famous through tourism. The thought that we should

[3:46:45] also be looking at ways to, how do we strengthen the natural ingredients that make up for

[3:46:51] great tourism engines here?

[3:46:52] Like the workforce that we have, like transportation and infrastructure, these wider

[3:46:56] resource questions.

[3:46:57] I think you're absolutely right.

[3:46:58] I'm so thankful that the last committee and that you have already previously advocated

[3:47:03] for really thinking wisely about how we do that.

[3:47:06] At the same time, you know, we don't want to build a goose that lays the golden egg and

[3:47:11] have these amazing assets here that generate all the CDT revenue. The thing I would have loved to have

[3:47:17] seen more this time around, I hope that in the future we'll see more from the major venues

[3:47:23] and public assets that we use to drive TET revenue in the area. The commitment to not only operate

[3:47:30] to their mission, for tourism and beds and heads, but to have a pledge to the local surrounding

[3:47:35] communities around them to be somehow also beneficial. We heard about how people had strong

[3:47:39] feelings about the herd even today about people's wages and certain hospitality related

[3:47:44] industries and sectors and the larger impact of just operating that business, it might

[3:47:49] fill our coffers as a community, but it's having real impact right where it's at.

[3:47:55] In our kind of neck of the woods on the west side for the stadium story of FCS, it's pledging

[3:47:59] themselves to be a benefit to that community.

[3:48:02] That story has been out for so long.

[3:48:03] I thought I would have heard more projects say, and here's how we want to benefit the

[3:48:09] we're going to operate, and here's how we're going to create benefits for children and families.

[3:48:13] If every single one of these investments, not only fulfills the mission of beds and

[3:48:16] heads, but makes our community stronger in other ways.

[3:48:20] And we don't have to come up with ways to spend money to make up for the impact that they

[3:48:24] might not be having in other areas.

[3:48:27] So I would just add that last little data point that the venues or attractions that we support

[3:48:33] with TDT, like we would expect the company to have a commitment to social responsibility,

[3:48:38] You should also have a lens for shared value this drink in our community by what they do every day not just put beds in head

[3:48:44] So thank you

[3:48:46] You know, when you say b's and he is you know

[3:48:51] We usually refer to it as he is and b's

[3:48:56] Maybe a tired but but but I understand what you're saying

[3:49:01] You know, we could get out thoughts around

[3:49:07] the two of reals, I'm putting, bringing people in, you know, we can put those, those thoughts

[3:49:12] of people in Beas and I here, but in any of the case.

[3:49:16] All right, I'm going to kind of go and order here, we're going to start with Commissioner Wilson

[3:49:25] and Commissioner, if you can, if you have a specific question, if you can address it to who

[3:49:32] you think needs to address it if you're not certain, then we'll look to count it in the

[3:49:38] administration to help there. Then we're going to go to Commissioner Scott, Commissioner

[3:49:43] Yerebe, Commissioner Crab, and then Commissioner Gomez, Codaro. Okay, so we're going

[3:49:52] to start with Commissioner Wilson.

[3:50:07] Thank you so much, Mayor.

[3:50:14] You teach a master class in diplomacy and eloquence for how to state what I believe, so many of us think.

[3:50:24] Yes, I'm seeing hands out there.

[3:50:28] It is what I believe after having sat here for several years, in hearing what, in that being sometimes very contentious debates, I walk out at the end and think we're all fighting for the same thing.

[3:50:40] And so understanding the unifying piece of this, which is that ultimately the investments in things that grow this tourism tax, can really provide benefits for our residents and seeing it spread out from what we understand to be our traditional core tourism corridor, because this is how people travel these days.

[3:51:05] is they do want to see more and they do and the evidence continues to show that so thank you

[3:51:12] for teaching me and allowing me to follow I can only aspire to be I think as diplomatic and

[3:51:21] impactful as you've been and I'm just really grateful for that. I also want to think I've

[3:51:27] I know I have one of my appointees here Joe Dunn who is an environmental advocate from years back

[3:51:34] that watching his participation in my other appointee

[3:51:38] was actually disability rights advocate.

[3:51:40] And so seeing the people who came together to produce

[3:51:44] what the support is, understanding that it's not perfect,

[3:51:47] that we do have a lot of work to do.

[3:51:50] I just want to state for the record

[3:51:51] that I support the findings of the task force.

[3:51:55] I also want to make sure to clear out

[3:51:58] what I would say is a bumpy start for me

[3:52:00] because I think I was very concerned

[3:52:03] And I do want to make sure I get clarification today from Whitney from her county attorney's office to make sure that on the record everybody sort of understands the legal review because it you know the very first meeting that that was held there was a preliminary and you stated it you know perfectly clear this is a very preliminary legal review.

[3:52:26] it is not as positive, it doesn't necessarily eliminate them, but this is what Mike, you

[3:52:31] know, my initial review shows. And from that review, there were some that were disqualified

[3:52:37] for the next round. And so in between that first and second stage, I had questions about,

[3:52:43] well, if it's not as positive, then how are they already eliminated? And if their legal

[3:52:49] the principal eligibility is the concern later on in the evaluation there were questions about

[3:52:57] them being able to be better served by other TTT funded grants. And so my concern there is

[3:53:05] if they were disqualified based on their eligibility from the start does that then just qualify

[3:53:12] them for anything that is provided through TTT funding. And so if I could just kind of get your thoughts

[3:53:18] on those two pieces.

[3:53:23] So, Commissioner, make sure I'm understanding the question clearly, and I think I need to reframe

[3:53:28] the first part because what I did initially for the committee, as you said, was kind

[3:53:34] of a gloss over a legal review because, of course, as we now know, we didn't have a lot

[3:53:38] of in-depth information on some of these.

[3:53:41] I did not eliminate any of these projects.

[3:53:44] I simply said some of these seem like they have more issues than others.

[3:53:48] There was a vote by the committee, which then turned into a reconsideration and amendment and multiple

[3:53:57] parliamentary procedures happen at that meeting.

[3:53:59] But I did not eliminate any of these from consideration.

[3:54:03] And I said one thing identified.

[3:54:05] So again, a lot of the committee.

[3:54:06] I think for identifying what was an opportunity to ask some of those difficult questions.

[3:54:12] So the presentation that was distributed that day prior to any discussion only listed the ones that sort of met legal muster and so they were already eliminated based on the slide presentation.

[3:54:26] So they were technically eliminated and I don't know if that was a decision made.

[3:54:32] I just sort of trying to figure out how to speak to the part that I did.

[3:54:34] Maybe we're standing and it helps me understand a little better because I want to make sure and I know it seemed like I was pitching for a specific project

[3:54:42] But really the process was what I wanted to make sure I understood so that any of those projects that maybe today wasn't the day for them

[3:54:49] Or they weren't eligible weren't going to waste their time later in a different TDT grant opportunity or if they had

[3:54:58] You know some other

[3:55:04] So, I don't know if you can speak to it. There were some very obvious ones. The one that was outside of Orange County, pretty obvious.

[3:55:11] But some of them, I think, because of the fact that they were in these spreadsheet identified as potentially not legally eligible.

[3:55:27] I'm going to go ahead and address Commissioner Wilson's concerns.

[3:55:31] So we had the 24 applications and we had one that was located in Lake County.

[3:55:36] So we eliminated that one and the second one only requested $10 million and so we pulled

[3:55:43] that one out.

[3:55:44] And then there were some others that actually ended up in the bottom of our ranking anyway

[3:55:49] because and it was the desire of the task force.

[3:55:54] So we had originally gone in and said, these have some challenges

[3:55:58] that we think they need more time and probably are better suited

[3:56:02] to maybe look at another grant program

[3:56:04] because maybe there were components of their request that

[3:56:08] qualified, but there were components that didn't.

[3:56:11] And so it would give them more time to figure out

[3:56:14] what worked and what didn't work.

[3:56:17] And the task force said, well, no, we want to see them anyway.

[3:56:20] And so we want to head and saw some of those presentations.

[3:56:23] And some of them actually naturally did end up coming out in the wash.

[3:56:31] But I think that was more, it wasn't so much the elimination because they weren't qualified.

[3:56:37] It was more that they were components that were components that weren't.

[3:56:41] And so we were trying to prioritize, but the task force, which this was the beauty of the task force.

[3:56:48] The task force decided that they wanted to see them all, and they actually ended up going from 24 to 20, and so we listened.

[3:56:57] Again, I'm so grateful that process worked the way it was intended to work.

[3:57:01] So I want to make sure that just looking forward that some of those, and the ones I think there was to the way through,

[3:57:08] but anybody that's looking at this process, and they may have heard that there was some potential concern about their legal eligibility,

[3:57:14] would they be prohibited from looking into the grant opportunities that are funded by TTT

[3:57:21] once they've been deemed ineligible from this as a, as a, as a project?

[3:57:29] We don't have the ability to prohibit anyone from applying for anything in the future,

[3:57:34] so that's what I will say to that.

[3:57:36] And I will reiterate that my legal analysis was a very basic legal analysis because I did not have all of the facts now.

[3:57:46] That's not to say that I don't still have some questions on some of these.

[3:57:50] However, if any of them apply to any of our grant opportunities in the future, including any that you all may approve for new grant opportunities, they're going to undergo a legal review at that point.

[3:58:00] And that's the point that I'm trying to make is there were quite a few, I think, incredible conversations about the opportunities that these new grants that were going through the process at the exact same time would be presenting.

[3:58:13] And my concern was that if as part of the initial discussion they were eliminated either by perception or reality for having maybe not made cut legal muster that they would then not see themselves as eligible.

[3:58:27] And I want to make sure that we're clarifying that that is not necessarily the case that it would require review at that next level.

[3:58:35] Anything would require with the next level. Yes. Thank you.

[3:58:39] And then just to say on the record mirror, I know this is a long hearing and I'm going to plan my plan here.

[3:58:44] But I support the recommendations of this task force and their findings.

[3:58:49] I do think it's important that those grant programs are funded to the full capacity of the recommendation.

[3:58:56] understanding that we may end up having to delay their implementation due to financial

[3:59:01] constraints.

[3:59:05] Okay.

[3:59:05] I'm just a commissioner.

[3:59:08] Scott.

[3:59:15] I think there's a bit of a delay from the time you do your thing to, thank you Mayor, Mayor

[3:59:24] Chapin, Eddie, members of the committee, thank you for your time.

[3:59:31] So I have 15 questions I'm not going to ask all of them.

[3:59:35] So I just kind of let you guys know, I'm going to try to do this quickly and shout out to

[3:59:42] the friends of like a pop guy I see over there and treat you while with the night of

[3:59:47] the arts.

[3:59:48] Some of my favorite people, they're more than people, but I just want to shout to you all.

[3:59:55] So I guess my first question is Rosanne.

[4:00:00] Given a presentation last week and we were giving another presentation this morning, so if you

[4:00:06] could summarize what changes were made between those documents.

[4:00:13] One has, maybe like, 98 pages,

[4:00:15] the other one has 81 pages I've been trying to sift through.

[4:00:19] Yes, so the original final report draft was added to legislative and it was the basic document.

[4:00:29] And from that time we were waiting for Dr. Blueston's final report.

[4:00:34] And so when we sent that, we also sent an email that said,

[4:00:37] here's all the other components that we will include.

[4:00:41] But we're waiting for Dr. Blueston's final report,

[4:00:43] which we got yesterday afternoon.

[4:00:46] He gave us the presentation on Friday, which was sent to you all.

[4:00:49] So once we got his final report, we put that into the document,

[4:00:54] and then from there after Commissioner of Briefings,

[4:00:57] We got some input on, we had provided you all the comments separately.

[4:01:02] We had provided you all the presents separately.

[4:01:05] So we decided let's just pull it all together in the appendix.

[4:01:08] So you had everything in one place.

[4:01:10] So what we added was Dr. Beer's presentation.

[4:01:13] We added all the comments.

[4:01:15] We added Dr. Bluestone's final report.

[4:01:18] And then we went ahead and reformatted some of it

[4:01:23] to make it a little bit more user friendly.

[4:01:25] So we didn't change the recommendations at all.

[4:01:29] They stayed the same and we just added more information based on request to have it all

[4:01:35] on document.

[4:01:36] Thank you for that answer.

[4:01:38] I have a short term request for you and a more long term request for Byron.

[4:01:44] My short term request is I do understand that sometimes things do come together, right?

[4:01:50] You're pulling information for a number of people.

[4:01:53] not just your main to the TTT conversation, but all conversations that we have, and so I would

[4:01:58] ask that going forward if there are substantial changes that we be given a summary, so we're

[4:02:05] not trying to decipher between what we've studied in research versus what was just presented

[4:02:10] to us after the meeting had started, okay? Long term and I've said this a number of times before

[4:02:16] I think maybe I should have done a more formal memo, but we received the agenda late afternoon

[4:02:22] on Wednesday, give her take you zero on one o'clock or so, and we require to review and if we

[4:02:26] have any concerns or changes, we have to submit them Friday by five, that needs to change.

[4:02:32] We have several hundred potentially over a thousand pages of documents to review in less

[4:02:37] than 48 hours to make a decision on how we feel, that needs to be extended.

[4:02:42] So I know we've talked about looking at our rules of procedures if I have to do this more

[4:02:46] from where I will, but I'm just saying again, the commissioners need more time to review

[4:02:49] these documents, and more time to provide feedback to county staff if there are changes

[4:02:55] to be made.

[4:02:56] That's for you, by and for our later date, I know there are going to be changes in the

[4:02:59] future, but I just want to say that on the record.

[4:03:02] My second question for you, Rosanne, is when you and I had a 101 meeting and then we had

[4:03:09] our briefing yesterday, when did the rubric change?

[4:03:13] I know you were kind of looking at it as I understand it would use the rubric from the previous

[4:03:17] TTT commission can you kind of summarize that because as I understand it, they might have been a couple of changes and when did it change the rubric to how the projects were evaluated when did it change or did it change because again, as I understand it, we were using the same rubric and same process from the previous TTT commission I do not remember in our conversations not saying you didn't say it, but I do not remember in our conversations the sentiment score that kind of came up later on.

[4:03:43] So if you can kind of summarize what if any changes were made to the rubric and work.

[4:03:49] So there was the arc matrix that we utilized in 2023 and at that time the survey was based

[4:03:57] on that arc matrix in 2024 the arc advisory board updated the matrix they made some minor

[4:04:06] changes to it. That was what brought forward to the 2021-26 task force. In discussions with

[4:04:14] the co-chairs and some of the task force members, there was a request. Yes, they wanted

[4:04:19] to use the matrix and form their decision, along with presentations and along with the economic

[4:04:26] analysis, but they wanted a broader survey that allowed them to just give some level of support.

[4:04:35] So, yes, they were constructed and you can look at the instructions on the survey that says,

[4:04:41] please utilize the rubric, please utilize your discussions, your notes, the presentations,

[4:04:48] and the applications to inform your decisions as you fill out the survey.

[4:04:53] But that was something that was done within the task force, and I don't know if any chair

[4:05:00] And we would like to make sure any others would like to weigh in on that. But it was in response to what the task force had asked us to make that change.

[4:05:10] We had prepared the other presentation ready to use that survey. Dr. Beerus was ready to use that one.

[4:05:16] And then we got requests that that one was a little too prescripted. They wanted something a little broader, that because some of these smaller projects, it was hard to get down to that granular level.

[4:05:28] And I think that was the challenge when you look at the group rookie and you look at some of these very, very small projects, it is very hard to get to that level.

[4:05:37] So that's why they suggested a wider type of survey.

[4:05:42] All right, I want, that's okay.

[4:05:46] Because I want to be respectful of everyone's time in my colleagues who I know have a number of questions.

[4:05:51] So I have a number of follow-up, so I'm not going to ask, we'll just have a briefing or have a conversation afterwards.

[4:05:56] I do have two additional questions, one for you and one for the professor.

[4:06:02] So, we made a change to the visit or a land of board to which the commissioner with

[4:06:08] the highest number of hotel rooms or what have you would serve seats.

[4:06:14] And so I believe that put commissioner Wilson on that board.

[4:06:18] You sometimes serve on the board as a representative of the mayor in my, am I right?

[4:06:23] Yes.

[4:06:23] I, the mayor automatically gets a seat on the board and I am his representative.

[4:06:28] Copy.

[4:06:29] So we, visiteral window, don't they give equal tourism dollars or, like, I guess was there

[4:06:36] a conversation about how they give equal tourism dollars to maybe, like, because I know

[4:06:41] some prod school referred to different places, but has that ever been, was it ever a discussion

[4:06:45] about the equal tourism dollars that visiteral window gives out?

[4:06:48] So Commissioner Wilson, they do, and all kinds of, it might be some kind of, I really don't

[4:06:55] know the answer to what level of visit or land does equal tourism advertising?

[4:07:01] Looks like we need to, she got a quiz, so.

[4:07:05] I don't have a answer on how many specific dollars they spend commissioner, I would just

[4:07:10] tell you that the contract that we sign with them does require them to include ecotourism

[4:07:15] as part of their advertising.

[4:07:16] at advertising, not necessarily marketing and promotion.

[4:07:20] Copy, thank you, you look amazing today.

[4:07:23] All right.

[4:07:23] Thank you.

[4:07:25] Professor, my last question for you.

[4:07:27] Like I said, I have a number of follow-ups,

[4:07:29] but again, just in the interest of time,

[4:07:30] I'll save those for either email or briefing.

[4:07:33] So, Professor, you talked earlier,

[4:07:37] hold on.

[4:07:39] In your presentation,

[4:07:44] today,

[4:07:48] And I'm speaking to, I guess it's page eight, appendix D, table nine, TTT, and total

[4:07:58] projects, spending ROI, the implant, TTT ROI, Orange County MSA, it's one of the

[4:08:04] make sure you know where I'm at,

[4:08:11] you're good, I think so, all right, so you kind of

[4:08:14] answered it earlier but I want you to answer it again and expand on it where you

[4:08:17] necessary because I want to make sure I understand your answer and the reasoning behind it.

[4:08:24] So when you look at the children's museum which would be number three and you look at the history

[4:08:31] museum which would be number four. And what was presented under the total project spending

[4:08:39] I was 66% and 27% for the history museum, 66% for the chosen museum, respectively.

[4:08:50] But the presentation, you're initial, and I think that maybe you're initial you talked

[4:08:56] about this earlier, it was 58% and 31% and I know those numbers are, you know, I think

[4:09:02] you said negligible, we're just 70% and 4% relative to the amount of money that we're talking

[4:09:08] about it's significant. So I'm trying to understand what information or what did you receive

[4:09:14] or what did you reevaluate that made you change those percentages from what was 58% to an

[4:09:20] increase of 66% for children's museum and then how we went from 31% to 27%. Do you follow my

[4:09:29] question? Yeah, so there is the short answer is I think it was just some spreadsheet errors.

[4:09:38] that some of the numbers, because we're looking at allocating based on county versus MSA.

[4:09:48] So for some of these things, I use a four-county region, which is appropriate for the larger economic impact for the tax.

[4:09:56] I just use the orange county.

[4:09:58] Okay, so

[4:10:02] I don't have it right in front of me, but my recollection was that some of those percentages may have been mixed up a little bit in some of the estimates, so that I had to readjust to make sure I was using the right region.

[4:10:16] Okay,

[4:10:20] I would, I was trying to avoid asking the follow-ups, I have a follow-up and I have a request.

[4:10:28] If you could, either through Rosanne or directly to my colleagues, however, if you could kind of summarize that in writing,

[4:10:36] so we understand what the reason for the changes. I mean, I don't know if you're not prepared to do that right now,

[4:10:40] but if you can kind of summarize it in a way that, hey, this is what happened on this date, this is what happened after that,

[4:10:45] and this is why.

[4:10:46] Just so we have a clear understanding of why those metrics

[4:10:49] should be, it would be great.

[4:10:53] I'm gonna hold on my follow-up

[4:10:55] because I think maybe it may be answered or asked

[4:10:58] based on the question that my colleagues are gonna ask.

[4:11:01] But thank you for your work.

[4:11:03] I do appreciate it.

[4:11:04] Rosanne, likewise, thank you for your work.

[4:11:07] Whitney, you do like 56 different things.

[4:11:10] I'm gonna how you do it, but I'm grateful for it.

[4:11:12] So I appreciate you all and members

[4:11:14] that really volunteered their personal time, they could have been doing anything and everything,

[4:11:20] but they volunteered their time and then they added extra time if they could

[4:11:23] get longer meetings and extra meetings and so knowing that you weren't paid and that you were

[4:11:28] alive on TV to share your concerns, some well-received some not so much somewhere in the middle,

[4:11:35] I just really want to tell you all how much I appreciate that you took time to give your time

[4:11:39] to others to know benefit of your own. So thank you for your work and may I am good.

[4:11:48] Commissioner, you read that.

[4:11:51] Fantastic.

[4:11:52] All right.

[4:11:53] Wow.

[4:11:54] Commissioner's gone.

[4:11:54] Okay.

[4:11:55] So Whitney, can I ask you some questions right off the bat?

[4:11:58] Because I went through all of the,

[4:12:04] I went through the ones that were quote-unquote approved

[4:12:07] and some people that I've met.

[4:12:09] I went through the ones that were strongly discouraged.

[4:12:12] And there's a couple things that are standing out of me.

[4:12:14] One.

[4:12:16] Do you know which one of these applications are actually eligible to receive TDT dollars?

[4:12:23] Because I think that we're having a discussion of moving things forward, but can we realistically have that conversation

[4:12:30] if we may like a project but it will not be eligible to receive those dollars?

[4:12:36] So I think I would answer that two ways commissioner one is when I did my review what I was looking at was is what they are asking for an eligible use under the statute and an accordance with the guidance on that statute meaning the Attorney General opinions.

[4:12:52] So that's largely what I based my initial analysis on.

[4:12:56] In terms of moving forward, it's up to this board what you want to do to move these projects forward.

[4:13:03] I think as we've heard today, what's being asked is simply an acceptance of the report.

[4:13:07] But it's up to you all if you want to get additional information from these applicants at which point I would have more information myself to be able to give you a clearer answer.

[4:13:16] But what I can tell you is the majority of what you saw come through appears to meet the criteria that is in the statute.

[4:13:23] Again, there are a couple that I have some questions on.

[4:13:25] because I listened and I participated a little not to the extent of all of you all, but that's

[4:13:31] what's kind of blurring at me because if we quote unquote try to move something forward,

[4:13:38] are we not necessarily doing being the smartest with that because if they're not going to be eligible

[4:13:45] then how does this entire cube offset and then also financial dollars?

[4:13:52] Well, that's largely a question for you all.

[4:13:55] I mean, I think it's, again, how you want to spend your time

[4:13:58] and how you want to analyze these projects moving forward.

[4:14:01] I can do the legal analysis whenever you ask me to do the full legal analysis.

[4:14:07] You know, I mean, I've done an initial legal analysis, as I said,

[4:14:10] and I think the majority of these meet the statutory requirements

[4:14:14] in terms of what they are asking to use the money for.

[4:14:19] And to get into the details, we typically don't do that until either a we go through one of our grant organizations, the arc or the arts and cultural affairs.

[4:14:29] And then obviously a funding agreement, we would have to make sure that everything dots all the eyes and crosses the T's and a funding agreement if and when you all decide you want to get to that point.

[4:14:38] I do, you know, I mentioned this to my opening remarks, and we talked about visitorland

[4:14:43] to do an ecotourism promotion, why can't we put a nurse under that?

[4:14:49] I mean, that is, when we had some public comment, a nurse was very open about these bands

[4:14:55] come here, they come back and have concerts, people return to Central Florida.

[4:15:00] To see them, why can't we include them? I mean, they're actually proving additional offsets from that event that have continued to bring people here from Atlanta and Columbus and all that kind of stuff. Why are we not able to do that? It's not a lot of money and then we could secure their funding for guaranteed for five years.

[4:15:20] So right now, the Visitor Lando contract doesn't provide for that. That's something that if you all wanted to do that would require an amendment to that contract.

[4:15:27] And that was my question on the ego tourism part, why can't it go in there when we're looking at,

[4:15:34] I think it was two and a half, four, two and a half million a year.

[4:15:39] I know it doesn't sound like it would be such a huge ask.

[4:15:43] And if we have ego tourism, it's a festival.

[4:15:49] I know, but it's something natural that we haven't here.

[4:15:51] Why can't we? Why can't we? Why not ask?

[4:15:54] Okay, secondly, I gotta tell you, when I look at these projects, one of the biggest things

[4:16:00] that I like about it is that other cities around Orange County are able to benefit from tourism

[4:16:06] dollars.

[4:16:08] While I personally believe the Dr. Phillips Center is a great facility here, I worry that

[4:16:15] that's a lot of money and we are closing doors to other possibilities of other projects.

[4:16:22] I really get excited seeing auto bond.

[4:16:25] I really get inside our arts and culture.

[4:16:28] While I believe the Dr. Phillips Center should receive significant funding so that they

[4:16:34] can start moving forward in the last draw.

[4:16:36] They did not get anything, so I really do want to advocate for that.

[4:16:40] But I don't think that entire amount of money should.

[4:16:45] I think that we should consider trying to fund other small projects.

[4:16:49] I also, I would love to see what UCF proposed.

[4:16:54] We all just went to their kickoff and the Roth tower and very excited about what they were capable

[4:16:59] of doing.

[4:16:59] I'm probably the one project that did complete on-time on budget and under budget, there you go.

[4:17:06] And I would love to, I feel like I need to see what's going on.

[4:17:10] So I'm a supporter of what you guys have going on here.

[4:17:14] My only concern is I see smaller projects.

[4:17:19] I like the Audubon.

[4:17:21] I would like to see a little bit more of the city of Ochoe.

[4:17:25] I like the children's museum.

[4:17:27] I like these projects.

[4:17:29] I definitely like them.

[4:17:30] I love them.

[4:17:32] But it really excites me to see smaller opportunities

[4:17:36] where these cities and smaller organizations

[4:17:39] can actually benefit from these funds.

[4:17:43] And I really, it's just lingering as most of us were at UCF.

[4:17:48] I really want to see UCF's presentation.

[4:17:50] I want to know how they were just, like, kind of immediately off of the roster, especially

[4:17:56] as knowing how much is happening there to major university.

[4:18:00] They are bringing heads and beds.

[4:18:04] I want to make sure we get that right.

[4:18:07] And while I support, I support the Dr. Phillips Center.

[4:18:11] I don't think that we should max out.

[4:18:13] I mean, when you think about $730 million,

[4:18:16] that's more than our convention center,

[4:18:18] adding the Kia Center, or more than the Kia,

[4:18:22] and that's a lot of money.

[4:18:24] So I do believe that we need,

[4:18:25] let me just get this clear,

[4:18:27] I do want to support them extensively, not just a little,

[4:18:31] extensively, but I don't feel comfortable

[4:18:33] at the tune of $700 million.

[4:18:36] And also, I really do want to pursue

[4:18:39] Some of these smaller projects, and I would really, I'm requesting to see UCF. Yes, oh mayor. Yes, mayor

[4:18:47] I simply want to say commissioner that your comments about visit Orlando were some of the first comments I made

[4:18:55] Why can't they incorporate the small amount of money into their very large budget?

[4:19:01] But that would be up to the board whether you wanted to reopen the entire visit Orlando contract

[4:19:08] And so, again, that is a decision you can make, and in terms of Dr. Phillips, I think they

[4:19:16] are well aware that you might ask that it be phased, that they give you their priorities.

[4:19:26] They expect to come and work through those numbers with you.

[4:19:31] I don't think they're going to be surprised if you say, I don't think we can give you $750

[4:19:37] million dollars this year. So I think you can relax a little bit about it. Okay. Well, it's, you

[4:19:44] know, when we were doing our metrics financially, it was a big line item, you know, and, um, but I,

[4:19:51] I really do, and with me, if I can, and I'm sorry, I'm just going back to Whitney, I, I like the

[4:19:58] on project. I

[4:20:00] I really want to hear the UCF project. I really would love to see the Okoi, but I only want to consider

[4:20:09] them if they're eligible. I think it's just, just in my time here, we've tended to focus only on

[4:20:16] the huge projects, Camping World, Kia Center, Convention Center. I would love to share the love to the

[4:20:29] us as we all grow, everyone's actually benefiting from that.

[4:20:34] But I only want to keep pursuing this if they're actually going to be eligible to receive

[4:20:40] those ones.

[4:20:44] Let me say this.

[4:20:48] Our role today is to either accept the report or not.

[4:20:53] The details of these individual projects still has to be worked out.

[4:21:00] I said when we started that we will have to likely modify.

[4:21:04] In order to meet the controllers,

[4:21:08] recommend a guideline of $300 million.

[4:21:12] I'm going to say floor.

[4:21:16] Means that we're going to have to go back and tweet this.

[4:21:19] We do not have all of those details here today.

[4:21:24] By accepting and report,

[4:21:25] The staff then has to go back, work with our fiscal staff, and make some recommendations

[4:21:35] of what this has, what this looks like.

[4:21:38] But what Commissioner Yerebe has just said is contemplated already in this is having funding

[4:21:46] going to products in the municipalities, funding where we will do eco tourism, we will do cultural

[4:21:55] tourism, we will expand the arc funding. And then those projects go into those existing

[4:22:05] processes. We're not trying to get in front of all of those processes and make those decisions

[4:22:11] now. But based on the recommendations of this task force is citizen-layer task force. They

[4:22:18] have already weighed in on what they think the priorities are for our community. And that's all we're

[4:22:23] to do is a firm that the decisions we're making is consistently what the citizens have recommended

[4:22:30] and then we put it into our processes and we make this happen.

[4:22:35] Well, I have a list of 12 and I don't support our 12 and I don't see you see up here.

[4:22:39] But Commissioning, you won't.

[4:22:42] I don't know.

[4:22:42] This is my time to ask it.

[4:22:44] I understand that.

[4:22:46] I still understand that but we're not trying to go back and re-lit again everything that

[4:22:52] task force has done. I don't believe at this point. You know, when you have these kind

[4:22:59] of one-offs, this is a global conversation that we're having trying to move this agenda

[4:23:05] forward to expand what we are spending money on in terms of capacity, what we are focusing

[4:23:12] on. That's what this conversation is. That's what my question was about UCF and not giving

[4:23:19] What you're trying to do is change what the task force recommended,

[4:23:28] you know, this is if

[4:23:29] if UCF comes back in if we have the opportunity once we look at this from a fiscal perspective and they're additional dollars yes, but this isn't about trying to

[4:23:40] in my humble opinion negotiate one up, one down at this point, because you have a personal

[4:23:47] preference here. This is what the mass force is already done.

[4:23:51] Mayor, I believe it, Mike.

[4:23:53] No, I don't know who you are.

[4:23:55] You're trying to take this in a direction that is not necessary at this time.

[4:24:00] That's all I'm saying.

[4:24:01] This is when I have to discuss it. We don't get a chance to discuss it.

[4:24:05] And to ask, to see something, is what was asked of us?

[4:24:09] But Mayor, and perhaps it was, when it's clear, I know you had indicated that you would anticipate

[4:24:15] a future discussion among this board, which would cover such matters of this as we

[4:24:21] can work the modeling in a way.

[4:24:23] But I guess from our standpoint, we were anticipating that upon action on the task force

[4:24:30] recommendation, there would be a future board.

[4:24:32] Now, only thing I was going to hand out, Sheriff of the Mayor, you probably have to be at a different

[4:24:35] and a regular board meeting because your board meeting is slam.

[4:24:40] But, anyway, me, I just went to that perhaps.

[4:24:43] The commission didn't recognize that you'd indicated that you'd anticipate it.

[4:24:47] Right.

[4:24:47] Don't make this work complicated.

[4:24:49] And it needs to be today, as what I'm saying to you.

[4:24:53] You're complicating this.

[4:24:54] I'm not complicating this.

[4:24:55] Why, I don't know.

[4:24:56] No, I'm not.

[4:24:57] To simply ask a question about.

[4:25:00] You see, if we weren't at the TD, we weren't at the TD, we weren't at the mayor, commissioner. I think something that could be helpful context in this, because it speaks to the process to your specific question about UCF and to what's really before you now. Obviously, for our more perspective, we debated all of these, and UCF made a fantastic presentation to the committee that was celebrated and considered seriously. It was one of those things where as worthy as it was, we contemplated in the light of all these other projects that you've talked about.

[4:25:30] that seemed worthy of having an opportunity.

[4:25:33] And given the fact that last time Dr. Phillips

[4:25:34] of Performing Arts Center did not receive funding

[4:25:36] and UCF did, we thought as we look at this moment in time,

[4:25:40] it is not a judgment of UCF or any one particular project.

[4:25:43] It felt like we could create more opportunities for those smaller projects

[4:25:47] and allow for Dr. Phillips of Performing Arts Center to have their moment

[4:25:51] by asking UCF by not moving forward with UCF.

[4:25:54] So I want to do to have the context, certainly no shutting down

[4:25:59] of the UCF proposal right away on the contrary.

[4:26:02] It really was a decision, as we started choosing projects.

[4:26:05] It felt really worthy.

[4:26:06] The term that kept coming up in the committee was like,

[4:26:09] we're running out of money, even though we didn't know

[4:26:10] how much money we had.

[4:26:11] But the sense that we're shopping beyond what we might be able

[4:26:14] to afford.

[4:26:15] Lastly, I'll just say this.

[4:26:17] I hope it provides a little bit of comfort for you.

[4:26:19] Today, all we're asking you to do is we are presenting a report.

[4:26:23] You're saying we received your support,

[4:26:25] your report, we received the work of the task force.

[4:26:28] All the questions that you have will be absolutely legitimate questions for the process that is still before you.

[4:26:33] Today we just want to like deliver our task.

[4:26:36] The rest of us got to get back to work.

[4:26:38] We want to be sure that we've given you the ball.

[4:26:39] You guys did a great job.

[4:26:41] It's just that when you look at 750 million.

[4:26:44] And then you look at everything else.

[4:26:45] It was significantly smaller.

[4:26:47] You just start saying, yes, we want to give you Dr. Phillips money.

[4:26:51] But if we didn't give you 750 and we actually gave you 350,

[4:26:54] Imagine we could get a COE done and UCF done, and that's where this conversation is going.

[4:27:01] It's not, I don't gain anything from UCF, I don't gain anything from Dr. Phillips or a COE.

[4:27:06] It's just about saying if we don't give you all the 750 million, we could actually get a few more projects that are smaller scope.

[4:27:13] The good news is that the decision wasn't ours, but it will be yours.

[4:27:17] So that'll be part of your agenda.

[4:27:18] But I wanted you to understand what this conversation was just because I think all of the, I mean just I went through all of these and I think they're all really good projects

[4:27:26] And this is where it started with when he was are they eligible if we're gonna ask for it is a co-eeligible is you know

[4:27:34] That's where that conversation was because if it's not then there's no need to have that discussion and that was where this conversation came

[4:27:42] There was no personal gain on anything here just as simple kind of can we negotiate a huge amount of money for some smaller things to get done, but thank you, Whitney, so I appreciate that.

[4:27:54] Commissioner Crab.

[4:28:02] There we go.

[4:28:04] All right, thank you, Mayor.

[4:28:06] First of all, by the same thanks to Eddie and Mayor and all the members for the time I know that was a long time.

[4:28:14] And my non-appointment appointment is very, but thank you so much for your help.

[4:28:22] I want to thank, I just want to be thankful that we're actually able to have this conversation,

[4:28:27] because of our tourism industry.

[4:28:31] So, there are other counties that aren't this lucky.

[4:28:35] So, this future meeting is probably going to get contentious,

[4:28:39] And we'll have lots of debate about whether to spend it, and I wish I could spend it.

[4:28:43] I wish I could fund all the projects, but clearly we can't.

[4:28:47] So I do have a couple of questions, probably Whitney and Rosanne.

[4:28:55] So please don't take my for my task force, folks.

[4:29:00] Please don't take my position as not being thankful for your work.

[4:29:06] But I do not agree with the recommended.

[4:29:09] recommendations. The way to make a question for you is if I vote yesterday, I'm still able to move forward with other recommendations that I want.

[4:29:19] Well, I would clarify that you are one member of the board, so other recommendations would need the whole board to support them.

[4:29:26] If your question is, do some of the folks that aren't on the list of recommendations have an opportunity to come back?

[4:29:33] I think, but would circle back to the conversation that Commissioner Wilson, I had earlier,

[4:29:37] which is if we fund some of these other grant programs, there's nothing stopping anyone from coming

[4:29:42] back and applying to one of those, provided they meet the requirements. Is that what the question was?

[4:29:47] I think the point is they're accepting today, they aren't, they aren't committing themselves to those,

[4:29:54] So the mayor doesn't mean anything about nature. I don't agree with the findings. I want to

[4:30:00] I recommend the different funding, and obviously I need four votes to get that. But by voting yesterday, am I still

[4:30:05] okay? This is a new guy question. So, by voting yesterday, am I still able to make those proposals?

[4:30:12] So, sorry, the peanut gallery is yelling in my ear over here. So, again, I will reiterate Mayor Chapin. You are being asked to accept a report. You are not being asked to make recommendations today.

[4:30:29] Thank you.

[4:30:30] My next question for Rosanne, I have the same concerns that Commissioner Scott has about

[4:30:35] the matrix and the rubric.

[4:30:38] And why that was the reasons those were bailed out and you did explain that that was kind

[4:30:42] of the way that the task force wanted to go.

[4:30:48] My issue with it is, by doing the survey, we now have, we get feelings involved in it.

[4:30:56] So I have feelings about some of these projects also.

[4:30:58] But I don't have the true data or a ranking list based on that matrix that tells me this is why they rank this way.

[4:31:09] And the smaller funding ones that you talked about, they may end up at the bottom of the list, but at least I have a list with data to look at.

[4:31:16] I've only got five projects, and the Edenville projects really, and I have nowhere near the education that you do sir, nowhere close.

[4:31:24] But I'm not sure they should have been combined because I'm not sure they're going to be able to be

[4:31:29] Be done together, so on the eatable project. So I mean, I mean, I'll spot here because I've got three I've got three

[4:31:36] projects in my district

[4:31:39] and all three I like

[4:31:42] Some eaten eatable ones we need to work on, but I just

[4:31:46] Why can't we have that data? Why can't we have them? They had to fill up the matrix to start with so you should have that data

[4:31:54] Why can't we have that?

[4:31:56] Because I've seen no data from the matrix.

[4:31:59] So, Commissioner, this was a citizens advisory task force, and the mayor wanted the citizens

[4:32:04] to just give their thoughts opinions, and that's what they did.

[4:32:09] And as part of this process, they felt like yes, they heard the economics of it, but they

[4:32:15] really wanted to have their opinions heard.

[4:32:19] And, you know, we have some members in the room here, and especially the municipalities,

[4:32:23] They had some thoughts and opinions, and so they felt some thought that confined by trying to assign that to a matrix and that last time around, based on the matrix, you had a lot of the highly capitalized projects, larger ones, rank at the top, and so they said this time, they really just wanted an opportunity to show support.

[4:32:52] support from around the county for a project and leave the economics to the board and say,

[4:33:01] you have the county attorney's office who makes sure it's compliance, they heard some

[4:33:05] ideas.

[4:33:06] They realize that there needs to be further evaluation and they realize the economics really

[4:33:12] requires the board and county staff to go back through and find more information.

[4:33:16] And they, as lay people, and Mr. Duns in the room here too, he's a very smart man, and we leaned on each other for advice, but they really just wanted to show their opinion.

[4:33:28] I understand, and I like the input from the survey, but it's about how people feel about a project, and I would prefer to have the data.

[4:33:39] So did they fill out a matrix? Is that possible for me to get the data from those?

[4:33:42] they did not fill out the matrix they used it as part of the decision-making process.

[4:33:48] But if you think about it, even if you fill out a matrix, right, you're still using your

[4:33:53] own thoughts and perceptions of everything that you have heard to fill out a matrix.

[4:33:59] It's still more data.

[4:34:00] You are.

[4:34:01] And somewhere it's in there, and that's why they just felt comfortable.

[4:34:05] I think utilizing something that was just a little bit more high level that put everybody

[4:34:11] on an equal plane?

[4:34:15] My last question, I have many more, but I'm going to end it, Mayor, but my last question

[4:34:20] is if I agree to fund refund the arc, has there been any review of the current projects

[4:34:29] in there for any data from them to prove that they are doing what they said they were going

[4:34:33] to do?

[4:34:36] So of the projects that were funded in 2023, only one has opened and that was the one

[4:34:42] Park Playhouse, and they just did the river combating in July, and counted an administrative

[4:34:47] Brooks, do you want to address how in the future you're going to be addressing this?

[4:34:51] On the days agenda was the night, so there were 11 projects, today's agenda includes the

[4:34:58] of funding agreements over there.

[4:35:00] Or they are all progressing along and is written described. The funding agreement is pretty detailed and

[4:35:07] involved in terms of the terms as well in that evaluation. But the ECF, when he knows, open the

[4:35:14] others, are nine of them. Eight others have funding agreements in place, and then there too, that I'm

[4:35:21] not sure exactly, with the same question.

[4:35:24] I guess my question is though, do we do any follow-up on the data on the data?

[4:35:31] So the funding agreement does provide for both audits and for the ability for this board

[4:35:36] and the tourist development council to ask those folks to come in and give them reports.

[4:35:40] I'm not sure how long the mayor is going to give me the new guy, excuse, but I'm going to

[4:35:44] use it as long as I can, Mayor.

[4:35:46] So that was, that was it, I just,

[4:35:51] it's important to me that we do look at ROI and we do

[4:35:57] look at heads in beds.

[4:35:59] I do it all the time, Eddie.

[4:36:00] I say it backwards all the time.

[4:36:02] We do look at heads in beds because that's what creates this money that allows us to do

[4:36:07] these things and I, and I like almost all the projects and wish that I could, wish

[4:36:12] that I could fund all of them, but we need to really take a hard look at the data.

[4:36:16] I love the feeling part of it, but we need to take a hard look at the data and we need

[4:36:20] to look at what's going to give us the ROI and give us heads and beds that will give

[4:36:25] us that money back so we can have this conversation again next year because if we don't

[4:36:29] do those things, then this will dwindle away.

[4:36:33] Thank you, Mayor.

[4:36:35] All right.

[4:37:01] Yes.

[4:37:02] Thank you.

[4:37:04] New technology here.

[4:37:06] Thank you.

[4:37:07] Okay.

[4:37:07] So first I want to say thank you so much for all the time that you all took the members of the

[4:37:14] tax force for the survey.

[4:37:16] 60 minutes come on and beside all those meetings so thank you so much for all of that time

[4:37:22] that you invested in the county and in the community and also I have to say thank you to the

[4:37:28] two members that represent district force so thank you thank you and saying that I want to go

[4:37:36] Well, I'm going to say through the line that Commissioner Crap was coming in.

[4:37:41] I wanted to say and ask some questions.

[4:37:45] I know that the ARC application process and so was created in 2017, started in 2028 to

[4:37:54] 2019.

[4:37:55] The was seven projects approved, then in 2024, the was 11 project approved, 18 in total,

[4:38:00] two of the projects that were given $10 million each is gone.

[4:38:07] What happened with the money that was not used?

[4:38:09] For example, one plus, they were given $10 million a fail,

[4:38:15] but they used $6.5 million.

[4:38:17] So there were 3.5 million dollars.

[4:38:19] I don't know whether you're okay.

[4:38:21] And then the Orlando Museum,

[4:38:22] hope and humanity, $10 million not operating.

[4:38:25] What happened with that?

[4:38:27] And that's questions that the community ask.

[4:38:29] So, so commissioner on the first one on Paul's, we did get the property back on that, we did not recruit all of our money on that, we were able to sell that property, I believe it was roughly $3 million,

[4:38:41] is what we sold that property for. So that money went back into the TDT pot, and then I missed the second one that you mentioned.

[4:38:48] Or land the museum? Or land a museum of art? Yes, no, hope and humanity. And humanity, it was, oh, we're working on the Holocaust center now.

[4:38:57] We're working on a funding agreement now, okay. So it's good that the community knows that, you know, the property was from one plus

[4:39:06] Paul's the property was sold under the $3 million. So it's good for the community to know that the money went back, okay.

[4:39:14] So my, my other question is

[4:39:19] I'm going back again with what was said by Michael.

[4:39:22] And we rely on the organisational when they do the application, the projections that they provide

[4:39:33] or the attendance are coming, what are we looking when they apply for that to someone

[4:39:41] who does numbers?

[4:39:42] Any words?

[4:39:44] Thank you.

[4:39:48] So when the applicants provide their estimates,

[4:39:54] I did my best to take those estimates at face value, to give them the benefit of the doubt.

[4:40:00] I did not want to be adjusting based on my judgment. I wanted to see if they were reasonable.

[4:40:06] And so that's where we developed the baseline models to try to compare them. For instance, when we looked at the convention center,

[4:40:12] those estimates seem very similar to our hard data that we have seen in Georgia for our convention center of the similar sides.

[4:40:19] When we looked at other projects, for instance, the Children's Museum, that estimate seemed

[4:40:26] high, again, that also relative to some other estimates, for instance, the Dr. Phillips

[4:40:32] Center, who, I look at their website and was able to see some of their academic impacts

[4:40:38] study that they did from Oxford Economics, that seems reasonable and also, um,

[4:40:43] ordered with other estimates that we had in our baseline model in terms of shares of out

[4:40:48] of region visitors and overnight visitors.

[4:40:51] In terms of, like, for instance, the three history museums, so each application had different

[4:40:56] levels of data, and we felt like that's when we showed relative to the numbers for a specific

[4:41:04] category, right, when we thought that, for instance, the representative Antone's estimate

[4:41:09] for 500,000 new visitors seemed high relative to the share of visitors for museums in the county.

[4:41:18] So we did our best to look at the data and benchmark it to things that we could find,

[4:41:25] you know, either on the website or through other means to verify it.

[4:41:30] So, Dr. Nada, now that you're there and in your presentation, you refer a lot to

[4:41:37] uncompere to the Convention Center and I just wanted to ask you, because I asked you

[4:41:42] before about the Convention Center is not feasible without TDC. What does that look like?

[4:41:49] What are you saying with that?

[4:41:51] So, again, I took that straight off the application and the application asked the question.

[4:41:57] And if you don't receive the requested TDT funds, is your project viable going forward, essentially.

[4:42:04] And the Convention Center, because I believe my understanding, is that they rely solely on

[4:42:09] TDT funds for their capital improvements that they could not, they did not have any other

[4:42:15] sources of funding.

[4:42:16] For instance, other entities had other philanthropic funding or other ways that they were going

[4:42:20] to move their project forward.

[4:42:21] So then what will be the concern of the worry right now because they are not in the list of the, you know, the 12 organizations and so, what, what does that mean then?

[4:42:36] That the advisory committee did not choose them to move forward.

[4:42:43] I'm not an expert on the procedure going forward, but my understanding is, I believe if you

[4:42:49] all is...

[4:42:49] Yes, I'm just thinking, because Orange County Convention Center belongs to Orange County,

[4:42:55] not the rest, but the Convention Center, so that's why you want to know what that looks

[4:43:00] like to Orange County.

[4:43:03] If they don't get the money for the expansion?

[4:43:06] Well, if they don't, if they defend solely on TTT, what does that mean?

[4:43:10] That's what I want to know.

[4:43:11] I hope this is all for to think about it this week, commissioner.

[4:43:14] So the saying that they were not feasible without the TTT funding is simply that if they do not get funded,

[4:43:21] project 5B does not move forward at this time.

[4:43:24] And so that's all that means it's not a judgment or an indictment of the project or that the convention center is somehow disqualified from funding of any other kind.

[4:43:32] So, that was what they decided to put in their application and we get this money.

[4:43:36] We move forward if you don't get it, we'll just have to wait.

[4:43:39] I hope that's helpful.

[4:43:40] Yes, it is.

[4:43:42] That's good.

[4:43:45] So, my other question.

[4:43:46] Oh, that's not for you.

[4:43:48] That would be, again, for the administrative.

[4:43:50] What obligations the Orange County have to track?

[4:43:53] A-R-C funding.

[4:43:55] Constructions progress, dot tourism returns.

[4:43:58] Do we have a monitoring program in place?

[4:44:03] That's what Whitney noted before that in the agreement, the funding agreement.

[4:44:09] We have a ability to audit the monitor, uh, the wiki, I don't want to call it wiki

[4:44:14] out, but uh, we also have the ability to ask those applicants to come back and make presentations

[4:44:20] to the board and the tourist development council in terms of how our funds are being used

[4:44:25] on their project.

[4:44:25] But do we do it, um, Whitney, do we do that monitoring?

[4:44:29] Well, do we monitor, I think we can move on it and so.

[4:44:34] Wouldn't it be a control of one and a dump in there?

[4:44:40] Thank you.

[4:44:42] If I could, and Commissioner to your question, and actually Commissioner Crap to your

[4:44:49] question a little bit earlier about getting some sense of the results from the spending, and

[4:44:59] To, to, to, to, to, to, to.

[4:45:00] The point of finding out what worked really well and what could be improved on, I guess. One thing that I wanted to remind everybody of, and one of the things that came out of our visit or landlord, it was a recommendation that the county hire a full-time,

[4:45:20] First Development Tax Monitor, if you will, someone to oversee all the agreements with all of the applicants who receive funding.

[4:45:32] Number one to make sure they were complying with the agreements and number two to measure economic impact and to get a sense for what was working and how well it was working.

[4:45:44] And the County Administration, Byron and Lisa and team, and really your whole team there,

[4:45:54] you hired someone, I think, two or three months ago, if I'm not mistaken,

[4:46:00] outstanding

[4:46:01] person.

[4:46:02] If I do say so myself, and I say that because she actually worked in the Comptroller's

[4:46:08] office for a number of years, but she has spent her career with

[4:46:14] terrorist development tax, auditing, terrorist

[4:46:16] development tax returns, serving a couple of times as president

[4:46:21] of the Florida terrorist development tax association.

[4:46:27] And so I think that will really go a long way towards providing

[4:46:31] the insights that I think we all would like to see.

[4:46:35] So, thank you, Councillor.

[4:46:36] So, going by that same thing.

[4:46:39] Councillor, do we have, do we know what has been the actual economic

[4:46:43] return on the investment since 2018 from the $131 million first committed to the ARC program.

[4:46:52] Do we know how many visitors, by project, do we have that audit, do we have that report?

[4:46:59] Like, you know, how many jobs created because I, you know, we see that, oh, this creates

[4:47:03] jobs, this isn't, but then we don't know exactly what.

[4:47:06] Well, and I think that's a great question, and I think that's what every taxpayer would

[4:47:10] I'd like to know is what are we getting for our tax dollars?

[4:47:15] Yeah, and I think that's true with all taxes, but TTT taxes, for sure.

[4:47:20] And that's something that we now have the framework to do that.

[4:47:23] We have a staff, we have metrics, our funding agreements, our requiring more information from

[4:47:30] recipients, whether it's general information, or even things like zip codes of visitors

[4:47:37] in gas because we want to see what benefit, what is coming in and what is going to benefit

[4:47:44] the tax collections in the future.

[4:47:47] Hey, Commissioner, what we'll do, I'm some of those like I was thinking of, what a part

[4:47:50] project.

[4:47:52] We can pull what they're reports of being what they provided.

[4:47:55] I used that when it came to mind as one of the projects.

[4:47:59] That is completely, we've got TDT dollars that's complete.

[4:48:01] And as they provide the information, we'll pull that information on their reports.

[4:48:10] Thank you.

[4:48:11] I have several more questions, but I'll email them to you.

[4:48:14] We'll see you on later.

[4:48:14] Thank you so much.

[4:48:16] Give me your.

[4:48:20] All right.

[4:48:20] Commissioner Samara.

[4:48:25] Thank you, Mayor.

[4:48:27] Thank you, co-chairs.

[4:48:28] And thank you.

[4:48:29] There are taskforce members that are here.

[4:48:32] Those that are watching or are back at work.

[4:48:34] Thank you for everything including the staff.

[4:48:37] because I know that you turned a heavy load over and a reduced amount of time and I know

[4:48:42] that the community and the sport and myself are very grateful.

[4:48:46] Thank you.

[4:48:49] So Whitney, I have questions, please.

[4:48:54] So on Wednesday of last week, we had our briefing and I was reviewing the report that was

[4:49:02] published in Legislative Star, you know, as of this morning, when the hearing started and it's different than the 81 page report that we received up here.

[4:49:14] So I haven't had the opportunity to read this one. So I'm going from this one.

[4:49:20] When we had our briefing and in this report, you know, I reviewed the mayor's memo in such of what the charge of the committee was in the charge of this committee was

[4:49:33] to make recommendations, let me read the language, was to make recommendations of future

[4:49:44] TDT dollars that fell within the statutory limits. And so when we had our briefing, one

[4:49:52] of the things that concerned me as that in this report is that I, when I asked you do all

[4:49:57] and you said, well, there's two that are in this list.

[4:50:00] But you didn't have enough information on in order to determine whether or not they met the statutory limits.

[4:50:05] And those two were the, you look, the advanced city of Akhoi Forest Lake golf course and advance the Florida citrus sports parking garage.

[4:50:20] So those are recommendations eight and nine. And I wanted to understand if we had any more information to determine if they do fall within the state statute.

[4:50:30] So, Commissioner, to clarify what I said was I still had questions on some of these, I still had some concerns.

[4:50:36] The ones that I listed in addition to those two were also the Eatonville CRA.

[4:50:43] And, excuse me, you said City of Ocoe in the parking garage, right?

[4:50:45] Yeah.

[4:50:46] Okay.

[4:50:47] The Eatonville CRA was the other one.

[4:50:49] So, based on the information I had at the time that I did my legal review.

[4:50:54] And again, when they submitted additional information, because both OCoE and the CRA submitted additional information,

[4:51:02] there were some portions of those projects that look like they might qualify for TTT, there are some portions that may not.

[4:51:09] So, I don't have any other information at this point other than what I had at that time.

[4:51:13] So, that's why I've said to you all today, I do still have some questions about a couple of these, but right now I don't have any other information than what I had then.

[4:51:22] Okay, and then just in reference to the charge of the committee, additionally, we, in recommendation number four, if I, when we reviewed the requirements of each project, they were supposed to be at the request amount of $20 million.

[4:51:37] And during the TDT task force, there was a discussion on the creative city project, because

[4:51:46] I had requested 2.5 million for 10 years and there was a motion at the committee, and I attended

[4:51:53] every single meeting that I could, and if I couldn't, my team was on site, and then

[4:51:57] I made sure to watch every single meeting, and I stayed up for a late-watching them again,

[4:52:02] including the last one, all seven hours of it.

[4:52:04] So I have done my homework on it, so there was a motion that was made to amend it to

[4:52:11] being five years because the task force was uncomfortable with the ten-year time span.

[4:52:18] And so, but now if we look at that recommendation, now it falls below the $20 million threshold

[4:52:25] that was required, I also watched the TDC Council and I know that the mayor of Eatonville

[4:52:30] was making a request to rectify that.

[4:52:34] It was not rectified in the TDC meeting.

[4:52:37] And now here it is in the final report,

[4:52:39] but it's not meeting the requirement of what

[4:52:42] was set forth at 20 million.

[4:52:45] And so we have, I'm concerned because we have recommendations

[4:52:48] in here that were one, we're not totally sure

[4:52:51] meet the statutory limit and then also one that doesn't

[4:52:55] meet our own internal criteria of 20 million.

[4:53:01] So, what was the question there, Commissioner?

[4:53:05] How did this one end up when it didn't meet our own internal criteria?

[4:53:08] It initially did, by the way.

[4:53:09] So, and I'm not opposed to it, and, you know, I hear that the committee was concerned

[4:53:13] about the 10 years, and I'm okay taking that recommendation and reducing it to five,

[4:53:17] but then we have to consider that we have a recommendation that is not in compliance with internal

[4:53:23] policy that was set forth on this committee.

[4:53:27] So I understand the concern there, and that is something that had come up with some of the other projects as well,

[4:53:32] specifically those that were asked to provide additional information after the initial legal review.

[4:53:37] One of the things that I mentioned was some of those would likely drop below that $20 million threshold,

[4:53:42] and to the extent we didn't know that there were some concerns that perhaps were treating folks differently.

[4:53:47] But ultimately, what happened was those projects did move through for a review by the task force.

[4:53:51] And by the time they got to the point of making their recommendations, what I told them was this is in your hands the mayor has asked you to form this task force and to give your best recommendations to the board

[4:54:01] So there's nothing legally prohibiting them from forwarding something to you that's less than 20 million dollars

[4:54:07] It was simply the threshold to get into the initial review for this project

[4:54:11] So again, this is up to the board to decide what you want to do with these moving forward

[4:54:16] If you want to bump them back up to 22.5 million

[4:54:20] I think is what the request was.

[4:54:21] I'm sure they'd be thrilled with that.

[4:54:23] But ultimately, it's up to you all to decide whether

[4:54:26] or not you want to move forward with these.

[4:54:28] And again, to reiterate today, you're just

[4:54:30] being asked to accept a report, not endorse it.

[4:54:33] Right, but this is my problem on the report

[4:54:36] is making recommendations that we're still not sure about.

[4:54:39] But let me just, I'll table, though, as in, maybe we can fix it.

[4:54:44] But what is concerning is, is that we bring up

[4:54:46] this word of fairness, and it merges me

[4:54:49] to you know like so now we require some to meet 20 million but we've got one that doesn't and

[4:54:54] you know what I I actually support that project I don't want to see that project come out just

[4:54:58] like the committee didn't want to see it.

[4:55:00] And I support the recommendations of the task force too. I think they did the best that they could within the time period allowed with the resources and the data that were provided, the problem is the consistency of that data.

[4:55:13] So if I, you know, I also just want to look at, you know, within the report when we talk about the implant and that we're using Georgia, Savannah as a benchmark for a land of Florida, we're comparing a first tier tourism city to one that is not a first tier city.

[4:55:27] So it's not a comparative analysis and size and scope

[4:55:31] or in terms of the level of the economic engine

[4:55:34] of our tourism industry.

[4:55:38] So with that being said, the economic impact analysis

[4:55:40] that was provided in the report measures economic activity,

[4:55:45] but not whether or not the investment is actually worthwhile.

[4:55:50] And I don't think it's fair to all applicants.

[4:55:52] It's not fair to those that did do it.

[4:55:54] And I don't think it's fair to those that didn't do it

[4:55:56] to be left out of a comparative analysis,

[4:56:00] if it's a different measurement criteria

[4:56:03] for different applicants.

[4:56:07] So because of that, I would really like to see

[4:56:09] some form of a further, and I just discussed this

[4:56:11] with Rosanna, financial analysis on these projects,

[4:56:15] so that we can have apples and oranges to oranges,

[4:56:19] but that financial analysis be within the size

[4:56:22] and the scale of the project request.

[4:56:26] So I want to, I just want to reference that one of the reasons that we have unite here,

[4:56:33] which represents 10,000 of our workers, and we've got 400,000 hospitality workers in Orange County.

[4:56:40] One of the reasons that they're upset pertains to that they worked very hard in this rubric

[4:56:46] to get a category that read economic benefit, jobs, wages, attracting employers and development.

[4:56:53] And if you read how they were scored, if you paid live little wage jobs, you got a higher scoring metric.

[4:57:00] So, you know, I attended, I watched my team attended, they watched.

[4:57:04] I never saw a vote that allowed that made a decision to move away from the rubric that was approved

[4:57:11] and the rubric that was used in 2023, so we requested the minutes.

[4:57:16] But the minutes are not actually available to review to even decide when did that vote happen

[4:57:21] because I didn't see it, so we used a different metric

[4:57:27] that didn't actually assess the job essentially wage quality.

[4:57:34] But when we used the economic impact analysis on implant,

[4:57:37] we took into consideration job creation

[4:57:39] that wasn't necessarily permanent.

[4:57:41] They're temporary because of construction.

[4:57:44] Again, it's an issue of fairness in terms of how we measure

[4:57:49] these projects with regard to the report.

[4:57:57] Also, I wanted to say that within the report,

[4:57:59] you know, and this came out during the TTT Task Force meeting by the Winner Park Representative,

[4:58:05] and was corroborated by the other members, was that the sentiment that was evaluated at the sentiment score,

[4:58:12] or the support for a project is actually not the valid metric or measurement of what Mayor

[4:58:19] dummings charge this task force to do per his memo.

[4:58:24] What should have been asked is the willingness to fund, or the willingness to pay, and that

[4:58:30] was highlighted in the discussion, which is devoid in the report.

[4:58:34] It's not reference because the task force members said, hey, wait a minute, yet you asked

[4:58:39] me if I support it.

[4:58:40] someone support it, but am I willing to fund it? No. And so that creates an issue of validity

[4:58:48] and actually what was measured. And

[4:58:54] if I move on from that,

[4:59:00] when I asked the TDT task force

[4:59:02] members that were representing District 5, if they had approved and reviewed the report,

[4:59:06] they didn't even know that it was completed. Which made me pause and so we went back and we looked

[4:59:12] for TDC Council, you know, and to see what the motion was on the floor and the motion was

[4:59:22] the motion was made to approve the final report.

[4:59:25] However, today we heard from the co-chair that the final report was provided to us on the

[4:59:30] dias right now.

[4:59:31] And when I asked on Wednesday for a report, it wasn't done for me to review.

[4:59:37] So I'm concerned because the TDC did actually, they voted to approve a final report that

[4:59:45] Rosen, this is the report right here. You said this is the final one.

[4:59:48] This isn't what was on the floor at the TDC. This is a different document.

[4:59:53] So,

[4:59:57] the DDT motion curl you have it.

[5:00:00] The TTT motion was to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve the final report.

[5:00:09] It's said I watched last night motion of the TDC recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners to

[5:00:15] accept the OC Tourist Development Tax Citizen Advisory Task Force final report. How could they make a

[5:00:22] recommendation to this board to accept the final report when they themselves had not reviewed the final report?

[5:00:29] We went over in detail all the presentation and they had discussion and the motion passed.

[5:00:43] If I move on,

[5:00:50] in terms of, you know, I just want to talk to the Board of County Commissioners,

[5:00:56] the members here because I support the recommendations of this report.

[5:01:01] I support them.

[5:01:02] I have a sentiment towards them.

[5:01:04] I'm also willing to fund some of them.

[5:01:07] But I'm not willing to accept or prove this final report when we have within here.

[5:01:16] One is that not everybody had an economic analysis, so we don't have apples to apples on that.

[5:01:23] We used Savannah, Georgia as a benchmark to assess economic activity.

[5:01:29] We deviated from the rubric that the 2023 Task Force recommended that we include job and wage quality within it.

[5:01:39] So we didn't follow the 2023 recommendation to use that in the rubric.

[5:01:45] What I support today is advancing the recommendations of the Task Force.

[5:01:50] I do not accept this final report.

[5:01:53] There are issues in terms of one of the recommendations,

[5:01:57] not meeting the 20 million criteria,

[5:02:01] not everybody got an economic analysis,

[5:02:04] not everybody had enough data to evaluate it.

[5:02:07] The statistical assessment did not actually measure willingness

[5:02:11] to pay or willingness to fund.

[5:02:13] It measured support.

[5:02:15] So I support, and I believe that the task force did

[5:02:19] best that could be done with the data and the time that was provided. I know that there are people

[5:02:24] who took time off of work to go to those meetings. I believe we should accept those recommendations.

[5:02:29] I believe we should move it forward. But I in no way shape or form a future meeting. Do I want

[5:02:34] to sit back and refer to a report where not every candidate or applicant was compared comparatively?

[5:02:42] It's not fair in my world. So I also don't want to vote on a report that I received while I was

[5:02:47] on this diet that exceeds what the report that I reviewed until late last night by nearly

[5:02:53] 60 pages.

[5:02:54] I don't know what's in the report and I would love to take somebody's word for it, but when

[5:02:57] I'm making a decision for hundreds of millions of dollars, I want to read that report

[5:03:02] every sentence by myself to evaluate it and to think on the best that I can of the taxpayers

[5:03:08] of Orange County.

[5:03:09] So I would recommend that we move the recommendations forward for consideration.

[5:03:14] I don't think that this report that the TDC did not even view when they voted for the final report.

[5:03:20] They didn't read it. They didn't have it. It wasn't done. I think there's problems in the process, and I think that, you know, we moved forward with the best that we've got, but I don't, I don't accept this final report.

[5:03:33] I think that the task force would be certainly willing, probably even happy, to have you

[5:03:42] advance the recommendations.

[5:03:47] The TDC preferred to simply accept the report without making any judgments.

[5:03:56] They accepted without even seeing it.

[5:03:58] It wasn't done.

[5:03:59] It wasn't available.

[5:04:02] I do object to the fact that the staff, the mayor staff, your staff, Orange County staff did the very best job they could.

[5:04:16] And I cannot accept any criticism based on an implication that they did not.

[5:04:26] They did a fine job, we did the best job we could, given the parameters that we all had

[5:04:36] to deal with.

[5:04:37] I would be very happy to have you advance the recommendations.

[5:04:42] Mayor Chip, and I just want to make sure I don't think that staff did a bad job, and

[5:04:46] I don't think that the TTT Task Force did a bad job.

[5:04:49] I think the process was rushed, and I'm acknowledging that I think you did the absolute

[5:04:55] best with the time-allotted and the data provided.

[5:05:00] Thank you. Thank you. I just wanted to add commissioner if it's helpful at all. The difference between the packets that you were provided to the TDC and what you received, and I get it sitting on a board, getting materials that are extensive and you don't have enough time to review it is not comfortable for anybody. So I completely understand that frustration and the commissioner Scott said the same thing.

[5:05:24] The our understanding of the only variant is that there was a desire for those being presented in the way that they were presented today to have more than just like their name on a slide and what the survey results were and so slides were added to provide visuals so that those could be so that was no one had seen those visuals that way that was a special for this presentation and then you've already heard about Dr. Bluestone's additions and revision to his report and his reasons for that.

[5:05:51] So to this I wanted you to know from our perspective and staff defense as well, like the only

[5:05:57] additions intended and all those were communicated to us in advance, that these changes

[5:06:02] were going to be made.

[5:06:03] They were simply meant to enhance what you received, not to change information, but I understand

[5:06:09] with enough time for you to review it.

[5:06:12] You'd be taking my word for it.

[5:06:14] So I just wanted to acknowledge that.

[5:06:15] Yeah and you know I mean my boss are the people who elected me and the taxpayers of Orange County

[5:06:20] And I'm not there's not any malice behind my intention, but I would have a hard time just

[5:06:26] to find saying I voted for something when I hadn't even read it.

[5:06:30] Yeah.

[5:06:30] I totally understand it.

[5:06:32] That's why the request is simply to accept the work done.

[5:06:35] Thank you.

[5:06:36] Commissioner Scott.

[5:06:36] Did you have a question?

[5:06:38] Mayor, I don't have a question for Commissioner eBay, but just a remark for Rosanne and

[5:06:47] as we figure out what next steps are regardless of the outcome of any acceptance or lack of

[5:06:54] acceptance. And I think chemistry would kind of set the same thing. I would love this

[5:06:59] year of process that has separate from municipalities like this is for municipal organizations only

[5:07:04] because I think that the resources and the effort that they put into a process versus that of

[5:07:08] a non-profit or any other entity is different. And I think it would help kind of keep some of the

[5:07:15] is consistent, compared to what we have found any given on-profit, arts organization or any

[5:07:21] other entity outside of a municipal corporation. So I would love to see the cities completely

[5:07:27] have their own process for anything relative to TTT.

[5:07:33] And then relative to the other presentations

[5:07:37] that were not presented here today. I don't know, let's say we move forward with acceptance.

[5:07:43] And then we select all the ones that were recommended to see their presentations, maybe that's 10 minutes for them.

[5:07:50] And five minutes for those that were recommended, we don't want to see all of the presentations together.

[5:07:56] How that takes shape again, that's up to you and inspiring depending on the outcome of a vote.

[5:08:03] You had a remark, I was just sharing for you to figure out, but you've had a more good.

[5:08:07] So you're requesting presentations by all 20.

[5:08:10] I want to see it all.

[5:08:12] I want to see it all.

[5:08:13] We can be out.

[5:08:16] No, what a, what a, what a, what a commissioner Wilson.

[5:08:19] What I'm saying is this.

[5:08:21] This is change multiple times, right?

[5:08:24] What they, commissioner Wilson.

[5:08:27] Hear me out here.

[5:08:27] I never interrupt you ever.

[5:08:30] What I'm saying is this processes change

[5:08:32] from the time the folks created their presentation

[5:08:35] to the time that they actually got into the presentations.

[5:08:39] What I'm asking for is for them to and they may revise a bit of it them to present in a abbreviated

[5:08:47] Like presentation to us, so I can have context for why I looked at the meetings and I get you know your time

[5:08:54] And again, this is not a yes or no. I'm just sharing my thoughts, right?

[5:08:58] Maybe it happens. Maybe it doesn't. I'm sharing my thoughts for their benefit. What ultimately happens is will be what's that

[5:09:03] So I'm not saying hey, I want to hear it all. I'm just sharing my thoughts like you do

[5:09:07] is that about whether you agree or disagree, but what I'm saying is this, what someone presents

[5:09:11] to a board of appointed volunteers versus what they will present, context and things they

[5:09:17] share with us, I think would be drastically different, right? Also given the changes that have

[5:09:21] occurred, they may add or include, but I'm just saying I want to see the totality of everything

[5:09:26] in comparison to what was recommended versus what was not, so that I can just have a full picture

[5:09:29] in one setting. That's all I'm saying. Commissioner Ribe, we had a sunshine meeting

[5:09:36] And I like your idea about UCF and the city of Akoi, but I want to understand, has your position changed relative to our sense?

[5:09:45] I mean, because you thought that we should hold off until November.

[5:09:49] So you still are the same thought. How do you feel about that?

[5:10:04] Unless there is support for that, no, but I do. I will tell you what's very inviting to me is seeing these municipalities get some money. But it's got to come up context.

[5:10:13] And so that's why I'm, I just, because again, that was, they changed it a couple of times

[5:10:19] like you had the sentiment score, you had the Rubik, it's just, I would just want to have a full clear

[5:10:25] and complete picture presented to the Board of County Commissioners of everything.

[5:10:29] It's like you review the work, yeah, they recommend something, but we can review the things that...

[5:10:33] And that makes it end the intent.

[5:10:35] I think I'm trying to protect what is a, an essential process as a Board of County Commission

[5:10:40] that we in paneled citizen task force and that we have certain procedures that they go

[5:10:49] through that hopefully get us information so that we then take that information and

[5:10:56] either can move it forward analyze it, but you're essentially asking to redo it.

[5:11:02] No, no, no.

[5:11:03] And so to have every single one of those presenters to come back in and go back through the

[5:11:07] process they went through with an in-panel citizen task force that we in-paneled feels like

[5:11:12] a tremendous waste of resources and time and I trusted the conversations, not just the analysis

[5:11:21] for the conversations that they had and we were given yes a plethora of information but

[5:11:25] a lot of it was full dialogue. Like part of that report that they included was full dialogue

[5:11:29] of these members. And so I would ask you to go back and maybe if there was parts of those

[5:11:37] The TDS course that you did not get a chance to review by watching our TV or not being there.

[5:11:44] Please do that before bringing that back as a restart for all of us.

[5:11:49] I just think that that undermines the citizen task force that we have.

[5:11:53] Commissioner, I am not asking for a restart.

[5:11:58] And I want to see if I can present this in a way that maybe I'd agree with, but you can understand.

[5:12:03] I wish I was the youngest.

[5:12:03] I have five brothers and one sister and often times they ask me to go to mom or dad for certain things, right?

[5:12:11] And I may do the work or whatever presented and maybe they get what they want or they don't.

[5:12:16] There have been instances where I've asked my mom or dad for something and they've said no,

[5:12:20] and then my brother and sister have wanted to go back and represent.

[5:12:24] There are people who are not happy with this process.

[5:12:27] You can agree.

[5:12:28] We all can agree that there were certain things that could have,

[5:12:30] I'd like to say better, just done differently, because better is subjective.

[5:12:34] Things could have been done differently.

[5:12:36] Given that things could have been done differently, I'm asking to have a full sense of

[5:12:41] everything given the changes that were made, the comments that were made, and I think

[5:12:45] it's fair to all parties, in particular the parties who weren't advanced forward.

[5:12:50] It doesn't mean that we are disregarding the time that the individuals could end.

[5:12:55] But at the end of the day, we are the decision makers, and so if we are the decision makers,

[5:12:59] I want to make sure that I have a full complete picture, similar to what Commissioner Semorad said,

[5:13:04] of everything before I make a decision because there may be context in a word, a phrase,

[5:13:10] or a presentation that was made by someone who was excluded. There may be context in a presentation

[5:13:15] or a statement that's made somebody who was included. And so for me, it's just a review of the work.

[5:13:20] Ultimately, we are the decision makers. No, in charge. I understand that, but that needs to be

[5:13:24] drilled down. And that's what they've done. So I guess the other parts that I want to make sure

[5:13:27] established on the record, is that by citizen task force and now doing the analysis, it

[5:13:33] depleadizes it to some extent. We understand every single day that you're being hit

[5:13:38] up by so many of interested members of rightfully, right? This is a lot of money and they are

[5:13:45] rightfully doing their jobs and trying to get their projects moved forward. But taking it

[5:13:50] one step away from somebody right now that is in a position of politics in an election

[5:13:56] year allows you the ability to look at it empirically. You can look at your appointees and their

[5:14:02] outcomes and trust that they did it from a deep politicized position. That is for me a value in

[5:14:09] a citizen appointed to task force that I hope that you're not dismissing. No good, you make great

[5:14:15] points. Again, I am not in different to what you're saying, right? But what I am saying is

[5:14:26] There are some things that were missed. I watched all those presentations. There were some things that were missed.

[5:14:31] There were some things that people who were not considered would have done differently had they known certain changes and things.

[5:14:40] You know what I'm saying in the beginning? I'm not asking to redo the work.

[5:14:44] I'm not asking for a long presentation because as I understand the process from Byron, we would choose some or all the people that are recommended it.

[5:14:51] So maybe we get them 10 to 5 minutes, but I just want to have a complete picture.

[5:14:55] First hand, not second hand.

[5:14:58] My appointees did a great job on half the day.

[5:15:02] And if I can't say, you see F-90 million to Dr. Phillips that are 750 million or not, hey, you just got some money, completely different caliber and that's where I want to see that clarification, because I don't, I don't believe that we got enough on that.

[5:15:20] And just my last comment, Mayor Demings, thank you, you've been a saint in your first day back, allowing us the time to have this dialogue.

[5:15:30] I am not for against any project at this time as it stands right now.

[5:15:37] I just want to complete picture of everything that occurred firsthand in front of me.

[5:15:43] I've looked at some of the meetings, not as extensively as Commissioner Semorad, but I have looked back at the meetings.

[5:15:48] And, like I said, I sat here with all these documents, I'm still a little bit confused, and so for me it's making sure I have a clear understanding of everything.

[5:15:57] Right in front of me prior to making a decision, it may be we move forward with the four process recommended and everything stays where it is.

[5:16:04] But I just feel like to have the benefit of all that information. The other piece, and again, forgive me for if I overstep Commissioner Crab, he came in at the end of this process, he's going to make a decision.

[5:16:17] for people who were not appointed. And so if for no other reason, for his benefit, I think

[5:16:21] he deserves the benefit of the doubt to hear these presentations directly.

[5:16:29] So that's all I'm saying, okay, that's all I'm saying. It could be an abbreviated process.

[5:16:34] It doesn't have to be the whole gamut, right? I think there should be weight to the recommendations

[5:16:40] that you made. Again, from a time like maybe we give them 10 minutes and we give the people

[5:16:44] we're denied five. I don't know what that is.

[5:16:46] There should be wait to the recommendations.

[5:16:49] But there also should be an opportunity for the folks

[5:16:52] who were not recommended to give their perspective

[5:16:55] to the full of the board so that we have clear contacts.

[5:16:59] So let's, let's, let's, let's just put can you put

[5:17:03] the recommended action up on the screen and perhaps

[5:17:08] we can expand the recommended action.

[5:17:10] So this is a recommended action.

[5:17:13] To one accept, acceptance of the orange kind of twist

[5:17:16] development tax, citizens of the biode or task force,

[5:17:20] final report.

[5:17:21] It seems like we're not debating whether we want to start

[5:17:26] to report.

[5:17:27] OK,

[5:17:31] but to me, they were wanting the same, but we

[5:17:35] can say twist of development tax, citizens of the biode

[5:17:40] or task force recommendations.

[5:17:42] If you want to say that,

[5:17:43] Okay. Okay. But the pick-up, the, where I hear the, the consternation that remains,

[5:17:52] I will offer something that may be able to be added without thorn the whole

[5:17:59] baby out with the valve water here. And that is to add. So in other words, it would

[5:18:05] read requested action, acceptance of the Orange County Tourist Development Tax,

[5:18:09] citizen device or task force recommendations.

[5:18:13] With the understanding, the staff will work with the

[5:18:17] comproller to adjust timing of funding across fiscal

[5:18:23] years and have recommendations for the specific project

[5:18:29] funding options.

[5:18:30] This would be for those recommended capacity options that we

[5:18:39] have that means that that will come back to the Board of County Commission staff will work with

[5:18:45] these different entities to adjust modify but they will come back with specific funding options

[5:18:56] for the Board of County Commission to consider. At a later date where you don't have to go back

[5:19:02] and redo everything that the task force did, what they heard, what they recommended to you,

[5:19:08] The board then has kind of what a part of what you heard about the capacity, okay?

[5:19:15] And the fact that we would have to make modifications because at some point if we did everything

[5:19:23] that was recommended, we would exceed and some fiscal use the floor that the control has recommended

[5:19:32] of that $300,000 reserve balance. So it gives the staff, it empowers the staff to go do the work,

[5:19:44] bring it to the board, but not undo all the work that the task force is done. Okay. And then it addresses

[5:19:52] the issue that I think you're trying to articulate here today, but staff took-

[5:20:00] Get the Board of County Commission to take action on these projects that have been presented or others. There's a lot of work that has to be done.

[5:20:12] And so that's something that really needs to go forward. There were excellent projects that have been presented.

[5:20:19] We can do some of those projects, many of these applicants who are here, they're excited about the potential for those projects.

[5:20:26] And they really need to move forward.

[5:20:28] Timing is very, very important to, I think, the success of moving advance in some of these projects along, okay?

[5:20:40] There's risk involved in allowing this money to just sit there, okay?

[5:20:46] And perhaps, could be, the law could change.

[5:20:49] It could be diverted in other ways to other projects, et cetera.

[5:20:53] So, I'm saying, expand the language, but empower the staff to go do the work, and come back with recommendations to the board.

[5:21:04] We change that to, I'm suggesting to recommendations, that's, yes, instead of final report.

[5:21:12] Acceptance of the Orange County Tourist Development Tax Citizen Advisory Task for Recommendations

[5:21:20] With the understanding that the staff will work with the controller to adjust timing of funding across fiscal years

[5:21:30] for projects recommended with specific funding options.

[5:21:49] Well, that, again, that's for the board to make that decision, staff will do the research and

[5:21:57] then provide you with funding options for all of them, even the ones that weren't recommended?

[5:22:03] You know,

[5:22:06] if you want to change the recommendation of the task force, the task force is giving you

[5:22:12] accommodations are what the priorities are. Some of these, and so what we're trying to do is stay

[5:22:20] within that particular framework. Now, if you want other projects to come, certainly that's

[5:22:26] within the Board of County Commission's, I think, prove you to change your air projects,

[5:22:32] but staff needs to have done the work to tell you what that looks like. Okay, so then they would

[5:22:37] value with those of a product.

[5:22:39] If you say they reduce the funding, there would be additional capacity for which we can consider.

[5:22:44] I'm trying to figure out what that past has.

[5:22:46] That's correct.

[5:22:47] They will look at the expansiveness of the contract, the projects based upon the dollars available

[5:22:58] and the work that they've done, what does that mean?

[5:23:01] Some of these, just for an argument, say, for example, Dr. Phillips may say,

[5:23:07] that, you know, through the conversations with staff, that the ability for you to receive

[5:23:15] $750,000,000,000,000 is not going to be recommended. It might be $500,000,000,000. What does

[5:23:23] that mean to you? And they will have to adjust what that project looks like. But that is work that

[5:23:31] is being done by at the staff level and then they bring it to the board, where the board

[5:23:41] then has, I think, a better option to make some decisions, as opposed to doing the work

[5:23:48] of the staff.

[5:23:49] So then the staff will evaluate all projects.

[5:23:52] If that's what you all want to direct, but you know, I don't know that they can evaluate

[5:23:57] all projects, but when they sit and they do the fiscal analysis, all of these projects are not going

[5:24:04] to be able to be done. I know they can't be done, but they can evaluate all of the projects

[5:24:09] in the totality. But then that's almost like ignoring the work of the citizen.

[5:24:14] It's not ignoring the work. Like let's say we advance the four projects that are reduced amount,

[5:24:19] then there's additional capacity for us to consider other projects. Okay, we would let the

[5:24:29] Is the board comfortable with the recommendations or the priorities that the task force

[5:24:36] made?

[5:24:37] If the board is not satisfied, you know, Commissioner Crab is brand new.

[5:24:44] He hadn't set through the kind of deliberations that we've had.

[5:24:48] But he's saying he's not comfortable.

[5:24:51] Commissioner Wilson.

[5:24:53] Commissionary Reveille is a note. Commissionary Gomez Cadero is a note.

[5:25:01] Okay, commission. Simra is a yes. I'm a no. I want to, I want to make it all of them. So if

[5:25:15] there's a path, commission, please explain to me, because I think you get where I'm trying to go, so.

[5:25:24] At the very least, gather some consensus over what I believe are critical grant programs that

[5:25:32] were very highly regarded, don't fall into some of the categories of, we still have questions, right?

[5:25:38] Because they are essentially orange county programs that we have as much access to the information and data every day as possible.

[5:25:46] Can we separate those and move ahead with having staff do what needs to be done?

[5:25:53] With the recommendations for the funding for those grant opportunities and so that the project piece of this is a separate analysis

[5:26:02] Yes

[5:26:04] Okay, I'd like to make a motion to advance the recommendations on the other discussion

[5:26:10] Okay

[5:26:11] All right, so is that further modification of the request of action?

[5:26:18] Well, once again the new guy here, but

[5:26:21] So, and I miss part of your, your, your motion mayor, but make sure, I'm not discounting any of the work that those fine folks did.

[5:26:32] I just happen to not agree with their recommendations.

[5:26:35] I'm allowed to do that, and I just want to have further discussion about the other projects.

[5:26:40] So, whatever that motion needs to look like, I just want, I'll accept their report.

[5:26:44] They did hard, great hard work, and I'll gladly accept that report.

[5:26:48] I just need to have the option to talk about other projects that they didn't recommend.

[5:26:52] Does that include the grant program programs that have been part of Orange County's?

[5:26:58] When you say they didn't recommend, you're talking about bringing in all the projects.

[5:27:03] You're talking about who the ones that they would take.

[5:27:07] Only the ones that they should take.

[5:27:09] You're talking about the ones that were only the ones that were presented at their task force

[5:27:13] meetings.

[5:27:15] And I do, Commissioner Wilson, I do have some issues.

[5:27:17] I think the funding length is a little long.

[5:27:20] I'd like to have a discussion about that on the...

[5:27:22] That can come back.

[5:27:23] I want to do that as a separate, because it's really even the analysis that I believe the

[5:27:30] Task Force had about the grant programs versus the projects.

[5:27:34] It was hard.

[5:27:34] Those are not Apple's Apple's things in understanding that we will be able to have Orange County

[5:27:39] staff speak to some of those things almost, it'll be a faster, I think...

[5:27:44] So far in the midst of this, could we do two things.

[5:27:50] One, do a fiscal analysis of what the advisory task force recommended and then one

[5:28:00] will

[5:28:03] perhaps all of the projects that would be more expansive what that looks like.

[5:28:12] Okay, John, listen to the capacity from the capacity of what we actually

[5:28:16] So we did not include those that were not recommended, but just showing one of the slides

[5:28:25] simply took all of the projects that were advanced by the Ivider Committee and it showed

[5:28:32] that we did not have the capacity to fund all of those projects.

[5:28:36] And this was before adding those that did not advance a TDT task force that did not advance.

[5:28:43] Okay, so let me ask this and Commissioner Scott, what project did not advance that you want to consider?

[5:28:56] Mayor, again it truly is not about any specific project.

[5:29:00] I just think and I think there's consensus that the process overall was a little bit confusing, right?

[5:29:07] And again, I don't want to say so you're not advocating to add a project that wasn't recommended.

[5:29:15] No, I'm advocating to hear their, I don't want to hear them. I don't want to add it.

[5:29:20] They may present something and we still move forward with the recommended projects.

[5:29:24] But I feel given the significant changes that occurred to them.

[5:29:28] I know what you are.

[5:29:30] Commissioner the crowd.

[5:29:32] What project?

[5:29:34] I'm in the same boat as Commissioner, Commissioner Scott.

[5:29:36] So I certainly, there's some day you don't agree with that.

[5:29:42] I don't want to cut out the other projects.

[5:29:45] I'm not bringing new projects.

[5:29:46] They've already been presented to the task force.

[5:29:49] I just want to have the opportunity to explore those and make

[5:29:53] my own recommendations.

[5:29:56] Mayor, if I may.

[5:29:58] Let's go.

[5:30:00] That's me. Over here, thankfully, not up there. I just want to clarify one point, and that is, I think, one of the issues with either accepting the final report or the recommendations today is that that puts a period at the end of the task force.

[5:30:17] These folks who have volunteered need to know that their work is done, and that's part of what accepting that recommendation today is doing.

[5:30:25] so to the extent it's helpful to maybe bifurcate that and simply accept the report and then

[5:30:30] this board as always has the ability to hear whatever they want to hear, whether it is the

[5:30:36] 12 projects, whether it's 20 projects, none. You have the ability to do that going forward and

[5:30:43] we could certainly work with Administrator Brooks and staff and the Comptroller's office to do that.

[5:30:48] Thank you.

[5:30:49] Thank you.

[5:30:50] What's he said?

[5:30:51] OK.

[5:30:52] Yes.

[5:30:53] All right.

[5:30:56] So in this case, the recommended action

[5:30:58] would be the acceptance of the orange kind

[5:31:00] of truce development text,

[5:31:01] advisory task force, recommendations.

[5:31:04] It's from Moosecraft.

[5:31:05] Second Wilson.

[5:31:06] All right.

[5:31:07] All in favor, let it be known, I say I oppose no motion

[5:31:12] passes, this is unanimous.

[5:31:14] The second part of it is, I don't know where we are,

[5:31:18] In terms of the direction to staff, what is it you want staff to do?

[5:31:25] I'd want to hear, Whitney, you said the 12 and the 20.

[5:31:30] There are.

[5:31:33] What I'm trying to do is get to the point where we're giving staff some direction.

[5:31:39] I would like to hear going to Rosanne, you're going to say something.

[5:31:42] I want to cut you off, go ahead.

[5:31:43] She's putting up the names of the recommended projects.

[5:31:47] You're going to see the front, so you can see the list of 20.

[5:31:56] I'm trying to get you the list of 20.

[5:32:19] There we go.

[5:32:22] There's the list of 20.

[5:32:28] Okay.

[5:32:29] So this is the applicant summary.

[5:32:36] You know,

[5:32:45] so which for you refer into?

[5:32:50] Okay.

[5:32:52] So,

[5:32:54] down in the, if you can see this down in the pink, at least it looks like on my screen,

[5:32:59] in Florida, in the museum, in the history, Orlando City Baseball Dream is all across

[5:33:04] capital and the Orange County Public Schools.

[5:33:09] Are we talking about excluding them from the list of what we may ask staff to review, because

[5:33:19] they didn't meet, they didn't meet the criteria.

[5:33:27] Well, whatever didn't meet, they really didn't,

[5:33:30] Whitney is sticking to hate it because they don't even

[5:33:33] exit, I mean, they don't have a ball club, they don't,

[5:33:37] I mean, it's a number of things that they're lacking in,

[5:33:41] so they don't really meet it.

[5:33:44] So out of these 20, OK, at least 16,

[5:33:52] I'm asking for,

[5:33:54] I would like to be presented with all of the projects that meet the legal definition based on what needs analysis.

[5:34:02] I would like preference, however that is given to the projects that were recommended by the committee.

[5:34:09] I just want to have a complete understanding because you all, you changed while they were in in panel.

[5:34:15] You changed some of the aspects of of the process and in that change how those folks presented their process.

[5:34:23] Commissioner, you've gone over that. Okay, what is it you want? I want them all. I said it. Okay, the remain in 16. Yes, that's going to have to be scheduled separately anyway, so. Okay.

[5:34:39] Commissioner, you're Commissioner, go ahead.

[5:34:49] Okay.

[5:34:51] Whitney, the eligibility thing, it's still important,

[5:34:55] because if they're not, why are we having them?

[5:34:58] Okay, because I remember here.

[5:35:00] We're going to bring you specifically on Camping World's Parking. And then I do worry about the

[5:35:05] acoing. So if they're not eligible, we don't need to hear them. If they're not eligible for those funds.

[5:35:11] And then the only question I had was citrus votes, sports, and go, they already get funding for

[5:35:18] proposal projects. It's already part of the system. So this is the masking for just more money than for, you know,

[5:35:24] I know that we, all the time, you guys know this on consent, they're going to go request WWE

[5:35:29] and there's 150,000 set aside if we get the contract and if they don't get it, we get the money back.

[5:35:35] But it appeared by what I saw in the presentation.

[5:35:37] They were just wanting more money to go big contracts, but it's already part of what they received.

[5:35:44] So to clarify Commissioner, there is a priority in the tourist development plan for large events, large sporting events.

[5:35:50] That is how they come through this board right now and get funding.

[5:35:53] I think the request there was for a dedicated part of money so that they could act faster

[5:35:58] rather than having to come through the board.

[5:35:59] Couldn't that be an internal system that you all-

[5:36:01] Well, that was more for, well, the Dow, it was also, it's more so for major events because

[5:36:06] the major events and the presentation showed that those dollar amounts were fairly substantial

[5:36:13] and quite frankly, the amount that is budgeted annually for the sports incentive committee

[5:36:19] to not sustain those major events.

[5:36:22] I know, but I know we've seen them do it,

[5:36:24] so it's the maybe, but I mean,

[5:36:26] when you look at actually being able to fund projects,

[5:36:28] I look at other priorities and having more money set aside

[5:36:31] to get, I was just telling you what that request was.

[5:36:34] Because they get that funding all the time.

[5:36:36] So are you, but when they're running out of the,

[5:36:37] you know, what they're running out of the money?

[5:36:40] Yeah.

[5:36:41] I'm good with the legal analysis aspect.

[5:36:44] Yeah.

[5:36:44] That's not the thing.

[5:36:45] Just don't want to present their request.

[5:36:48] So I just wanted to follow up on that quickly and add something to the conversation whether this

[5:36:53] is helpful or not.

[5:36:55] Your first four items are all grant programs to of which already exist.

[5:37:00] If the board is comfortable with those four, that might be an easy place to start because

[5:37:05] some of those other projects in the list below certainly some of those recommendations from

[5:37:10] the task force could be routed through those programs and that would cut down on the number

[5:37:15] that might need to come before you.

[5:37:16] Which ones I

[5:37:20] need I need I need a I need a question is when I have an opportunity there

[5:37:25] Yeah, because they'll try to submit in there. Yeah, Mike is all all right. Thank you sir. I just want to make sure that I

[5:37:34] Mayer you charged a task force of citizens

[5:37:39] When you you expanded that task force also to include more citizens, so thank you for doing that

[5:37:44] What I'm getting concerned about is that we charge citizens to evaluate these projects, I think they did the best that they could and the time that was provided with the data and the resources that they got.

[5:37:54] This is not round two where everybody gets to come up and talk to all of us about our preferences and readjust their presentation and come back up and present alternative presentations that look sound and emphasize different points than what was the point of the task force.

[5:38:14] So I'm uncomfortable, like if we want, if you want to hear all of them, I mean, there are great videos through Orange TV and, you know, that can be watched.

[5:38:26] But if you want to hear from them, then we should be making a request that that presentation coming before this board is identical to what the TTT Task Force was required to evaluate.

[5:38:39] we can't have around two and revitalize, you know, I'm just really concerned because my

[5:38:48] representatives took time off of work. They arranged to have kids picked up from school by

[5:38:53] different, and every task force member has a story like that of the time and the resource

[5:38:57] that they expanded to try to make the best decisions they could. So I'm becoming, now I'm getting

[5:39:02] uncomfortable when I when I start thinking about this as another round when the TDT task force

[5:39:09] was charged with the task, the process was by far not perfect and everybody will acknowledge that.

[5:39:17] But I don't want to leapfrog over what taxpayers evaluating public money dollars for.

[5:39:24] I don't want to diminish that, so.

[5:39:27] All right.

[5:39:29] Well, if you agree, Commissioner Scott, then we'll back this square one.

[5:39:36] This is.

[5:39:38] It's just, it's meaning like that align them to adjust your presentation, but we want to hear it.

[5:39:48] I don't know if you can even do that.

[5:39:49] How do you even do that?

[5:39:50] You can go on review.

[5:39:52] You can sit and review all of those presentations live.

[5:39:57] That's on the way you're going to have it exact.

[5:40:01] You can just, in your tab, you can go look at that. If that's what you want to do, go do that and then come prepare to, to, to, they can't answer my questions when I watch the video.

[5:40:14] Well, but if you can ask questions, you can, you can ask them the questions, but they won't be present because it'll only be the people that were recommended.

[5:40:23] well you can you can contact them you know that's what you want to do with your

[5:40:32] time because you didn't sit through all those meetings you don't want to take what

[5:40:39] these citizens have recommended and I understand you know there's politics involved

[5:40:46] here we have people running for office and because they're running for office they

[5:40:51] behaving in certain ways to be honest with you.

[5:40:55] So, what is it you want to do?

[5:40:58] May I don't agree with that?

[5:40:59] Well, I'm not asking you to agree with it.

[5:41:01] I'm just making a statement.

[5:41:02] You're running for office.

[5:41:03] Yeah.

[5:41:04] That's a fact, right?

[5:41:06] And you're doing a lot of this.

[5:41:08] I mean, I changed you.

[5:41:09] What we're trying to do is depolit...

[5:41:11] The reason we did this was a depolitesty as a process.

[5:41:14] To take politicians out and let the citizens make recommendations.

[5:41:17] the citizens have done that. Now all of a sudden politicians want to say, well, I didn't like it.

[5:41:25] Mayor, I guess what I'm saying is in this process and I think we all agree whether we're on the ballad or not.

[5:41:30] The process was changed in the middle of the process. That's the confusing part, right? That's all.

[5:41:35] It wasn't changed in the middle of the process. These folks fall out that precisely what they were asked to do.

[5:41:43] Nothing was changed there.

[5:41:45] What you're trying to do now is change it after the fact it was not changed while the process was going on.

[5:41:54] Roseanne said that they made adjustments while they were in the process based on feedback in my wrong or something.

[5:42:00] So can I clarify that for their presentations they were asked to touch on the three categories in the matrix,

[5:42:09] which were tourism expansion, project soundness and anticipated return on investment.

[5:42:15] So, yes, they were asked to present on all three of those, and that was covered in their presentations, and they were also provided with the matrix and advance.

[5:42:26] So, we didn't change what we asked them to present.

[5:42:29] They presented around those three topics.

[5:42:32] It was just the task force chose to, when they were giving input to take this and form their decisions.

[5:42:40] But to widen it so that they could when they felt like equalized smaller projects competing against very large ones

[5:42:47] But all projects covered three these three topics and so the sentiment was based on decision of the task force

[5:42:53] Not direction or guidance from the staff. Is that what you're saying? Correct. Staff did not

[5:42:58] Did not tell them how to vote how to score how to do any of that?

[5:43:03] They went through and made up their own opinions

[5:43:05] we just compiled the information, and they're in the lives, the messiness of it is because

[5:43:10] we were trying to take feedback from so many people and make changes on the fly.

[5:43:15] Even at lunch breaks, they wanted to see information a different way.

[5:43:19] That's innovation.

[5:43:20] You know, it's a little bit messy and you're trying to do something in different involve

[5:43:24] the people.

[5:43:25] So that we did the best we could, but they did, the presenters did cover these topics

[5:43:30] in the matrix.

[5:43:31] Okay, Mayor, given that context and the way she presented an answer to the question, I'm good at what it as is.

[5:43:39] Okay.

[5:43:42] Given that that's just the balance of what we're directing staff to do, is to then look at what the committee, what the task force recommended, and

[5:44:00] what I said earlier, bringing back.

[5:44:04] You know, you know, we've been sitting in a long time now. Okay. Yeah. We could bring that for discussions.

[5:44:12] Those scenarios. That's the race. And then the board can have what the task force is

[5:44:17] wrecking over there. Some considerations that they spun with a board. Czos that would affect the model.

[5:44:26] That is the, that's the where the majority of this board is at this point. Okay. And that's the, I miss, I missed it.

[5:44:33] got lost? Can you say it one more time? I'm so sorry, I'm sorry. So this is where the

[5:44:42] bifurcated part comes in, where the board is direct in the staff to work with the control

[5:44:51] to make modifications of justice and timing of funding across fiscal years.

[5:44:59] And bye-bye.

[5:45:00] Recommendations for specific project funding options.

[5:45:06] Okay. Are we getting a financial analysis or fiscal analysis at any time within that scope of what you just described?

[5:45:13] Yes, that's part of what the staff would do.

[5:45:16] And they were bringing that back to the board and you make your decisions.

[5:45:20] But only these projects would be considered.

[5:45:25] Okay. All right.

[5:45:27] If that is understood, I will entertain a motion.

[5:45:32] So moved, Wilson?

[5:45:34] Motion by Commissioner Wilson.

[5:45:36] Second by Commissioner Scott.

[5:45:39] All in favor, let it be known for saying aye.

[5:45:42] Opposed?

[5:45:43] No.

[5:45:43] All right, the motion.

[5:45:44] Mayor, I have just one other question.

[5:45:46] Is there any appetite to move the first four or four word now

[5:45:50] as Commissioner Wilson was referenced thing before without?

[5:45:53] I, let's, let's just speak with the motion.

[5:45:55] We have a motion of the second on the floor.

[5:45:58] On the favor, I heard all eyes, I heard no nose,

[5:46:04] or the motion passes, and it is unanimous.

[5:46:09] Sorry, everybody, we're way behind, but because we really

[5:46:17] haven't had a restroom break, any of that, how much time you

[5:46:25] I'm going to stand there.

[5:46:28] How much time you on me?

[5:46:29] 15 minutes.

[5:46:30] 15 minutes.

[5:46:31] All right.

[5:46:31] 15.

[5:46:32] Okay.

[5:46:34] And, Mayor Tafin, half a birthday, half a birthday,

[5:46:38] half a birthday, mayor Tafin, you got a birthday coming up.

[5:46:44] I owe it dinner.

[5:46:45] 20 minutes.

[5:46:47] Come back.

[5:46:50] Three, ten.

[5:47:34] All right.

[5:47:34] Good afternoon everyone.

[5:47:35] welcome back to the Orange County Board of County Commission meeting of August of 25,

[5:47:40] 2026. We're now in the afternoon portion of our meeting. We do apologize. We start in the afternoon

[5:47:47] session late, but the morning session ran quite long. We did not have breaks, but here we are.

[5:47:57] And so this afternoon we're going to begin with Lake and O'Hara, who is going to come forward

[5:48:03] from a plan and division to present the August 6th, 2026 Board of Zoning Adjustment recommendations

[5:48:11] and with that, Miss O'Hara, you have recognized.

[5:48:13] Yes, get afternoon, Mayor and commissioners on August 6th, 2026. The Board of Zoning Adjustment

[5:48:18] heard nine cases. Five cases were recommended for approval. One case received a split recommendation

[5:48:25] for approval and denial. One case was withdrawn by the applicant at the hearing and two

[5:48:30] cases were continued. The BZA appeal deadline was on Friday, August 21st, 2026, and no appeals were received.

[5:48:37] It is my understanding that Commissioner Gomez Quadero would like to pull case VA 2608072,

[5:48:44] J. Gooding, for a board called hearing, and Commissioner Crab would like to pull case VA 2608065,

[5:48:51] Catherine Contana for a board called hearing. The zoning division will be requesting that these

[5:48:55] is be scheduled for separate public hearings.

[5:48:58] So with the exception of cases VA-2608-072 and VA-2608-065,

[5:49:05] which were pulled, and cases VA-2606051 and CSE-2604-012,

[5:49:12] which were continued, we requested the BCC accepted BCA

[5:49:15] recommended action and findings.

[5:49:20] With that, in a Tane Emotion Commission of Uribe,

[5:49:25] It's making the motion for approval, second by Commissioner Gomez for Dero.

[5:49:29] All in favor, let it be known by saying aye, opposed no motion passes, and it is unanimous.

[5:49:36] Thank you so much.

[5:49:38] We're going to move forward to item A1, a shoreline alteration and dredging fuel this afternoon.

[5:49:44] A1, we're open to public hearing on this item, a system whole environment and programs

[5:49:48] and administrators are going to frame that this item in.

[5:49:51] that and I'm just to hold you recognize.

[5:49:54] Thank you and good afternoon Mayor and commissioners.

[5:49:58] Today at the pleasure to present a short.

[5:50:00] Our line alteration judge in Phil permit request for the St. John's River Water Management District, to authorize hydraulic

[5:50:05] dredging within Lake Apapaca, including near the Newton Park boat ramp and winter garden, and associated restoration activities within the Lake

[5:50:13] Park and North Shore. This permit number is SADF 260030. Here's a location map. The project consists of three parcels, and they are located both in district

[5:50:29] one and in district two, the addresses are south-fineen road and 34, 51, less road.

[5:50:37] Here's a new aerial photo of the subject properties outlined in yellow.

[5:50:42] And here's some photos of the existing conditions.

[5:50:44] The photo on the left is at the Newton Park boat rampant winner garden, along the southern shoreline of the Lake Apapaca.

[5:50:49] And the photo on the right is of the Lake Apapaca North Shore property.

[5:50:54] So just some background for you about Lake Apapa Restoration, since the late 80s, state legislation

[5:50:59] is directed the St. John's River Water Management District to restore Lake Apapa, the

[5:51:04] fishable and swimble water quality. The district acquired former floodplain Muck Farms,

[5:51:09] which is now known as the Lake Apapa North Shore lands area as an early step. Restoration

[5:51:15] actions have included water level management, pesticide remediation, wetland flowy construction,

[5:51:20] and Canal Mouse judging in aquatic vegetation restoration.

[5:51:24] The long-term goals include phosphorus reduction,

[5:51:26] wetland habitat management, flood storage,

[5:51:29] and expanded recreational opportunities.

[5:51:31] There are some key constraints remaining,

[5:51:33] including phosphorus, rich organic soils,

[5:51:36] lake phosphorus, and dissolved in particulate forms,

[5:51:39] soil subsidence, and residual pesticides.

[5:51:42] The current request will build on prior BCC approved

[5:51:44] like a popular restoration activities.

[5:51:49] A little bit more background specific to the request today, and 2019, the District Submitted

[5:51:54] SADF Permanent Application, proposing to dredge approximately 12,825 acres of un-consolidated

[5:52:02] flocculent sediment, or UCF from Lake Apaca.

[5:52:06] That permit requested to pump that judge material onto approximately 9,630 acres of wetlands

[5:52:13] in the lands area on the North Shore, also to plant approximately 600 acres of the

[5:52:19] the Torleson and Lake Apopka with native vegetation, and a 20-year permit time frame that provides

[5:52:25] conceptual approval by the sport for the activities listed above, and a mechanism that allowed

[5:52:31] the environmental protection officer to issue construction permits as the activities were phased over time.

[5:52:36] So, on December 17th of 2019, the Board approved that permit and on January 13th of 2020,

[5:52:44] EPD issued that permit, SADF-1900 to, with an expiration date of January 13th, 2040.

[5:52:53] The current request, March 11th of this year, EPD received an application for an SADF for a similar project as approved under the conceptual.

[5:53:03] The current request includes judging 58.2 acres of the lake adjacent to Newton Park and

[5:53:08] Winter Garden.

[5:53:10] 58 acres of that was already approved in the conceptual, but the reason this is back

[5:53:14] before you today is because 8.2 additional acres of proposed judging is intended to maximize

[5:53:20] removal of the nutrient rich sediments and improve navigability to the Newton Park boat ramp.

[5:53:26] The applicant proposes the pump, the judge material, to that placement area along the

[5:53:32] North Shore, in the lands that judge material would be distributed to provide cover

[5:53:37] of historic pesticide-contaminated areas on the North Shore and to replace material

[5:53:42] that was previously lost due to oxidation and soil subsidence.

[5:53:47] The proposed sediment placement, however, will not increase elevations to the extent to

[5:53:52] any wetlands into up-and-up ecosystems. So in red there is a pipeline that will

[5:53:58] transfer the judgment to the North Shore. The design of the proposed

[5:54:05] judging area was a line to reduce impacts to submerged aquatic vegetation to the

[5:54:09] greatest extent practicable, but it is estimated that an impact of 15.6 acres of

[5:54:15] submerged vegetation will occur as a result of the judging.

[5:54:20] To mitigate the loss of

[5:54:21] the applicant is proposing to replant 16 acres of Lake Opapka with some merged aquatic vegetation

[5:54:27] adjacent to the judging areas. So the judging area is shown in the green outline on the

[5:54:34] left and the red outline on the right and the proposed planting area is that cross hatch rectangle

[5:54:40] in the graphic on the right.

[5:54:43] So here's the review criteria. They're found in chapter 15 article six

[5:54:48] section 15 to 18E and the applicant has provided responses to each of these items.

[5:54:55] I won't go into all of them here.

[5:54:57] These are the same criteria that are...

[5:55:00] Use for every SADF. Most commonly, you're reviewing these for our C-wall approvals. This is also apply. So eight total criteria.

[5:55:12] Considerations, the project goes reviewed in accordance with chapter 15, Article 6, and the review criteria and conditions of issue is there.

[5:55:19] Notification of the public hearing was sent to property owners within 500 feet of the project site, and we received no objections.

[5:55:26] Do the scope of this project staff is recommending a condition that allows the work to be done within five years from the date of instruments, instead of a typical one year that code provides.

[5:55:37] Our finding is EPD is evaluated the proposed SAD of permit application and required documents as made a finding that the request is consistent with orange County code, chapter 15 article six.

[5:55:49] And our action requested is acceptance of the findings and recommendation of the EPD staff and approval of Shoreline Alteration Judgent Phil permit,

[5:55:57] SADF 260300, but the St. John's River Water Management District, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report.

[5:56:06] This is in District 1 and 2, and that concludes my presentation. Thank you.

[5:56:10] All right, thanks, sir. Is the applicant on this item, so would you like to come forward and make any comments?

[5:56:19] We invite you to the mic.

[5:56:27] Joe Dunn, 525 Lake Co. Point Circle, Winter Garden.

[5:56:32] Friends of Lake Apopka was founded in 1991 by local biologist Jim Thomas to advocate for the continued

[5:56:39] restoration of Florida's fourth largest lake.

[5:56:42] We wholeheartedly support the district's effort to dredge the area on the shoreline of Newton Park,

[5:56:52] because it will reduce turbidity and increase ecotourism.

[5:56:58] And for the record, no work will be done on the boat ramp.

[5:57:03] During the dredging, that will be done subsequent to the project using FWC money.

[5:57:08] Thank you so much.

[5:57:10] All right, thank you, Mr. Dhan.

[5:57:12] I don't know if I've ever seen you and you didn't have all my shirt,

[5:57:15] and it looks like that.

[5:57:17] So you've got to close it, full of them.

[5:57:19] All right, do we have any members of the public president who should be heard on this item?

[5:57:33] We have no speakers for this item, Mayor.

[5:57:34] All right, with that, then we'll close the public hearing portion.

[5:57:39] This area sits in both kind of commission districts in one and two,

[5:57:43] so I entertain a motion from Commission of Crayon.

[5:57:50] I'll approve it as well, so I so moved Mr. Mayor.

[5:57:54] All right, we have a motion and a second all in favor of letting me know I'm saying I oppose no motion passes, and it is unanimous.

[5:58:04] We're then now we'll move to the next item.

[5:58:07] We'll open public hearings B2 and C3 together.

[5:58:11] They will require two separate motions, however,

[5:58:15] and with that we'll open B2 public

[5:58:23] hearing.

[5:58:25] This next one is public hearing for a similar private boat ramp application and the companion conservation area impact permit numbers BR 2312001 and CAI 2406042 and the applicant is the homeowner's association of Avalon Cove Incorporated and they desire to construct a boat ramp for the subdivision on

[5:58:53] Lake Hickry Nut Lake, excuse me.

[5:58:57] Here's a location map of the proposed boat ramp

[5:59:01] shown in red on the map there.

[5:59:03] The dress is 1964 Morgana Court in Wintergarten, Florida,

[5:59:08] and that tracked his own by the H away.

[5:59:11] And here's an aerial photo of the property, which

[5:59:14] is outlined in blue for you.

[5:59:16] The boat ramp is proposed at that location where

[5:59:19] the yellow star is on the southern shoreline

[5:59:23] of that peninsula that sticks out into the lake.

[5:59:28] And then here's an aerial map of the entirety of Hickory

[5:59:32] Nut Lake showing the location of the Avalon Cove

[5:59:35] subdivision in the boat ramp is the Yellow Star

[5:59:38] and the bottom right portion of the map.

[5:59:42] They're also shown here to existing boat ramps on the lake.

[5:59:46] The only other two existing, they're the blue dots

[5:59:49] in the upper left corner, and they are both private boat ramps.

[5:59:53] And then lastly, you can see the other subdivisions involved on the lake waterly takes the majority of it.

[6:00:00] The rest of the real estate along the lake and then Hickory Lake estates up in the northwest corner is also on the lake.

[6:00:08] Here's some photos of the proposed boat ramp site. The photo on the left is looking approximately southwest out of the lake.

[6:00:16] And the photo on the right is looking west towards the approximate location where the boat ramp will begin, and there's a small recreational lot there.

[6:00:26] Some background on this one, October 4, 2016, the land use plan, number LUP-1507193 was approved.

[6:00:36] The plan notes indicated there would be a community boat ramp, December 13, 2016, the PSP,

[6:00:43] number PSP-1507194 was approved, it depicted a boat ramp, although it was on the northern

[6:00:49] side of the tracks, and then in 2017 the South Florida Water Management District and the U.S. Army

[6:00:56] of Corps of Engineers both issued permits authorizing a boat ramp. Both of those permits

[6:01:01] did expire however in 2022 prior to any construction being done. October 11, 2019 the subject

[6:01:08] parcel was recorded on the platform as track C and it was recorded as an open space park and boat

[6:01:16] and all of these things are requirements in the boat ramp code to be completed.

[6:01:22] June 24, 2020, the development plan, DP-1806207 was updated by a CDR,

[6:01:30] number CDR 203094 to add the semi-private boat ramp to the existing track C and a similar location

[6:01:36] and configuration to the current proposed ramp.

[6:01:39] And then June 24 at same day, the CDR 2005144 was approved to update the PSP to show the same boat ramp location and configuration as in CDR 200094.

[6:01:55] There was a previous boat ramp permit application, BR-18003, and an associated conservation area.

[6:02:02] from an application, those are both reviewed by EPD on the subject property, but both those

[6:02:08] applications were subsequently withdrawn on September 16th of 2020.

[6:02:14] So moving into the current request, the proposed semi-private boat ramp would be 12 feet

[6:02:18] wide and 80 feet long, it will also have a four foot wide by 80 foot long companion dock,

[6:02:24] which is a requirement in the boat ramp code.

[6:02:27] Here is the site plan and a profile plan of the ramp.

[6:02:32] The ramp in the graphic on the left is shown in blue.

[6:02:37] And immediately adjacent to that is a green line.

[6:02:40] And that will be the companion boat dock.

[6:02:45] They are also asking for a variance.

[6:02:48] So it's a side set back issue.

[6:02:50] The code says no portion of any boat ramp or any type of boat ramp.

[6:02:53] Facility should be closer than 25 feet from the projected property lines.

[6:02:57] of a button shoreline owners, the applicant is requesting a variance to build the ramp with a 20.23

[6:03:04] foot set back from the Southern projected property line. The applicant is provided a sign letter

[6:03:09] support for the requested variance from the affected adjacent property owner indicating they

[6:03:15] have no objections to the request. Here are a list of the review criteria. It's letters A

[6:03:22] through O on these next few slides, and I won't read all these for you, but these are

[6:03:29] the criteria by which the boat ramp is considered and it covers various topics like

[6:03:34] the number of existing ramps on the lake, the number of additional users to the lake,

[6:03:40] any noise impacts, any impacts to fish wildlife, all those kinds of things that you would

[6:03:47] aspects, an environmental review to include.

[6:03:51] And moving into the conservation area impact permit, they're proposing 0.163 acre of direct

[6:03:58] impacts, and 0.145 acre of secondary impacts to the lake itself in order to construct

[6:04:03] the semi-private boat ramp, and that would include the concrete for the ramp itself in any

[6:04:09] judging and filling that they need to do to get the bottom contours right.

[6:04:13] And then they're also proposing 0.0042 acre of direct impacts to the shoreline wetland.

[6:04:21] So just above the normal high, there's a very narrow strip of wetland, and they're needing to impact that as well.

[6:04:28] The direct impacts include permanent alteration to the surface water, including the dredging and filling.

[6:04:33] As mitigation, the applicant has reserved and will purchase 0.15 freshwater herbaceous

[6:04:41] uniform mitigation assessment method credit from the Lakex mitigation bank in Asiola County.

[6:04:49] And here is the Conservation Area Impact Permit exhibit.

[6:04:56] And again, the ramp is shown in blue and the dock is shining.

[6:05:00] The direct impacts are kind of a light gray shading and then the secondary impacts are shown in that orange color.

[6:05:10] The review criteria for the wetland code. This project came in before the new code went into effect.

[6:05:19] And so it's being reviewed under the old wetland code that was adopted in 1987.

[6:05:23] And so the applicable criteria, the first one in Section 153625,

[6:05:31] where wetland service, significant and productive environmental function,

[6:05:35] the public health safety and welfare require that any alteration or development

[6:05:39] affecting such lands should be so designed and regulated,

[6:05:43] so as to minimize or eliminate any impact upon the beneficial environmental

[6:05:46] productivity of such lands consistent with development.

[6:05:49] right, so this is our avoidance immunization criterion. And then the next one in 153963A,

[6:05:57] it says the removal alteration or encroachment within a class 1 conservation area,

[6:06:02] shall only be allowed in cases where no other feasible or practical alternatives exist

[6:06:07] that will permit a reasonable use of the land or where there is an overriding public benefit.

[6:06:15] And so staff has determined that the applicant has demonstrated the proposed site plan

[6:06:19] allows for reasonable use of the land, and that there are no other feasible or practical

[6:06:24] alternatives available to further minimize or eliminate impacts to class 1 wetlands.

[6:06:30] Staff's determined that the mitigation is appropriate and sufficient to offset the adverse impacts

[6:06:34] that will occur as a result of the project, and so staff is determined the request meets the

[6:06:39] criteria for approval.

[6:06:43] Moving on to stakeholder engagements in March 12th of this year,

[6:06:48] the applicant held a community meeting for the proposed ramp.

[6:06:51] It was well-attended, some topics that were brought up by the community were concerns about

[6:06:58] access to the ramp and security people from the public that weren't supposed to be there

[6:07:03] coming in and using the ramp.

[6:07:05] Environmental concerns, including nuisance exotic vegetation, erosion, and water quality,

[6:07:12] number of additional voters, a precedent for other developments to obtain approval for

[6:07:18] community ramp, so those are kind of all of the objection ideas, and then these last ones

[6:07:24] are the supporters, the Avalon Cove Resonance Expectations to have access to a boat ramp.

[6:07:31] The residents' property value and perceived increase if there were a ramp, and then the

[6:07:36] residents' desire to be able to remove their boats from the lake from maintenance or during

[6:07:41] hurricanes and other major storms.

[6:07:44] EPD is received, I think we're up to 100 and five responses as of just before this hearing.

[6:07:54] And this is a map showing those in favor are in green.

[6:07:59] And it's mostly confined to the avalanche of subdivision itself.

[6:08:05] And then those that are opposed are shown in red.

[6:08:08] And those numbers are 30 in favor and 75 opposed, like I said, I think there's a couple that have just come in.

[6:08:17] Some considerations for you, pursuant to county coach under 15 articles, 10 and 15 staff is evaluated.

[6:08:24] The permit applications and required documentation therein.

[6:08:27] The public was notified everyone on the lake was noticed.

[6:08:31] and some in the interior of Avalon Cove as well, in accordance with Article 15, Section 15, 605, D2,

[6:08:41] as mitigation for the impacts the applicants proposed to purchase .15 UMam mitigation credit from Lake Ex mitigation Bank.

[6:08:48] And the applicant is proposing a water quality monitoring plan to ensure construction does not negatively affect Hickory Nut Lake.

[6:08:56] And so our findings are pursuant to county code,

[6:08:59] chapter 15, article 10, EPD is evaluated,

[6:09:02] the proposed CAI permit application and required

[6:09:05] documents and is made of finding that the request

[6:09:07] is consistent with article 10.

[6:09:09] And pursuant to county code, chapter 15, article 15,

[6:09:13] EPD is evaluated, proposed in my private boat

[6:09:15] ramp facility permit application and required

[6:09:18] documents and is made of finding that the request

[6:09:20] is consistent with article 15.

[6:09:22] And so are two actions requested for you the C.A.I. is first,

[6:09:27] acceptance of the findings and recommendation of approval by the EPD staff and approval of the

[6:09:31] Avalon Cove Conservation Area Impact Permit.

[6:09:34] C.A.I. 2406042 for the Homeowners Association of Avalon Cove Inc.

[6:09:40] Subject to the conditions listed in the staff report.

[6:09:43] And acceptance of the findings and recommendation of approval by the EPD staff and approval of the Avalon Cove

[6:09:49] in my private boat ramp permit.

[6:09:51] BR-2320-01 for the Homer's Association of AvalanCoving

[6:09:56] subject to the conditions listed in the staff report.

[6:09:59] This is in district.

[6:10:00] One, and that concludes my presentation. Thank you.

[6:10:07] All right.

[6:10:08] With that, is the applicant on this item present?

[6:10:10] So, would you like to come forward and make any comments?

[6:10:13] May I light you to the microphone?

[6:10:16] Mayor,

[6:10:20] procedural clarification.

[6:10:21] Who that sounds weird?

[6:10:23] There's about seven or eight people who have identified themselves as the applicant on this application.

[6:10:29] And so, consistent with your board rules, anyone who is the applicant should be in that 15 minutes.

[6:10:34] So I don't know if people may be erroneously identified themselves as the applicant or maybe the applicant himself can clarify

[6:10:40] But in order for Nick to keep the time appropriately we would need every everyone who is a member of the applicant

[6:10:48] To appear in the 15 minutes. I don't I don't know who it may be just when we scanned in this morning here

[6:10:54] I scanned in excited enough. I had to and

[6:10:56] I'll be just our engineer and that did the work on it and our environmental consultant.

[6:11:02] Did you tell us their names?

[6:11:03] Sure, it's a shot.

[6:11:06] Let me stand up and then build Griffin.

[6:11:09] Okay.

[6:11:10] You all are part of the applicant team.

[6:11:14] I'm the engineer of record.

[6:11:16] Yes, sir.

[6:11:18] So we're going to say you're the applicant.

[6:11:21] You're going to have a total of 15 minutes.

[6:11:26] I'm the H.O.A. President.

[6:11:28] I'm the H.O.A. President.

[6:11:29] I'd say I'd probably applicant.

[6:11:33] So I won't take that much of any time anyway.

[6:11:35] Okay.

[6:11:37] Is that okay?

[6:11:38] Yes.

[6:11:38] Okay.

[6:11:39] All right.

[6:11:39] Good afternoon, Mayor.

[6:11:40] Commissioners.

[6:11:41] My name's Brian Chussis.

[6:11:43] On the President of the Homeowner Association of Avalon Cove.

[6:11:46] Thank you for giving me a few minutes to speak on R.B.F.

[6:11:49] Also, I wanted to thank the Orange County E.P.D.

[6:11:52] that's there for the time, they've spent reviewing this application and working through all

[6:11:56] the questions and concerns that have been raised.

[6:11:59] Before discussing ramp itself, I think it's important to explain who Abelon Cova is and how

[6:12:05] we got here.

[6:12:07] Abelon Cova is a small community, just 49 homes located directly on Hickory Nut Lake.

[6:12:12] 26 of the 49 homes are lakefront homes, and the other 23 are, or you can sit in interior.

[6:12:18] So, we're not an outside community seeking access to a lake with which we have no connection.

[6:12:26] More than half of our community or lives directly on the lake.

[6:12:29] We swim in it, we boat on it, we look at it from our houses every day, and we care deeply about itself in its future.

[6:12:37] It also important to understand that the boat ramp was not an idea recently created by our HOA board.

[6:12:43] A community boat ramp was contemplated as part of the original development of Avalon Cove.

[6:12:49] The developer moved that project forward, spent money on engineering and permitting, it took substantial steps towards constructing it.

[6:12:57] The prior permit application was ultimately withdrawn before the ramp was constructed.

[6:13:03] From the residents perspective, we purchased homes in the community where the humanity had been planned and actively pursued.

[6:13:09] The development sold quickly, the developer finished building the homes, and then left the community.

[6:13:15] And the residents were ultimately left within unfinished project.

[6:13:19] The developer left, we didn't.

[6:13:21] We live here, and today the homeowners are willing to complete the process properly.

[6:13:26] Pay the engineering and construction for ourselves, pay it for, you know, by ourselves,

[6:13:31] comply with the county's permitting and environmental requirements.

[6:13:35] maintain the facility and short of the facility and force the tools and live with the consequences of how it's operated.

[6:13:42] In fact, when our community was asked to approve a special assessment to fund the engineering and permitting necessary

[6:13:47] to pursue the project more than 80% of our community's support in moving forward.

[6:13:53] I want to put the issue of voting at the perspective we are not asking our county to introduce voting to Hickory, not Lake.

[6:13:59] voting already exists here and as for many years there are numerous docks and boat lifts around the lake many of which have gone through orange counties permitting process

[6:14:08] Even the opposition submitted to the county acknowledges substantial number of existing docks boats

[6:14:15] and personal watercraf already on-hickering nut lake

[6:14:18] So the question before you isn't whether boats are going to exist on hickering nut lake they already do

[6:14:23] The question is whether a small established lake community that owns property directly on the lake can construct one

[6:14:29] controlled, semi-private means of safely putting watercraft into and removing watercraft from the lake.

[6:14:37] And that access has practical purposes beyond simple recreational voting.

[6:14:42] Boats need to be removed for maintenance and repairs.

[6:14:44] They may need to be removed for preparation of hurricanes and severe weather.

[6:14:48] Water access can be necessary for dock construction or maintenance.

[6:14:52] The ramp would also provide an additional controlled access point for emergency services to reach hickering nut lake.

[6:14:58] If access to...

[6:15:01] We've heard concerns raised by our neighbours around the lake. We take them seriously. One concern raised repeatedly and written comments is that

[6:15:10] avalanco homeowners would each receive a key. Those keys would be duplicated and eventually people outside the community could gain access. That is not how the rampal operate.

[6:15:21] We intend to adopt separate, addendum to our HOE rules, and regulations specifically governing

[6:15:27] the boat ramp.

[6:15:29] The gate will remain locked, residents will not be issued keys.

[6:15:32] Only designated HOA board members will control access to the gate.

[6:15:37] A resident who needs to use a ramp will have to coordinate access through the board member.

[6:15:41] And importantly, guests will not be permitted to launch votes from this ramp.

[6:15:45] So, this is not a public boat ramp, it is not a ramp for friends, relatives or people coming from outside the community.

[6:15:52] It is a controlled HOA facility for Avalanco residents.

[6:15:57] We are equally serious about the environmental protection.

[6:16:00] We understand the concern of introducing nuisance and exotic vegetation.

[6:16:05] From the bodies of water, the project will include the required washout measures and our HOA rules can reinforce requirements

[6:16:11] that watercraft be properly cleaned before entering hickory nut.

[6:16:18] There is also a practical limitation on the amount and type of additional watercraft that can come from our 23 interior homes.

[6:16:25] A long-coves existing HOA restrictions do not allow boats or boat trailers to be simply stored on dryways or anywhere else around the community.

[6:16:34] In addition, there is no parking spaces within the gated boat ramp area for storing or leaving boat trailers.

[6:16:40] and trailers are not permitted to be stored within our community as our violas.

[6:16:46] And when our interior residents have discussed using a lake,

[6:16:49] it's simply kayaks, canoes, and other non-motorized watercraft,

[6:16:52] not always just large boats.

[6:16:55] We cannot predict which homeowners will own,

[6:16:57] what type of watercraft 510 or 20 years from now is home's change ownership.

[6:17:01] But the 23 entry homes represent a maximum number of potential eligible households,

[6:17:06] not 23 boats.

[6:17:08] Finally, I understand why our neighbors are protective of Hickory Not, Lake.

[6:17:11] We are protective of it too.

[6:17:13] 26 Avalon co-family live directly on the lake.

[6:17:16] Whatever happens to the quality of the slake happens in our own backyards.

[6:17:21] We have every incentive to protect it.

[6:17:24] Our neighbors in Avalon co-v made disagree about this particular boat ramp, but I don't

[6:17:28] believe we disagree about the lake.

[6:17:30] We all want Hickory Not Lake through main clean safe and beautiful.

[6:17:33] The question before you is not whether the leak deserves protection, we absolutely agree

[6:17:37] it does.

[6:17:39] The question is whether Abelon Code can provide reasonable, controlled access to a small community

[6:17:44] while continuing to protect the lake.

[6:17:46] So we believe the safeguards we are proposing demonstrate that we can.

[6:17:50] Thank you.

[6:17:53] All right, Mr. President,

[6:17:58] you said, how long have you lived in it?

[6:18:01] I've been there four years four years

[6:18:04] The community is only probably five years. So did you sign women in the league?

[6:18:08] Yeah, yes, so I'm not got it. It's on the jet skis and I'm just curious

[6:18:13] What's that other alligator's in the list is alligator's in there? I won't go on a shit girl in it

[6:18:20] Okay, all right, thank you. I had thanks

[6:18:24] All right, do we have

[6:18:25] Members of the public president who wish to be heard on this item again. We're on on B2 and seek the

[6:18:35] We do, Mayor. We have a handful of folks who have signed up for this. As previous

[6:18:41] mentioned, some of them identified themselves as members of the applicant team. So I will

[6:18:46] not call them however if there wasn't error we can work that out as we go.

[6:18:52] And folks, in the call of your names, in batches, want to do, please line up along the back

[6:18:55] wall, approach the podium in the order called when you do, please begin with your name

[6:18:59] address for the record. First speaker is going to be Linda Temple,

[6:19:07] followed by Dalton Rodriguez,

[6:19:12] Ellie Nevis, Horst Ull, Sherry High,

[6:19:22] Stephanie Esposito,

[6:19:34] who's Temple York.

[6:19:38] My name is Linda Temple.

[6:19:40] I live in 1917, like Kick Green at Dry and Winner Garden, and I want to thank you for letting

[6:19:47] me speak my mind.

[6:19:50] Okay.

[6:19:51] I'd like to address some of the concerns we have about the building of the boat ramp.

[6:19:56] As a resonant since Everlake Hickory nights.

[6:20:00] Since 1981, we are deeply concerned about any environmental issues with the building of the ramp.

[6:20:07] We have been sampling Lake Hickory not with Florida Lake Watch since 1989.

[6:20:13] And our lake has maintained a clear depth reading of anywhere from 10 foot to 20 foot clarity.

[6:20:20] It concerns us about the storm would run off into the lake as the entrance to the ramp is significantly significantly higher than the 11.5 at lake level.

[6:20:37] The ramp will run through a dry retention pond to get to the lake access.

[6:20:42] The dry retention pond is there for a reason to collect any run off before it gets to the lake.

[6:20:48] What happens to the retention area, if they build the boat ramp, you know, the access through it?

[6:20:55] How will the concrete ramp affect what runoff comes into the lake?

[6:21:00] I think any and all environmental impacts,

[6:21:05] an example, water quality, shoreline erosion, effects to wildlife and habitat,

[6:21:11] need to be studied further to make sure any and all concerns are met.

[6:21:15] We request that these studies be done before any approval of the ramp is considered.

[6:21:22] Please deny or defer voting before these studies are completed.

[6:21:26] Thank you for your time and consideration in these matters.

[6:21:30] Thank you, Mr. Temple. We'll move to the next speaker.

[6:21:37] Dalton?

[6:21:39] I'm Ellie Nielas, but I don't see who was the second speaker.

[6:21:42] Okay, so I'm happy to go.

[6:21:45] Dalton and Rodriguez are something like that.

[6:21:56] I have just one consideration.

[6:21:59] I have a boat, a jet ski, on the lake.

[6:22:04] And how can I remove my boat to fix it?

[6:22:08] Just in case if broke, you don't have access to the lake.

[6:22:15] You need the boat rep.

[6:22:17] Is this it?

[6:22:19] All right. Thank you.

[6:22:22] That's 100.

[6:22:24] 9.080 Morgana Court.

[6:22:28] Thank you.

[6:22:30] All right.

[6:22:31] Now, the next speaker.

[6:22:35] Elineata's 9116 Morgana Court's in Avalon Cove.

[6:22:38] Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor, permission.

[6:22:41] My name is Elineata.

[6:22:42] My husband and I are home owners in Avalon Cove.

[6:22:46] And we're here to respectfully request that you approve our communities proposed boat ramp.

[6:22:50] Avalon Colb was originally designed to include a boat ramp.

[6:22:54] Many of our homes were approved with docs and boat lives, creating a reasonable expectation

[6:23:00] that residents would have a safe and practical way to launch boats onto HickoryNet

[6:23:04] Lake.

[6:23:05] Today we don't.

[6:23:07] We are a lakefront community without community access to the lake.

[6:23:12] That affects the use and enjoyment of our homes and has implications for our property values

[6:23:17] and resale.

[6:23:17] What we are requesting is modest, AvalanCov has only 49 homes.

[6:23:23] This would be a private, HOA controlled and maintained ramp for our community, not a public

[6:23:29] boat ramp.

[6:23:31] There is a misunderstanding that this ramp will provide general lake access to anyone with

[6:23:35] a keyfab or anyone who has friends in AvalanCov.

[6:23:39] That is not what we are proposing.

[6:23:41] We live on Hickory Nut Lake and we have every reason to protect its health and water quality.

[6:23:46] A properly permitted and controlled launch point access allows us to manage lake access responsibly.

[6:23:53] Our homeowners have already overwhelmingly supported this effort and invested financially in engineering and permitting.

[6:24:00] We're not asking for something new.

[6:24:02] We are asking to complete an amenity, contemplated as part of the original design of our community.

[6:24:08] We respectfully request that you vote to approve the Evalon code vote ramp.

[6:24:12] Thank you.

[6:24:14] All right, thank you. We'll move to the next speaker.

[6:24:19] Good afternoon, everyone. I'm Horsesuel 87-74,

[6:24:22] Bayview Crossing Drive. I want to go to Florida.

[6:24:27] I'm definitely against the boat ramp.

[6:24:31] I also bought a house already on the lake.

[6:24:34] And, of course, it had a boat ramp, a dock on there,

[6:24:36] and it came a little boat in some jet skis.

[6:24:40] Maintenance can still be done on the docks.

[6:24:42] There's no issues about getting them in and out if you need it to there's always a lift

[6:24:48] You can always get it lifted out pay a company and don't come get it in and out of the water

[6:24:53] Everybody else bought the same way I did you either bought with a

[6:24:57] A doctor you bought off the lake if you bought off the lake you dig

[6:25:00] Get the access, you need it.

[6:25:04] Looking down the line, there's we build something, somebody built something, but there's no long term, hey, how are we going to maintain this in the years?

[6:25:12] I know the HOA is like, yeah, we're going to build this, but there's no long term. Who's going to maintain it down the years?

[6:25:17] There's going to repair that document of false apart. Who's going to pay to have the concrete report, which requires your new permits and permission to do all that also.

[6:25:28] The hydrology plan, we already support that one, you have the number, it's one of the top

[6:25:35] lakes for cleanliness right now, and that's only because we can't get our boats in and out by

[6:25:41] backing up a trailer and just pulling them on when we need to.

[6:25:43] So there's no introduction of anything from any other lake in this state or another state

[6:25:48] being brought in without being cleansed properly or at least it's in there for a long.

[6:25:55] We're talking about the budget.

[6:25:59] There's no process except for our water individual tests on our own time to see it down the line.

[6:26:07] What she can provide you with is the proof that up until today it's been clean.

[6:26:12] It's remained clean.

[6:26:13] Yes, there are boats already on the lake.

[6:26:15] Yes, there are jet skis already on the lake and people kayak and people fish.

[6:26:20] But we're about to add on.

[6:26:21] I want to I'll agree with the gentlemen earlier. We're not going to all 49 families in that neighborhood over there.

[6:26:28] I'm not going to head and thank you for your time.

[6:26:32] Thank you.

[6:26:34] We'll move to the next speaker.

[6:26:40] Next speaker was Sherry High, followed by Stephanie Esposito.

[6:26:48] Hi, good afternoon. All right. I'm terrible at public speaking, so I'm going to publicly read.

[6:26:53] Let's see. I'm here. All right. Stephanie Esposito,

[6:26:57] 10417 at Water Bay Drive, I'm in phase two of Waterley.

[6:27:01] I sit directly across from this.

[6:27:05] Seven and a half years ago we bought this property.

[6:27:08] Between this property and a house on the Butler chain,

[6:27:13] we had to make a decision.

[6:27:15] This was incredibly an important decision

[6:27:21] because do we want to be on something where there's a bunch of public

[6:27:25] access or not. So that's why we chose to be in waterly, knowing that it was going to be

[6:27:32] a quieter lake, something that you used it outside, you're enjoying and you don't have

[6:27:37] a bunch of jet skis flying by, this, that whatever.

[6:27:42] I'm not going to bring up all of the other

[6:27:44] previous concerns because that's already been raised, but I did some work to start over the

[6:27:54] last couple months, every house that we have that's on the lake, there's 179 homes on the

[6:28:03] lake. As of currently, there's a hundred that have docks already, but there's 164 that

[6:28:12] are capable of getting docks down the road. So as people move out, you know, some that we could

[6:28:18] more dots to it. There is a total of, let's see, in phase 2, 20, 20 vote dots, 13 votes.

[6:28:31] There's 12 votes. In phase 1, there is undisclosed. I'm not sure how many are in the old

[6:28:38] you guys have a lot. 25, 25 that I counted. That's already enough. 27 homes in

[6:28:49] Avalanco already have docs on the lake. There's 27 homes on the lake. I think

[6:28:56] there's 20 in your neighborhood that are already have docs. So you're almost

[6:29:02] completely full of docs. So to add 22.

[6:29:07] All right, man, that little buzz it means you out of time.

[6:29:11] That goes quick.

[6:29:12] It goes quickly. Thank you.

[6:29:14] All right, thank you. We'll move to the next speaker.

[6:29:17] Our next speaker is going to be Lester Austin, followed by Patrick Wheeler,

[6:29:23] Jerry Jackson, Tom Armstrong, and Dave Maggi.

[6:29:33] Lester Austin, 93, 94, we're Lake Hickory Nut Drive.

[6:29:38] We have owned a house on Lake Butler for over 60 years,

[6:29:42] and we saw the Lake deteriorate over the years.

[6:29:47] Motors coming in with vegetation, throwing out trash,

[6:29:51] drunk, crazy driving, boomboxes.

[6:29:55] And if you don't want to say just listen to some of the winter mirror folks.

[6:30:00] Of a bird island, completely different situation, voters or some of the religious people in the world.

[6:30:11] The concern on Lake Hickory, not all of these concerns apply.

[6:30:18] But that lake is particularly different because it's long and narrow, and whiteboarding is really

[6:30:31] have to have a big boat, balance full of water, it creates a monster's wave and with that

[6:30:37] narrow shoreline. It really erodes. We have one such boat and we hate to see it coming

[6:30:46] and we hate to see any more coming. It's just a, if this, you know, is approved, I just wish

[6:30:55] the county would follow suit, you know, you have an award-winning concert to you have an award-winning

[6:31:03] horizon where some of the planning and you could have an award-winning boat situation where

[6:31:11] people can enjoy it, but not polluted restrict the boom boxes, these directional boom boxes

[6:31:19] are unbelievable, but restrict the size of the boat so that you don't have these wakes

[6:31:25] there, eroding the shoreline, and just some real good common sense, and put some teeth

[6:31:31] in it, not just a single lock that eventually everybody has a key.

[6:31:39] Thank you.

[6:31:41] All right.

[6:31:41] Thank you very much.

[6:31:42] Next speaker.

[6:31:47] Patrick Wheeler?

[6:31:49] Nine.

[6:31:52] I live in Avalon, cove on the lake.

[6:31:55] We constructed a dock shortly after purchasing about five years ago.

[6:31:59] And two teenage daughters, we've been very excited to get a boat,

[6:32:03] but have helped off thus far because of the reasons mentioned

[6:32:07] only private boat ramps.

[6:32:09] And so I just want to show support that it would be nice to be able to have a way.

[6:32:12] And as everyone has said, we are also concerned about the lake continuing to be well protected.

[6:32:16] We go out there and spend lots of time, so we are not interested either in having it be overrun,

[6:32:23] but we do think it would be a great asset to those of us living on the lake. Thank you.

[6:32:28] Okay, thank you.

[6:32:30] Next week.

[6:32:34] Good afternoon.

[6:32:35] I'm Tom Armstrong, 90-50, Morgana Court.

[6:32:39] And I'd just like to say, in general, that I really appreciate

[6:32:44] Waterloo's perspective protecting this particular lake. It's beautiful.

[6:32:48] I was the second house to move and build a house there right on the lake.

[6:32:53] I opened a build my future dream house and live on the lake.

[6:32:58] I work out at my house and I have my office faces the lake and I could see how beautiful it is.

[6:33:04] I could see the migration of birds that come in every year.

[6:33:10] So I'm very appreciative of why everybody is really adamant about protecting the lake.

[6:33:16] But when I bought the house, you know, we were all under the impression that we were not going

[6:33:22] to have any issues of being able to build a dock, which I haven't built mine yet, because

[6:33:26] I'm waiting on being able to get a boat safely in there and cleanly, and with respect to

[6:33:33] the lake and the other communities, and that, so if you really really sad that I can't make

[6:33:41] happen for my 11-year-old son when we moved in there five years ago. We want to do

[6:33:47] it's just a new vision. We don't want to go out there and crush 30 beers and play boom

[6:33:53] boxes all day long. We just want to be able to get in safely on the lake and have some fun safely

[6:34:00] and keep it clean.

[6:34:03] Our community is mostly an older community. There's hardly any kids there.

[6:34:07] I would say most of the people are older and might have been in the movie cocoon back in the day.

[6:34:14] I mean, that's how all our community is, you know, so where we have no interest in that long

[6:34:20] code of doing anything but actually helping protect the like even further than it already is.

[6:34:27] Thanks.

[6:34:29] Thank you.

[6:34:30] Next speaker.

[6:34:34] I'm Jerry.

[6:34:35] I'm a recovering landscaper.

[6:34:38] All right.

[6:34:40] 9-1-1-5-ly kickerina drive, we bought 2020, under the same premise, where we thought there

[6:34:51] was not going to be any ramps, you know, we have a lot of decisions to make buying a property

[6:34:56] and having it as private as that with no public boat ramp.

[6:35:00] We had a decision to make, maybe the Butler chain of lakes and things like that. So we're kind of on the flip side of that. We bought it because there was no ramps and no public access.

[6:35:13] Also, just a reminder, if you saw the numbers up there, there's over a two to one objection to this right now from the people that live around and on the lakes. Just a reminder.

[6:35:28] But, yeah, again, we have some clients that live on other lakes in they have access and they have access controllers and all this stuff.

[6:35:38] And you ask them and you say, so how's that going?

[6:35:41] And the first thing they do is laugh because what they started with has broken down, or the HOA has transitioned, the system is not implemented anymore.

[6:35:53] more. There's the various reasons as the years gone by. So I know the intentions are good for security

[6:35:59] and securing the ramp that people move and transition. So there's no guarantees to that either.

[6:36:08] And the other thing is we have our boats there, our boat there, and we get service. You call somebody

[6:36:16] down. This is Florida. A lot of boats on the lakes. There are diamond dozen for mobile

[6:36:24] mechanics to come out. There's a lot of great ones out there. Obviously, if you need that,

[6:36:29] you make a phone call. If you want to buy a new boat, they will come down and deliver your boat

[6:36:34] to the lake. They'll figure away. I'll take you to do that as well. So everybody can enjoy that

[6:36:39] part of the like. Thank you for your time.

[6:36:43] All right, thank you sir. Next week.

[6:36:49] Good afternoon. My name is Dave Ackey. I live at 9331

[6:36:52] Lake Hickory and I drive.

[6:36:55] Real quick, quick background. The initial developer

[6:36:58] Jones home. He closed the application right after

[6:37:01] a public meeting because of all the opposition.

[6:37:07] And then six years later, we're here again.

[6:37:10] So, it's already been stated about the cleanliness and what not.

[6:37:14] But you add more 26 more homes of access to it.

[6:37:20] You add increased voter accidents, more congestion.

[6:37:26] You are increasing the disturbance of the lake on the shoreline, the bottom.

[6:37:34] If you introduce wakeboard boats, wake and hands boats, you're going to further destroy

[6:37:38] docs and basically teal up everything. Keeping the way clean is very important. Everybody

[6:37:44] talks about intrusion of the weeds. Well, there's no MSTU and there's no MSTU tax. Who's

[6:37:52] going to pay for this when the weeds come in? Am I going to pay for it? Do I have to pay

[6:37:58] more money because they decided to put a ramp in and there are people don't adhere to

[6:38:03] their guidelines. Who's going to police that? When the weeds come in, who's going to

[6:38:07] for it to eradicate them, to spray form.

[6:38:11] You guys spray present lake and wind the mirror constantly because it goes out to the butler

[6:38:15] sound.

[6:38:15] That has an MSTU and M.S.B.U budget.

[6:38:18] You guys are constantly spraying for it for Hydrilla.

[6:38:21] I've seen the effects of it.

[6:38:23] There are no effects.

[6:38:24] It's constant.

[6:38:26] So that is a big concern for all of us that nobody wants to talk about and nobody can answer.

[6:38:33] It's something, something else is real quick.

[6:38:37] We have all these issues going on with the HOA's up in Tallahassee.

[6:38:43] What happens when they pull all the power out of the HOA?

[6:38:48] Who's going to monitor the HOA?

[6:38:51] Who's going to monitor the ramp?

[6:38:52] Who's going to take care of that?

[6:38:53] See, it'll just turn into an open program.

[6:38:55] Not my job, not my responsibility.

[6:38:58] This is can't go through.

[6:39:02] All right, sir.

[6:39:03] Thank you.

[6:39:04] Next speaker.

[6:39:06] All right, our last batch of speakers is going to start with

[6:39:09] Max or Nellis followed by Brian White and Eduardo Neorl.

[6:39:35] First person up in a first putting.

[6:39:42] Okay. Ryan.

[6:39:44] This is Max, but it is supposed to be me.

[6:39:46] It was a Max.

[6:39:47] It was a Max.

[6:39:48] But go here, Brian. You there.

[6:39:50] Alright, my name's Brian White.

[6:39:51] I live in Avlovco, 9063.

[6:39:53] I am not on the lake.

[6:39:56] And we understand that everyone has a concern about,

[6:39:58] you know, safety on the lake.

[6:40:00] Protecting the lake. We all have those same concerns. We have our own private meetings. We understand that it's important to protect the lake.

[6:40:10] I'm for it.

[6:40:12] It doesn't mean that I'm going to be on the lake, but it's something that we were looking forward to when the builder said that this is an option for us.

[6:40:22] So I am here to support it. Hopefully, guys, because you're proof.

[6:40:27] Thank you,

[6:40:39] sir.

[6:40:39] Eduardo, you're a text.

[6:40:45] Hello, Mr. Mayor.

[6:40:47] My name is Eduardo Mayor.

[6:40:49] It's a 763-way view crossing.

[6:40:53] So we keep here in Hickory not is one of the cleanest lakes in Florida.

[6:40:58] It's only three miles away from Disney.

[6:41:02] And you wonder how come this happen?

[6:41:05] I mean, it sounds like an impossible combination that a lake in such proximity to this

[6:41:11] need, that has been with people using boats for all these years is so clean.

[6:41:21] Well, the reason is there is no boat ramps.

[6:41:28] I hear all the good arguments and all the good reasons to put about ramp and the convenience.

[6:41:33] We had that problem ourselves when we bought the house and we had to put our boat in.

[6:41:40] It was expensive.

[6:41:42] The boat has been like I call it Lake Locked.

[6:41:46] Once you put it in, it's so expensive you don't want to be put it in in and out.

[6:41:51] It's locked in the lake and the same situation for all the other 70 persons that are currently with boats.

[6:41:59] So, yes, it's expensive, but I think it's a commitment that everybody can make to keep the lake

[6:42:06] as it is, is hard to argue with the results and the fact is, for 60 years, the lake has remained clean.

[6:42:15] And it was not planned. I don't think anyone, 60 years ago, said, we're not going to put in ramps, we're going to have only two private.

[6:42:23] No, I mean it just happened, but right now, this is the situation we have, now we can make a decision.

[6:42:29] Now we can say look, let's keep this going, it's going very well. We know what happens when we

[6:42:37] have a lot of traffic, how the quality of the world declines and I'm speaking on behalf

[6:42:46] of me and my wife, but I think I sure the same feeling for many of our neighbors. So please

[6:42:53] consider not approving this one. Thank you.

[6:42:55] Alright, thank you, sir. Next speaker.

[6:43:04] Hi, my name is May Ho, 15990, Golden Street. I am

[6:43:10] not on a late front property. I do not plan to purchase a boat, but when I purchase

[6:43:18] the property and it is advertised as we have a boat rent. So I think boat rent should

[6:43:26] in there because it was what was approved back in 2016. And if you're doing the math, we have only

[6:43:33] 49 homes and not everyone will have a boat which include myself, my other neighbors. And we have

[6:43:43] all the professionals from EPA and permitting, they have done their job, they have justified to

[6:43:49] see to let us know if it's okay for us to build a boot RAM or no. So let the professional do the job do the studies, not because of anything else. Thank you.

[6:44:02] All right. Thank you. All right.

[6:44:06] Later in the other speakers on this item.

[6:44:08] I believe that was our last speaker for this item.

[6:44:12] All right. We have one more.

[6:44:14] Okay. You're not a part of the applicant team. You're a resident.

[6:44:18] Yeah,

[6:44:22] if you didn't fill out a car,

[6:44:29] this is the name and address.

[6:44:31] Uncle Barrios, 9104 Morgana Port, Mr. Major, Commissioners, thanks for the opportunity.

[6:44:39] I just want to say I'm in favor of this ramp.

[6:44:43] I have a house at the lake.

[6:44:47] I think I spend more time at that boat dock than I spend inside my house.

[6:44:55] Sometimes my wife is looking for me in the house and she knows I'm going to be by delay.

[6:45:00] I love that. It's a beautiful lake. We want to really protect it. We don't want people going in the

[6:45:07] serving the lake and polluting the lake. I think it's just fair that nobody mentions this in our

[6:45:15] side of the lake. We have a retainer wall that is ten feet high. Getting our boats in our

[6:45:23] Yes, he's out of that house, out of that dog.

[6:45:27] With a retainer wall that is 10 feet high,

[6:45:30] it's really a problem, it's expensive.

[6:45:34] But we want to protect our legs.

[6:45:36] So the actions that we are promising we're going to take

[6:45:39] to control the entrance to the bull ramp

[6:45:43] is something as community we're going to put in our bylaws.

[6:45:48] It's going to be in our book,

[6:45:49] we're going to be responsible for that.

[6:45:51] The other thing that I wanted to put in perspective, like imagining all this serious amount of

[6:45:57] bows are going to be in this lake. I have a 17-year-old son, Tinaier. I have two jet skis

[6:46:05] and I have a boat. Do you know how many times he was in the lake during summer time this year?

[6:46:16] He brought his friends over, he had access to the jet skis, dating and go to the lake to use the jet skis.

[6:46:24] Once the jet skis twice is boring for them.

[6:46:28] So, pretending that everybody is going to be under both jet skis every week and every day of the week

[6:46:34] that is going to be polluting the lake is the wrong misconception.

[6:46:39] Thank you for your time.

[6:46:40] I thank you.

[6:46:45] Are there any other persons who want to speak on this item?

[6:46:50] If not, then we're going to go back to the applicant for any, you want to speak, ma'am.

[6:47:05] My name is Heather, you will. I have a live at 8774,

[6:47:08] Baby Crossing Drive, winter garden.

[6:47:11] We've talked a lot about the fear of mass voting or troublesome folks on a lake for a couple

[6:47:21] of reasons.

[6:47:22] First, it is a private lake, so license votes are not required.

[6:47:28] So that should give you a little bit of perspective.

[6:47:31] If you have no license requirement, you're going to have a looser level of restriction or

[6:47:39] regulation. The other piece that we have talked a little bit about is the number of homes

[6:47:47] and docks on outwater and avalanche. That is only one small subdivision within this complex.

[6:47:58] There's currently upwards of 3,000 houses in the waterly phases, one, two, and three.

[6:48:10] Not to mention the three apartment complexes that are also associated with the waterly HOA, which are now across the street from us.

[6:48:18] So, you are not talking about only access to the lake from Adelaan Koch, who you are also talking about the follow on precedent of the other three to five thousand residents that will want access to this very small lake.

[6:48:37] It's under 400 acres, which is approximately 40 boats.

[6:48:42] We are now talking about 3 to 5,000 personnel, homes living in that, not boats, residents.

[6:48:50] So when you talk about this scale, it has changed.

[6:48:54] That also that survey size of the lake was prior to the amount of vegetation and grass growth of the islands.

[6:49:01] There has been no recent hydrology or vegetation studies.

[6:49:05] We did have one of our residents talk about the budget or proposed budget funding for hydrology studies.

[6:49:13] That has not occurred only the construction impact of the concrete being laid where there was vegetation.

[6:49:20] That's the only carbon.

[6:49:21] Thank you very much.

[6:49:28] There are any other members on the public who wish to be heard on this item.

[6:49:34] And, Heather, if you didn't fill out a car, make sure you fill it out.

[6:49:39] All right.

[6:49:41] Yeah.

[6:49:41] So, it looks like the best thing in the speakers.

[6:49:44] But I'll go back to the applicant.

[6:49:47] You have the opportunity for some rebuttal comments,

[6:49:51] that where you can address your neighbors.

[6:49:58] It's got batteries in three or four.

[6:50:00] I'll go drive one of our Florida 32789, engineer of record for the boat ramp. I just want to make sure that you guys know that the stormwater runoff was already designed and permitted to do the water management district in the county to accommodate this, and it started with the zoning. The PD lane use plan has a note number five that says this community will have a boat ramp and that was in 2016. So this is not a precedent setting situation. It's very unique situation where we're not in compliance with our zoning district.

[6:50:30] The land use plan hasn't proved the PSP hasn't proved the DP the change of

[6:50:35] termination even the final engineering plans that were recorded

[6:50:39] have it in there. So all the stormwater will be taken care of.

[6:50:43] In fact, we'll be getting updated, be our peace with the

[6:50:47] Lermanent District, and that will meet the current criteria, which

[6:50:51] there's plenty of extra room to do. And addition, what

[6:50:53] a manager district requires the HOA funds to be proven, so that it

[6:50:58] We'll operate in perpetuity and it has the case here as well.

[6:51:04] Let's see if there is any else.

[6:51:05] Yeah, and this is not a precedent.

[6:51:07] This is a unique zoning note.

[6:51:11] Thank you.

[6:51:12] I'm having you answering other questions.

[6:51:16] A lot of good comments on both sides for pro and against.

[6:51:21] Again, we're trying to do it.

[6:51:23] The right way to finish what our bill didn't do for us.

[6:51:26] We all want to protect the lake.

[6:51:28] I don't think there's any question about that.

[6:51:31] I mean, I've heard things from,

[6:51:32] you know, I don't want to do oil changes over the lake.

[6:51:35] Okay, I'd rather take my boats and jet skis out.

[6:51:37] I think that I just safety,

[6:51:38] this safety for, you know,

[6:51:40] for the lake and we don't want to be dumping

[6:51:41] oil and things like that in there.

[6:51:43] So, I think it's about it.

[6:51:46] I think this will, you know,

[6:51:48] we're just trying to finish out what we started

[6:51:50] a long time ago.

[6:51:51] So thanks.

[6:51:54] Okay.

[6:51:56] Thank you very much.

[6:51:58] With that, we're going to close the public hearing portion and I want to go to the District

[6:52:06] Commission, Commissioner, we have two votes, one for the semi-private vote ramp,

[6:52:11] two and the three is the Conservation Area MPAT.

[6:52:16] Do you have a potential motion?

[6:52:27] Commissioner Crab.

[6:52:28] For the engineer possibly, just wondering for the variance on the 25 foot, it looks like there

[6:52:32] The room on that to move that down, but why are we having to ask for that variance?

[6:52:39] So the original purpose of the fact had the lines going in the parcels in the Cinder Lake,

[6:52:42] which is now a submersal land, the actual corner changes in an angle, and nobody thought

[6:52:49] about it when they went through the entire LUP until all they had to do was just turn a little

[6:52:55] three foot strip of land, 10 degrees to the left, it's a technicality.

[6:53:01] There's, you know, we've done everything we can.

[6:53:03] That person's in support of the application.

[6:53:06] They're also up much higher than the surrounding lands.

[6:53:10] So I think it was just a simply look over.

[6:53:13] All they have to do is change out one little angle.

[6:53:15] A little bit.

[6:53:15] We wouldn't be having a conversation.

[6:53:20] All right.

[6:53:20] Commissioner Wilson will do to see first.

[6:53:23] I actually asked some questions also.

[6:53:24] I had a time just understanding this is this is controversial.

[6:53:28] This has been a conversation for years.

[6:53:31] The withdrawal of the original application happens after I was elected before I was sworn in.

[6:53:40] So I guess my question is for staff that was here longer. Why did they withdraw the application that

[6:53:45] developer if there was an intent to do this knowing that they had sold this to residents?

[6:53:52] I

[6:53:57] think we're that question commissioner.

[6:53:59] The applicant actually did a site a reason as to the withdrawal, but I do know that Scott

[6:54:05] better sent him to give you a reason for that.

[6:54:09] I wasn't part of the original as you're in design team.

[6:54:11] That was a happy and major stage to you and another friend of mine Scott Sterns with Jones

[6:54:16] Holmes.

[6:54:16] You know, it's my understanding from what I've heard and experienced is that sales were going

[6:54:22] very fast and I understand they had a public meeting.

[6:54:25] And if sales are going fast and you can get out and not have to waste your time fighting things,

[6:54:32] then you leave them and then you hand the problem over to the HOA.

[6:54:35] I think it's a great injustice.

[6:54:37] I don't know about it, justices.

[6:54:38] Yeah.

[6:54:39] Well, it makes the statement accurate to the resident who said that they were met with concerns over the quality back then,

[6:54:48] and knew that they were going to be up against potential questions about the impacts

[6:54:52] and didn't want to go about that. It just makes me feel for the residents that were

[6:54:57] assured something that...

[6:55:00] You know, Orange County takes, I take that pretty seriously that somebody out there represented something. In the meantime, and I don't know if this was still under the developers watch, but I would like to get more information about the notice of violation. I guess there was some wetland impacts and evaluation that had already happened in the neighborhood, along with shoreline, through EPD.

[6:55:23] I could probably speak to that a little bit as well.

[6:55:26] Just look like people had already cleared it during the original construction, and essentially...

[6:55:30] Can I just want to hear from staff though, because it was an EPD violation.

[6:55:33] It wasn't through the state or it

[6:55:51] was...

[6:55:53] So there were some boats being launched without authorization to have a ramp.

[6:56:00] There was an enforcement case staff went out and met with them.

[6:56:04] There was a restoration plan and that was implemented.

[6:56:07] Okay, so when I did, I did pull the shoreline restoration plan and it does call for the

[6:56:17] number of plantings and restoration to that area.

[6:56:22] Is this the exact area that would be torn up again for the potential grant project?

[6:56:30] I don't know the precise location where they had disturbed the vegetation right now,

[6:56:39] So, the notice of violation was issued in 2021, it looks like Liz Johnson signed off on it,

[6:56:47] and there was a requirement for them to have a restoration plan.

[6:56:54] What did EP do as far as follow up on that plan and the restoration?

[6:56:59] Do we know if that was complete and satisfied?

[6:57:02] And I would say holistically, I just have a really hard time knowing that there was violations

[6:57:06] by an entity that's now seeking permission to, you know, essentially remove the portion of the

[6:57:14] shoreline.

[6:57:15] I'm not sure what the current status of that case is commissioner.

[6:57:18] I have to, I'd have to dig into it.

[6:57:21] So, Commissioner, are you saying that the, the relation was given today, Troy?

[6:57:25] Yes.

[6:57:26] To have long COVID, Troy, and it was by PD, it was within, it looks like a six-note period, potentially

[6:57:33] with withdrawal of their applications. I don't know if it's related, but I know that there was a violation for

[6:57:39] what looks like wetland, notice the violation for some damage to the wetlands there, and their corrective actions were that they would be

[6:57:51] providing a shoreline restoration plan, but there's very little follow-up on what that means.

[6:57:57] And for me, I think it's really important, especially hearing about the quality of the

[6:58:02] slate and understanding that there is no unlike many of other lake systems where we

[6:58:07] have a citizen review panel that oversees it in a taxing mechanism that everybody chips

[6:58:13] into to make sure that they can correct things where we do have bad actors not correcting

[6:58:18] their own problems.

[6:58:20] They don't have any of those mechanisms here, so I wanted to find out what EPD is done to

[6:58:24] make sure that this particular entity is doing what they say they're doing if they haven't

[6:58:32] in the past.

[6:58:32] I think that's an indication that we already have problems in the future and that makes me

[6:58:35] very hesitant to move through the action I've been approved.

[6:58:41] So our CRAT EPD staff does have an update for you about that.

[6:58:46] The restoration plan was implemented and then our normal follow-up with them is if somebody completes

[6:58:54] the restoration. We send a no further action letter. So we sent that to them on January 5, 2022

[6:59:03] saying that the restoration had been completed. Okay, so but just so I understand our oversight

[6:59:09] there because it also came with, you know, this application comes with the indication that they'll

[6:59:15] provide water quality monitoring. What does that mean? Is that all the honor system? Or is there

[6:59:20] somebody that actually makes sure that that's done in a timely fashion and what happens

[6:59:27] if the quality changes, who then does pay for that remediation knowing that this is, you

[6:59:32] know, this is a turbidity and there's, I mean, the action alone of construction and then

[6:59:40] on top of that, the end and now. So just trying to fund out the oversight in that shoreline, especially

[6:59:46] shoreline that is now those residents have paid for restoration.

[6:59:51] So, typically the water quality monitoring plans during boat ramp construction is a weekly

[7:00:00] Monitoring, they take background, usually out in the middle of a baseline established, and then they do their monitoring during construction just outside the construction and within the construction of this contained by a floating turbidity curtain.

[7:00:14] They would send those results to us on a schedule. And if anything is above, if it exceeds the standards that are allowed, then construction should completely stop.

[7:00:28] And they should, they and staff will coordinate on a remedial action.

[7:00:34] There are treatments that they can do to settle the solids down out of the water.

[7:00:40] And then, once the quality returns to a level outside the construction that does not exceed the allowance,

[7:00:48] then they can resume their construction.

[7:00:51] So, relying again, though, on self-reporting, correct?

[7:00:56] That's true, from,

[7:01:00] so I clearly am stating that I have concerns about this impact, the approval

[7:01:07] of an impact permit in this case, very specific to, I think, a certain set of circumstances

[7:01:14] in this lake.

[7:01:16] So, at this time, I would make a motion to deny the CAI as an infinite action in the hopes

[7:01:25] I can get support from the board for denial of that action.

[7:01:32] All right.

[7:01:33] There's a motion for denial.

[7:01:35] Secondary Commission of Scott.

[7:01:38] All in favor, let it be known by saying aye.

[7:01:41] Opposed?

[7:01:43] All right.

[7:01:44] Motion passes.

[7:01:45] And it is unanimous.

[7:01:48] And with that.

[7:01:52] It's without.

[7:01:54] There need a motion on the boat ramp.

[7:02:03] Yeah, George M. And you had to, I think, press that button yourself to speak. There you go.

[7:02:09] Yeah, I want to. I believe the staff report has indicated that without without a approval of the

[7:02:15] boat ramp, I mean the C.I. the boat ramp cannot be constructed. So the denial of

[7:02:24] the C.I. is denial of the boat ramp.

[7:02:30] I think that's the end. Yeah, you have a question? Yeah,

[7:02:34] I don't know what happens next, but I guess my question is,

[7:02:38] it sounds like there's a procedural problem, you know,

[7:02:41] and how do you do the checks?

[7:02:42] Like how does that work?

[7:02:44] Like if you rely on us to give you, you know,

[7:02:47] we're going to volunteer and give you the information

[7:02:48] on the water quality.

[7:02:50] But it sounds like, you know, these, it sounds like there's,

[7:02:53] it's something, it's something, it's something, it's something.

[7:02:54] So, Teelem, probably, yeah.

[7:02:55] I'm sorry.

[7:02:56] Teelem, please follow up with the gentleman and Howard.

[7:03:00] Someone, who's here from OPED with you?

[7:03:10] Yes.

[7:03:12] You know, Jenna, what were you saying?

[7:03:15] I'm asking Commissioner Wilson to make a motion on the boat ramp to the effect of the denial to effectuate the denial.

[7:03:22] So it's clear for the clerk what the action is on the second boat ramp application.

[7:03:29] Commissioner Wilson, I entertain the motion.

[7:03:35] This is what a boat ramp.

[7:03:39] Yes, all right.

[7:03:40] Make a motion to deny the, deny BR 23, 12001.

[7:03:47] All right.

[7:03:48] There's a motion on a second.

[7:03:49] The second is Commissioner Scott.

[7:03:52] All in favour of that to be known by saying aye.

[7:03:54] Aye.

[7:03:54] Opposed no motion passes and it is unanimous.

[7:04:03] All right.

[7:04:03] We're going to move now to item D4.

[7:04:10] We're open the public hearing on this item.

[7:04:13] Stale Mula is going to be frame in this item with that true recognized.

[7:04:20] Thank you, Mayor.

[7:04:38] Check your difficulties.

[7:05:06] Just one moment please.

[7:05:18] All right. This is item K CDR 2603057. This is an amendment to the Orlando International Hotel Plan Development.

[7:05:27] Low property is generally located west of Universal Boulevard east of I drive south of Sand Lake.

[7:05:37] This is a PD substantial change to amend the master sign plan and to request four waivers and code.

[7:05:43] waivers listed here are for two new tenant buildings within the entertainment center development.

[7:05:53] These allow for some flexibility in code for some additional copy area and additional number of wall signs per face for each of the proposed developments.

[7:06:04] sites located in District 6. Here we have the Future Landy SMAP properties designated

[7:06:10] commercial on the Future Landy SMAP and as previously mentioned it is owned PD as the

[7:06:16] and Orlando International Hotel PD. Here we have aerial of the site property more commonly

[7:06:22] alone as icon park. And here we have a copy of the signage plan. You can see buildings

[7:06:29] be three and D2 highlighted those are the locations of the buildings with that are subject

[7:06:36] to the signage waivers within this entertainment complex area.

[7:06:42] And with that, the recommendation is to make a fine new consistency with the conference

[7:06:45] of plan and approve the amendment to the Orlando International Hotel PD subject to the conditions

[7:06:51] listed under the DRC recommendation on the staff report.

[7:06:55] And with that staff in the applicant are available for questions.

[7:06:57] All right, thank you, sir.

[7:07:01] Is the applicant on the side of the President?

[7:07:03] All right.

[7:07:05] I invite you to the mic.

[7:07:07] Good afternoon, Mayor.

[7:07:08] Commissioners, John Townsend, with L.J.

[7:07:12] Engineering 101 South Hull Drive,

[7:07:15] Maryland, Florida.

[7:07:16] We agree with that.

[7:07:17] Recommendations are heard.

[7:07:18] Any questions you may have?

[7:07:21] All right, Mr. Townsend, if you'll stand by.

[7:07:25] And do we have members of the public presence?

[7:07:27] Who should be heard on this item?

[7:07:32] We have no speakers for this item, Mayor.

[7:07:35] All right, then we're going to close the public hearing.

[7:07:37] I'll go to Commissioner Scott, before we'll

[7:07:40] potentially motion.

[7:07:44] I don't know, we'll have a motion.

[7:07:45] Commissioner Scott, seconded by Commissioner Yuribay.

[7:07:49] All in favor, let it be known by saying aye.

[7:07:51] We'll close no.

[7:07:53] All right, motion passes, and it is unanimous.

[7:08:02] Yes, sir.

[7:08:07] Just for the benefit of those listening,

[7:08:09] And this action allows us to designage for a build-a-bare workshop on icon park and blue

[7:08:16] man group.

[7:08:18] They've been waiting many, many months to be able to put a sign on their building so

[7:08:22] I know that the tenants are happy, and I just want to make that known for the record.

[7:08:27] Thank you.

[7:08:39] Okay.

[7:08:41] Thank you, sir.

[7:08:42] Are we going to move them to D5 at this point over the public hearing on this item, Mr.

[7:08:49] Thank you, Mayor.

[7:08:52] This item is case CDR 2602032.

[7:08:56] This one is an amendment to the Orangewood N1C World Vacation Village PD.

[7:09:01] This was continued from our last board meeting in order to allow the applicant team to

[7:09:09] have a conversation with the adjacent property owner, which I understand has occurred and

[7:09:14] we might hear about when the applicant gives their presentation.

[7:09:17] But generally, the sites located north side of C. Harbor Drive south of Westwood, off I. Drive.

[7:09:24] And the request here is to convert some of the PD entitlements for this particular parcel.

[7:09:30] Converting 362,000 square feet of office uses into the typical of 1124 multi-family units.

[7:09:42] site located in District 1, designated activity center mixed use on the county's future

[7:09:48] land use map indicating it's within the iDrive activity center, which is the area identified

[7:09:54] as intended to concentrate tourist commercial type activities.

[7:10:00] And work for support of housing for those industries. As previously mentioned, property is

[7:10:04] owned PD, plan development district, which is requirement within that I drive activity center

[7:10:10] overlay. Here we have an aerial map. Properties currently developed with an office building

[7:10:15] and parking structure. As mentioned, the proposal is to confer the office uses that office

[7:10:22] building is posed to be removed and redeveloped with a multi-family development. I will note

[7:10:29] that on the site plan that the applicant is submitted that is currently under review, the parking structure remains and the apartment project is proposed to be constructed around it and incorporating it into the project.

[7:10:43] I will also note that while that trip equivalent conversion from the entitlement perspective equals out to those 1124 units, the applicant is on that site plan proposing about 679 units.

[7:10:58] unclear if that'll be the final count, but that's currently with the site plan shows.

[7:11:02] I will also cite that while I mentioned it is from a total perspective, a trip

[7:11:07] neutral conversion, there is still the requirement through the development of the process

[7:11:11] that we have in traffic operational analysis to identify any potential traffic safety improvements

[7:11:17] that might be triggered by the development.

[7:11:20] Here we have the overall PDLandies plan, affected area highlighted in red, along with the entitlements

[7:11:27] and development standards, and with all of that said, recommendation here is to make a

[7:11:32] finding consistency with the conference plan and approve the amendment to the Orange

[7:11:36] Wood N1C World Vacation Village PD subject to the conditions approval listed under the

[7:11:42] DRC recommendation in the staff report, and with that staff in the applicant are available for

[7:11:46] questions.

[7:11:48] All right.

[7:11:48] Thank you, sir.

[7:11:50] Is the applicant on this item present?

[7:11:52] Yes.

[7:11:53] It's coming forward.

[7:11:54] Good afternoon, Mayor and commissioners.

[7:11:57] Rebecca Wilson, 2015, Northeal,

[7:11:58] the drive here on behalf of the applicant.

[7:12:01] Mayor, we missed you at the last meeting.

[7:12:04] We were here on August 4th and we were ready for an approval

[7:12:09] to convert this eight story, 362,000 square feet of an office

[7:12:16] building to the multifamily use.

[7:12:20] At that time, see world asks for a continuance for three weeks.

[7:12:25] We agreed to that continuance, we've met with them and answered questions that they posed

[7:12:30] to us.

[7:12:31] We're back today requesting approval.

[7:12:35] We're asking to utilize the transportation equivalency matrix to convert 428 PMP trips of office

[7:12:45] to 427 pmp trips of multifamily, which as your staff said is consistent with the existing future

[7:12:54] land use and all of your county regulations.

[7:12:56] I have a full presentation to give you all.

[7:12:59] I know it is late in the day, so if you don't mind Mayor, I will just reserve the rest of my time

[7:13:06] for a rebuttal and happy to answer any questions that you all may have.

[7:13:10] Okay. I'm okay with that as long as the board is okay with that. Thank you.

[7:13:16] All right. We'll open it up for public comment. Do we have a lot of public

[7:13:22] present? We should be heard on this item. We do, Mayor. We have a handful of

[7:13:27] individuals signed up to speak for this. What is a handful? One, two, three. Sorry,

[7:13:34] there's some time being dedicated. Four speakers with one speaker that is going to

[7:13:42] All right, folks, I'm going to call your names, well, in one big batch, I'm going to do

[7:13:46] please line up along the back wall, Coach Spodium in the order called when you do, please

[7:13:50] begin with your name and address for the record.

[7:13:52] First speaker is going to be Chris, what, oh, sorry.

[7:13:57] First speaker is going to be Will Hawthorne, and Will looks like you have one minute

[7:14:03] in addition,

[7:14:08] and actually I'm a spoke, there are going to be two speakers.

[7:14:10] next speaker is going to be Derek Bruce and Derek. You're going to have additional four minutes.

[7:14:16] Okay, thank you. Will Hawthorne, BHB, 225, East Robinson Street, Orlando, Florida, 3-2-8-0-1.

[7:14:23] Mayor and commissioners, thank you for the opportunity to be here and get on record that

[7:14:28] our clients see world has asked us, our company, to form their own traffic impact analysis.

[7:14:33] We started that 13 days ago and we are working as fervently and as diligently as we can,

[7:14:40] get that done. This study is going to take into account not only the weekday trips but we

[7:14:46] can as well as pedestrian embites and it's something that our client wants to make sure

[7:14:52] that whatever change happens here that impacts our mitigated and or minimize it all cost.

[7:15:00] Being the nature of their business, theme park, their busy time drone, a weekend.

[7:15:06] So looking at it from just a weekday, cannot always give you the full picture.

[7:15:10] So that's what we're including in our study.

[7:15:13] As well as we're taking a look at the signal for analytics data, which is a comprehensive list of all of the vehicular traffic accidents,

[7:15:22] as well as the pedestrian incidents going back five years.

[7:15:25] So that's going to be included in our study.

[7:15:27] And it's something that, like I said, these things take time, and unfortunately, I think

[7:15:32] we'll be done in about 30 to 40 days, but just wanted to get on record, they have

[7:15:37] engaged us to do that, and we're working as fast as we can.

[7:15:40] Thank you.

[7:15:42] All right.

[7:15:42] Thank you.

[7:15:45] Mr. Bruce, the Uninex person.

[7:15:50] And Derek, just for clarification, you actually have six minutes dedicated to you, you'll have

[7:15:53] to relate.

[7:15:54] Okay.

[7:15:55] Thank you so

[7:15:58] much.

[7:15:58] We have a presentation that asked miles to bring up, but in a while we wait for it.

[7:16:07] Before I begin I want to take a moment of personal privilege, Mayor Demings, in a few short

[7:16:11] weeks, you'll reclaim one of the most treasured titles in our society and that is private

[7:16:16] citizen.

[7:16:18] This is likely to be the last time I address you at a meeting of the Board of County Commissioners.

[7:16:23] I want to let you know how much of a joy it's been to work with you and Mr. Brooks and the team that you all have assembled around you.

[7:16:31] We haven't always agreed on everything, but the manner in which you've led our region through a global health crisis,

[7:16:38] as well as tremendous economic and political growth, population growth, and even shared your health journey has been a model of wisdom, thoughtfulness, and dignity.

[7:16:47] You serves as a world model for many.

[7:16:50] Myself included, so I want to say thank you and acknowledge that your successor will have the issues to fill.

[7:16:55] All right, thank you very much.

[7:16:58] Derek Bruce, with the Gunster Law firm on behalf of SeaWorld,

[7:17:18] and you did hear that the last time we were here that we did request the continuance.

[7:17:25] It wasn't a three week continuance that we asked for.

[7:17:28] We asked for a more significant amount of time to allow for some work to be done.

[7:17:34] And we're here to make a similar request today and ask for a 60-day continued.

[7:17:39] I'll start by asking the question, what's the rush?

[7:17:44] We're requesting this continuance because we need adequate time for full evaluation of whether

[7:17:50] this proposed conversion alliance would be adopted, compliant.

[7:17:54] It's combatable with the with the neighbor and uses and and the neighbors including C-world and the ad-drive overlaid and

[7:18:03] And we need to analyze as you heard

[7:18:06] Mr. Mr. Arthur and say the adequacy of the traffic systems and the you and the infrastructure around it

[7:18:14] Without

[7:18:15] Detailing without going to into each prong. There's there's really no dispute that this is a

[7:18:22] significant and a substantial under the stat under the ordinance.

[7:18:26] Substantial change from what's there currently, and office building that would be converted to,

[7:18:34] as many as 1124 units.

[7:18:38] And because this is substantial, the code requires plans, supporting data,

[7:18:43] DRC review, and a public hearing in front of the board.

[7:18:47] What have we done since we were last here in front of the board?

[7:18:52] We've met the applicant on multiple occasions to learn more about their plans and share our concerns.

[7:18:57] We received a 250 page traffic impact analysis on August 17th and we observed what we believe

[7:19:07] to be flaws in that analysis and you heard Mr. Hawthorne alluded to it earlier.

[7:19:13] This area is unique, the typically you look at peak traffic on weekdays, but this is the tourism corridor, anchored by the Crown Jewel of Orange County Government, the Orange County Convention Center.

[7:19:28] And the traffic there very often and because of this specific area is on weekend nights,

[7:19:38] especially there at Sea Harbor Drive and International Drive.

[7:19:43] We've also met with area stakeholders and county staff.

[7:19:48] We know we have commissioners, both Wilson and Scott, who have residents on and business stakeholders.

[7:19:59] stakeholders.

[7:20:00] That would be impacted by this.

[7:20:06] When we were last here, Commissioner Cordero Gomez Cordero asked, hey, it's three weeks enough. And the short answer to that is no. The BCC can and should continue this hearing for 60 days. And that is allowable under both your code as well as Florida statute 125.6668, which says, consideration of our proposed county ordinance or county resolution.

[7:20:32] and a properly-noticed meeting may be continued to a subsequent meeting if at the schedule meeting the date time in place of the subsequent meeting of his public.

[7:20:42] Case law also supports this. There's the Shaunasi versus Metropolitan Date County case where we're just talks about the ability to continue.

[7:20:52] The pain versus city of Miami case is really, really interesting, 52, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7.

[7:21:01] In that case, the city of Miami Commission recognized the need for additional information and additional study.

[7:21:09] But still, when it had an approved a land use change anyway, and it got reversed on appeal.

[7:21:16] And part of what the, what the court recognized is that when there, when there is a need for additional information and additional study on impacts, the more defensible course is deferral, which is similar to what we're requesting here.

[7:21:35] The Orange County Code requires compatibility with adjacent property and land uses.

[7:21:40] The uses must be in a manner compatible,

[7:21:45] and we submit that there's not a clear answer

[7:21:48] that this is compatible, and we'll talk about that a little more in just a little bit.

[7:21:53] The overall project has to be evaluated in conjunction with the remaining portions of the PD,

[7:21:58] and it must consider the relationship between the present for posesone classification

[7:22:02] and conserving the value of the property in the area.

[7:22:07] I've just laid out your section 30, F and G requirements.

[7:22:12] And here's what we're looking at.

[7:22:16] This conversion is likely to dramatically alter

[7:22:19] pedestrian safety in the area traffic patterns

[7:22:22] and we've talked about peak hour traffic generation.

[7:22:26] You have a letter in your packet that

[7:22:29] technologies, school capacity concerns from

[7:22:34] from Orange County Public Schools.

[7:22:38] From a residential standpoint,

[7:22:40] is going to tax parts and recreation

[7:22:44] as well as utility infrastructure,

[7:22:45] or at least we need to study that.

[7:22:48] And quite frankly, how will multi-family

[7:22:50] residential in this specific area aligned with the

[7:22:53] surrounding uses?

[7:22:54] We submitted it may not align very well.

[7:23:00] Mayer and Commissioners see World is a 24-hour, seven-day

[7:23:04] week business with that operates relatively late as fireworks in the evening, and then

[7:23:11] when the park closes, there's traffic that leaves, but it doesn't stop there.

[7:23:17] Trucks come in through the night to clean the park and prepare all of its activities

[7:23:23] for the next day.

[7:23:24] The 1125 up to 1125 new units and residents directly across the street from there will predictably

[7:23:34] result in calls to law enforcement about noise and not distracting people and keeping them from getting proper rest.

[7:23:46] These are the types of things that we think are appropriate to be looked at and considered.

[7:23:51] Even when we don't have the results of the transportation study, we talk.

[7:24:00] And I'd like to finish by talking about a budding property owner's due process rights.

[7:24:06] What we are allowed is a meaningful opportunity to participate in this discussion.

[7:24:13] Meaningful participation meet requires time.

[7:24:16] The opportunity to review the application and supporting data, retain and consult with expert professionals

[7:24:22] which we've done and you've heard that analysis is underway, but it is going to take

[7:24:26] a little more time, prepare our substantive testimony and then engage in dialogue.

[7:24:32] In conclusion, these are the reasons for our request for continuance of note.

[7:24:36] we've found no cases, after searching high and lower,

[7:24:41] 60-day continuance was successfully challenged.

[7:24:44] There are however numerous examples

[7:24:46] where proceedings without affording affected property owners

[7:24:49] with meaningful opportunities to participate

[7:24:52] have been deemed a denial of due process.

[7:24:55] And so we respectfully request that the Board of County Commissioners

[7:24:58] continue this hearing for six.

[7:25:00] Today's to allow the county and adjacent property owners adequate time to properly assess the application for consistency with the compliant.

[7:25:08] Thank you. And we're here to answer questions as well. Thank you.

[7:25:14] Thank you, Mr. Bruce.

[7:25:18] All right. Is the applicant still a president? There she is.

[7:25:28] Mayor, the applicant is present. I just want to address a couple of things. First, with regard to a 60 day continuance,

[7:25:38] We're not going to agree to a 60 day continuous.

[7:25:40] We'd like an up and down vote today.

[7:25:43] We've spent many months on this project.

[7:25:46] They were aware of this project before August 4th.

[7:25:49] When we called them and made ourselves available to answer questions,

[7:25:53] we've been available to answer questions for the last three weeks.

[7:25:56] And I'll tell you there aren't questions

[7:25:58] that they are looking to get answered.

[7:26:01] They are looking to drum up opposition and possibly have a different board.

[7:26:06] And I guess Mayor also, in 60 days, which I think you've also done a great job, Mayor.

[7:26:12] I want to put that on the record, but I'm going to see you in 60 days.

[7:26:17] I'll save that speech for the last time.

[7:26:21] I'm before you.

[7:26:23] But just a couple of things that I just think were, I want to correct.

[7:26:28] Well, this is how great the project is going to look.

[7:26:31] So, there is, we provided them with our traffic analysis, we can go through all of this, but really what I wanted to point out is right here.

[7:26:44] So, this is where there is a median cut and a connection.

[7:26:49] Our property is on the north and sea world is on the south.

[7:26:53] We are currently working with your county staff in order to put that's going to be a fully

[7:26:58] signalized intersection there.

[7:27:01] Our IDD is under review right now and so if my guess is that there will be things requested

[7:27:09] such as a dedication for the location of the signal and I assume in the county's plans they're

[7:27:15] also marked crosswalks.

[7:27:17] I think it's important when we talk about pedestrian safety that that is occurring.

[7:27:22] Also, when we talk about access, you can't see this is when you have a lawyer makes slides.

[7:27:28] But our property is way up here, way up here.

[7:27:31] This is where you enter to get into the entrance of C-World.

[7:27:36] Down here on Central Florida Parkway.

[7:27:38] It's all the traffic that they're worried about is going to come in on the weekends.

[7:27:42] It's not up here, it's down here.

[7:27:44] Now what you do have are five to six intersections,

[7:27:47] sections, including the one that we're going to assist with adding a light to that allow

[7:27:53] for exit.

[7:27:55] So the exit traffic goes out that way.

[7:28:00] We also have a bus stop in front of our site, which is wonderful for a compatibility with

[7:28:05] multi-family.

[7:28:07] And I also, I can go through the need for housing and all this, but what I find is the most

[7:28:13] ironic is in 2012 see world sold this piece of property see world owned this right here right across

[7:28:21] from them sold it to my client epic for $7 million in 2012. 2012 they didn't have a problem

[7:28:29] with compatibility they didn't have a problem with traffic they they were happy to have multifamily

[7:28:36] located within this PD.

[7:28:39] In fact, SeaWorld built Aquatica right adjacent

[7:28:44] to the neighborhood of Williamsburg.

[7:28:48] So I would offer to you that multi-family not only

[7:28:52] is a compatible use, it's a use that's

[7:28:54] needed in our tourist corridor.

[7:28:59] Additionally, the county has similarly approved another

[7:29:02] multi-family. This is on Westwood with the exact same request before you and the exact same

[7:29:11] materials before you. This is a project that is needed. It is a project that is compatible.

[7:29:18] We had a unanimous approval from the Development Review Committee that we have provided

[7:29:23] All of the necessary components for this application and I'm happy to answer any questions and would just like a vote of approval from you all today.

[7:29:39] All right. Thank you, Mr Wilson.

[7:29:42] I'm going to go ahead and close the public hearing portion at this time.

[7:29:48] and we do have questions or comments by members of the board before I go to the district

[7:29:54] Commission and Commission of Wilson for a potential motion, with that, like...

[7:30:00] Commissioner, your rebate. Becky, is there any way to go back to the trips?

[7:30:10] This is where we show the projected trip conversion. This is at the top. It's the 428 that is the office

[7:30:20] number existing and then down at the bottom when you convert is the 427 we're requesting.

[7:30:25] When you had one that talked about less peak, there we go.

[7:30:29] Yes.

[7:30:29] It's actually a reduction of trips.

[7:30:32] Correct.

[7:30:33] So this analysis is run on the IDD that we submitted, that was for the 679 somewhere,

[7:30:41] 670 something units.

[7:30:43] And so it shows a reduction of AMP and a reduction of PMP.

[7:30:48] Remember, this building had 2,000 employees in, so it hasn't just been

[7:30:55] sitting there like it's vacant vacant land. Correct. And as someone who has sat in DRC meetings

[7:31:00] when you've not been happy about traffic lights being ordered on a project, this is actually

[7:31:05] huge investment on the developer for our traffic engineering and for safety for us. And to be clear,

[7:31:13] the city and the sorry, the county is funding the light. We are assisting with the dedication of

[7:31:18] Okay, fantastic. That's what I just wanted a clarity of point. Thank you.

[7:31:25] All right, Commissioner Crab and then Commissioner Simran.

[7:31:32] All right, thank you. Thank you very much.

[7:31:35] Question, another new guy questions, sorry.

[7:31:38] But this might be for over here.

[7:31:41] You said earlier there has to be another county run study that we wouldn't necessarily use the one from sea world.

[7:31:47] For traffic wise, I think Kenny's in here can speak to the operational analysis requirements.

[7:31:56] There's a quest for an operational analysis study for that intersection.

[7:32:00] Based on that in the results, the safety measures would come into play via its signalized intersection,

[7:32:08] any additional other safety improvements along the way.

[7:32:11] And is that just where the new light is or where would that be international drive?

[7:32:13] And that is just for that specific location, which is C-harber and C-World intersection.

[7:32:20] Where the new light's going to go.

[7:32:22] And then I just want to make it clear to everyone where it says reduction of 150 AM peak trips

[7:32:29] and reduction of 144 peak trips, PM peak trips.

[7:32:34] That's for total.

[7:32:35] However, the distribution is different for the AM and peak, I mean, for the in and out.

[7:32:40] So, if you look at the table, I don't know if she wants to pull it up, but the table in the A.M. peak hour,

[7:32:47] the out is not a negative, but it's a positive. So, it equates to a higher trip generation

[7:32:54] for the out in the A.M. peak hour. I know it's getting really technical, but in the P.M. peak hour,

[7:33:02] it generates a higher end and not a negative in trips.

[7:33:06] I'm happy to put that on. If we're going to go down this to try to confuse everyone, I'll write that.

[7:33:12] That's like you might want to see the table.

[7:33:15] What

[7:33:27] Susan was clarifying is it is a.

[7:33:32] You may have to go back to the mic and somehow.

[7:33:35] So what Susan is clarifying here is that the AM peak total is 150, which is what I said.

[7:33:44] you agree with that Susan. And that the in is negative 313. Correct. And then that

[7:33:52] AM out at that time is 163. Correct. That's what you're going to have to do.

[7:33:57] Going from multi-family to office there are more people leaving in the morning and in the office

[7:34:02] there are more people coming. And then just to opposite, opposite in the evening. But what I said was

[7:34:08] still correct, there is an overall net reduction, which means fewer cars overall. Right. But I just

[7:34:14] I want to make sure that that's not a false narrative, that it's a negative, because depending on the operation on analysis based on those data, it will determine if say you need additional left turn lane or whatever the results of the analysis is.

[7:34:29] Absolutely. And so to be clear, an operational analysis is not required at the PD level but is required in conjunction with the approval of our IDD correct?

[7:34:40] Yes, and that we have Marna if you need to

[7:34:43] the additional information and have a traffic

[7:34:45] and so Marna as part of the approved methodology,

[7:34:51] we are actually required to study eight different intersections

[7:34:54] in this area for that operational analysis.

[7:34:58] And I'm not hurt.

[7:35:00] Overly concerned with the morning trips, as you've already pointed out, the entrance to see

[7:35:03] world is in the opposite side of that. And the PM ones could, could be an issue, but I did

[7:35:10] me with both parties. And I appreciate their input and the information that they provided to me.

[7:35:16] Thank you.

[7:35:21] All right.

[7:35:27] Commissioner Simmerhead.

[7:35:30] Thank you, Mayor. So I had a question. So Susan, are the, are the chip count numbers based

[7:35:37] off of, and I don't remember the exact unit count, like the 1100, or where the trip count

[7:35:42] numbers based off of what I think we heard was, instead of 670 or 680 units.

[7:35:51] My understanding is it is from 699 units.

[7:35:55] 680 units.

[7:35:56] So there are two different things.

[7:35:59] So what is up here now, right now the project is approved for 362,000 square feet of office.

[7:36:07] When you take that number and you run it through the conversion, that gives us the 1,124.

[7:36:15] That's what we're asking for the PD to be changed to because you don't want to give up those trips.

[7:36:24] The operational and concurrency analysis that is required as part of the IDD approval requires us to use the unit count in the IDD.

[7:36:35] our proposed IDD commissioner has that lower number.

[7:36:41] So, it is net no difference in trips because or PM peak hour trips because that's what

[7:36:48] we're required to use in the conversion.

[7:36:51] So, that's what you see on the screen now that's the 428 to the 427.

[7:36:57] Right, I understand, but the account was because the trip conversion is the 1,100.

[7:37:04] but your unit count that you are going to be building is approximately 679.

[7:37:10] That is what we've asked for the IDDS.

[7:37:12] Okay, and does C-World know that it's a reduction of all of the of just 679?

[7:37:18] We have a copy of our IDDS and we also provided this full impact analysis to them.

[7:37:26] Okay, and then I thought that you had mentioned that C-World and Heiser Bush had once owned

[7:37:34] This property is at this property, or was it the one that you were referring to regarding the multi-family?

[7:37:40] So my understanding is that a C-world controlled entity once owned this property,

[7:37:47] hardcore, that I pronounce it, hardcore, so that is true, the property we're currently talking about,

[7:37:52] and it is also true that C-world or Anheiser Bush owned the property my client purchased in 2012.

[7:38:01] And when did the sale happen?

[7:38:04] I have the existing property that I'm in.

[7:38:07] An eyes are bush sold it.

[7:38:09] When did that happen?

[7:38:10] That transaction.

[7:38:11] Oh, my goodness.

[7:38:12] The property we're talking about now.

[7:38:14] I couldn't tell you when.

[7:38:15] Again, it was hard core, which was a C-world entity.

[7:38:19] I'm looking at Jake Elbrough, who's our historian here.

[7:38:22] I don't know when it was when it was sold.

[7:38:26] They're saying the 80s.

[7:38:28] Okay.

[7:38:28] All right. Thank you.

[7:38:29] So, all

[7:38:33] right, Commissioner Gomez could there.

[7:38:38] Thank you, Mayor.

[7:38:39] So, I wanted to ask the same thing, because I was confused if they,

[7:38:46] the residential one and not this one, but they did.

[7:38:49] So, another question, Becky.

[7:38:54] What are the peak hours there?

[7:38:56] The peak hours of the peak PM peak hour AM peak hours is that when see woolly's clothes when his open is what?

[7:39:07] Because I can't see that peak hours all the time, but anyway

[7:39:10] Do you know that area?

[7:39:11] I do not know see world's operational hours.

[7:39:14] My bet would be they probably have employees coming in in the morning when you look at an AMP.

[7:39:21] But then this report was the peak hours in this report.

[7:39:26] So the peak hours in this report that we looked at were in the AM, which was 7am to 9am, and then also in the PM, which was 4pm to 6pm.

[7:39:36] Who's 6pm?

[7:39:37] And as you can imagine, multi-family's peak is not on the weekend, right? People are coming and going to work during the week.

[7:39:47] And C-World said that their peak, or maybe it was their traffic engineer, said that their peak would be on the weekends.

[7:39:56] I was, I was gonna actually maybe this, but I don't know if I should actually.

[7:40:01] I'm just thinking, you know, seewall is one of the team parks, right? Team parks here in Florida, Central Florida. And so I was thinking that you, your client, so have had a good communication, so with them, you know, before they, you know, they were deciding to have this to see if that was, you know, something that that could, you know, maybe help, we regained, see we're okay for the hearing.

[7:40:28] See that again? We reached out to see world before the original hearing. Yes, okay. Okay, okay. Thank you. Thank you, thank you.

[7:40:40] Commissioner Wilson. Commissioner Scott, your was was pressed to do unprecedented.

[7:40:52] You wanted to speak. Okay, then we'll go to Commissioner Wilson.

[7:40:57] So I was trying to declare you can excuse me. So just for the record.

[7:41:06] and then sold to you wrote and I was a bus, it wasn't the inverse.

[7:41:09] Because I remember there was a book company I just checked online to make sure

[7:41:12] so hard-curt own that property I think they had a call center or a book warehouse.

[7:41:16] They bought C-Rode in 76 and then sold C-Rode in 89.

[7:41:21] Hard work at some point owned both C-Rode and the piece of property we are buying.

[7:41:27] Copy. Okay, just wanted to make sure I understood.

[7:41:29] I haven't done a dig deep on that one.

[7:41:32] but I know that much, and then you can see on the screen

[7:41:37] the other part of it.

[7:41:38] I mean, I was the guy just want to make sure I

[7:41:39] had a good understanding of time out of this.

[7:41:48] Commissioner Wilson.

[7:41:51] Thank you so much, Mayor.

[7:41:51] Thank you to my colleagues for thoughtful questions.

[7:41:54] I want to thank the applicant team for being

[7:41:59] amenable to the last continuance and forgetting

[7:42:02] together with the neighboring property owners

[7:42:04] and continuing to provide information.

[7:42:05] And I also met with the C-World team and have continued to get information in and everything

[7:42:12] I get.

[7:42:13] I want to continue to facilitate because I think, no matter what, you will be neighbors and

[7:42:17] want to make sure that the goal, if the state of goal from, I think, you know, C-World

[7:42:22] is to make sure that we're getting around this area safer and in a way that makes sense

[7:42:30] for the residents and visitors that we're all in the same page.

[7:42:33] I don't think anybody's disagreeing with that.

[7:42:35] I will tell you that philosophically, I love a project like this.

[7:42:39] This is an infill project with multi-family housing near a large employment area.

[7:42:45] So I do hope that as part of the process, that there are plenty of pedestrian options,

[7:42:50] and that hopefully some folks that work at sea world will get a chance to live so close they

[7:42:54] don't have to get in their car.

[7:42:56] So those are the things that I think, you know, looking at this holistically and I understand

[7:43:00] and we didn't work out the details that wanted to be worked out.

[7:43:04] But I'm still very hopeful for the outcome here, knowing that there's an underutilized

[7:43:08] piece of property right in an area that can really use some additional housing opportunity,

[7:43:13] multifamily housing opportunity.

[7:43:15] So with that, I'll make a motion for approval.

[7:43:17] Second, you're Ruby.

[7:43:19] Okay, just to be clear, that's for the 60-day continuance, is that what we're talking about?

[7:43:24] No, no, no, no.

[7:43:24] Motion to approve the requested action.

[7:43:26] Okay.

[7:43:26] All right.

[7:43:27] So, all right, with that, we have a motion by Commissioner Wilson, second by Commissioner Uribe.

[7:43:34] All in the favor, let it be known by saying aye.

[7:43:36] Aye.

[7:43:37] Opposed no.

[7:43:39] Motion passes, and it is unanimous.

[7:43:42] All right.

[7:43:43] Thank you all for your presence.

[7:43:44] We're going to move to the next item.

[7:43:45] We're going to agenda, and this is item E6.

[7:43:48] We're open the public hearing on this item.

[7:43:50] And Mr. Thelmut, I'm going to ask you to frame this item.

[7:43:57] Thank you, Mayor.

[7:43:58] This item is case CDR 25.

[7:44:00] 5, 10, 2, 4, 8, this one is in movement to the epic Aloma PD.

[7:44:07] This site's roughly seven acres located in northwest corner of the intersection of North

[7:44:11] Semoramble of Arden Aloma Avenue.

[7:44:14] This is a waiver request to amend the PD to ask for one waiver code to allow accessory structure

[7:44:21] used for covered parking in a multi-family district between, to be located between the primary

[7:44:27] structure and the right of way and lieu of not being that, and I'll explain that way for

[7:44:32] just a moment. This is located in District 5. Probably is designated medium high density residential

[7:44:40] on the future land use map, and as previously mentioned, is zone PD as the epicoloma PD.

[7:44:48] Here we have an aerial of the site. The site was previously approved and constructed as a senior

[7:44:54] 55 plus the Parkment Complex. You can see the existing apartment complex.

[7:45:00] And the surrounding parking lots. And the proposal is the developer would like to take some of those existing parking spaces and over top of them construct some covered cardboard structures.

[7:45:16] However, those covered cardboard structures qualify under our code as accessory parking structures and code says those should not be located within the or between the primary building and the right away.

[7:45:28] Hence, the waiver, though we have the overall land use plan here, but what might be a little more

[7:45:36] Clear on the proposed ask you have their proposed. This is just a general concept plans. This is not part of the land use plan

[7:45:43] But if you look very closely, you can see

[7:45:46] certain covered areas within the parking lot. That's where those proposed

[7:45:51] covered

[7:45:52] the important areas would be and staff did work extensively with the applicant team to limit

[7:46:00] the number and location of those throughout the process. So with that, the recommendation

[7:46:05] is to make a final consistency with conference a plan and approve the amendment to the

[7:46:10] ethical OMAPD subject to the conditions of approval listed under the DRC recommendation

[7:46:14] the staff report. And with that staff and the applicant are available for questions.

[7:46:18] All right, if the applicant or Representative is present, would you want to approach the mic?

[7:46:24] It's yours.

[7:46:26] I, Cody Klanowski, 5A1100 Avenue East, represent the owner.

[7:46:33] Pretty straightforward project.

[7:46:35] We agree with the DRC recommendation and here to answer any questions.

[7:46:40] All right, stand by.

[7:46:42] Do we have members of the public present who should be here on this item?

[7:46:45] We have no speakers for this item there.

[7:46:48] All right.

[7:46:48] Then we'll close the public hearing.

[7:46:50] We'll go to the District Commissioner, Commissioner Simre,

[7:46:53] I have a potential motion.

[7:47:02] Thank you, Mayor.

[7:47:03] I only had one question that it's I asked staff yesterday,

[7:47:06] and I just wanted to make sure because this is a

[7:47:09] senior facilities or senior.

[7:47:13] Yes, ma'am.

[7:47:14] Yes, ma'am.

[7:47:14] And I, so seniors, we, we all retire on a fixed income.

[7:47:19] And I want to make sure that this is not looked at as like,

[7:47:22] You know, you have assigned parking spots in apartment buildings and condominiums.

[7:47:27] And so your assigned spot is this and now you get a canopy over it and now your

[7:47:32] rent goes up and you're living on a fixed income.

[7:47:34] So I wanted to make sure that we're not talking about an amenity that becomes a price increase.

[7:47:40] No.

[7:47:40] Okay.

[7:47:41] It's not going to be considered an amenity.

[7:47:44] It's just for the community.

[7:47:46] I guess they were kind of requesting it for quite some time.

[7:47:51] Okay, I'm going to put these in.

[7:47:53] Great, with that, I'm very comfortable with making the recommendation with the motion on the screen.

[7:48:02] All right, if we have a motion in a second, all in favour of letting me know I'm saying aye.

[7:48:09] Opposed, no.

[7:48:10] Thank you.

[7:48:11] Motion passes, and it is unanimous.

[7:48:13] All right, we're going to move the item F7.

[7:48:16] We're open to public hearing on this item.

[7:48:17] Mr. Thelmule, I understand you're going to be framing this item as well.

[7:48:21] Thank you, Mayor, this item is case DP-209-220.

[7:48:26] This one is the Hamlin West Plan Development Unified Neighborhood Plan Hamlin West Plan

[7:48:30] Engineering Subdivision Plan Lifetime at Hamlin Development Plan.

[7:48:35] This site is generally located east of state road 429 west of Babylon, south of New Independence Parkway

[7:48:41] within the Horizon West Town Center Village.

[7:48:44] This is a development plan, not to entitle a property or to subdivide a property, but to construct

[7:48:51] and 84,000 square foot athletic club gym facility. This is not something that typically

[7:48:58] would require consideration before this board. However, the property is within Horizon

[7:49:04] West and being located in Horizon West. They do have the ability to ask for waivers from code

[7:49:10] at these downstream site planning stages in lieu of the requiring to request those waivers

[7:49:19] at the earlier land use plan stage, like on the previous cases we just heard.

[7:49:23] So in addition to the proposal to construct the structure, there is also one way

[7:49:27] we're from code, and it is to reduce the linked to node ratio from 1.42, 1.14, from 1.35.

[7:49:37] And I'll identify what that means here in just a moment sites located in District 1, designated

[7:49:42] on the Horizon West special planning area land use map as retail wholesale district, and as

[7:49:48] the Vision Zone PD, Planned Development District, which is a requirement of all development within

[7:49:54] Horizon West site is currently undeveloped, which might be able to identify from the aerial

[7:49:59] here.

[7:50:00] Surrounded by in-process and entitled development, mixture of commercial single multi-family mixed types of uses out there, consistent with the horizonless framework.

[7:50:11] Here we see the site plan, and on the site plan, we see the building itself.

[7:50:16] There is also a requirement this being in the horizonless town center that there is a certain project, intersection density.

[7:50:24] So there are requirements for what are called links and nodes.

[7:50:28] Those nodes are the intersections.

[7:50:29] The links are either public streets or in horizon

[7:50:32] what's what are called framework streets,

[7:50:34] which are essentially private streets.

[7:50:38] And you can see here there are streets running through the project,

[7:50:44] north, south, east, and west.

[7:50:46] And there are several existing intersections.

[7:50:48] This project comes very, very close.

[7:50:50] But technically there should be one more per code right down here.

[7:50:54] However, due to the site design and constraints and requirements that was unable to be

[7:50:59] complied with, hence the request for the waiver, which staff is in full support of due to

[7:51:06] the very limited nature of it.

[7:51:08] So with all of that said, the recommendation here is to make a fine of consistency with

[7:51:12] the conference of plan and approve the lifetime of Hamland Development Plan subject to the

[7:51:17] conditions of approval listed under the DRC recommendation of the staff report, and with

[7:51:21] staff in the applicant are available for questions.

[7:51:26] All right.

[7:51:27] Thank you, sir.

[7:51:28] Is that how we're going to miss item present?

[7:51:30] OK.

[7:51:31] Ms. Wilson, you're busy.

[7:51:34] I'd like to take the first 14 minutes

[7:51:36] to thank you for being mayor.

[7:51:40] Oh, by the way, I'll be mayor to desilting

[7:51:44] more to speak today.

[7:51:47] Rebecca Wilson, 2015, Northeal,

[7:51:49] arrived here on behalf of the applicant,

[7:51:51] happy to answer any questions you all may have.

[7:51:53] We agree with the DRC's recommendation.

[7:51:59] All right.

[7:51:59] Thank you.

[7:52:01] With that, do we have a member's out of public presence?

[7:52:04] Who should be heard on the side?

[7:52:06] We have no speaker, so the side of the mayor.

[7:52:08] All right.

[7:52:08] Then we'll close the public hearing.

[7:52:11] We'll go to the District Commissioner.

[7:52:14] We do have questions.

[7:52:16] I have Commissioner Wilson.

[7:52:19] I see Commissioner Simran.

[7:52:24] Thank you, sir, and I also wanted to say how much I appreciate you having

[7:52:28] bed mayor.

[7:52:31] But I just wanted I was happy to hear with this one that there's a wetland on site and I

[7:52:38] just wanted to make sure I'm public record that we're saying that that's not going to

[7:52:42] be impacted.

[7:52:43] Is that this one this Wilson this is the other one okay thank you I'll be chiming in again

[7:52:52] and will appreciate you again mayor thank you.

[7:52:58] Okay, with that commissioner Wilson.

[7:53:03] Yes, thank you, also Mayor for being mayor.

[7:53:06] And thank you for the question.

[7:53:07] This is actually a frightening thing for me

[7:53:10] to think about this getting derailed,

[7:53:11] because the people out there are so serious

[7:53:13] about getting a gym, and like heaven help us

[7:53:16] if this was somehow derailed at this point.

[7:53:19] So with that, I'll make a motion for approval.

[7:53:23] All right,

[7:53:27] okay, we have a second on the motion,

[7:53:30] Commission on UVA. All in favour, let it be known by saying aye. Aye. Opposed no. Motion

[7:53:37] passes and it is unanimous. All right. As we move forward, item G A has been withdrawn. So

[7:53:44] we will not have an conversation regarding that today. Also item G 9 has been withdrawn. There

[7:53:52] would be no conversation on that today. And item H 10 has been withdrawn is where that would

[7:53:59] no conversation on that. That takes us to item I in 11. You know, open the public hearing on this item,

[7:54:06] and I'm going to call on Mr.

[7:54:11] Guedanic. Our chief planner from the planning division to come forward

[7:54:16] and he'll be framing this item with that. You are recognized. Good evening, Mr. Marin Commissioner.

[7:54:21] It's Julian Guedanic with the Planning Division. At this time, we are discussing the adoption

[7:54:28] hearing for a small scale future land use map amendment SS26007038 and the concurrent rezoning.

[7:54:36] The applicant is Gregory Crawford of Thomas and Hutton, and this request specifically

[7:54:40] is to change the future land use from planned development commercial to industrial and

[7:54:48] property is approximately five acres in size. It's in district three and proposed development

[7:54:53] intent of the applicant is industrial warehouses.

[7:54:57] This is the general location of the subject property industry.

[7:55:00] Three, it's on East Oak Ridge Road, just west of the FDOT railroad, right of way, and this is the area of the subject property.

[7:55:08] You can see the surrounding environment for context.

[7:55:12] The existing future land use, as mentioned, is planned development commercial. This was established in 2010.

[7:55:18] Founded in it created entitlements of approximately 40,000 square feet of commercial development on the site.

[7:55:23] The request is to salvage the industrial future land use

[7:55:28] desidation, and in essence, this is to revert the property back

[7:55:31] to what was designated prior to the creation of the planned

[7:55:34] development.

[7:55:35] The applicant no longer intends to develop under those entitlements

[7:55:38] and therefore is electing to revert back to that industrial designation.

[7:55:43] As you can see, it's surrounded on three sides to the north,

[7:55:47] to the southwest, and to the east, with existing industrial future land use.

[7:55:52] Likewise, the current zoning is planned development.

[7:55:55] This was established through land use plan approval in 2024 for a private school of 488 students.

[7:56:03] Again, the current property owner does not intend to develop that school, so they are

[7:56:07] electing to revert the property back to the prior designation, which is industrial district light.

[7:56:12] I won I-5.

[7:56:13] Again, you can see the properties surrounded by industrial zoning designations on three sizes as well.

[7:56:20] For some context of the area, this is the subject property.

[7:56:24] It's currently vacant on improved land.

[7:56:27] Each of the site is the FDA to railroad right of way,

[7:56:30] and then further east is industrial property,

[7:56:32] and then further east of that is orange Avenue.

[7:56:35] North of the site is another vacant,

[7:56:37] industrial, designated property,

[7:56:39] and then the north of that, as well as more industrially designated property

[7:56:43] with the development already in place,

[7:56:46] that the property owner currently owns.

[7:56:48] they own all three of these properties, contiguous.

[7:56:52] West of the site is a place of worship.

[7:56:54] That's in industrial future land use

[7:56:55] designated property.

[7:56:57] South of the site is a various mix of light industrial

[7:57:00] and commercial uses a few different automotive repair shops.

[7:57:05] They're located here.

[7:57:06] This is commercial future land use.

[7:57:09] Here's another one, just across the street.

[7:57:13] There was a community meeting held on June 15th.

[7:57:15] The 240 notices were mailed out. We had nine members of the public in attendance. There were some concerns discussed by those in attendance and they generally related to potential impacts of the industrial traffic that might be generated by this use as well as the visual appearance of the proposed development and whether it was appropriate for the site.

[7:57:35] In terms of traffic, I will point out that this is overall anticipated to be a net reduction

[7:57:40] in trips relative to the traffic that would be generated from the private school that

[7:57:44] was previously entitled.

[7:57:49] And staffs analysis just wanted to summarize three quick points.

[7:57:52] We are recommending approval of this request, specifically, Future Land Use Element 8.1.7 from

[7:57:59] the comprehensive plans, says that non-residential plan developments should be considered

[7:58:02] for reversion to their prior land use destination if development does not commence within

[7:58:07] five years. That's what it's occurred here. As mentioned, they're proposing to

[7:58:11] revert back to their prior designation. And then to summarize, each land use policy 11417 and

[7:58:18] 11420. This is not verbatim, but just again, in summary, the county should retain an adequate

[7:58:23] supply of industrial land uses and guide industrial growth towards established industrial areas

[7:58:27] and existing corridors, in four existing employment centers, et cetera, staff finds that

[7:58:33] this particular location meets that criteria, and then lastly, the most recent industrial

[7:58:38] capacity analysis for the county, which occurred in 2007, found that the existing industrial

[7:58:44] vacant land is not sufficient to meet the demand capacity for the 2030 planning horizon,

[7:58:50] and as such, introduction of new industrial future land use in areas where compatibility

[7:58:55] can be maintained should be prioritized, staff finds that compatibility is maintained in this location.

[7:59:01] So for those reasons, we recommend adoption and approval, the local planning agency also

[7:59:06] unanimously recommended approval and adoption as well.

[7:59:11] We are attaching one recommended condition or restriction to the rezoning, which is that

[7:59:15] billboards and poll signs shall be prohibited.

[7:59:18] And with that, that concludes my presentation and I'm happy to answer any questions.

[7:59:25] All right, with that, I will invite the applicant or representative of the applicant to come forward and make any comments.

[7:59:39] Good afternoon.

[7:59:39] My name is Greg Crawford.

[7:59:40] I'm with Thomas and Hutton, 5127 South Orange Avenue, Orlando, Florida.

[7:59:45] And here representing the owner and the property.

[7:59:47] With that, we agree with the recommendations and the staff report with regards to this project.

[7:59:51] And here, to answer any questions you might have.

[7:59:53] And also, be open any responses after public input.

[7:59:57] All right, stand by my scroll for the door.

[8:00:00] We have members of the public present, which we heard on this item. Again, this is I in love him. If you want to speak on this item, if you have not filled out the card, you can do that afterwards. Otherwise, please come forward. Mayor, we had a number of speakers on this sign that some of them have left. It looks like we have one, two, three, four, five, six speakers left.

[8:00:26] First speaker will be Gail Patrick followed by Nancy Compiglia and Nancy, you had some time dedicated,

[8:00:43] you're going to have a one extra minute, it looks like two of the folks have left.

[8:00:47] So following Nancy, we'll have Lauren Buckner followed by Sandra Castano.

[8:00:53] And Sandra, you're going to have two extra minutes

[8:01:01] following Sandra, it will be Nisha Thompson and

[8:01:06] Jacqueline Davenport.

[8:01:12] Okay.

[8:01:13] We will start with the first speaker if you can give us your name and address for the record.

[8:01:17] We appreciate it.

[8:01:19] My name is Gail Paget.

[8:01:20] I live at 1605 Orangewood Avenue or Lando.

[8:01:24] I'm chairman of the Pine Castle Historical Society.

[8:01:30] Mayor and commissioners.

[8:01:32] Thank you.

[8:01:33] The applicant and the staff encourage you to approve

[8:01:37] the investigation of the industrial zoning to the site,

[8:01:41] zoning which you reverse to commercial just two years ago.

[8:01:47] In furtherance of that objective,

[8:01:49] they tell you that the comprehensive plan generally supports

[8:01:51] the integration of infill properties for industrial use,

[8:01:55] but that is the only part of the story.

[8:01:58] And you as leaders have an obligation to determine

[8:02:01] and what is best for the fabric of the community and cannot act on microscopic and partial

[8:02:07] information.

[8:02:08] The area within the subject sites perimeter within the past several years has evolved

[8:02:13] into a significant activity hub.

[8:02:16] A community that has revitalized restaurants that serve cuisine from American diners to diverse

[8:02:22] cuisine from throughout the globe, office and professional establishments, a charter school

[8:02:28] from K to high school, which is almost doubled in student size.

[8:02:32] There are public elementary, middle, and high schools,

[8:02:35] the Pancas of Women's Club, places of worship,

[8:02:38] and residential use.

[8:02:40] Here, industrial use declined, because the community no longer

[8:02:43] needs it due to an oversuppied industry in the peripheral area.

[8:02:48] In fact, without significant restrictions,

[8:02:51] such development will serve to undo the revitalization

[8:02:54] that we have accomplished.

[8:02:55] Therefore, responsible planning means learning from history, adapting current trends, and improving

[8:03:03] our environment.

[8:03:05] Without well-planned and well-thought-out restrictions and industrial zoning is adverse

[8:03:11] to the safety, health, and welfare of our community.

[8:03:15] We need efficient and effective use of infill properties.

[8:03:18] What is before you today, merits quality and comprehensive review, you should not approve it as presented.

[8:03:30] All right, thank you very much.

[8:03:34] We'll move to the next speaker.

[8:03:42] Nancy Campelia 5465 Lake Jessam and Drive.

[8:03:47] I am an attorney.

[8:03:49] I have represented developers throughout the state of Florida for 26 years.

[8:03:56] So I don't want to mislead you as to my background.

[8:04:00] However, I am here as a member of this affected community.

[8:04:05] I want to say to you that on page three,

[8:04:08] and additionally as recommended today,

[8:04:11] page three of the staff report,

[8:04:13] you're being asked to rely on an industrial capacity analysis of 2007.

[8:04:19] I'd like to share with you information

[8:04:21] from Cushman Wakefield and CBRE and I want you to please understand that the industrial vacancy

[8:04:29] rate in Orlando, that vacancy rate is up 30 points of industrial properties, that the leasing

[8:04:39] is down 69.6% almost 70%. That the city of Edgewood through their wonderful attorney,

[8:04:50] who's here today and done wonderful job is now currently building

[8:04:58] and 563.

[8:05:00] 1,000 square feet of industrial warehousing use. And that particular area is bringing 2,365 trips, give or take.

[8:05:15] It's affecting 14 neighborhood intersections. I want you to please understand that the airport, Lake Nona area, which has a combination of the most modern product,

[8:05:29] in tenant options has a 12% vacancy that the Silver Star Apopka, which has the lowest fee.

[8:05:40] I should say the most economical, has a 13.1% vacancy rate.

[8:05:47] Commissioners, our community is suffering, has suffered.

[8:05:53] I had a tremendous amount of information that our people had to leave for reasons.

[8:05:59] reasons, but I want you to please see what we see from our

[8:06:12] living rooms. And yet, our

[8:06:15] backyard is a 290 acre coveted lake. I could go on showing you pictures, the entry to our

[8:06:25] community,

[8:06:29] Lake Jessam and Drive.

[8:06:33] Thank you for your assistance.

[8:06:39] This is what we see.

[8:06:42] This is

[8:06:49] what we're seeing to our entry and if you would just bear with me this particular picture

[8:06:56] I want to share because the cost analysis is what these people have dealt with your awesome stuff.

[8:07:03] Okay, ma'am.

[8:07:04] And I'll give you a little bit of a rebate.

[8:07:06] Thank you.

[8:07:07] Thank you.

[8:07:08] All right.

[8:07:08] Thank you.

[8:07:10] There's going to be the next.

[8:07:12] All right.

[8:07:12] We're going to move to the next speaker.

[8:07:14] Now,

[8:07:23] my name is Lauren Buckner, I live at 6, 7, 8, 1, Tom's Jefferson Way or Landa 3, 2, 8, 9.

[8:07:32] Development of infill properties are undeveloped within the community's activity of,

[8:07:39] as the potential to serve as a key factor to the neighborhood vibrancy and wholeness.

[8:07:46] Equal is important and proper in-field development could cause a downward cycle on the established community.

[8:07:55] We want to be good neighbors and partners with those willing to invest in our community.

[8:08:02] However, the proposed change must be measured by tangible and positive outcomes for both the community and the developer.

[8:08:11] to be truly affected development must be strategic, data informed and seamlessly integrated

[8:08:21] with the physical environment. Public perception also plays a key role.

[8:08:28] Zoning should be sustained commitment. There has been substantial growth in the

[8:08:34] community consistent with the planned development zoning you approved in 2024.

[8:08:42] Growth that is in concert with planned development.

[8:08:46] You should either reject the application or put in place restrictions

[8:08:50] that will ensure the character safety, health, and welfare of the

[8:08:56] communities fabric is maintained.

[8:08:58] Either way, what is before you is not a toolbox that makes sense, it's a work in progress

[8:09:06] and does not merit approval as presented.

[8:09:10] And just as an extra personal note, traffic in that area is horrendous.

[8:09:18] I couldn't imagine more semis going through the area.

[8:09:23] Thank you.

[8:09:26] Thank you, Ms. Wagner.

[8:09:28] We will move to the next speaker.

[8:09:31] Good afternoon.

[8:09:32] My name is Sandra Castanio.

[8:09:34] I live at 5774 Chipola Circle,

[8:09:37] Orlando 32839.

[8:09:39] Fiction number one.

[8:09:41] The planners tell you,

[8:09:43] Spread industry into multiple smaller parts near highways,

[8:09:48] rather than close to the end in one massive area.

[8:09:53] That does not work here

[8:09:54] because then I don't really do massive warehouses parts within...

[8:10:00] In the immediate area. Project 1, just was of the applicant side of the road building built on 2021. We

[8:10:10] 421, 2, 7, a square feet warehouse, a live manufacturing, operating 24, 7, project number 2, just

[8:10:20] on hold and anobity at the Rundal Main nice property. Could you please play the video for me?

[8:10:41] I

[8:10:42] Project will generate. According to FDOT data, the cost of resurfacing a road could add costs up to $12 million per mile.

[8:10:51] Not only will vehicle overload accelerate infrastructure deterioration, it will pass these costs directly onto the county in state budgets,

[8:10:58] about and at the proposed site the state has invested $8.7 million on road improvements in pedestrian safety for orange blossom trail.

[8:11:07] Which will be reversed by the addition of industrial traffic.

[8:11:11] In addition to mobility and safety issues, the lack of adequate regulation has allowed dangerous

[8:11:16] practices, such as unloading trucks on public roads, which increases the risk of accidents.

[8:11:21] If this massive industrial project is allowed, the cost of emergency services, including

[8:11:26] fire and rescue personnel, will default to the county in state.

[8:11:29] The impact goes beyond infrastructure.

[8:11:31] Tourism, one of the region's main sources of income, will also suffer because, will

[8:11:36] affect mobility in key areas.

[8:11:37] such as Gatlin Avenue, Orange Avenue, and Macboy Road, which connected downtown Orlando, theme parks, and the airport.

[8:11:46] Reducing accessibility and impacting the local economy, economic development is crucial, but it must be executed with planning and responsibility.

[8:11:54] It is not about stopping growth, but about demanding solutions that protect the safety, mobility, and quality of life of our community.

[8:12:00] It is time to make informed decisions. This project will have a destructive effect on our community and should not be approved.

[8:12:06] Our local roads are not designed for the heavy traffic, and devastating impact that the proposed

[8:12:12] massive industrial project will generate.

[8:12:14] According to FTOT data, the cost of resurfacing a road could add costs up to $12 million

[8:12:19] per mile.

[8:12:21] Not only will vehicle overload accelerate infrastructure deterioration, it will pass these costs

[8:12:26] directly onto the county and state budgets, about and that the proposed site the state has invested

[8:12:31] $1.8.7 million on road improvements into this.

[8:12:38] Okay.

[8:12:39] The project was approved and construction is underway.

[8:12:44] Just one and a half miles from the subject side,

[8:12:47] $560,000 square feet of warehouse space,

[8:12:50] $784 parking spaces, $2,365,

[8:12:55] that's what they say,

[8:12:56] new trips affect in I-4 critical intersections.

[8:13:00] and 41.3 acres, a building, high-end residential communities, social slagacy park.

[8:13:08] Fiction number two, they are applicable for you who is proposing a 165,000 square feet

[8:13:15] of warehouse space, told the planning and zoning board that at most, there will be one semi-truck

[8:13:22] per day coming to the site, they believe him, please tell me that you know better, this community

[8:13:30] need you recognize fiction from fact. Our children's and family deserve better. I've been

[8:13:38] begging everybody for the edge good development not to happen and they just laugh a P and they

[8:13:48] told them I'm lying but you guys are making a severance mistakes in the roads of Orlando Florida.

[8:13:54] And this is a brand new city, and it's not supposed to be destroyed before we develop it.

[8:14:02] Thank you.

[8:14:02] All right.

[8:14:03] Thank you very much.

[8:14:06] We'll move to the next speaker.

[8:14:19] My name is Jacqueline Davenport.

[8:14:21] I live at 1124 Hall Lane as president of a volunteer organization of the Pine Castle Safe Community Association Inc.

[8:14:32] We are business and residents laboring for the welfare of our community.

[8:14:39] We facilitate a diverse spectrum of programs.

[8:14:44] Some of our members have been invited to write articles on community and that's what I'm

[8:14:49] giving to you today.

[8:14:52] The application before you have approved without proper safeguards, create dangers for our children.

[8:15:00] The applicant site is located within the arts of a school and daycare center. In addition, not mentioned on the staff report, your traffic division has reported that Oak Ridge Road has the most traffic accidents on record in Orange County. School safety is a responsibility of parents and educators and residents.

[8:15:26] The safety of children at school while traveling to it from as a matter of trust.

[8:15:32] When communities perceive the school areas or unsafe, we expect from the staff, excuse me.

[8:15:44] The confidence in local leadership, what restrictions can we expect from the staff from this

[8:15:55] object, restricting billboards and poll signs are not sufficient measures.

[8:16:02] The motions before you would define constantly with a comprehensive plan.

[8:16:08] The staff report primarily consisted of the reference language from the Florida land map.

[8:16:19] The staff report does not address consistency of the fabric of the community.

[8:16:32] You have the ability to reject the application as presented for the safety of our children.

[8:16:41] All

[8:16:46] right, thank you.

[8:16:47] We'll move to the next speaker.

[8:16:50] Nisha Thompson, 202 Harrow-Av, I wasn't going to speak today, but I've watched the state try to convince everyone property taxes are in consequential.

[8:17:00] They want us to be uneducated, selfish and oblivious to how much those taxes affect your daily life.

[8:17:06] Now with that being said, Florida's destruction continues, as Desantis has performing a press conference saying he's putting a moratorium on data centers.

[8:17:15] us before 84. However, if you read the bill, it actually says data centers are allowed to keep

[8:17:22] their plans secret for up to two years with government assistance. They're selling every

[8:17:28] single piece of land in the Everglades to develop, to developers, in turn, decimating our

[8:17:34] Florida Panthers. One cannot ignore these facts. They're data centers of the most dangerous things

[8:17:40] in American history.

[8:17:42] They're destroying land, poisoning our water supply, endless consumption of electricity.

[8:17:47] Yes, it is a small parcel, but people have been making data centers in their garages.

[8:17:52] Changing your status to industrialists, so-so-sus, especially since some of my neighbors are a little bit older,

[8:18:01] perfect age to start ripeting and stealing their houses via payoff or underneath the guys of what

[8:18:08] Companies are doing now is helping the government take our houses through eminent domain.

[8:18:15] Now, I'm going to tell you, this guy, he has not told us what this industrial compact

[8:18:20] does.

[8:18:21] He wants to switch it to industrial because again, they want to keep us stupid.

[8:18:27] Data centers are also sometimes classified under light industrial zoning due to their building

[8:18:34] type and operational needs.

[8:18:37] So keep in mind, we need to work this together.

[8:18:41] They cannot do this to us.

[8:18:44] The traffic that he's talking about,

[8:18:46] there is a private school right there.

[8:18:48] Cornerstone Elementary.

[8:18:50] My kid went there and I could tell you

[8:18:53] from being there at sixth grade to graduating in 2022,

[8:18:58] it was horrible.

[8:19:00] Just the people that lived there would wait.

[8:19:03] I lived in downtown.

[8:19:04] I'm sorry I know I'm over but I lived in downtown

[8:19:06] And I would have to sit from Orange Avenue and Hoffman all the way there for 20 minutes.

[8:19:12] Thank you.

[8:19:15] We understand your passion.

[8:19:17] All right.

[8:19:19] Do we have any other speakers?

[8:19:20] Mayor, I believe that was our last speaker for this item.

[8:19:25] With that then, we'll close the public comment.

[8:19:27] I'll give the applicant or the Rep opportunity to find the rebuttal comments.

[8:19:36] Yes, thank you, Mayor.

[8:19:37] Yeah, I heard the comments that are in there just want to go ahead and talk to Phil and some banks with regards to some information.

[8:19:43] I want it.

[8:19:44] Basically what's happening is that there was a discussion with the girl, a lot of occupancy available with regards to the industrial.

[8:19:50] But this is basically an owner operated for the most part. He's going to own an operate and most of the majority of the area.

[8:19:56] There might be a small piece that you want to at least put for the most part. It's going to be strict.

[8:20:00] General Assembly and owner operated a product that's going through here. With regards to the tenants, we currently have a

[8:20:06] an existing industrial use incident of back portion that's on the property like said the property on or has three properties here. One of

[8:20:12] these was a one that was switched over to the plan development, and he started to get a rear rear back over to the industrial use to match what it was previously

[8:20:19] basically about a six-eight years ago for that. It's trying to get back into matching what's on he has only other lots there.

[8:20:26] But the existing industrial usage on the North ends have been there been a tent for about 30 years.

[8:20:30] These already been operating on this property for quite some time on it.

[8:20:34] Overall from a trip, it's our traffic consideration.

[8:20:38] There was a school proposed to be on this site and if they were actually to build a school,

[8:20:42] based on the previous documentation, they had basically the Regicornage generated about 1200 trips per day,

[8:20:47] with about 83 PM trips.

[8:20:50] And right now what will happen when it's switched over to the industrial is going to reduce down to about 81 trips,

[8:20:54] based on the ITE. And then it's going to reduce the PM trips required for the site to 36.

[8:21:00] So it's going to be a great reduction with regards to PM trips on the property from the property and also from the overall average daily trips.

[8:21:07] So it'll help to keep the traffic down. It is correct that we're going to have the owner basically when he comes in.

[8:21:12] He's going to have one truck a day to come in to greet him to product and then at that point they would redistribute all of the product they have in the house.

[8:21:18] And then it leaves in smaller like FedEx boxes or truck box trucks on it.

[8:21:23] So, from a semi standpoint, that would be basically just one day as always,

[8:21:27] guys the main part comes in at that point for it.

[8:21:31] So, I noticed with some of the pictures and such like that, there are some cars in that

[8:21:34] and trucks being parked within the roadway.

[8:21:36] Obviously, the circulation, that's the one we're not going to be allowed these days.

[8:21:39] So, the overall design of the site will be served where you basically have the internal circulation

[8:21:42] to where when you come back out to the roadway, you're not parking on the roadway.

[8:21:45] The driveway is going to be set up to where obviously to meet the code today to be able to get the trucks in and out without having issues with regards to

[8:21:52] potentially stopping up on the traffic lanes themselves on that, and then any of the buildings would take and be set up to be able to meet the current architectural codes for orange County in order to

[8:22:03] take and make sure we match their other criteria on that, so I think that kind of covers a lot of the questions or some of the questions that were brought up for the products and hopefully that gives a

[8:22:15] the clear picture with regards what the owner is proposing to do for the site and open to any

[8:22:20] questions you might have.

[8:22:29] Let me do this.

[8:22:32] We're going to close the public hearing and before we go to Commissioner Uribe, Commissioner

[8:22:39] Wilson has a question or comment.

[8:22:43] Yes, thank you Mayor.

[8:22:45] So this is a question for the staff, staff analysis on the land use compatibility.

[8:22:54] looking at,

[8:22:57] I think it's like the fourth paragraph down, it says the most recent industrial

[8:23:00] capacity analysis was completed in 2007. Is that something you're using as a basis for compatibility

[8:23:08] or a report that was from 2007? So, unfortunately that's the most up-to-date information we have

[8:23:15] in this planning horizon, technically we're still in the 2030 planning horizon, one special

[8:23:20] which is a whole other topic becomes effective.

[8:23:23] We would move on to the 2050 horizon,

[8:23:25] but based off of where we are now,

[8:23:31] those numbers are...

[8:23:32] It's a pretty conclusion.

[8:23:33] Resetment that based on this,

[8:23:35] that there's a need for more of a zoning,

[8:23:38] but more of this land use.

[8:23:40] Correct.

[8:23:41] I mean, that's what the analysis finds.

[8:23:42] It's 20 years old.

[8:23:44] Correct.

[8:23:45] That is...

[8:23:45] Yeah.

[8:23:46] That's so complex.

[8:23:46] Okay, sorry, I'm not your, I want to make sure I'm highlighting the fact that that is something that as part of an analysis for compatibility, I would think that there would be some

[8:24:00] other analysis of the need for this particular land use, especially understanding sort of the impacts to historic hearing.

[8:24:08] Sure, I mean, so in terms of the analysis, one aspect of it was reference to the capacity shortage as found in 2007 we haven't had any updated data that suggests that there's a

[8:24:19] still isn't a deficiency, it would be great to have that information, but we don't have it available.

[8:24:24] But in terms of compatibility with the properties that are immediately adjacent, there

[8:24:30] is an established pattern of industrial, future land use, and when we're evaluating any

[8:24:34] property, one of the first things we do is consider what's immediately adjacent to understand

[8:24:39] how that impact might be relevant to what's present, and so it's not just based on the

[8:24:48] capacity analysis although it did play a factor in our conclusions.

[8:25:00] I understand that if it wasn't available and that it was one factor, just based on my reading, though, it was part of the determination, and I guess, you know, and I don't know if we've established something, and Nick, maybe this is a question for you, but about the freshness, if you will, of information, especially when you're looking at capacity building for a future underlying land use.

[8:25:25] I would think that something 20 years old in that capacity analysis that I would rather not be included as part of the analysis, we don't have good information.

[8:25:36] I would rather.

[8:25:37] So one thing to point out is in addition to the study there are comprehensive plan policies.

[8:25:42] And typically that's how comprehensive plan works.

[8:25:44] We do a data analysis for as Julie mentioned, a long plan horizon.

[8:25:50] Well, that's what he uses this for. He actually uses it to justify a value

[8:25:54] 1, 4, 2, 0, orange county seeks to retain adequate supply of industrial land use and then

[8:26:00] justifies it by citing the 2007 capacity.

[8:26:05] So, I think those policies go on to say that there is an eat and based on the analysis that does

[8:26:12] go out, as Julie mentioned, out to 2030, there is an eat for those industrial lands and it is

[8:26:17] to say that it is very, very difficult to create new industrial lands and that new industrial

[8:26:22] tax base, which is why there are those policies.

[8:26:24] Yeah, but I think in this case, the county went through the process of changing the underlying

[8:26:28] land use because of, probably some, um,

[8:26:35] alignment with the comprehensive land.

[8:26:37] Yes, so.

[8:26:37] And this is a reversal of that.

[8:26:39] Yeah, on the history here, I think the, the property originally, they wanted to go commercial,

[8:26:43] uh, the board at the time was uncomfortable with going straight commercial, which was where

[8:26:47] that PD commercial came from, that PD commercial requires is it forces the developer

[8:26:52] property owner to resound the PD to go through that more highly negotiated process.

[8:26:57] I'm assuming the board at the time thought that well if there is going to be commercial

[8:27:01] here there are going to be alternative.

[8:27:03] Uses that's something that needs to go through that negotiated process.

[8:27:06] We know a couple of years ago, property owner did go through that process.

[8:27:10] We worked with the commissioner in the community on that school PD to come up with a number

[8:27:15] of conditions, which seems they're not moving forward with that, and they want to go the other

[8:27:20] way now.

[8:27:23] Thank you.

[8:27:26] Commissioner Samurai.

[8:27:28] Thank you, Mayor.

[8:27:32] So I, so there's only, so I have two issues that are happening right here.

[8:27:37] So one, there's like 0.25 wetland impact, that's going to be on that.

[8:27:43] And I know it only sounds like, hey, it's just 0.25.

[8:27:46] But when we look collectively about how the 0.25s add up over the course of time, we start seeing properties flood in ways that they've never flooded before and we are seeing that every time we have a heavy storm.

[8:27:59] And the result of that is increased property insurance and flood insurance that has outpriced many, many people, including the seniors who showed up today to advocate on behalf of their community.

[8:28:15] The Florida Legislature has completely failed to address property insurance increases, flood insurance increases,

[8:28:24] and has handed over the keys for development to developers who fund their campaigns.

[8:28:30] So, I basically took a oath. I'm not going to contribute to that problem. I'm not voting for any wetland impact.

[8:28:37] Because right now we're looking at less than a 1% annual growth rate in Florida, which is the all-time low with the exception of in the 1940s and the great recession.

[8:28:53] One of the reasons that that's happening, we're actually the only reason is because Florida is so unaffordable and one variable contributing into that equation is because of property insurance and flood insurance.

[8:29:06] Where we sit now today is voters are going to walk into the booth in November and they're going to decide whether or not they should reduce their property tax.

[8:29:18] If they check the box, yes, it's because they're hurting.

[8:29:22] They're wallets are hurting.

[8:29:23] They're strapping their belts and they're strapping the government belt as well.

[8:29:29] But had we addressed property insurance?

[8:29:31] Had Florida legislature not failed?

[8:29:34] We might not be in this predicament.

[8:29:36] So, 0.25 acre is too much for me because we shouldn't be in the predicament of where we are today, and we got here by saying 0.25 doesn't matter, 0.25 doesn't matter, 0.25 doesn't matter, eventually it all adds up in it all matters, and we see it through the cost of our insurance.

[8:29:53] Additionally, when the people of Orange County, people of Orange County are my North Star.

[8:29:58] And when the people show up in these chains...

[8:30:00] Members and say this is not the type of growth or development that we want to see in our community. I support you. I'm standing with the community. I'm standing with the fact that we're pricing ourselves out of our own state by doing these little point two five digs into our environmental assets that mother nature gave us to deal with the incredible storms that Florida gets. So I would not support this. Thank you.

[8:30:25] Well, Commissioner, are you reading for us, Rose?

[8:30:34] First of all, I really do wish that the county would

[8:30:38] relook at this.

[8:30:39] I don't know if you guys remember two months ago,

[8:30:41] the TAF community sat here and said,

[8:30:44] please stop taking our community away by industrializing

[8:30:48] everything.

[8:30:49] And I love someone who born and raised in Pine Castle

[8:30:52] and still lives in Pine Castle.

[8:30:55] What we don't remember is a history of Orange County.

[8:30:58] Everything came in and out on the railroad tracks.

[8:31:00] So it made sense that you had things along the railroad track like this property, but you know you also had houses right on the railroad tracks because that was a way goods came in and left.

[8:31:13] What wasn't discussed and I appreciate you.

[8:31:16] I was a little bothered by the one picture you show which is a car mechanic shop across the street because that doesn't give a full story of what that area is.

[8:31:27] because cornerstone just invested one block away

[8:31:31] and increasing 1,200 students of their school.

[8:31:35] There is a gallery, a block and a half away.

[8:31:39] There's a women's council, less than a block away.

[8:31:43] There's the Pine Castle Safe Neighborhoods, less than a block away.

[8:31:47] And two years ago, we've, we're trying to create this Main Street,

[8:31:52] which included Pine Castle, like Lockhart.

[8:31:54] So, here we have contrary to what the county says we should have been 20 years ago, actually converting.

[8:32:02] And if you really pay attention to the satellite map,

[8:32:05] you don't see all the houses surrounding this area too.

[8:32:08] Or the church, right next to the property, as you go into it.

[8:32:12] So, when you discuss industrial, what you're missing is so much more to this community than what is being portrayed on a screen.

[8:32:21] And this is, I won't be here long enough,

[8:32:24] but this is something that we started digging into,

[8:32:27] which is these future land uses,

[8:32:29] that were created 20 plus years ago,

[8:32:32] and are eating at our communities.

[8:32:36] And I'm so thankful that you guys stayed.

[8:32:38] I'm so thankful that you guys came.

[8:32:41] And with that, I am proud to put a motion

[8:32:45] to deny this application for our Pine Castle community.

[8:32:52] Okay, I think this second to her was commissioned in a similar way.

[8:32:57] She was louder.

[8:33:00] All right.

[8:33:02] All in favor, let it be normal saying, I opposed no motion passes and it is unanimous.

[8:33:10] We're going to move forward to the next item on our agenda item 812.

[8:33:15] I'm

[8:33:20] going to open the public hearing on this item.

[8:33:22] And Mr. What did I say?

[8:33:27] I at the well.

[8:33:28] I at the well.

[8:33:32] I'm going to call them as a Julie and

[8:33:36] a good anecdote to also frame this item with that to recognize.

[8:33:41] Good evening again Mr. Mayor and commissioners.

[8:33:44] Julie and good anecdote with the planning division.

[8:33:45] It's time we are discussing small scale, future land use map amendment.

[8:33:48] SS-260309 and concurrent rezoning case R-V260309.

[8:33:56] The applicant is Rebecca Wilson of Lounds law firm.

[8:34:00] The specific request is to change the future land use from medium density residential to commercial.

[8:34:06] And the rezoning from R-3 restricted, which is a multi-family district to C-3 restricted,

[8:34:13] the current restriction on the multi-family district only allows the use of

[8:34:17] place of worship or church is previously owned by a church. They've, from what I understand, sold the property to the current owner.

[8:34:25] And the proposed restriction on the C3 district is to allow for C2 uses with the addition of one C3 use, which is flex warehousing.

[8:34:33] The acreage is 2.48 acres of or 0.48 R wetlands, so there's two net-developable acres on the property.

[8:34:42] This is where we're located. It's in district 2.

[8:34:46] This is an aerial view of the subter property.

[8:34:48] You can see it's a very unique configuration.

[8:34:51] It's extremely narrow and very long.

[8:34:55] And as I mentioned, the existing feature land uses MDR.

[8:34:59] You can see.

[8:35:00] To the west and southwest, the bud's commercial future land use, and then to the south, there is a multi-family development

[8:35:06] and to the northeast, the town of Eubill, and its commercial designation in the town of Eubill.

[8:35:15] The current zoning, as mentioned, is our three restricted, and as discussed, they are requesting C3 restricted.

[8:35:22] This is the subject site. Again, it's a place of worship, but no longer operable at this location. You can see to the north, or the left of the screen,

[8:35:33] This is the interior of the subject site.

[8:35:36] This is looking northward along Forest City Road.

[8:35:39] You can see the commercial corridor.

[8:35:41] To the south, this is a vacant unapproved commercial property.

[8:35:45] Again, already has commercial destination.

[8:35:47] I believe it is under common ownership with this applicant as well.

[8:35:52] This is south of the site, the multi-family.

[8:35:54] I want to point out that any commercial development,

[8:35:57] adjacent to multi-family is required to provide buffering.

[8:35:59] So this applicant would be required to do the same

[8:36:02] and the particular buffering would be worked out

[8:36:05] at time of permit.

[8:36:07] These to the site is the lake, there's no proposed impact

[8:36:10] or modification to the lake, no Docker connection

[8:36:13] to the lake as far as I'm aware.

[8:36:15] And then, west of the site across Forestary Road,

[8:36:17] you have a mix of office and commercial uses.

[8:36:21] There was a community meeting held on March 12.

[8:36:24] One individual was an attendance.

[8:36:26] they did not support or oppose this for questions.

[8:36:30] It was more so informational and they asked some questions

[8:36:32] and with the applicants for sponsors they had no concerns.

[8:36:37] We have not received any letters of opposition or contacts regarding this request.

[8:36:43] With that staff recommends, you find, to adopt, the Futurulani snap amendment

[8:36:48] and approval of the concurrent rezoning.

[8:36:52] With two restrictions, billboards and poll signs shall be prohibited

[8:36:54] and uses shall be limited to C2 uses, and the C3 use of flux warehousing along with associated

[8:37:01] infrastructure and parking, and I'm happy to answer any questions as needed.

[8:37:06] All right, standby.

[8:37:09] Is the applicant all right?

[8:37:11] Once again, it's Wilson.

[8:37:16] Mayor, thank you so much Rebecca Wilson, 2015, Northeal, a drive here on behalf of the applicant.

[8:37:21] And it's my first project in Commissioner Krabs district, so happy to answer any questions

[8:37:26] that he may have, and to Commissioner Simran, this is the project that has the Wetland

[8:37:32] Determination and we are not requesting any impacts to the Wetland.

[8:37:39] Wetland impacts on here?

[8:37:42] This was, okay.

[8:37:45] Thank you.

[8:37:46] And I'm happy to share the site plan.

[8:37:48] It's an unusual piece of property if you have any questions about that.

[8:37:52] But we agree with the staff report and we're here to answer any questions the board may have

[8:37:56] there.

[8:37:56] All right.

[8:37:57] Thank you very much.

[8:37:58] With that, do we have members of the public present who should be heard on this item?

[8:38:04] We've been to the speakers for the side of Mayer.

[8:38:05] All right.

[8:38:06] Then we'll close the public hearing.

[8:38:08] Commissioner Crab will go to you for potential motion of questions.

[8:38:14] Yes.

[8:38:14] Thank you.

[8:38:15] This piece of property, the conversion to commercial fits well in the area.

[8:38:22] With the buffer, the required buffer between the apartments.

[8:38:24] I'm confident that this will turn into a nice piece of property, so with that I move that it

[8:38:31] that it be approved.

[8:38:32] Second Wilson.

[8:38:33] All right.

[8:38:34] We have a motion and a second.

[8:38:36] All in the favor of letting me know I'm saying aye.

[8:38:39] We'll pose no in the motion.

[8:38:40] The second was Commissioner Wilson.

[8:38:46] Both as unanimous.

[8:38:47] All right.

[8:38:47] With that, we'll move to the next item on our agenda, which is J13.

[8:38:53] We'll open the public hearing on this item.

[8:38:55] Do we realize we have a number of persons from the healthcare industry who've been here for a while now.

[8:39:02] So welcome.

[8:39:03] Mr. John Goodrich, our Deputy Director of Health Services will be frame in this item.

[8:39:07] With that, Mr. Goodrich, you have recognized.

[8:39:10] Good evening, Mayor Commissioner.

[8:39:11] Today I'm here to discuss some proposed modifications to the local provider participation fund ordinance.

[8:39:22] So the local provider participation fund ordinance was approved by the BCC on August 21, 2021.

[8:39:30] It authorizes a non-advillarum special assessment to be imposed against private for-profit

[8:39:35] and non-for-profit hospitals in Orange County.

[8:39:38] It provides that proceeds be used only to benefit the assessed hospital properties through

[8:39:43] enhanced Medicaid reimbursements for health care services provided to the Medicaid eligible

[8:39:48] population.

[8:39:50] The assessment does not financially impact the county or the county's residents, and currently all hospitals must participate and sign an indemnification agreement with the county.

[8:40:00] And 28 jurisdictions have an LPPF program, including Hillsborough, Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami-Dade counties.

[8:40:10] Funds that are collected in the LPPF are sent to the state's agency for healthcare administration and used to fund the state's directed payment program.

[8:40:19] Participating in DPP allows hospitals to receive a higher Medicaid reimbursement rate.

[8:40:23] Currently hospitals are only reimbursed 60 cents on the dollar from Medicaid expenses, and participating in DPP increases reimbursement closer to a dollar.

[8:40:34] The program is administered by Oca and must be approved by CMS at the federal level annually.

[8:40:41] So this just elicit participating hospitals in the county.

[8:40:46] And this is the LPPF budget over the last six years.

[8:40:49] I just wanted to point out that although this is passed through funding, it isn't included in the overall county budget number.

[8:40:56] And that's close to 600 million this year.

[8:41:01] Recent negotiations with Oka and CMS require the following ordinance revisions to ensure compliance with current anticipated program requirements.

[8:41:10] The first revision will allow certain hospitals to be exempted from the LPPF assessment, the second revision will allow LPPF funds for approved programs in addition to the directed payment program, and the third revision clarifies the timing and formula of the assessment resolution, and I'll discuss each of these more in depth.

[8:41:34] So currently the assessment must be broad-based, which means it must include all hospitals and

[8:41:39] the county.

[8:41:40] This is created a statewide challenge for smaller hospitals due to significant unfruitment

[8:41:44] costs.

[8:41:46] And to mitigate this, the state has requested a waivers from CMS to exempt smaller hospitals

[8:41:50] from this assessment.

[8:41:52] If these waivers are approved, it would exempt four hospitals in Orange County and these hospitals

[8:41:57] make up less than 1% of the current assessment.

[8:42:00] So, the hospitals pending removal are as fire health partners, university behavioral center,

[8:42:07] select specialty hospital, and essential Florida behavioral hospital.

[8:42:11] So we are proposing to amend the ordinance to allow these waiver hospitals to be exempted

[8:42:15] from the assessment resolution.

[8:42:18] It's important, this exemption applies just to the assessment.

[8:42:22] The four hospitals will still receive the increased Medicaid reimbursement rate.

[8:42:28] So, the second revision we are proposing is the current ordinance was written specifically to provide funding to the directed payment program.

[8:42:37] And currently, Auckland CMS are discussing whether to redirect some DPP funding toward a new quality metrics program.

[8:42:45] Additionally, the funding could already be used for other currently approved programs that are out there.

[8:42:51] So we propose and menu the ordinance to make clear that funding can be used for any CMS authorized, supplemental, or quality incentive program.

[8:43:04] And this brings us to our last revision. The current ordinance has some administrative language that needs to be clarified.

[8:43:10] But ordinance specifies that the OCA, L-O-A, must be fully executed before the assessment resolution is approved.

[8:43:16] This is not always possible and may lead to delays in approving a future assessment resolution.

[8:43:21] So we propose a mending the ordinance to make clear and execute a letter of agreement is needed before funds are transferred to the state and not before the board approves the assessment resolution.

[8:43:36] Additional, additionally the ordinance specifies the calculation of the percent of the aggregate net patient revenue is based on a county wide amount.

[8:43:45] Recent federal guidance is clarified this should be calculated on a statewide basis and the formula

[8:43:50] and ordinance needs to be updated to reflect this change.

[8:43:54] So we propose emending the ordinance so the percentage of aggregate net patient revenue for all

[8:43:59] assessed hospitals is calculated using that statewide amount.

[8:44:06] In summary, staff recommends approval of ordinance revisions to allow CMS to prove hospital exemptions,

[8:44:11] authorized the use of funds for any CMS or an OCA approved supplemental or quality incentive program

[8:44:17] and clarify current language to update the timing and formula of the assessment.

[8:44:23] There is no cost to the counting to these revisions.

[8:44:27] This concludes my presentation.

[8:44:28] I have a proposed action requested for your consideration.

[8:44:31] Thank you.

[8:44:33] All right.

[8:44:33] Thank you.

[8:44:35] Do we have a members of the public present?

[8:44:37] We should be hearing on this item.

[8:44:38] We have no speakers for the side of the mayor.

[8:44:40] All right.

[8:44:40] Then we'll close the public hearing and we have the action before us.

[8:44:49] We do have commissioners and you have pressure button.

[8:44:55] Commissioner Scott is making a motion for approvals.

[8:44:57] The Secondary is Commission of Wilson.

[8:44:59] All in favor.

[8:45:05] We have an item, the next item that will schedule this discussion agenda item B1. We had a public hearing schedule that was supposed to begin at 5 o'clock, we will obviously well pass that at this point. And this is regarding an item, we have an item that will continue to continue to continue to continue to continue to continue to continue to continue to continue to

[8:45:29] K-14, but this morning we pulled item I-7 that was in tandem with K-14, I'm going to go ahead and this item should move fairly quickly and then we'll have the discussion agenda item that will take a bit longer.

[8:45:52] So with that I'm going to go ahead and open the public hearing at this time on

[8:45:59] K-14 along with the item that was pool of this morning.

[8:46:03] I seven, Mr. James Gray, the Assistant Project Manager from the Zone Division is going

[8:46:07] to come forward and frame this item, and then we'll have public comment.

[8:46:18] Good evening, Mayor commissioners.

[8:46:22] Thank you.

[8:46:24] Since we get the PowerPoint up here, here we go.

[8:46:27] I'm James Gray, I'm the Assistant Product Manager with the Zoning Division here, and I have

[8:46:31] for you today. The second of two public hearings regarding an ordinance related to mobile temporary

[8:46:38] overnight shelters.

[8:46:43] Quick outline will look at the background, proposed code amendments and

[8:46:48] ordinance amendments. There have been some minor changes to that. The fee resolution that was

[8:46:52] pulled earlier, that's going with this item now, and the requested action.

[8:46:57] The background,

[8:46:59] Back in May of last year, we had a memo from District 1, Mr. Wilson, requesting that the board

[8:47:05] has a discussion on zoning or zoning ordinance to address the parking of buses, trailers,

[8:47:10] and other mobile structures supporting homeless shelters and transitional service providers.

[8:47:16] On February of this year, there was a board discussion where they directed staff to create some proposed

[8:47:21] code amendments. And then on June 1st, BCC work session, June 18th, PCC work session, July 17th,

[8:47:29] PCC public hearing, and then on August 4th, we have the first BCC public hearing. First

[8:47:36] of two, again, this is the second one.

[8:47:39] So the proposed code amendments slash ordinance amendments

[8:47:45] is to create a new definition in section 381 where the definitions live for mobile temporary

[8:47:50] overnight shelter, that's MTOS, which would be a self-propelled vehicle, including a bus,

[8:47:57] lawfully registered and operable for use on public roads, that has been retrofitted

[8:48:01] for temporary overnight sleeping accommodations and sanitary facilities, and that is operated

[8:48:07] as part of an approved social service program.

[8:48:10] We don't have a picture of one here, but just for illustrative purposes, imagine a greyhound

[8:48:15] or a motor coach or something along those lines where the seats have been taken out and

[8:48:19] have basically bunk beds lining the aisle.

[8:48:25] We are also proposing to add the M2OS as a specific

[8:48:28] use in the use table section 3877 and they would be permitted outright in commercial and industrial

[8:48:35] zoning districts subject to the general requirements.

[8:48:41] Those general requirements are as follows.

[8:48:43] I will note that initially we were planning to put these in subsection 7 of 3879 and legal has

[8:48:51] advised us that they should go in a Subsection 183 instead.

[8:48:57] They must be operated by or pursuant to a written agreement with a governmental agency

[8:49:01] and in coordination with a bona fide institutional use, such as a non-profit or social

[8:49:07] service organization, church or school, and shall function as an extension of the services

[8:49:12] provided by such institution.

[8:49:15] The arrival and departure of occupants shall be conducted by or under the direction of

[8:49:20] governmental agency or affiliated institutional partner operating the MTOS as part of its

[8:49:25] coordinated service program.

[8:49:28] And then occupancy of the MTOS shall be limited to people referred through the program operator.

[8:49:36] The overnight parking location site must have an existing lawful principle use and shall

[8:49:41] provide access to backup water and restroom facilities for the MTOS occupants in the event

[8:49:47] that on-board facilities become unavailable or inoperable.

[8:49:51] So there has to be a primary structure there on the property.

[8:49:54] It can't just be an empty lock.

[8:49:57] If NMTOS may be parked overnight, excuse me.

[8:50:00] At the site of an approved social service provider, so long as the provider's location is in a zoning district that permits the MTLS and the unoccupied MTLS is located in an approved parking area during the hours of 7 AM to 7 PM.

[8:50:17] So here making a distinction between the occupied and unoccupied MTLS and where it's allowed to park when it's occupied versus when it's unoccupied.

[8:50:26] We'll get into a little bit more of this with some of the other standards, but essentially if it's unoccupied,

[8:50:33] the property would need to be zoned somewhere where you can do a dual rear wheel vehicle, if it's unoccupied.

[8:50:41] If it's occupied, it would need to meet these standards and some of those properties might meet those standards and some of them might not.

[8:50:51] Electrical service shall be provided by either a lawful electrical connection to the overnight location site or by a built-in generator

[8:50:57] that is internal to the NTOS, portable or external generators are prohibited, so these buses

[8:51:03] have a way to add a internal generator for their power or would be outside of the bus.

[8:51:12] We are prohibiting those external generators, but obviously you would be able to do the

[8:51:15] internal generator.

[8:51:18] The overnight parking location site shall have frontage on or direct vehicular access to

[8:51:23] an arterial and or collector roadways, so these are going to be a long major roadway,

[8:51:28] is not tucked back into neighborhoods.

[8:51:31] Occupancy of the MTOS at the overnight location

[8:51:33] shall be limited to the hours of 7pm to 7am.

[8:51:39] Parking of the unoccupied MTOS, once again,

[8:51:41] making that distinction.

[8:51:43] During the hours of 7am to 7pm

[8:51:45] is permitted where the parking of dual rear wheel vehicles

[8:51:49] is permitted as an awful.

[8:51:51] Must be parked on an improved surface,

[8:51:54] so it paved surface or something else

[8:51:55] that can handle the weight.

[8:51:57] There would be a distant separation of 1,000 feet to the nearest residential use measured from property line to property line.

[8:52:06] And the MTOS and overnight location sites shall comply with all applicable fire, life safety, health, sanitation, and vehicle, operability requirements.

[8:52:18] So there have been some ordinance amendments too. This is mostly related to codification and how this ordinance is going to find its way into Orange Code.

[8:52:25] So it modifies that there is a modification to the codification provision section 5 to more clearly

[8:52:33] describe how the NTOS amendments will be incorporated into Orange County Code.

[8:52:38] If in when vision 2050 in Orange Code and the related implementing ordinances become effective,

[8:52:44] the modification does not change the substantive NTOS standards have approved by the board.

[8:52:49] It just clarifies me that codes instructions for placing the NTOS definition per minute

[8:52:53] use provisions and operating conditions in the appropriate locations within the restructured

[8:52:57] code.

[8:53:00] So here are those revisions. I won't read them all out to you, but what's being done

[8:53:04] here is essentially what I just summarized.

[8:53:09] There's also the fee resolution, so there's a resolution

[8:53:12] to establish a permit fee into amend the fee directory with a proposed fee of 93 dollars.

[8:53:21] And onto

[8:53:22] the requested action request that you make a finding of consistency with the comprehensive plan

[8:53:28] To approve and adopt an ordinance pertaining to land use in Orange County, Florida,

[8:53:32] amending Chapter 38 zoning of the Orange County Code,

[8:53:35] amending Section 381 to create a definition for mobile temporary overnight shelter

[8:53:40] and TLS, amending the zoning district use table to establish mobile temporary overnight

[8:53:44] shelters as a permitted use in the zoning code, creating subsection 38797

[8:53:50] to establish operational standards for mobile temporary overnight shelters,

[8:53:54] providing for severability, providing for codification, and providing for an effective date,

[8:54:00] as modified in all districts, as modified referencing the changes that I illustrated earlier.

[8:54:08] And to allow staff to correct any non-substantial grammatical or scripted errors and amend

[8:54:12] the ordinance to include the ordinance number in effective date.

[8:54:17] There's also a requested action for the resolution to approve the proposed resolution,

[8:54:22] Approved a fee of $93 for the review and processing of the MQS permit and to allow staff to correct any non-substantial grammatical or scripted errors and amend the resolution to include the resolution number and effective date.

[8:54:35] That concludes my presentation.

[8:54:36] I'm available for any questions.

[8:54:39] All right, thank you, sir.

[8:54:40] Do we have members of the public present?

[8:54:42] We should be heard on the side of.

[8:54:44] We have no speakers for the side of the mayor.

[8:54:46] All right, then we'll close the public hearing.

[8:54:48] Commissioner Wilson, you have a motion.

[8:54:50] Thank

[8:54:57] you. I need more than one motion. I can I.

[8:55:05] All right, we have a motion by Commissioner Wilson, second by Commissioner Uribe, all in favour of that to be known by saying aye, aye, opposed no, motion passes, and it is, you know, thank you. All right, thank you all very much. All right, we're going to back up now. And Mr.

[8:55:31] Renzo Nostasi, you're sure.

[8:55:34] We're going to own deck, mayor, commissioners.

[8:55:38] This evening's discussion item has to do with a unsolicited proposal that we received

[8:55:45] regarding a promenade concept at the intersection of international drive and assembly

[8:55:50] road.

[8:55:52] This concept was admitted to a spy, Mr. Judge Wallace, who is a proprietor of several properties

[8:55:56] on the international drive, and Mr. Wallace is here as part of the audience.

[8:56:02] So in regards to the presentation itself, just to go through the introduction, statutory public

[8:56:10] private process requirements or procedures, the problem-odd concept itself, considerations

[8:56:17] for the board, and then options or next steps, a summary, and then finally board direction.

[8:56:24] In terms of the introduction, Mr. Wallich's submittal came through his Gateway 2040 LLC, as a unsolated proposal that we received an April of this year.

[8:56:39] Essentially, the Promenade concept is to significantly improve the pedestrian environment on the approaches of the intersection of international drive and San Lake Road.

[8:56:47] And clearly it would enhance the gateway to international drive.

[8:56:56] Certainly a promenade concept would complement the I drive pedestrian bridge, which is currently

[8:57:03] soon will be under design.

[8:57:06] And again, it will function as a place-making enhancement to the bridge footprint.

[8:57:12] a large expanding footprint quite a bit.

[8:57:18] So just to give you a quick refresher on where we are

[8:57:22] with the pedestrian bridge, the concept of study

[8:57:26] was approved by this board back in June of 2025,

[8:57:30] and we had invested approximately $700,000 for that study.

[8:57:35] As I said, the design will soon will be underway.

[8:57:38] We've budgeted 8.79 million dollars

[8:57:41] for that project, for the design, and we anticipate the design to be completed in the summer

[8:57:47] of 2028.

[8:57:49] Right away acquisition, we don't anticipate acquiring any right away for the bridge itself.

[8:57:57] And we are presuming that the right away will be provided to us at no cost to the county

[8:58:03] from the various property owners.

[8:58:05] And then finally, construction is budgeted 32.5 million dollars and the plan completion date for the bridge is in late 2030.

[8:58:16] So I'd like to ask Ms. Wallace to come up and discuss the statutory process for public financial partnerships.

[8:58:27] Good evening. Heather Wallace, Assistant County Attorney. Section 255.065 Florida statute provides a process by which government agencies can engage in a public private partnership.

[8:58:39] In order to meet the needs of timely and cost-effective public projects by improving schedule

[8:58:46] for delivery, lowering the cost and providing other benefits to the public.

[8:58:51] The statute provides general guidance for the process, but allows government agencies to adopt

[8:58:56] their own more detailed process, including an application fee that will help defer the cost

[8:59:01] of reviewing unsolicited proposals.

[8:59:04] The statutory requirements for an unsolicited proposal are listed on the screen as you can see there fairly general.

[8:59:12] We do believe that this particular submittal does meet the minimum requirements of the statute.

[8:59:19] Gateway 2040 LLC intends to finance the promenade with private funds, but seek reimbursement from the county to subject to a negotiated agreement.

[8:59:30] So, if you all decide to move forward with this project, we will have to negotiate a contract which will involve reimbursement for the costs of the project.

[8:59:43] Thank you.

[8:59:44] So, onto the Promenade concept itself.

[8:59:47] So, as I mentioned in a little bit earlier, it's going to require the reconstruction of existing sidewalks and very extensive landscaping features at the intersection and beyond.

[9:00:00] Any required rightaway and easements are to be donated by the property owners in coordination

[9:00:05] with the Gateway 2040 LLC. This renditions sort of illustrates for you the concept itself

[9:00:14] and the general improvements that would occur at the intersection and both north and south of

[9:00:25] international drive.

[9:00:27] And regards to the, again, specific proposals, concepts that was submitted, the idea is to enhance

[9:00:37] and widen sidewalks, include decorative de-walls and retaining walls, fountains,

[9:00:44] irrigation, small public parks or gathering spaces, public art, gateway clock, and so forth.

[9:00:50] So, again, clearly, these are not all items that the county typically would install as part of an improvement to the intersection.

[9:00:59] But regardless, this is the concept that was submitted, and of course, is subject to further discussion and negotiations with Mr. Walak and the effect of property owners.

[9:01:12] The submittal as currently stands today proposes that these improvements be maintained and operated by the county, but we can discuss that a little bit further down in the presentation as to what the county might recommend in regards to O&M.

[9:01:29] Just to give you a sense of the extent of where those improvements are going to take place.

[9:01:34] The areas that you see in blue or purple are the foundations of the location where the bridge

[9:01:41] peers are going to be located.

[9:01:43] As I mentioned earlier, those are going to be donated by the property owners for the installation

[9:01:50] of the pedestrian bridge.

[9:01:52] The rest of the highlighted area that you see along in our national drive to the north and then

[9:02:03] highlighted in blue is what's proposed to be part of the

[9:02:07] promenade concept.

[9:02:09] So as you can see, the improvements go well beyond the footprint of the bridge.

[9:02:15] Sandlight Road is a state road, so we will have to have extensive coordination with the state as well.

[9:02:25] So this is the Northern segment.

[9:02:27] Mr. Awellex properties on the north east property.

[9:02:32] And then on the, oops, next slide, this is the southern piece, as you can see, we still have the proposal that has improvements both along San Lake Road on the south side and on international drive.

[9:02:54] So in terms of cost estimates, now these are cost they were submitted to us as part of the proposal.

[9:03:00] So, these have not been vetted, that's part of something that we will do in the future.

[9:03:05] So, it should the Board decide to proceed with the negotiations, but this is just to give you a sense of what the potential cost might entail.

[9:03:15] So, for planning and design, $700,000, construction 13.8, contingency of $4.8 million in the total project cost is approximately $19.3 million.

[9:03:28] Again, these are very preliminary planning costs, and we will work with Mr. Wallek to refine

[9:03:35] those costs as we go along should we proceed with the project.

[9:03:40] In terms of public benefits, certainly the enhancement is going to provide some additional

[9:03:47] mobility and accessibility and safety features to the public.

[9:03:51] It will certainly highlight the I drive experience and certainly would anticipate that property values would be increased.

[9:04:02] And then I want to emphasize that the property is to be donated to the county and no cost.

[9:04:08] Now, a preliminary evaluation of that property is $8.8 million.

[9:04:12] Again, that's a preliminary cost that was submitted to us.

[9:04:15] But I just wanted to indicate that the donation of the right away is the key element of this project.

[9:04:22] So, just to give you some information or regards to the schedule of both the promenade and the pedestrian bridge, you can see there's some significant overlap at the beginning of the process in terms of the design and somewhat of the right-away phases, but the intent is to complete the construction of the promenade well in advance of the construction for the bridge so that there isn't any conflict that could take place.

[9:04:51] So, again, the Promenade Project is relatively simpler than a much more complex project

[9:04:58] than the bridge that we would just make.

[9:05:00] That's done before final construction of the bridge takes place. So, on to considerations. So, on the face of it today, the concept is consistent with the comprehensive plan.

[9:05:17] Yeah, I drive code and the CRA plan.

[9:05:21] This specific through the CRA, this proposal appears to be consistent with adaptive policy

[9:05:27] and CRA plan and funding already earmarked for this part of investment.

[9:05:32] And the next slide we'll get into the potential investment that might take place.

[9:05:38] So within the CRA itself, there's $26.7 million that is in the budget.

[9:05:45] 15.5 of which is either programmed or already spent and then on the beautification in the

[9:05:53] aesthetic side of the CRA there's $70 million that is in the budget and $13.3 million

[9:06:00] of that is already programmed and or spent. Basically that leaves us with $14.8 million that

[9:06:07] could be available to fund the Promenade and also, as you all know, there's the original cost

[9:06:19] that was submitted as part of the plan. It was $14.4 million. So there's a bit of a doubt

[9:06:23] to there. But as I mentioned earlier, the $14.4 million are very preliminary, high-level

[9:06:32] planning costs so we certainly can go through and refine those costs further.

[9:06:41] So in terms of the project in this scope, the county would recommend that should this

[9:06:45] propose an advance that the final scope and cost be approved by the county in addition to

[9:06:52] the approval of the design firm to make sure the contractor has the proper qualifications.

[9:06:56] And then construction, coordination on oversight, not only take place between the, between Mr.

[9:07:03] Wallock and the county.

[9:07:05] But as I mentioned earlier, Sandlick wrote as part of the state system and will require some

[9:07:10] extensive coordination with the state as well.

[9:07:15] Again, assuming that this proposal would advance, the other things we want to make sure of is that future

[9:07:22] And I'm befunded as appropriate by the property owners, or the or some other entity, as I had mentioned earlier,

[9:07:29] as the proposal stands today, the assumption was that the county would take on the cost of the O&M.

[9:07:35] That is not something that staff is recommending.

[9:07:38] We would recommend that this could take the in the form, the O&M take place in the form of a separate maintenance agreement through a special assessment M&S BU or TU.

[9:07:49] And again, these are negotiation points that can take place, should we move forward.

[9:07:56] In terms of the right away and or easements in the production schedule, as mentioned earlier,

[9:08:04] the pedestrian bridge is fully funded today, it is on schedule.

[9:08:10] And we want to make sure that the right away issues are separate from the promenade.

[9:08:14] So, the issues directly associated with the bridge have to

[9:08:20] pertain to that project and deal with the problem

[9:08:23] on as a potential two-step process.

[9:08:29] So again, right away for the bridge, it remains separate

[9:08:32] from the problem on and all right away commitments should be obtained

[9:08:36] before extensive design efforts have been expended.

[9:08:41] As I mentioned earlier, the DOT will be part

[9:08:45] of our coordination process, and I'm sure as everybody is aware, aside from the Sandlake Road

[9:08:54] ownership of the state, there's a huge interchange project that is currently underway

[9:08:59] at the intersection of BIFOR and I drive, or Sandlake.

[9:09:05] And we have several conversations and meeting with the state, and they have submitted a set

[9:09:12] of issues that they want to coordinate with, which are listed there.

[9:09:15] So, for instance, the maintenance of traffic would have to be approved by the Florida Department

[9:09:20] Transportation prior to the execution of any agreements.

[9:09:25] I want to make sure that the promenade does not interfere interfere with the pedestrian bridge.

[9:09:28] Again, we've extensively coordinated the pedestrian bridge with the state.

[9:09:32] So, again, I want to make sure that there's two issues or somewhat separate maintenance of the sidewalk and landscaping

[9:09:39] agreement for anything that affects Sand Lake Road, address any operational changes that

[9:09:46] would happen on Sand Lake Road that would require FDOT approvals, and then schedule coordination

[9:09:53] of projects, and then, as I mentioned earlier, the proximity of the interchange.

[9:10:00] Is an issue for the State and for FHWA. So we will need to coordinate all those issues with the State and potentially with FHWA as well.

[9:10:12] So continuing on the considerations. Public involvement is part of what submitted. It was submitted to us as part of the proposal.

[9:10:22] And should this again, should this proposal proceed?

[9:10:26] Staff will continue and consult with the I drive CRA advisory committee before any decision

[9:10:32] is made.

[9:10:33] As you can see, there are many entities that pertain to the advisory board, the I drive

[9:10:40] business improvement district, the I drive chamber of commerce, the efficient transportation

[9:10:44] for the community of Central Florida, universal bullroad property owners, tangible park,

[9:10:50] The mayor is appointed member, a membership, a mission review board appointed member.

[9:10:55] So again, it will be extremely important to have the coordination and the

[9:11:01] conversations with the CRA advisory committee, even before any final agreement is

[9:11:09] reached the board direct staff to proceed with negotiations.

[9:11:13] So beyond the CRA discussions, we want to make sure that we reach out to the entire

[9:11:19] community in the I drive area, and the goals are defined and identified for the partners

[9:11:28] and property owners and any interested parties, and that coordination just needs to take

[9:11:35] place from all the way from the conceptual planning stages, all the way through construction.

[9:11:39] So this is a long-term commitment that needs to be made to the community to make sure that

[9:11:44] everybody's informed and is aware and hopefully supportive of the project.

[9:11:51] So in terms of options and next steps, I will ask Ms. Wallace to come back up and discuss

[9:11:57] those items.

[9:12:02] Okay, as I said earlier, the statute does allow local governments to have their own process

[9:12:06] for P3 proposals.

[9:12:08] We do not have one here in Orange County at this time.

[9:12:11] We have drafted one and it's currently under review and will be coming to the board in the

[9:12:15] couple of months. So, because we don't have our own process, we are following the statutory

[9:12:20] process. And again, we believe this proposal does meet the minimum statutory requirements.

[9:12:26] However, we feel additional details are necessary for us to proceed. We are going to discuss

[9:12:33] three options for the board. Option one would be to take no action. If you all decide that

[9:12:39] this is not something you're interested in moving forward with, we would provide Britain notice

[9:12:43] to the proposal that the county just does not wish to proceed at this point.

[9:12:49] Option two would be to advertise for additional proposals for the proposed work.

[9:12:54] This would not be our traditional competitive solicitation that we normally do in the

[9:12:58] county.

[9:12:58] It would be a very abbreviated process where we would open it up to others who might want

[9:13:03] to make a proposal.

[9:13:05] However, that package must include a design criteria package, so it would take some time

[9:13:10] to create that design criteria package, or option 3 would be to proceed with this unsolicited

[9:13:17] proposal, including the donation of the right away. If you choose to select this option,

[9:13:24] we would need to come back to the board at another date. At that time, the board would be required

[9:13:30] to make certain findings under the statute, which are listed on the screen. They include benefits

[9:13:36] So the public, you have to approve the financial structure of the proposal, the qualifications and experience of the private entity, the project's compatibility with regional infrastructure plans and also we would have to address any public comments made at a meeting.

[9:13:53] That would probably come in forward in the form of a resolution that we would present to you at that second meeting should you decide to move forward.

[9:14:02] Law staff would normally recommend option 2, which would be to open it up for additional

[9:14:07] proposals.

[9:14:08] With this particular proposal, we are not recommending that because the LLC involved has

[9:14:14] indicated that they will not provide a donation of the property needed for the project if

[9:14:20] they are not selected to construct the project and if we don't move forward with this public

[9:14:24] private partnership.

[9:14:26] So, again, you have three options at this point. Option one would be not to move forward.

[9:14:32] If you do that, we will provide written notice to the Mr. Wallock that we are not prepared

[9:14:39] to proceed at this time. If you select Option two, we would return to the BCC with a recommendation

[9:14:46] after evaluating any other proposals that are submitted. Again, we are not recommending

[9:14:52] misoption in this particular project. If you select option 3, we will proceed with creating the...

[9:15:00] Report, that's required by the statute and the form of the resolution. We would engage the

[9:15:05] adjoining property owners and we would return to the board for findings and then we would publish

[9:15:11] the report in accordance with the statute. If approved, under, excuse me, either option 2 or option

[9:15:19] 3, we will engage an engineer and begin negotiating a comprehensive agreement, which will also

[9:15:25] back to the board for final approval. So basically, you would see this at least two more times

[9:15:31] after tonight if we were to move forward with this project. As part of the statutory requirements

[9:15:38] for a comprehensive agreement, we must, the board must determine that the proposed project

[9:15:44] has been determined to be in the public's best interest, that the proposed project is one that

[9:15:49] will be conveyed to Orange County.

[9:15:52] We have received that representation from Mr. Wallick.

[9:15:56] That it has adequate safeguards to ensure that any additional

[9:15:59] cost or service disruptions would not be imposed

[9:16:02] on the public in the events of a cancellation of the agreement

[9:16:06] that we ultimately negotiate.

[9:16:08] And then it has adequate safeguards in place

[9:16:10] to ensure that the public or private entity

[9:16:13] has the opportunity to expand capacity to the project.

[9:16:17] Again, if direction is provided to advance the proposal and continue negotiations on the proposal and eventually a comprehensive agreement,

[9:16:26] in addition to the safeguards that I just mentioned, staff would recommend addressing the following and any agreement that would result.

[9:16:34] Renzo mentioned these earlier, county approval of the design, maximum amount that the county

[9:16:40] would contribute, and also cost reasonableness, county approval of the design from the

[9:16:45] contractors and construction oversight, agreements for a maintenance of the landscaping

[9:16:51] and other improvements by private entities as opposed to the county, early commitments for

[9:16:56] right of way from the property owners separate from the right of way for the pedestrian bridge,

[9:17:01] and also a commitment to meet FDOT and FHWA requirements and enter into any necessary agreements.

[9:17:11] So I will turn it back to Renzo.

[9:17:15] Thank you.

[9:17:17] I know this is a little repetitive, but just want to make sure that we outline everything that was discussed.

[9:17:24] So just in summary, Gateway 2040 LLC submitted on solicitor proposal and April of this year.

[9:17:32] The promenade includes enhancements to the areas surrounding the international drive pedestrian bridge.

[9:17:39] It is a key gateway to the international drive district.

[9:17:42] The proposal meets the statutory P3 requirements.

[9:17:47] The promenade is proposed to be privately funded initially with a provision for reimbursement

[9:17:53] and the estimate cost of the improvement is $19.4 million.

[9:17:58] While rights away are to be donated most costs and maintenance obligation could fall to the county and taxpayers be of the CRA.

[9:18:07] If the proposal is advanced, key issues require clear board direction.

[9:18:12] So, at this point, I would ask Mr. Wall to come up for a second and I believe we have a very short video.

[9:18:22] Good evening, Mayor Deming's Board.

[9:18:25] Members of the Board County Commissioner's Joshua Wallach, 8126 International Drive.

[9:18:29] I know it's been a long day, but this is a very wonderful moment here for us, and I just wanted to thank staff for this tremendous work that they've done on this project.

[9:18:45] We started out with an unsolicited proposal.

[9:18:48] I've owned property at this intersection since 2012, and I'm sure we all know.

[9:18:54] have heard all the statistics about all the car crashes and all the pedestrians and bicycles and we've

[9:19:02] all been down there and we've all seen it. I believe I have a tremendous institutional

[9:19:07] knowledge of this area both in construction and mobility and our property and the county's bridge

[9:19:15] together, created a much larger, amazing vision, which we were calling gateway 2040.

[9:19:24] The county's bridge is an iconic work of art, and met with Mayor Demings last summer,

[9:19:30] just talked to him about the bridge, and everything regarding the bridge, and with Rosanne,

[9:19:36] and we just sort of fluttered through this idea of, I had already drawn one promenade

[9:19:41] you know, in a drawing and there it was mentioned, you know, why don't we just do this

[9:19:45] on all four sides and divide and conquer?

[9:19:48] And I just took that and ran with it and between the idea and submitting the unsolicited

[9:19:55] proposal took fifty-seven days, I worked.

[9:20:01] 24 hours a day, basically, with my team, and was able to submit the unsolicited proposal. And that's how it just flowed through me as far as the need for this, because this is a community.

[9:20:16] You know, this is not just the tourist district. We've had so many people move here in the last five years, even though it slowed down a little bit because of the economy. This is a community.

[9:20:25] And this is part of Dr. Phillips, as far as I'm concerned.

[9:20:29] This is where I like to take my kids, just walk around and get lunch and, you know, and

[9:20:34] right now, obviously it's two highways that meet each other, but we're putting in a beautiful

[9:20:40] bridge, but what this partnership does between Gateway and Orange County is that it just expands

[9:20:49] the vision geometrically in many different ways, and it takes the I drive 2040 vision, which

[9:20:55] has been lost since 2017, and it really starts to turn it into reality. So when people

[9:21:00] come off of I-4 through that beautiful new intersection that we're building, a beautiful new

[9:21:05] interchange rather, and they come on through the divergent diamond. The first thing that they're

[9:21:10] going to see is the promenade. They're going to come under I-4 and they're going to see that

[9:21:15] somewhere else. I don't know if this will play. Miles will play. But the reason that I don't

[9:21:22] have a static rendering and then I have something like this is so that people can live inside

[9:21:27] this vision. People can see what it will be like when you're standing on the promenade, eating

[9:21:33] at a cafe, just walking past people that are having lunch and there's the pedestrian bridge and

[9:21:40] But where are the cars?

[9:21:41] They're on the other side of those royal poms which have beautiful lighting on them.

[9:21:47] And it really, really looks like an amazing place to be.

[9:21:53] There's another JPEG.

[9:21:56] So this is something that you guys haven't seen yet, is just something that, again, the

[9:22:03] beautiful drone bridge, the beautiful promenade, you have still have zillions of cars coming

[9:22:09] going, but no more people in the street. They're all on the promenade. They're next to the

[9:22:14] shops, restaurants, and cafes. They're nowhere near the cars any longer. And so now you have

[9:22:20] more mobility with the cars, double timing, through the lights, because they're not waiting for

[9:22:24] pedestrians. That's great any longer. The pedestrians are walking next to shops. And so the sales

[9:22:29] and shifts and jobs are going up. People can upgrade their tenants. People on I drive right now

[9:22:35] are walking on a sidewalk right on the street. And then there's 20 feet of nothing. And then

[9:22:39] windows. So people are walking, they don't even see what's in the shops right now. We're going to

[9:22:44] completely change that over because why? Because that's what tourists and conventioneers and these

[9:22:49] great cities that we compete with and certain areas within our city like Disney Springs and

[9:22:54] City Walk and other places like what will become hopefully church street as a pedestrian

[9:22:59] promenade. This is what people expect. They want to be safe. They want to not be near cars. They want to

[9:23:07] have no danger with their children, and they just want to shop and eat and relax and not have

[9:23:12] to deal with crossing highway.

[9:23:16] So the bridge is an amazing enhancement to the area.

[9:23:19] It's going to be iconic.

[9:23:20] It's going to be between you and me, next to Cinderella's Castle in Spaceship Earth, it's

[9:23:26] this building.

[9:23:27] I mean, that's going to be the icon of this town.

[9:23:30] But the promenade makes the bridge work in a much more profound way, both in foreman and

[9:23:38] function.

[9:23:38] And the entire gateway, all of the businesses, all of the development, it needs infrastructure

[9:23:44] to grow along with it, because right now our roads and our sidewalks are stuck in the

[9:23:50] 1970s, and we need to kind of quantum leap them into the future here.

[9:23:55] And that's done with a master plan project, like a gateway 2040 vision, which is a, will

[9:24:02] be sort of a combined layered project between the promenade and the bridge.

[9:24:08] So it'll come in as a master plan, and you will have this master result.

[9:24:14] And this you're looking at is the I drive 2040 vision plan, Mayor Demings has supported

[9:24:19] this his entire administration and we pushed us along but we're still early within the

[9:24:26] 2040 we still have 14 years of till the year 2040 but this is what it should look like

[9:24:34] in 2030 this is this is the year 2030 so what would be 10 years ahead on the gateway and

[9:24:41] then going if you make a left turn you can see as mentioned the biggest promenade which is

[9:24:46] The bottom left is in front of Perkins.

[9:24:49] We're donating land in front of Perkins and 7-11 in Berkin going all the way down.

[9:24:56] We'd like to do something for a North High Drive Gateway, Rosen.

[9:25:00] Hotels and Resorts, they were here a little while ago, they wanted to come and speak also, because

[9:25:04] they're so very, for the project, but they're looking to get involved with their hotel, somewhere

[9:25:11] along the north side. We'd like to do some sort of cultural trail. We think that there are

[9:25:16] some great people like Harris Rosen, the late Harris Rosen and his son, Natham, as well as Ron Dowdy

[9:25:23] and Donald Hubert and other people like that that deserve their place in history on international

[9:25:28] drive. There's some great, great names that have done a lot for the drive. Maybe we can find

[9:25:33] some little area for them to take some, do some sort of a cultural trail. We have some

[9:25:39] very cool street art. But all this stuff is just conceptual. Obviously, we'll come back to

[9:25:44] this staff and we'll go through these finishes. We'll choose the finishes that you are wanted.

[9:25:49] And I've talked to the I drive district, which I've been on the board of directors of for nine

[9:25:57] years now, and we do a lot of landscape maintenance on international drive, so we realize that

[9:26:03] the county is not going to be able to take care of, you know, whatever tree package, again,

[9:26:07] and this one we have beautiful royal palms, but we don't know that that will be what we ultimately

[9:26:13] choose, but we believe we can find suitable maintenance for all this that won't fall on the county.

[9:26:20] And again, we have commitments.

[9:26:24] Renzo mentioned the commitments for the bridge.

[9:26:30] I was helpful to assist Luciana in contacting the owners of the other corners so that the

[9:26:41] county can obtain those corners.

[9:26:43] I did have to do some bird dog to find out who these people were but we got to them.

[9:26:48] And I'm also pledging to obviously not only deliver the voluntary conveyances, but also we've

[9:26:59] spoken to McDonald's about similar voluntary conveyances, not just the corner, but also some

[9:27:05] areas of the promenade that they could donate land, and then also some other international

[9:27:11] shops area right there where you see the billboard, you see that beautiful promenade coming

[9:27:16] down.

[9:27:17] all that land is there and it's available and she's also believes this will be an iconic thing

[9:27:22] and I told her I said you don't even have to redevelop your building, you just put that

[9:27:26] promenade right there and all of a sudden the you know some of those shops that are there will

[9:27:30] become Starbucks and the highest rent you can possibly get versus you know some of the stuff

[9:27:35] that's there now so I'm extremely excited about being involved with Orange County on such a wonderful

[9:27:43] long-term community project.

[9:27:47] This is a steady hand that's going to get this done.

[9:27:50] And it's, you know, obviously, we're highly invested

[9:27:52] in this area.

[9:27:54] All that we have the support of all of our neighbors

[9:27:57] and all of our all the organizations.

[9:27:59] And we're hoping to get your support as well.

[9:28:03] Obviously, staff, thank you so much for your incredibly

[9:28:06] hard and diligent work in this amazing endeavor.

[9:28:10] and we hope you will look favorably on this proposal.

[9:28:18] All right, thank you, Mr. All.

[9:28:22] You go to the last slide, please.

[9:28:26] So, just to finish off, Mayor.

[9:28:29] So, staff is seeking more direction on options for the unsolicited proposal.

[9:28:34] Again, the repeat option one, no action.

[9:28:37] Option two, the county solicitation of additional proposals.

[9:28:41] Option three, procedure and negotiations for the unsolicited proposal.

[9:28:45] staff would recommend that approach given that essentially there would be no project without

[9:28:52] the right way being donated to the county.

[9:28:55] If option three is selected, staff will coordinate with the address stakeholders prior to

[9:29:01] returning to the board and prior to the final consideration of the comprehensive agreement.

[9:29:06] Staff additionally seeks authority to negotiate the following terms and conditions to

[9:29:10] including a future comprehensive agreement before a final decision is made.

[9:29:15] County approval of design, maximum county contribution, and cost reasonable of this.

[9:29:21] County approval of design firm contracts and construction oversight.

[9:29:26] Agreements for maintenance of the landscaping and other improvements by private entities.

[9:29:31] Early commitments for a right away from property owners, separate from the right away

[9:29:34] for the pedestrian bridge and finally commitment to me, FDOT and FHWA requirements and answer

[9:29:41] into any necessary agreements with the state and or federal government. With that,

[9:29:48] Mayor and Commissioner, that concludes our presentation on our here for any questions you may have.

[9:29:56] All right.

[9:30:00] Mr. Wallik, thank you for your foresight and your vision. I can tell you that overall the international drive

[9:30:08] corridor has come a long way. We have been very successful over time. We learned over time some

[9:30:17] of the mistakes made and want to say in the development phases of the northern portion of our

[9:30:24] driving. The Southern portion is much more aesthetically pleasing than the way it started

[9:30:32] out many years ago as a young police officer, 45 plus years ago. We had to deal with

[9:30:42] all kinds of traffic congestion and teenagers and young adults will come out and they

[9:30:47] would just take over the roadway and we would have to shut down the roadway they would

[9:30:53] ride and just create all kinds of challenges for the business community that made it

[9:31:00] unfriendly. Perhaps Commissioner Wilson was in the group, but you know, no, but I see

[9:31:10] it was a hang out smile. So I wrote motorcycles and horses out in that area and so

[9:31:19] Because of growth in our own success, international drive has become a destination onto

[9:31:27] itself.

[9:31:29] People used to come here to the area to visit our theme parks and they would sometimes

[9:31:34] stay off site and stay on the international drive and go to wet and wild and some of

[9:31:40] the other attractions.

[9:31:41] But now, because we have a wonderful convention center that brings in a lot of people.

[9:31:47] we have world-class hotels, we have icon park and a lot of other things that makes it a

[9:31:55] destination unto itself. But bringing in all the vehicular traffic as well as the pedestrian

[9:32:02] traffic, this particular intersection of international driving and saying like, Roe, it has

[9:32:08] made it inherently unsafe because of so many pedestrians that have to cross at gray and there have

[9:32:17] in a number of tragic accidents, their motor vehicle versus pedestrian, etc. in an area.

[9:32:27] And so I don't believe that option one of taking no action is in a best interest of the

[9:32:36] public, from a safety perspective and even from a business perspective, I think we'd be

[9:32:43] sure cited to do nothing there because of what we are experiencing. I don't believe that

[9:32:51] the visitation in the area is going to decline as unlikely in any time soon. So we have to

[9:32:59] look to the future. And in order to, I believe I have the right balance of calls. We do have to

[9:33:09] invest more in public private types of partnerships, and that's what this really

[9:33:15] accentuates. However, that needs to be certainly the right balance of the investments

[9:33:22] between the private partners and the public partners, because at the end of the day we use

[9:33:28] the public taxpayer dollars to make our investments. And so this is an unsolicited proposal

[9:33:36] One that I have do a promise of Walaq and his team for bringing forward here to the county.

[9:33:45] They need us and we need them.

[9:33:49] And so to me, option three is perhaps the right option at this time to involve our staff and having further conversations with the existing

[9:34:05] I drive stakeholders because we need here from them, you know, to, we have the initial investment

[9:34:13] of building this intersection, this elevated intersection, but also across, well, because you

[9:34:22] say, but we also have, I think, the responsibility to make sure that the businesses who are

[9:34:33] operating in the area, they're going to benefit from their bottom line, I think, will go up.

[9:34:42] And when we talk about operations and maintenance calls associated with this going into

[9:34:48] the future, that needs to be a conversation about how we pay for that, certainly the

[9:34:55] will be engaged, but I want to hear more about.

[9:35:00] The potential for some sharing in the calls to maintain this area, the aesthetics of the area.

[9:35:11] And I believe that some type of MSVU or other funding mechanism is going to become appropriate.

[9:35:20] So we need to have those conversations with the potential stake holders and hear directly from them.

[9:35:27] Not through Mr. Wallek, not through anyone else, but directly through them where we discuss publicly what the vision the true vision is for this project going forward.

[9:35:44] And to me, option three, allow staff to continue moving forward.

[9:35:50] I think there's some synergy with some of the construction with the Florida Department of Transportation that is already underway in the area, you know, just west of there.

[9:36:01] You know, we have the new interchange with the industry for and the San Lake Row area that is providing some relief there.

[9:36:12] but we then need to carry it forward into this international

[9:36:18] drive and saying they grow a corridor as well.

[9:36:23] So I come park, continuing to grow, today we even talked about.

[9:36:29] I come park in some of the new businesses and expansion going on there that's going to

[9:36:34] bring additional people there.

[9:36:37] And if people don't feel safe, they won't want to come to the area.

[9:36:41] So to me, safety is a paramount issue.

[9:36:46] I'm going to open it up for questions by members of the board,

[9:36:51] and we're going to start with Commissioner Scott

[9:36:53] and Commissioner Wilson, Commissioner Yereve,

[9:36:58] Commissioner Crab, Commissioner Gomez, Cadero,

[9:37:02] and then Commissioner Martinez, Sam Red.

[9:37:05] So everyone has some questions or some comments that they like to offer.

[9:37:10] So we'll start with Commissioner Scott.

[9:37:14] Thank you, Mayor.

[9:37:15] Thank you, Josh, and Company.

[9:37:16] I appreciate you all.

[9:37:17] Don't in the work.

[9:37:19] Rinse out.

[9:37:19] Well, I don't know if this is your county attorney from the process standpoint.

[9:37:23] You want direction, so will that direction be in the form of consensus or we need to make

[9:37:28] a motion?

[9:37:29] No, sorry.

[9:37:30] We're not looking for a formal motion.

[9:37:32] We're looking for it.

[9:37:33] It's just the authority for staff to continue negotiations and discussions with Mr. Wallick and

[9:37:39] rest of the property owners, so not necessary to have a formal motion, but just give us authority

[9:37:44] to do so.

[9:37:45] Okay, you got two out of seven.

[9:37:47] I'm sure rest of my colleagues are on board as well.

[9:37:49] But option three, let's go.

[9:37:50] Thank you, Mayor.

[9:37:53] Commissioner Willson.

[9:37:56] Thank you, Mayor.

[9:37:58] And thank you, Mr. Walgain.

[9:37:59] And I want to say for the people who have been here.

[9:38:03] Since the beginning of the day, thank you.

[9:38:04] Because I know these are really important issues that will leave impacts for

[9:38:10] for years and years in years to come and I want to say that I like pedestrian improvements

[9:38:16] are near and dear to me and it's a heartbreaking thing a little bit for me to look at this

[9:38:21] because all of the renderings that are so engaging. The one thing they all had in common was there

[9:38:27] was no 12 lane, 10 lane road that was interrupting really the commerce which is what you all are

[9:38:35] kind of navigating in that area.

[9:38:38] The most 70s thing about that area is quite

[9:38:40] frankly the fact that it is completely auto-centric,

[9:38:43] that it was designed and continues to really operate

[9:38:46] in an auto-centric way.

[9:38:48] And I said this is as a, you know,

[9:38:50] I have a love-hate relationship even with the pedestrian

[9:38:53] overpass because it is an incredible, incredible project

[9:38:58] that has taken a lot of time and partnerships.

[9:39:01] But it's because we weren't willing to give up

[9:39:03] single bit of automobile traffic to give way to pedestrians, and so I just wanted to put

[9:39:10] that out there as what I feel like is something philosophically and culturally, we're

[9:39:15] going to have to really navigate when we look at destinations around the world, and what

[9:39:20] is attractive, and what attracts my eye to these things is that it's people, it's humans out there

[9:39:27] enjoying one another, it's natural landscapes. The automobile is a mechanism for getting

[9:39:33] in there and how do we make sure that that's not the focus of all the design.

[9:39:37] So that's just my sort of a little bit of a lead-up to this, but I do think that you are

[9:39:44] exactly right in looking for ways to take advantage of what is already a paid for opportunity

[9:39:51] to keep people safe and then also to bring more foot traffic into that area.

[9:39:57] I think my concerns and thank you all for the brief.

[9:40:04] We are a public entity and therefore, the process of procurement is rightfully, very much competitive and public, and it's something I feel pretty strongly about making sure that we have all of it open to the public, and I know that's a difficult thing in this set of circumstances.

[9:40:23] So, my question is if there, you know, would there ever be an opportunity to sort of separate

[9:40:29] these things and think about the land right away conveyance as one piece, the design and

[9:40:40] construction of the improvements as a second piece and then the ongoing operations management,

[9:40:45] the maintenance, if you will, as a third piece so that the parts that can be competitive right

[9:40:50] away in that we can make part of a public procurement process that we can do that with some

[9:40:57] assurances.

[9:41:00] I'm not sure, I'll answer your first question first, so I'm not sure that we can separate

[9:41:05] the design from the actual project moving forward, precisely because of that right away donation.

[9:41:12] So the preliminary cost of a value of that right away is $8.8 million.

[9:41:16] I don't know that certainly the county does not have that as much as today to engage a design firm

[9:41:25] to implement the concept or design the concept and then go out for construction without the right way being in place.

[9:41:36] So that's something that we discussed at your briefing.

[9:41:40] And again, I think Mr. Wallick's been pretty clear and he saw it on the slides that he would

[9:41:46] not be willing to proceed with the project any other way.

[9:41:52] So the right way is key to the success of this process.

[9:41:58] And then as to your second question regarding the maintenance of the proposed improvements

[9:42:07] and features, certainly from what you saw on the slides and, again, as we discussed in your briefing,

[9:42:14] a great many of those features are something that the county typically would not build or maintain,

[9:42:20] whether it's, you know, fountains or statutes and so forth. That's something that we believe

[9:42:28] staff that that would require a MSTU or BU or some mechanism that would pay for the maintenance

[9:42:38] of those elements that are outside of our typical maintenance program.

[9:42:43] That is not to say that the county would not participate in some of the improvements like

[9:42:48] potentially widening the sidewalks and something that we would typically do anyways.

[9:42:53] But that's going to be part of the process and then negotiation to determine what's a public

[9:42:59] benefit versus more of a private benefit.

[9:43:03] And I guess, you know, the question is, would there be anything, and let's, I mean, we sort

[9:43:07] of are also looking at a local government funding, you know, a lot of funding on certain

[9:43:12] these, you know, a local government right now.

[9:43:14] So would there be anything from the county's perspective that would prevent the private entities

[9:43:19] from pursuing this project, independent of county contribution.

[9:43:30] What board can I?

[9:43:32] So private entities that are there, and I understand we're working with one person

[9:43:36] that is a landowner, but also is really a champion of a project.

[9:43:41] But there is more than one entity that is obviously would be participating in this project

[9:43:47] moving forward.

[9:43:48] Is there anything that prohibits them from doing the project independent of counties financial support should the uncertainties that we are?

[9:43:59] So I don't know that I can answer that question without if the county would not invest in the project itself.

[9:44:08] But what is clear is that the state will want to negotiate with the county and not with the property owners.

[9:44:17] So when we get into maintenance agreements and costs, the county has to be involved.

[9:44:22] And that's when we decide, well, who's responsible for what?

[9:44:24] That's part of the transfer.

[9:44:25] As you're going to pay for it.

[9:44:27] I guarantee the state will want to deal with the county.

[9:44:31] They've already expressed that sentiment.

[9:44:33] And to me, the second piece of it is,

[9:44:36] staff has to begin to engage with the stakeholders.

[9:44:42] Okay.

[9:44:43] conversations with property owners or the stakeholders in the area. But we really need to get

[9:44:50] a first person from them about what their potential tolerance is for and making an investment

[9:44:57] into this area again if it's a troupe.

[9:45:00] Public private partnership, we're not talking about just one partnership with one private entity, but we're talking

[9:45:08] about potentially with multiple ones. And we don't know what we don't know until we really have that full engagement.

[9:45:14] And I want to make sure I'm being clear. I'm very much leaning in the way of making sure that we're empowering,

[9:45:20] to have to go through that process. I think the part that I want to make sure that I can go back and explain to my constituents and people,

[9:45:27] who want to know why they don't get this help

[9:45:29] at the entrance of their own neighborhoods,

[9:45:31] is why is this different?

[9:45:33] If there's a group of citizens with private property

[9:45:36] that are willing to donate this,

[9:45:38] some of their private property the right away,

[9:45:42] and in design they're landscaping and then the county,

[9:45:48] what's gotta gonna pay it me back for that.

[9:45:49] I made it as beautiful.

[9:45:50] It's now worth more.

[9:45:51] You're getting more out of the alarm.

[9:45:53] So, how do we distinguish those types

[9:45:55] of opportunities, you know, in an equitable way and understanding that kind of have to look at it

[9:46:03] holistically, right?

[9:46:04] I mean, has this ever been done anywhere else, is there a model we can use?

[9:46:09] And, but I do agree with you, Mayor, we have to speak with the stakeholders.

[9:46:12] I agree with you also, in that part of your point was that we need to look at multimodal

[9:46:18] solutions to the traffic going into the area.

[9:46:22] So I believe that is something that has to occur concurrently what we are talking about here

[9:46:29] because we have an intermodal sentiment that is this plan and we have had conversations

[9:46:36] in partnership with universal and others about getting, you know, sundry off from the airport

[9:46:47] or some type of connectivity from the airport

[9:46:50] into the international drive corridor.

[9:46:53] And beyond all of those conversations

[9:46:55] need to continue if we really want to get

[9:46:59] more of the vehicles off the roadway

[9:47:02] and turn that area into a more pedestrian friendly area.

[9:47:07] So I think that all of those conversations

[9:47:11] So for future boards, we're going to have to continue.

[9:47:17] Obviously, we have multiple conversations about opinion sales tax,

[9:47:24] half opinion sales tax to try to advance the solutions to our transit challenges

[9:47:32] So for, and timing is everything, our community didn't feel that we had with the economy

[9:47:41] being what it was at the time, the ability to go forward with that.

[9:47:46] But our remaining optimistic that as traffic congestion worsens, I believe that the interest

[9:47:56] And the desire of our community for a real multimodal solution to traffic problems is going

[9:48:03] to go up and so keep that in mind, know in your tenure remaining here on the board and

[9:48:13] others that this is going to not go away, it's going to be part of the conversation I think.

[9:48:20] We can't solve housing without solving transit, we can't solve the economic issues without

[9:48:26] creating jobs, good paying jobs, and we're working on all of those fronts to make that whole

[9:48:35] area better, area in our entire community better.

[9:48:40] All right.

[9:48:41] Commissioner Graham.

[9:48:48] You was one out.

[9:48:53] All right.

[9:48:53] Thank you, Mayor.

[9:48:54] Appreciate it.

[9:48:55] Just a while.

[9:48:55] Thank you so much for bringing this forward.

[9:48:57] Having the vision to do this.

[9:48:59] And, and although I agree with Commissioner Wilson on transparency and

[9:49:08] an opportunity for people, you're the one that brought it forward.

[9:49:13] Other people had an opportunity to do it and they did.

[9:49:16] So I appreciate the vision.

[9:49:18] I'll certainly have some questions about how we're going to pay for this and how what

[9:49:21] is some maximum dollars that the county would commit to it.

[9:49:25] And Rinsa too, I forgot to say how do you have a senior forever, but I'm glad

[9:49:28] I've been able to see you today.

[9:49:31] This is an unbelievable project for those who don't know.

[9:49:36] I worked down on I drive for many a year at the Convention Center, very familiar with

[9:49:40] the issues down there and very familiar with what's needed down there.

[9:49:44] And so I will always be a voice of common sense for some solutions down there and agree with

[9:49:51] the mayor for all of those transportation issues that we need to have a discussion about.

[9:49:56] But thank you for bringing it forward, and I am a.

[9:50:00] Okay, yes, on option 3. Commissioner Gomez, good day roll. Thank you, Mayor. Good afternoon, even in everyone. Thank you for being here. Soleil, we attire to, I know that.

[9:50:15] for sure. Okay, so I have several questions. Number one, do we know how much the county

[9:50:24] will save if we do unsolicited proposal and solicitation of additional proposal?

[9:50:34] So I don't think the savings necessarily in nature of the proposal. The savings is really

[9:50:41] the fundamental piece to this project, which is the right away.

[9:50:46] So, it's approximately $8.8 million.

[9:50:48] $8.8 million.

[9:50:50] $8.8 million.

[9:50:51] So, that's the benefit that Mr. Wallach and other property owners bring to the table without that right away is frankly there isn't a project.

[9:51:00] So, the right away belongs to him?

[9:51:03] So, I can let Mr. Wallach answer specifically, but he has at least two properties there and that there are the property owners.

[9:51:11] both a long-standing and a long international drive.

[9:51:14] So it's a group of property owners.

[9:51:18] OK, but not all of them are going to be donating.

[9:51:22] Well, conceptually, the idea is yes.

[9:51:26] Those folks that will see improvements on their property

[9:51:31] will be required to donate their right way.

[9:51:33] Otherwise, those improvements are not going to take place

[9:51:35] on their property.

[9:51:40] And then, okay, my other question is, I still have to get them up.

[9:51:46] That's fine.

[9:51:48] In one of the slides, it says landscape in and the other improvements will be done by private entities, right?

[9:51:57] That's in one of the things.

[9:51:59] So who decides is, it says, she said not the county.

[9:52:02] So who decides who's going to take care of that?

[9:52:04] So, that is part of the negotiation.

[9:52:07] So, as the proposal was submitted by Mr. Wallick, the assumption was that the county would pay for the operations and maintenance.

[9:52:17] County staffers recommending something very different.

[9:52:20] We're recommending that the ONM be primarily funded by the property owners through an MST or BU or some other instrument.

[9:52:29] the county could potentially be responsible for those elements of landscaping or maintenance

[9:52:36] that we would typically maintain anyways, but nothing beyond that.

[9:52:40] But again, those are discussions and negotiations that still need to take place.

[9:52:46] So we assuming the board direct staff to continue our conversations and negotiations with

[9:52:52] the property owners, that is one of the key pieces that we will be discussing.

[9:52:56] Okay and I wanted to ask because I like the pictures that he missed a wallet showed and it

[9:53:08] looks very pretty and all of that. But I was going to ask the people that go in ebi

[9:53:14] scooters will they be able to go through the bridge or they will have to go. So any motorized

[9:53:22] vehicle would not, at least I don't think they would, I think we would have some issues with

[9:53:33] you know, motorized vehicles on the bridge itself. So they would have to be part of the

[9:53:40] typical operations on the road itself. That's the assumption I'm making. I can't, I can't

[9:53:49] I'm having webinar scooters on the bridge.

[9:53:54] Okay, and then my last question, and maybe this is too early to ask,

[9:53:59] but I'm going to ask anyways, because sunlight,

[9:54:02] like Commissioner Wilson said, I've been in construction

[9:54:05] for a long time right now, like very long.

[9:54:09] Okay, so then I just wanted to know what specific impacts

[9:54:12] does sunlight anticipate and do in construction?

[9:54:16] Is that going to be, you know, if we're ready?

[9:54:19] So we've had some discussions with the department, primarily, for example, on the bridge, right?

[9:54:26] So, you know, there's no way that they're going to shut down Santa Lake Road and I4.

[9:54:33] So, that is part of the discussion that needs to happen with the department,

[9:54:36] as to how that made it's a traffic is going to be managed.

[9:54:40] And if you saw one of the earlier slides, that's one of the first thing the department wants to be in place.

[9:54:45] is an agreement about how that management of traffic is going to take place.

[9:54:50] Equally, that's important to the county on our system.

[9:54:55] How are our roads and our operations going to be impacted?

[9:55:00] All agreements that will be subject to negotiations as we go forward.

[9:55:06] So, my last question. Can you explain if we decided on option 3? What does that mean?

[9:55:15] What does that mean?

[9:55:17] That means that this board will authorize the county to continue negotiations

[9:55:23] with Mr. Wallock and the rest of the other property owners and to enter into a series of agreements

[9:55:30] with him and the other property owners on a myriad of issues and don't want to exclude the

[9:55:37] numerous agreements with the state.

[9:55:42] That's sorry. Actually it means after we go through negotiations we will come back to you again

[9:55:47] so you can make the findings to determine that it's in the public interest and we can publish

[9:55:52] report that's required by the statute. And then when we have an actual agreement, we would

[9:55:57] come back for a third time with the contract that governs how it's going to move forward.

[9:56:03] Oh, we would get additional details now so that we can bring it back to you later and you can

[9:56:08] actually make a decision as to whether you want us to move forward and enter into a contract.

[9:56:14] Okay, so I understand all of that and so but for the effect that people are you know listening

[9:56:18] to this and they would like to know why it missed a while I can see on why we negotiate with him

[9:56:23] here. What should we tell them? What is the point? Why him or not the others that are around there?

[9:56:31] Because he submitted the proposal. That's what I wanted to say. Thank you. Okay.

[9:56:42] Commissioner Simmerhead. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you so much for the presentation and I want to

[9:56:49] I'll tell you, thank you to mangoes for a long time ago in Miami when I was a grad student.

[9:56:56] Every time I had a friend come into town, we would go to mangoes and it was always a fun place and more importantly, it was always a safe place, so don't tell too much.

[9:57:07] So everything I say, I say with love for mangoes, that's my prelude.

[9:57:11] So I really I subscribe to the philosophy of what you do for one, you have to do for all.

[9:57:21] And so if we're entering into an agreement with one company regarding an exchange for safety improvements, we have to be consideration of the precedent that we then set moving forward for all.

[9:57:32] And if

[9:57:38] we think about what is being said here, Commissioner Wilson, I think that that procurement

[9:57:44] process is sacred because it's our transparency to the public to say that everybody

[9:57:49] has the same fair shot at getting contracts with Orange County government.

[9:57:56] And so when you get an applicant that says, played by my roles or I won't play, despite

[9:58:01] I can tell that when you present it's coming from a genuine place so I don't mean to insult that, but when I hear that type of language in writing or when I read that it's that's difficult for an elected official to digest.

[9:58:17] Because you're asking us to deviate from a process that on any other day we uphold with pride.

[9:58:24] So, the way that the District 5 team and myself when we read this arrangement, and I want

[9:58:32] to say that before we got the briefing from the county when my team briefed me on this,

[9:58:38] I said, pull all the property owners in the area and run the owners against the name of the

[9:58:44] company that made the application of an unsolicited bid, because things like that don't resonate

[9:58:52] well with the public. And they also don't resonate well with the people and the small businesses

[9:58:58] and the other companies who don't get the same type of deal. So if you look at the actual

[9:59:03] contract, well we're committing to here is that they're going to donate and I put in airports.

[9:59:09] Donate the land to the county on the condition that they get to build what they want, decide who builds

[9:59:16] it. And then the county reimburses them and maintains what they build.

[9:59:25] Whoa. We can do so much

[9:59:27] better for the people of Orange County than that type of negotiation. And I'm not comfortable

[9:59:34] with abandoning a process that we uphold with pride every day in our procurement by giving

[9:59:39] every single company that resides within Orange County, a fair shot at getting deals with Orange

[9:59:46] County. So I'm a real firm know on the way that this is presented. Now, safety is an issue and we shouldn't. If safety is an issue, we need to address it. And

[10:00:00] If men goes once to do some type of a deal with Orange County, where somehow we're profiting off of this deal as well, because it's no secret. You guys are going to profit a lot.

[10:00:12] So what I want to profit to for the people of Orange County. So I don't like this deal at all, and I think we can do a whole heck of a lot better.

[10:00:21] So I say try again and come back and let's hear what's in it for the taxpayers of Orange County, the small businesses in the area of Orange County,

[10:00:28] the other companies in Orange County and the tour is district so I'm just we can do a lot better

[10:00:35] and I and I know that we can and I think that this could be successful but this is this is far away from

[10:00:41] I think being in the best interest of our our bosses the people of Orange County. Thank you

[10:00:53] It may be a but I understand the point you're making but it may be somewhat premature

[10:00:59] because we don't have a deal yet, and the way you characterize that is that we are at the deal is one way.

[10:01:08] That's not what we're seeing here. What we're seeing here is that it came forward with a concept

[10:01:14] what we're doing is going to go further to explore, is there balance, is this in the best interest

[10:01:21] and we're empowering our staff to do so.

[10:01:25] There's no agreement, there's no procurement contract at this point.

[10:01:29] These are discussions that will come back before this board

[10:01:34] and to have all of those conversations about is this appropriate.

[10:01:40] And we do this commissioner all the time.

[10:01:44] Even today we had essentially a public private partnership with the hospitals.

[10:01:49] Those are private entities, and it is a partnership between the federal government, the state,

[10:01:56] the local government, and those private hospitals, okay.

[10:02:00] So until you, the devil is in the details, all we're saying here is, let's take a look

[10:02:06] at the details here, and see as it appropriate.

[10:02:09] This is something that is allowed underfloor to law to happen, and it's allowed for a reason,

[10:02:17] okay.

[10:02:17] So, you don't know what you don't know until you sit down and have a conversation, a business

[10:02:22] conversation with individuals and that's all we're saying at this point.

[10:02:27] There's no obligation here.

[10:02:30] We're not obligating to do anything.

[10:02:33] Everything will come back to this board.

[10:02:36] And that is when you have to look and make the determination whether or not what is being proposed

[10:02:45] is in the best interest of the public.

[10:02:48] That decision is really not today in my humble opinion.

[10:02:53] You don't have enough information to make that decision today.

[10:02:58] Absolutely.

[10:03:06] Thank you, Mayor.

[10:03:07] And I'm not far away from what you're saying, but what I'm saying is that if we could

[10:03:11] please go back to the slide where it talks about why option 2 is not an option.

[10:03:17] So, when you say, like, we're not entering into any type of a deal, we actually are because

[10:03:25] if option two was selected, they said, no, the reason why option two couldn't be an option.

[10:03:35] So, here we go.

[10:03:36] So, while staff would normally recommend option two, opening a public process for additional proposals

[10:03:41] is not recommended with this particular unsolicited proposal, because they indicated that

[10:03:48] We will not provide a donation of the property needed for the project if they are not selected

[10:03:53] to construct the project so a public bidding process is not recommended.

[10:03:59] So that is a deal because what it is saying is that we're deviating from our regular procurement

[10:04:05] process and essentially it's telling us if you don't play by our rules we're going to take

[10:04:11] our ball and go home and just not play.

[10:04:13] So, I don't like walking away from what we would normally do, which is, it says right there,

[10:04:19] we would normally recommend option too.

[10:04:22] I don't like walking away from what we would normally do because that's the transparency

[10:04:26] and what we do.

[10:04:28] So I'm very uncomfortable with option number three.

[10:04:31] And all I'm saying to you is that this part, even on the option two, is not necessarily

[10:04:39] off the table.

[10:04:40] You have to sit down and have the conversation right now. There's been really not a full conversation

[10:04:48] Our staff is listening to what they have proposed and they brought it to you.

[10:04:53] They have to go back now, hopefully, that's where we'll end up to say that they're okay. Go back.

[10:05:00] I can have these conversations. Do you really mean that you won't do this or do that? Those are parts of conversation. That's all we're doing at this point.

[10:05:15] We do for all. And so that's why I don't think the way you characterize it is, you know, the reason we have this very public conversation is to make sure that the public is engaged and knows about the process. That's all.

[10:05:33] But, all right, we don't really believe all.

[10:05:36] Commissioner, you're rebate.

[10:05:40] First of all, Josh, I want to just say you're

[10:05:43] excitement for what you're doing here is amazing

[10:05:46] and you've always been consistent on your commitment

[10:05:48] to I drive and what you're doing.

[10:05:50] I will say the one thing that excites me is if you really

[10:05:53] want to get something done, don't get government involved.

[10:05:57] So, and that's what you've done, what you've done.

[10:06:00] But I got to say, I respect what Commissioner Samrod said.

[10:06:04] But if we don't know what's going to happen, I don't want to end the conversation here.

[10:06:11] So I feel okay moving forward so that you all could find out more and really realistically.

[10:06:18] I know off the bat privately if this is done, it'll cost us cheaper than if we did it ourselves.

[10:06:24] I know that already because I'm in construction and I see what the county pays for things.

[10:06:29] And I see what the real-world pays for things.

[10:06:32] And if the real-world paid what county and government pays,

[10:06:35] we wouldn't be building anything.

[10:06:37] But the idea of we normally wouldn't do this with option number two,

[10:06:44] does leave me uneasy, but it's not an easy enough

[10:06:47] to not want a further discussion and find out more.

[10:06:52] So I am a cautious number three only because I think this

[10:06:57] Lawrence a lot more than just saying right here yes or no okay so I wanted to

[10:07:03] I wanted to make that because over the years if there's been anything consistent

[10:07:07] in my years here has been Joshua like try to fix the corner of San Lake and

[10:07:12] international drive okay I think the first ever met you in 2017 or early 2018 you

[10:07:20] had this vision for there and I appreciate that but I think all of us as it's like

[10:07:26] And if we completely just turn away and say, yeah, that's fine, what kind of precedent

[10:07:33] are we setting forward for government as a whole?

[10:07:37] But at the same time, I think it's warranted.

[10:07:40] And I would like to know more before making a final decision.

[10:07:44] So I'm okay with proceeding to see what viability.

[10:07:49] I do have a question.

[10:07:50] And now I realize DOT is what's happened in on I4.

[10:07:55] We've been very involved with that project.

[10:07:57] But at the same time, Stanley Grotes is a DOT road, you know?

[10:08:03] How have we had conversations with DOT?

[10:08:07] I actually asked Secretary Purdue two weeks ago.

[10:08:11] I said Secretary Purdue, do you know anything about this I4 thing?

[10:08:13] He goes, no, I don't know.

[10:08:16] How expensive how those conversations are?

[10:08:18] We've had several conversations with the state.

[10:08:20] He didn't know that he didn't know the detail.

[10:08:22] Well, I understand the Secretary for Duma not be aware,

[10:08:25] but Secretary Tyler here in District 5 certainly is aware,

[10:08:29] as well as his staff and there have been conversations

[10:08:32] with tell-assie staff not at the Secretary's level,

[10:08:37] but with-

[10:08:37] But you know Secretary for Duma lives all the way down,

[10:08:40] Stanley Grode, or dead-end, right?

[10:08:44] Again, we've primarily dealt with District 5.

[10:08:50] I've had a conversation with him recently as last week.

[10:08:54] We've had multiple conversations.

[10:08:56] I know that Mr. Wallik and his team has had a conversation with the district.

[10:09:02] John Tyler?

[10:09:03] A big part?

[10:09:04] Would John Tyler?

[10:09:05] No, with him specifically, we go to his staff.

[10:09:07] Yeah, because I have to share that information with you.

[10:09:11] I would like to know that, absolutely.

[10:09:16] Commissioner Scott, did I, I don't know if we kicked you out or not.

[10:09:20] But you were in and then it disappeared.

[10:09:22] So I'm going to go back to you.

[10:09:24] Thank you Commissioner.

[10:09:25] I just wanted to provide a perspective for Commissioner Semberrand's comments.

[10:09:31] I think you are a fierce protector.

[10:09:33] I feel like if we were in a branch of service,

[10:09:40] I don't know if you remember this commissioner Simran,

[10:09:43] but Mr. Wallick, when you came to town,

[10:09:48] you were not like the U of U doesn't outside

[10:09:50] or there were a number of negative

[10:09:52] or not so great articles written about you.

[10:09:55] And it took time to build a relationship

[10:09:57] with the members of the I-Draft community.

[10:10:00] Our county at large and so I thank you for staying in the course because you certainly could have kept your business elsewhere and moved.

[10:10:07] Commissioner, your points are valid. I think when I'm looking at these processes and these options, the things that stick out to me is like specific

[10:10:17] proceed with negotiations, negotiations, not agreement or or or or or decision, but proceed with a conversation.

[10:10:25] And then staff will coordinate with I drive stakeholders prior prior to returning to the board and prior to final consideration.

[10:10:33] So they may come back and say, hey, this is what was discussed. This was read upon and say, hey, you know what?

[10:10:39] Mayor commissioners, we need to do something else. Hey, you know what? We need to go through.

[10:10:42] everything is still in the table to what the mayor has shared. I know when we acquire

[10:10:49] right away and likewise for like Disney and Universal and other larger entities. When someone

[10:10:56] knows that you have maybe a nice pocketbook that price gets inflated. And so outside of this process

[10:11:03] if we were to do this we would have to spend money on lawyers fees and things like that just

[10:11:08] to acquire the property and then they'll be additional things

[10:11:11] with design.

[10:11:12] I think one clear benefit is the donation of the right away.

[10:11:17] There may be other benefits to the taxpayers

[10:11:19] that we haven't realized yet

[10:11:20] because they haven't had the authority to have the conversation.

[10:11:23] And so I think as they start to have the conversation,

[10:11:26] Renzo, I have briefings, you and other commissioners

[10:11:29] in the mayor may come back with,

[10:11:31] hey, here are some additional things we can do

[10:11:33] to add value to this agreement.

[10:11:35] Should we go in this direction

[10:11:37] that will enhance the value to the taxpayer.

[10:11:40] So like the mayor was saying, while we are deviating from the process,

[10:11:44] we are deviating for a reason, and we're really deviating just for a conversation,

[10:11:49] not necessarily for a decision, because when the decision is made,

[10:11:52] a conversation will be had with the board to determine whether or not we move forward,

[10:11:57] based on what is negotiated or whether we go back to the option to.

[10:12:02] And so I just wanted to give that perspective, as we've shared before,

[10:12:09] I think you asked me

[10:12:10] when we had a vote about the school. And you asked me specifically, are you supporting Commissioner

[10:12:16] Wilson and her advocacy for her district? And so likewise, I would just ask for your support

[10:12:23] and my advocacy for my district and the residents and businesses that are there because I haven't

[10:12:28] hurt any bad, feedback about this, they've been discussing this, and again, as the

[10:12:32] mayor just iterated, this is just allowing staff to proceed with negotiations and the

[10:12:38] conversations. They may come back, this is just like Timberscan. They may come back with

[10:12:42] different options and like, hey, we need to go in a different route, but we're just giving

[10:12:46] them empowering them to continue this conversation on a more formal level to then bring back

[10:12:52] additional options and perspectives for you. And like I said, you're going to have briefings

[10:12:56] with them, they may find some additional benefit to the taxpayer that we haven't yet determined

[10:13:02] or thought of because they haven't engaged in the conversations on this level that we're

[10:13:07] hopefully about to get them today.

[10:13:08] So I just want to share that perspective with you, like I said, I'm in four in favor of

[10:13:13] option.

[10:13:13] Three, let's go, let's go, let's go.

[10:13:15] Thank you, Mayor.

[10:13:15] Thank you, Commissioner Samrad.

[10:13:19] Just called me out by name, but first of all, there was just something in the way that

[10:13:22] what you just said about did I ask you if you were going to support Commissioner Wilson

[10:13:26] and kind of implied like a sunshine violation or something

[10:13:29] cut a car and I want to.

[10:13:31] That was done in the meeting, that's what you did.

[10:13:38] In a open meeting, just so we're clear, in an open meeting,

[10:13:41] when we were talking about a land use for,

[10:13:43] I think it was the winter park prep.

[10:13:46] You asked, on the record, when we were a prep or whatever,

[10:13:49] are you some, when it was confusion about the vote,

[10:13:51] that's what that was, not a sunshine.

[10:13:53] Sorry about that.

[10:13:54] I wanted to clear that up.

[10:13:55] That was a public day.

[10:13:57] Sorry.

[10:13:57] That was a giant but that was in the meeting you asked me without so I'm just asking okay same

[10:14:03] Okay, we may have long time

[10:14:05] But I have to say something mayor because called me up by name and I wasn't I had said my piece and I was going to button up and I was gonna be done for the night

[10:14:13] But you know again

[10:14:14] I just want to say I'm coming at this from a perspective you're asking for my support

[10:14:18] But this is a values issue for me and when we talk about going into a negotiation

[10:14:23] You want to make sure that we put the county and the government and

[10:14:27] that not a deficit level in the negotiation of the deal,

[10:14:31] but we want to be on a playing field

[10:14:34] where we have a chance to make an outcome of something

[10:14:37] that is beyond what has been presented today.

[10:14:40] So again, I want to reiterate what has been presented

[10:14:43] in terms of what we're doing.

[10:14:44] They donate the land to the county on the condition

[10:14:48] that they build what they want decide who will build it.

[10:14:54] And then the county reimburses them, and maintains.

[10:15:00] The costs that they built, that is not a place where I think we're putting the county government

[10:15:09] at a position of power in a negotiation. And that is why I'm saying, I'm not opposed to it. But

[10:15:16] I want something to come back that sounds a lot different than what we heard today. And then

[10:15:22] move forward with some form of negotiation. So that's a values statement for me. So I please

[10:15:27] don't inform my position as not being supportive of you. I'm just simply saying this is a

[10:15:33] values proposition and issue for me. And so I'm trying to get us to a point where when we

[10:15:40] talk about bargaining power and Commissioner Crab your part of your union I was also part

[10:15:45] of my teacher's union and involved in all in the bargaining we put our county government

[10:15:50] at a better position than what this deal gave to us today. That's my point and that's why I

[10:15:57] I'm a note today, but I hope that we get to a point where we're at a better level for negotiation for the people of Orange County period.

[10:16:09] So, Mayor, if I could, I just want to reiterate that, you know, as you said,

[10:16:16] what staff is looking for this evening is just should the board decide to give staff authorization to continue having discussions and negotiations

[10:16:26] Mr. Wallace and the rest of the property owners.

[10:16:29] I do want to make one thing clear though.

[10:16:32] We've already identified issues that we would not be willing

[10:16:36] to compromise that is on the paving for E features that the county

[10:16:42] would not build in the first place or maintain in the first place.

[10:16:46] So these are just some of the very small items that we've already identified

[10:16:49] where we need to have further discussions on.

[10:16:52] And again, for this evening, we're only seeking authority to proceed with the negotiations.

[10:16:58] Nothing more.

[10:16:59] And as of this, while I said earlier, we would come back here at least two more times,

[10:17:06] following meetings with the community in their national drive area.

[10:17:11] So that's what we're looking for.

[10:17:12] And whatever they do, the county has to approve.

[10:17:17] Okay, so, the consensus is, even though, you know, Commissioner Simriass sounds like she may not be all in here, is option three.

[10:17:33] Okay, okay, so option three is, is the during consensus out of board.

[10:17:39] And that's where you all, that's a direction you have today to move, to continue to bring it back, to be additional conversations.

[10:17:51] So, thank you all, thank you all for your presence.

[10:17:53] Before we conclude our meeting, however, Commissioner Crab asked that he'd be given an opportunity to make a statement, a brief statement.

[10:18:07] Commissioner,

[10:18:09] he's working on it.

[10:18:11] First of all, I survived my first meeting and I want to thank the Mayor and all the commissioners

[10:18:16] for your support.

[10:18:17] I appreciate it.

[10:18:18] Mayor, your staff has been unbelievable in helping me get settled and get briefed.

[10:18:24] Byron.

[10:18:25] Thank you so much.

[10:18:25] So anyway, I just want to thank everybody.

[10:18:27] I so appreciate all the support and help.

[10:18:28] Thank you.

[10:18:33] No,

[10:18:40] right, we moved up on the hit. Is that the one you?

[10:18:45] Well, I don't know, but if there's nothing else,

[10:18:50] Byron, anything else you have today?

[10:18:52] No sir.

[10:18:53] All right, then we stand adjourned.

2026-08-25 BCC Meeting Video

Agenda

Transcript