Name: BOCC Workshop - Wildwood
Duration: 1 h 47 min 19 s
Description: I've never heard one villager's resident complain that $55 million of their dollars are going to the Sanford County school system, and they don't have any children in school.

[0:02] We'll call the meeting to order. This is a special meeting of the Board of County Commissioners of

[0:06] Santa County. It's 7 p.m. on February 16, 2021. We're meeting tonight at the Village

[0:13] of Santa County Service Center, 7375, Powell Road, Room 102, and Wildwood, Florida.

[0:21] The first item on our agenda tonight is a proclamation recognizing February 20, 2021 as

[0:29] is Florida Healthy Teen Relationship Month.

[0:32] And I think we have a group here to be a part of this.

[0:39] Okay, the proclamation reads as follows.

[0:42] Florida Healthy Teen Relationship Month.

[0:45] Whereas each year, approximately 1.5 million high school students nationwide

[0:51] experienced physical abuse from a dating partner.

[0:54] And whereas data from the 2017 Florida Youth Risk Behavior Survey report

[1:01] indicates that 8.4% of students experience physical dating violence and 9.6% of students reported being threatened, controlled or made to feel unsafe by someone they were dating.

[1:15] And whereas many teams do not report dating violence because they fear the abuse may escalate and that they will not be believed.

[1:24] And whereas, victims of dating violence are more likely to experience the symptoms of anxiety and depression and engage in unhealthy behaviors such as drinking and smoking.

[1:35] And whereas, dating violence can be prevented and teen dating violence prevention instruction is required through Florida statutes.

[1:43] And whereas, partnerships between state agencies, nonprofits and private organizations, law enforcement in the courts, health care,

[1:51] faith-based communities and educational institutions create a coordinated, efficient, and cost-effective system of support to prevent teen dating violence.

[2:02] And whereas Florida Healthy Teen Relationship Month is an opportunity to increase awareness, social support, and education on healthy dating relationships, and provides encouragement for all four readiness to work together to prevent teen dating violence.

[2:18] Now, therefore, the Board of County Commissioners of Subter County Florida hereby proclaims the month of February 2021 as Florida Healthy Teen Relationship Month, done and proclaimed this 16th day of February 2021 Subter County Florida by the Board of County Commissioners of Subter County.

[2:37] and I understand.

[2:38] Mr. Sattel still in here.

[3:23] Thank you for what you do.

[3:25] Thank you.

[3:26] I want to thank you for what you do.

[3:28] I want to thank you for calling me a few weeks ago

[3:30] and give me the opportunity to come down and see

[3:32] your wonderful facility.

[3:34] I was impressed beyond all the leaf.

[3:37] The kids and children and teenagers of Sumpra County

[3:41] are much better off for what you folks are doing to help them.

[3:45] So I thank you from the bottom of my heart.

[3:46] Okay,

[4:00] the next item on our agenda tonight is public forum.

[4:04] The Board of County Commissioners welcomes and encourages public input on all issues subject to the Board's jurisdiction, which affect the residents of Subtac County.

[4:13] However, in order to preserve decorum in these proceedings, the Board respectfully requests that an individual wishing to address the Board during public forum be mindful of the following provisions of Section 2-3-1 of the Subtac County Code, which has been in effect since 1982.

[4:28] Each person shall limit their one address to five minutes unless granted additional time by majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners.

[4:37] I'll remark she'll be to the Board of County Commissioners as a body and not to any individual member.

[4:42] Additionally, any person making in pertinent or slanderous remarks or who becomes the boisterous,

[4:48] she'll be instructed to remain silent by the presiding officer until permission to continue as granted.

[4:54] Thank you.

[4:55] So, we will open the public forum portion of the meeting instead of anyone that would like to address the board this evening under public forum.

[5:11] Please give us your name and address for the record please.

[5:13] My name is Bryant Fulton.

[5:15] I live at 121 West Central Avenue in Bushnell.

[5:19] I wrote this speech a year and a half ago when the old board was elected.

[5:23] Well, it was still in their positions and I dreaded giving it tonight.

[5:28] Before I begin my speech tonight, I must quickly quote when the most phenomenal and

[5:32] charismatic tell-of-place screenwriters of this century.

[5:34] The late Mr. Rod Serling, any state, any entity, any ideology which fails to recognize the worth,

[5:41] the dignity, the rights of man, that state is obsolete.

[5:45] The incompetence, the belligerence, and the audacity that you all have is incomprehensible and

[5:50] unreconcilable.

[5:51] The increase in the millage rate by a hideous 26% is the equivalent of Centennial, the big floor of the lie, growth does not pay for itself.

[6:00] What price must the people of this county pay for the expense of your own nefarious and

[6:04] diabolical self-loathing that you, yourselves, are not capable of accommodating, rectifying through your own means?

[6:10] You have plundered and looted this county for everything it is worth.

[6:13] You have given it to the despotism of the developers of the villages, and you should thoroughly, and you should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself.

[6:20] You are not deserving of the title of County commissioners.

[6:23] You are barely deserving of the right to call yourselves figure heads.

[6:26] The people of this county have had great vigilance this past year in modern interactions rigorously.

[6:31] And the true notion that you men are not capable of holding public office in any capacity has stood faithful.

[6:37] The lies that you have strewn throughout this county over the past two decades, and

[6:41] the lies that you have conceived along with the developers of the villages now pour and

[6:45] through your careless actions and indecisive words that come out of your decisions.

[6:51] It is illogical and counterintuitive that you men stand and pray before the feet of God,

[6:57] asking him to usher you to do the will of the people when you fail to meet the basic

[7:02] outcries of your constituents. The same constituents who begged and pleaded with you not to increase

[7:07] their taxes. The same constituents who have been silenced and essentially gagged and tied when

[7:12] they questioned you. I remember that man who was on oxygen, who was taken out by the police

[7:16] under the old board. He was on oxygen. He is dead now. The tyrannical rule you hold over

[7:25] this county is something you men should have never been allowed to grasp power over. The

[7:29] egotism that you have built up in the minds of yourselves is only outmatched by that of your

[7:33] authoritarian fears, who regularly and manage their own personal paradise on earth, in which

[7:38] they conceal themselves from the monuments as hand of American law.

[7:42] However, there is one fatal error in their doctrine, their paradise, unlike that of which God promises on the good earth, for all men to inhabit, is not permanent.

[7:52] I saw conclude my address of the following, you men should be humiliated and conscious-stricken.

[7:57] You are not worthy of being in the offices you hold.

[7:59] You are not worthy of governing from the false lies and promises you use right in your campaigns.

[8:03] You have made a name for yourself in this county.

[8:06] You may very well be the most hated men in the county.

[8:08] As being the three men who can run their own personal Roman Empire, but I assure you

[8:13] men, your time, much like that of the Roman Empire will come.

[8:17] The people of this county shall reign judgment over you with the same provocative and tumultuous

[8:22] attitudes that you yourselves have.

[8:24] The turmoil and instability that you men have placed this county into will be undone by

[8:28] the will of the people and the people we place into office to make sure our true requirements

[8:32] and desires are met to the very end.

[8:35] And quite frankly, the marvelous people of this spectacular county,

[8:38] and it's true in an imaginative state, would like to see the resignations of all of you before the end of this meeting.

[8:43] And I don't know how you can sleep with your self-commissioner, E-Step.

[8:59] Anyone else who would like to address the board on any issue tonight?

[9:02] Please come forward and give us your name and address, please.

[9:08] Good evening.

[9:09] My name is Dan Warren, 3087 Bureau Path, the Village of Gilchrist.

[9:17] I'm here to speak with regard to the proposal in front of you tonight, with regard to road impact fees.

[9:27] I'm surprised I've got a parking spot tonight, compared to the last time I came really early, so

[9:33] the developer must be pretty confident on the outcome tonight.

[9:37] Anyways, editorial comment.

[9:39] The only spec of good news in the developer's office is his recognition of the almost 300 percent differential and disparity between the single-family age restricted fee of $972 and all other single-family in the county at $2,666.

[10:01] That's basically just shy of three times the difference.

[10:04] is that fair, not by any common sense measure.

[10:11] Now let's look at the developer's offer in front of you tonight and what it really represents.

[10:17] The developer wants to be seen as the economic savior of Sumter County by eliminating the threat of higher across the board road impact fees for three and a half years.

[10:30] All you have to do is read the letter in his proposal and read the description in his newspaper, and you can figure that out for yourself.

[10:40] The truth is this. It is not a contribution from the developer. It's not his money that he is agreeing to pay.

[10:50] These impact fees are paid by the new home buyers as it should be.

[10:56] Any amount of road impact fee will not affect jobs or the developer's marketability of homes.

[11:05] He is the market.

[11:08] Besides the impact fees are not included in the developer's home prices.

[11:15] They show up as a surprise in the closing statement as additional supplemental charges.

[11:21] Long after the buyers have signed the purchase contract.

[11:25] I think a lot of people miss that.

[11:28] They think he's got to build it into his pricing, not true.

[11:32] This proposal represents an insurance policy against this commission,

[11:39] not to touch any of the 71 impact fee categories for three and a half years.

[11:47] He's buying an insurance policy, not to touch them.

[11:50] Is this worth giving up the right, which you have always had, just for $400 additional in new units?

[12:00] Not even close in my judgment.

[12:05] I noticed a peculiar clause in paragraph 5A of the proposed agreement, that is the termination clause of the proposed agreement.

[12:18] And I'm just going to read it to you, it's real short.

[12:22] It says the agreement shall automatically terminate on October 22, 2024, or upon the

[12:33] earlier or current of any of the following, A, the companies, which means the developer.

[12:42] If the developer fails to timely pay, the voluntary agreed higher rate set forth in this agreement when due.

[12:53] So if he doesn't pay, which would be his choice, the agreement can terminate.

[13:01] So my read of that, literally, is he has the ability to terminate this agreement at any time simply by not paying.

[13:12] Is the developer really committed to this deal or not if it is true that he can terminate this agreement at any time by simply not paying the additional fee?

[13:24] So in summary, I would like to recommend the following for your consideration.

[13:30] Number one, don't give away your current right to evaluate and adjust road impact fees.

[13:37] You have always had that right, don't give it away.

[13:41] Number two, take your time by following through with this board's action about a month ago to analyze the benefits and impacts of raising the impact fees.

[13:53] That's what you wanted to do a month ago.

[13:56] Three, you can redo the current study to more

[14:00] equitably narrow the significant gap between single family age and

[14:05] non-age restricted categories permanently by redoing that study.

[14:11] And if for some reason you feel compelled to take this type of offer

[14:21] from the developer, don't touch it for anything less than $2,000 for an age-restricted fee,

[14:30] that would bring you up still only to 75% of non-age restricted and at least it narrows

[14:37] that gap. If you accept this proposal, as is tonight, there will be many disappointed and

[14:44] upset voters throughout Sumter County. Thank you for the time.

[14:56] Anyone else that would like to address the board? Yes, sir.

[15:07] Good evening. My name is Phil Montaldel. I'm a fairly newcomer to the religiousman here about a year and a half. Live at 1943, Raheli Road in Linden, the religious Linden. I was here at the last meeting spoke at that meeting also.

[15:29] I went over and I went through the documents that were available. I'm speaking in support

[15:36] the support of the agreement that's being proposed, and I'll tell you why.

[15:44] I wish I had the youth and passion of the young man that stood up here and spoke.

[15:53] Very passionate, but I think misdirected, kind of reminded me a little bit back in the days when

[15:59] Jim McCarthy was running for President and McCarthy's army was out there.

[16:03] you know, beating the ground and talking about good and evil and that type of thing.

[16:10] And then I grew up, and here I am, at the twilight of our years, living in the greatest place on Earth, barring none.

[16:23] I don't have a prepared speech, but I do have a sense of what I think is happening here.

[16:32] When I was doing the last meeting, the conversation was the economic development impact that it would have and

[16:43] having this across the board increase in impact fees, because it wasn't targeted, it was just overall.

[16:52] Then I read the opinion from legal counsel, and they concurred, you can't just pick and

[16:59] you can choose, you have to do it all or none.

[17:02] If you're going to raise the impact fees, you can't just buy your action, then you have to do it for the whole county.

[17:12] Which was exactly the problem that I spoke out against the last time, as you would be stymying economic development.

[17:21] And it would be hurting areas outside the developer's kingdom which doesn't bring me to my point.

[17:31] This thing's kind of morphed into a us against the developer type of a thing.

[17:38] And it seems like we're just saying, you're bad people.

[17:43] You got this developed and you're making a lot of money, God forbid.

[17:48] And we want more of it.

[17:49] We want, we don't, not the sense to put it in a pocket, but we don't want you to put it in your pocket.

[17:55] I think it's a wrong philosophy to begin with.

[18:00] The bottom line is when I walked out of the last meeting, I had a sense that it would be highly, highly inequitable and

[18:07] wrong to kill the goose just because you wanted one little golden egg.

[18:15] Okay, stop everything, hurt the county, because those that lived outside the kingdom would be hurt, but well, you know what, that's just a casualty of war.

[18:28] Well, it made ample sense to me that the two parties would come together, recognize that that was not a good thing and I have heard nothing said tonight, yet only a good speaker.

[18:41] that addresses a problem of the county white problem.

[18:46] In other words, you raise the impact fees, everybody gets hurt.

[18:50] The developer comes up and says, hey, look, I understand that, we'll absorb some of that.

[18:58] And put it on our development, leave the rest of it alone, which I think is fine.

[19:05] That's the way it should be.

[19:07] Our county, this is my county now, guys.

[19:11] I, this is my fifth final home, and I have, I told my wife, I'm living here at a feet first from the slab, and I love it here.

[19:21] But please don't ruin the county by doing that, well, guess what?

[19:24] We have a solution to this problem, a very reasonable solution.

[19:29] We're talking about nickel-dime stuff.

[19:31] Maybe some people said, well, you know, $100 here, $100 here, you know, it's up.

[19:35] Well, I come from Illinois, wherever Durscher once said, you know, a billion here and a billion there,

[19:40] pretty soon you're going to be talking some real money.

[19:41] Well, it's not the case here.

[19:44] This is a real, good, sound, equitable resolution to a problem that is facing us.

[19:53] I think we can put it into it.

[19:55] Just by doing this, the developer will be paying more, they came forth, put this proposal.

[20:03] And it's not about, oh, well, now they recognize that they were wrong.

[20:06] No, in a negotiation, this is a contract, guys.

[20:09] I see you need you to wrap up your comment.

[20:10] I'm sorry.

[20:11] I do need you to wrap up your comment.

[20:13] Okay, I'm sorry.

[20:13] I wouldn't keep it in terms of.

[20:16] Anyway, I advocate in favor of accepting the proposal.

[20:19] I think it's fair and equitable.

[20:21] I think we'll do a lot to heal the wounds and get us moving forward.

[20:25] Thank you very much.

[20:34] Anyone else ever wanted to address the board this evening?

[20:36] Yes, ma'am.

[20:37] Good

[20:41] evening, my name is Deborah Butterfield.

[20:43] I live at 2421, Littlestone Terrace in the villages.

[20:47] I actually had two items I wanted to speak to.

[20:50] One is the next item on the agenda about video streaming board meetings.

[20:55] I wanted to strongly encourage your serious consideration of video streaming.

[21:02] It has been very difficult for people to access public meetings in the past year of COVID.

[21:07] There are a lot of people who don't want to come out in public.

[21:11] There isn't as much room as evidenced by the sign out there says maximum occupancy 74.

[21:20] I didn't count how many of you there are, but there are 13 seats out here, nowhere near the maximum.

[21:26] So I feel like voters are, and residents are not having the kind of access to government as they need to have.

[21:33] And I'm actually encouraging the village's district government to consider video streaming as well.

[21:40] So I feel very strongly about that.

[21:43] Secondly, I think it's a good sign that the developer has offered a compromise.

[21:50] But here are my concerns.

[21:52] This was brought up at, I believe, your last meeting which was a week ago.

[21:58] Two days later you received the letter from the developer that's dated February the 11th.

[22:03] Now, we're here one week later and you're considering, as I read the agenda, taking action on this item tonight.

[22:13] While I think it's a good sign, I hope it's an opening negotiation, I hope it's not, as we've seen in some other offers, a take it or leave it, offer from the developer, I think it's a starting point.

[22:27] But with three new commissioners, and with the very complicated topic of impact fees, and how they relate to the overall tax system, and revenue stream for the county, I think it's too soon to make a decision tonight, I would ask you to listen to people, do more due diligence and then make a decision at a later meeting, thank you.

[22:58] Anyone else that would like to address the board on any issue tonight?

[23:03] Yes, ma'am.

[23:10] Hi, my name is Joan Pike.

[23:13] I reside at 3229 southeast 20th Lane Sumterville.

[23:18] I'm a native Floridian and my grandchildren are 7th generation Floridians and we love the state.

[23:25] However, I have come to a whore the politics in Sumter County.

[23:30] You are elected officials by the residents of Sumter County and

[23:34] And took a note to work on behalf of the residents, not the developers.

[23:38] We cannot stop the growth, however, we can have the growth paid for by the developer.

[23:44] I ask why we should all pay, foot the bill for the infrastructure of the villages, and

[23:50] the damage it is doing to our roads and environment.

[23:54] The impact fee needs to pay its fair share in the one time payment upfront.

[23:59] My husband and I, and we're both over 65, are considering building a new residence on land we own in Sumter County.

[24:09] Will we get the sweet deal impact fee that the developer is getting?

[24:14] No. I implore you to vote to raise the impact fee to a higher fee than the measly 40% they are offering.

[24:22] Please do not accept their offer.

[24:25] It is wrong and you need to raise it to what you know would be fair to all residents of Sumter County.

[24:32] The three new commissioners, you need to keep your promises to us and do what is right.

[24:38] Thank you.

[24:49] Anyone else who would like to?

[24:51] Yes, ma'am.

[24:57] I am Liz Roberts and I reside at 3164 Southeast 23rd Place in Sumterville.

[25:04] Thank you for this time tonight to speak.

[25:06] I have some numbers, I want to run by you and some things I want you to consider.

[25:10] It's according to me I learned that the recommendation originally for the impact fees was anywhere between 45% or so.

[25:18] So we were at 45, we came down to 40.

[25:22] Would that be unsaid, if the villages are offered in 56 to 57% that already gives their offering 12% more than we're at today?

[25:32] Would that be unsaid, there's something else.

[25:34] I hear so many times about the villages, the villages, the villages.

[25:37] I am not employed by the villages, none of my family is employed by the villages.

[25:43] I graduated from South Sumter, I am from South Sumter.

[25:49] I am for the development in this county, and I am for

[25:54] South Sumter County working with the developer.

[25:57] With that being said, I want to ask the board if they consider different phases.

[26:02] this phase one and phase two or phase three of implication of any kind of fees.

[26:08] And if you are familiar with the five to seven tier program as it is based on square footage and footage allowances.

[26:17] Since we're looking at new family starting out that want to build a home.

[26:22] The square footage would be different than someone that already owns a residence and wants to build a bigger home.

[26:29] If the developer is reaching out to you and trying to make some kind of mists with you so that they're going to be a balance within the county, I ask you to actually go in there with an open mind and listen to them.

[26:44] The other thing I want to say is the gentleman that brought up the termination on 5A, it clearly states if the developer does not pay, it terminates the agreement.

[26:54] If it terminates the agreement, then you can simply have another form and decide what you're going to do with your impact fees.

[27:00] Because I don't understand what the big problem is with that part of that termination clause.

[27:07] So as a resident that graduated from Sumter County, group in Sumter County, my dad graduated from Wildwood,

[27:14] my mom graduated from South Sumter Emotional, we have been million owners in here for over 75 years.

[27:20] First, I ask you to reconsider the agreement and also to listen to the developer as well as the county citizens outside.

[27:30] Thank you.

[27:38] Is there anyone else who would like to address the board tonight?

[27:41] Yes, ma'am.

[27:53] My name is Sherry DeBall.

[27:54] I live at 29.58 in Lurville and I'm here again tonight because as a taxpayer, our side of the story needs to be heard.

[28:04] I am asking you all of the following and there are a bunch of questions and I'm hoping that I will get some answers.

[28:14] Number one, why does the Morris family get a discount on impact fees?

[28:22] Number two, are you offering the same discount to other builders or developers?

[28:30] Number three, now that the Moore family has offered to pony up another $400 per unit for a limited time, May 1st, 2021 through October 22nd, 2024, and only with conditions that no other developer steps on their toes, or they will take their money and go back to paying approximately one third of what others are being charged.

[28:59] Are you really going to suck up to the Morris family and take this offer knowing that A, it has a short shelf life?

[29:08] B, no one else can develop more than 500 units in our county and

[29:14] C, at the end of a sweet deal with the Morris family.

[29:18] How much of a tax increase should we expect for the tax year?

[29:22] 24, 2024, 2025, along with a soon to be proposed almost 300% increase in the fire assessment rate,

[29:31] which is an increase in tax payers yearly fees.

[29:36] We the tax payers have been picking up the lion's share right along and

[29:41] it had our taxes, assessments, and fees increased while the developer has not paid any increase or his fair share.

[29:49] Does this commissioners group represent the taxpayers for the developer?

[29:57] And finally, D, it's one more thing.

[30:00] It gets slapped in the face by the developer. But it hurts more to get slapped in the face by the people who are supposed to be representing us. Once again, I ask you for answers to my questions. Would you like me to repeat the questions, I will. We don't need you to. No. And when will I get answers?

[30:27] We're going to take all this into consideration in the process of making this decision.

[30:31] So I cannot hear from anyone tonight.

[30:36] No one will answer any of the things I brought up, is that correct?

[30:42] Yes or no, please?

[30:44] No, right, not right now.

[30:45] Not right now.

[30:46] And if I waited like half an hour, maybe?

[30:50] We're going to go through a decision-making process.

[30:53] I don't know what outcome of it will be, and a determination we've made on issue before tonight.

[30:59] So in other words, the public form is just something for us to get up here, get it off our chest, and then you're going to do what you're going to do without getting any answers.

[31:10] Once again, you have stuck it to us like you did. Remember the summer you stuck it to us, thank you.

[31:17] I will be back.

[31:18] Anyone

[31:29] else would like to address the board on any issue tonight?

[31:31] Yes, sir.

[31:39] Good evening.

[31:40] My name is Brian Lifsy.

[31:42] I live in the village of Elhamra in the villages.

[31:45] I'm a start tonight by apologizing to all the commissioners.

[31:49] Apparently, I miss the memo that announced that this commission was going to advocate their duties

[31:56] and responsibilities to the voters of Sumter County in favor of one individual developer.

[32:03] By giving up your authority to set and enforce impact fees, you move from the dog wagging its tail to the tail wagging the dog.

[32:17] I admit it is nice to know that the developer will not oppose an increase in impact fees from 972 to 1372.

[32:30] too. Of course, your very own 2019 impact study paid for by some of the county voters recommended

[32:43] an increase to 2430. And that would be an increase to everyone who pays an impact,

[32:53] not just the developer, and it would not be cancelable at the whim of the developer.

[33:02] Even better, that does not disregard the ordinance requiring that the impact fee apply across the board to all, not to just one.

[33:17] last November, voters in this county elected three new commissioners, based partly on the promise of more backbombing.

[33:29] Indications were our new commissioners, which show some grit when dealing with special interest, like the developer.

[33:38] Gentlemen, the fact that you are seriously considering this proposal by the developer

[33:45] One that makes you look like a lackeys of the developer, in the case there may be less backbone present than voters were led to believe.

[33:58] Let me close by offering you three short words of advice.

[34:05] Shame on you, thank you.

[34:09] Anyone

[34:19] else that would like to address, yes, sir?

[34:28] Good evening, my name is Andrew Bullardello, I live at 5562 Malachite Terrace in the villages, and I have to apologize.

[34:34] I wasn't prepared to speak tonight, I thought I was going to be saving my comments for the July meeting, but I felt compelled.

[34:42] I'll keep it short, because I didn't prepare any notes, and I really don't have exact numbers.

[34:49] We've heard people speak tonight about, people outside the villages.

[34:52] Why do our tax dollars support the villages?

[34:57] Why do my tax dollars going into the villages?

[35:00] Last week, I ran some numbers through the tax collector's office, and

[35:04] again, I apologize because I don't have them with me.

[35:06] So I can't give you the exact numbers that will provide it to me, the public records request.

[35:12] But the people inside the villages pay approximately $350 million a year into the Sanford County taxes.

[35:19] I've never heard one villager's resident complain that $55 million of their dollars are going to the Sanford County school system, and they don't have any children in school.

[35:30] So if it's okay for the villager's residents to support the school system, why are the people outside the villages complaining about some of their tax dollars coming back into the villages.

[35:42] Personally, I don't care about paying school tax.

[35:45] We're a community people.

[35:47] This cannot continue to be us versus them.

[35:50] I'm fortunate enough that I've been a Florida resident long enough,

[35:54] that I know what Sumter County was like before the villages got here.

[35:58] It was the poorest county in the state.

[36:00] Just about every piece of property had an ag exemption.

[36:04] People were paying minimum taxes, just like Jefferson County, Madison County.

[36:08] There was no taxes coming in.

[36:10] Heck, this building that we're in right now probably wouldn't be here if it wasn't for the Morse family building the villages.

[36:17] But yet it seems like people want to cut off the head of the goose that's been laying the golden eggs.

[36:22] We have to come together as a county, we are all Sumpter County residents.

[36:28] My belief is that this board should accept the villages offer, and then re-address it when that contract is up, and we'll move on from there.

[36:36] I'll see you all in July when I've prepared exactly what I want to say.

[36:40] Thank you.

[36:52] Yes, sir.

[36:57] Mr. Chairman, Board members.

[36:59] Thank you for the opportunity to speak today.

[37:01] My name is Don Wiley.

[37:02] I live at 3503, Vail Court in the Villages.

[37:05] I am also a small business owner here in Sumter County.

[37:09] I don't know.

[37:10] I'm not an economist if this is the right answer or not.

[37:15] But what I do know right now is that the indecision and delaying this decision,

[37:20] one way or the other is hurting this county.

[37:25] Businesses don't know which way things are going to go.

[37:28] That's going to be to the detriment of everyone in this community.

[37:33] And the last thing is the thought that the villages or

[37:39] any other business is going to be taxed is a misconception.

[37:45] I as a small business owner, just like every other business owner,

[37:48] We do not pay a dime in taxes.

[37:51] We pass those costs onto our customers.

[37:54] Until the point where we can't make a profit, in which case, we go out of business because we're taxed out of business.

[38:02] Make the decision whichever way you want, Dolan, but please just make a decision and don't keep delaying this.

[38:11] Thank you very much for your time.

[38:25] Yes, ma'am.

[38:25] My

[38:39] name is Marilyn Iskram, 815, Regal Manor Lane, the Villages, good evening commissioners.

[38:46] I would like to comment on a phrase that I have been hearing quite a bit lately.

[38:51] It goes like this, impact fees are once but property taxes are every year.

[38:59] Have you heard that one?

[39:02] Well, it's a bit misleading.

[39:04] What it fails to recognize is that once commercial and industrial businesses build or lease their facilities, they to become residents.

[39:14] As residents, they to pay property taxes on the buildings they own, or those taxes are baked into their lease agreements.

[39:22] And those taxes are paid every year.

[39:25] The majority of Sumter County is currently residential, and the largest category of land use is retirement homes.

[39:33] Individual homeowners, therefore, provide the majority of the county's annual property tax revenue.

[39:41] The long range of vision should be to shift the tax burden from homeowners to businesses.

[39:46] But first, you have to encourage businesses to make their home here.

[39:52] To become residents who contribute their share of property taxes, not just once, but every year.

[39:59] You have heard many opinions about the effect of impact fees on business growth.

[40:03] You have studied this issue more than anyone in this room.

[40:07] There is nothing new that any of us can tell you.

[40:10] You are in the best position to make an informed decision.

[40:14] But remember, we are now at a crossroad and this county's economy is dependent on your decision.

[40:22] The voluntary offer that is under consideration today provides you the opportunity to limit

[40:27] Let an impact fee increase only to new homes built in the villages.

[40:31] This will produce additional revenue while continuing to encourage business growth.

[40:36] The end game is to generate enough tax revenue from businesses every year.

[40:43] So that individual property taxes can be significantly lowered.

[40:47] That is the critical path in providing long-term tax relief to all property owners.

[40:52] But this is all dependent on your ability to motivate businesses to come to Sumter County.

[40:58] If you fail, residents of retirement homes will continue to be the county's major source

[41:04] of annual tax revenue.

[41:06] And I can't think of a single conservative government official in this country who would choose

[41:13] to remain in that position.

[41:16] Commissioners, I have no doubt that this decision weighs heavy on you.

[41:20] I pray that God gives you the strength, the courage, and the wisdom to choose the path that will lead this county towards future economic prosperity.

[41:32] Thank you, good luck, and God bless.

[41:46] Yes, ma'am.

[41:56] Good evening.

[41:57] My name is Susan Ridgeway, and I live at 3-7-7-5,

[42:02] with one palm away, and the village of Lake Dayton.

[42:06] And I come here to know as a concerned resident and taxpayer of Sumter County.

[42:10] Normally, I don't get involved in these issues, but I did after attending in 2019,

[42:18] the total arrogance and disrespect shown to the residents who came there asking why?

[42:27] Why? A 25% property tax increase was necessary.

[42:33] The decision had already been made by the board at that time.

[42:38] So I started to question why?

[42:40] Why not even listen to the residents?

[42:42] Why go forth with this 25% tax increase?

[42:47] When the following year, the commission at that time was allowing,

[42:53] oh, we just reduced property taxes.

[42:55] Well, no, you raise them 25% and then you reduce some 4% the next year.

[43:02] That's not reducing taxes.

[43:09] That meeting, and those meetings, excuse me, I think really opened a lot of people's eyes to the impact that the village's developer has and how they were running the county.

[43:23] I love living here, not going to change living here, but it seemed to me that anything that

[43:32] benefited the developer, the hell with the rest of us, they were going to get.

[43:38] So I started looking into it and I said, well, what do we get?

[43:43] There's always a quid pro quo here.

[43:45] Why was this tax necessary?

[43:48] So I came up on some documents which were made available to me by the county and one was a regionally significant road construction agreement that was approved by the board July 10 of 2018.

[44:06] In the agreement, it obligates some for county for the next 30 years or until 2038 to do three things.

[44:15] Reimbursed the villages, companies for the construction expenditures of future new regional roadway segments as noted in exhibits A and B, which is the majority of the roads I do have them here are in the southern village of South of 44.

[44:32] design permit and build future county roadway, regional redway sections as noted for county road 501 phase 3 and county road 525 E phases 2 and 3.

[44:46] And whole harmless, the villages company for future widening of US 301 from state route 44 to county road 470 and the future widening of county 470 from 301.

[45:00] To the late county line. So, what during this 30 years is the villages obligated to provide? Number one, develop a fourth town center in Sumter County. Two, develop the villages of southern oaks as a mixed youth community, for established design standards for the villages of southern oaks, and for design permit and build future new regional roadways, noted in exhibits A and B.

[45:29] Well, if you go back and you look at the villages, promotional materials, there's always going to be a fourth town center.

[45:38] All right, Southern Oaks area was always going to be developed, and they strictly control how they're going to design their homes.

[45:48] So what did the villages developer give up, nothing that I can see.

[45:56] So then I started, I attended a meeting in September, last September.

[46:03] And the reason I went to the meeting was I was reading the agenda.

[46:08] And I saw that there were a lot of contracts that were up for approval.

[46:13] I think there was about nine of them that day.

[46:15] And all of them had gone through a process.

[46:17] It was all right on the agenda, and if you go through it, three bid process, they met with

[46:25] the proposals and the board, Mr. Arnold and his staff were recommending for approval or not approving.

[46:37] So one of the companies that I saw was there was the village's technology services group.

[46:43] This was a $5.8 million contract that was approved by the board that was not sent out for bed.

[46:52] that, indeed, going back to 2009, the county's own internal selection committee removed

[47:04] the village's technology service group from consideration because they had too little

[47:11] experience and their bid was too high.

[47:14] In August of 2009, the RFP was canceled for the IT services and wasn't re-issued.

[47:22] However, in March of 2010, a contract for IT services was approved by the then board of commissioners for the village's technology services group for three years.

[47:36] Following this, Sumter County has consolidated IT services in support by granting multi-year contracts without competitive bidding.

[47:44] to TSG, most recently approving the 5.8 million three year contract extension in September of 2020.

[47:55] I posed the question to Mr. Arnold, the county administrator, who responded, my question was why wasn't the three-bed process carried out in this case?

[48:08] His response was, the Board of County Commissioners has the authority as a body to deviate from its established

[48:14] policies as well as amended policies.

[48:17] So the board of commissioners had set a sound and legal purchasing process in order to give preferences to the village's developer regardless of the quality or the cost of the work.

[48:31] That same day, the commission approved a contract that was for a one time contract for $22,000.

[48:42] went through the three-bed process.

[48:45] So you're going to forgive and you're going to deviate

[48:49] from the county's own purchasing agreements.

[48:54] You look at this and you say, why?

[48:57] Here is a company that didn't exist prior to 2009.

[49:03] It's an IT company that didn't exist, okay?

[49:07] It is wholly owned by the village's companies developer,

[49:11] or whatever, and we gave you the board at the time, gave all of this business unbid to

[49:22] the villages.

[49:25] Not only does the villages now provide all of the IT support services and

[49:32] computer servers, but also those of the county property appraisers, the board of elections

[49:38] and the county tax collector. I don't know about you, but I'm not comfortable with the

[49:43] the largest single land owner in Sumter County, having this much control over county records.

[49:50] What should the road impact fee be?

[49:52] I don't know.

[49:53] I think that it should be more fair than what it is, I think it can be increased.

[49:58] The villages itself is a juggernaut.

[50:00] People are going to come here and even in their own, the paper just two days ago, the pandemic has not hurt home sales here.

[50:09] So what do home sales bring into Sumter County?

[50:12] They bring customers like myself who need goods and services.

[50:17] It's going to continue, businesses are going to continue.

[50:21] I haven't found one study, and trust me I've been looking, that shows that raising of impact fees has a negative impact on bringing business into an area.

[50:33] It just doesn't do that, not when you see that.

[50:36] Okay. I think we have to look past the fair mongering that we're seeing in the daily sun.

[50:46] And you were going to wait until July, I'm saying that in a month, you don't have the information if you didn't have it then that you need now to even consider a 40% on only one entity.

[50:58] So thanks for your time.

[50:59] Yes,

[51:13] sir.

[51:15] I know you all.

[51:20] Good evening.

[51:20] My name is Gilbert Windsor.

[51:21] I live in the villages, 2, 3, 5, 4, Bramble Terries.

[51:27] And I've listed, I want to make a statement, if the impact fee was $20,000, does anybody

[51:33] think the most family is going to stop?

[51:37] Of course not.

[51:39] The Sumpher County voters in the most recent election mandated that impact fees be increased.

[51:44] As stated, prove in the impact study and also whiff sand a legal challenge.

[51:50] I'm strongly against the proposal dated 211% by the Morris family slash Lester as emptying and

[51:59] a deceptive charade.

[52:01] The impact fee should be 2400 hours at minimum for each new home permit issue.

[52:07] This array, this array is an inadequate attempt to attain the equitable fee increase of impact fees.

[52:18] The taxpayers see through this pretence indifference.

[52:22] This proposal by the Moore's family and Gary Lester is self-importance and continues to fester a lack of trust by the taxpayers.

[52:33] This latest array consists of existing flow of the latest array is consists of an existing

[52:41] flow of road agreement, which include reimburse impact fees, 25% property tax increase, and

[52:49] 22.5 million dollars that provides an annoying that has been barred by some per county, all earmarked

[52:58] toward cost of roads that should be more family's totally responsibility.

[53:03] All in money received from the 25% tax increase is dictating it to go to that agreement.

[53:15] Nothing else.

[53:17] The previous county commissioners committed tax payers to millions of debt even today cannot justify to the taxpayers.

[53:25] The previous county commissions were a body that advocated a great devotion to the Morse family slash the Lester's syndicate.

[53:36] Indeed, Morse family and Lester's candidates in the past election combined spent $214,000 between them to justify their actions.

[53:48] However, taxpayers saw through this array and removed from office their candidates.

[53:52] The President Board of Commission voted to table a public hearing to discuss reasoned

[54:01] existing impact fees.

[54:02] At that time, the Moore's family, Lester Syndicate, began a fear publicity campaign

[54:09] to discourage reasoned impact fees.

[54:12] The fear was the workers and their families would lose their jobs because the development

[54:19] would face competition.

[54:20] To the contrary, on page 62 of the revenue bond of $90 million, the Morse family of CDD-13 assures the bond owners they do not have any competition.

[54:38] Now, Morse family slash the Lester proposes that they would voluntarily accept a higher impact fee, which is the complete opposite of their fear publicity campaign that was conveyed.

[54:52] We need 200 workers and her families.

[54:54] The poor workers believe they're going to lose their jobs, cry, and they've got kids.

[54:59] And they started a fear, fear, to the most family I asked following.

[55:08] Why you are obsessed to always question integrity of the taxpayers and

[55:14] hundreds of workers and their families of some recounting.

[55:17] The Moore's family lust proposal agreement includes stipulations that the board should reject 100% such, but not limited to the following.

[55:30] Page one of the agreement, last paragraph, county recognizes and

[55:37] hereby agrees gives appropriate economic development within Sanford County.

[55:42] What's appropriate, what is it?

[55:45] what's appropriate, economic development.

[55:49] This is the Morse talking, page two of six, first paragraph.

[55:54] County declared that it is in the public's best interest.

[55:58] Don't even make sense.

[56:01] Page three of six, item five C, planned development, project of 500.

[56:06] Asking the commission to be against development, accept the Morse family.

[56:15] Why does Moore's family lester need agreement?

[56:19] Why you need agreement?

[56:20] If we can voluntarily pay, send the money to us.

[56:23] We'll put them into treasury.

[56:25] We'll need agreement.

[56:26] If you want to pay, send it into us.

[56:30] We'll put it in the county impact trust fund.

[56:33] We're gladly accept your money.

[56:35] The board should set a public hearing as soon as possible

[56:38] to increase the impact fees, it's $2,400.

[56:41] $100. And remember, it's never the wrong time to do the right thing.

[56:59] Is there anyone else

[57:00] that would like to address the board on any issue tonight?

[57:07] No one?

[57:08] Is this spring?

[57:14] Okay. I've been getting that all long. He's been bringing people in.

[57:19] So I assume there's no one out there either. Okay. Okay. There's no one else desiring to address

[57:28] the board tonight, we will close the public forum portion of the meeting.

[57:33] Item three on our agenda tonight is the video streaming of the board meetings, and

[57:40] Stronger is asking for direction, I'll seem that Gloria.

[57:45] She's not going to be here, she provided this document for that.

[57:50] I think what's in, and I've given it to the deputy clerk as well as to the commissioners.

[57:56] The clerk at court is responsible for all of the meeting minutes, which also includes any type of video activity.

[58:05] So she is responsible constitutional officer for that.

[58:08] Unlike a city where a city doesn't have a separate constitutional officer that handles that that's internal to the city.

[58:16] We do have that as a constitutional county.

[58:19] The concerns that Miss Hayward has raised are towards end of her letter.

[58:23] What she's looking for is for the county to actually have a county-owned facility where that infrastructure can be put in place.

[58:31] As the board knows, we do use this room, but for regular meetings, we're actually using the regional recreation center.

[58:40] So that is her position is that the board needs to stick to a particular location so that infrastructure can be installed to be able to accommodate it.

[58:49] The second issue is, she points to staff to be able to manage that particular process

[58:56] on her side, to be able to accommodate the video streaming activities for the board.

[59:03] Obviously she references the ADA criteria, which is also part of the government's obligation

[59:08] when you're putting information out to the public from a minute standpoint, whether it's audio

[59:14] or video.

[59:16] So my request for direction was intended to have Ms. Hayward here to be able to answer questions that the board may have rather than the prepared statement because any of the direction that you might have on this would be based on the points that she's made a county facility for that permanent location for the meetings and what your direction is on that.

[59:40] not. The other would be then a budgetary or an issue that if the board wants to move

[59:44] forward without having designated a facility to handle all your meetings then it would

[59:51] be a budgetary discussion and direction.

[59:53] Basically what I see from her comments is she's working only with her number hurdles to get

[59:58] it over to a car.

[1:00:00] We can't accomplish what we've asked about. So we certainly don't have a county-owned facility that we're going to hold all of our meetings now. There would accommodate that. That would eliminate it right there. That's what the requirement is. We could go back to the county courthouse. Nobody wanted to do that. That was my suggestion.

[1:00:25] If the board has the desire to move the meetings back to the county courthouse, we certainly can do that.

[1:00:29] But

[1:00:33] with the ADA requirements, you'd also need a signer to stream, too.

[1:00:41] Again, that would be, because there are some capabilities within systems to where it

[1:00:49] can actually run that.

[1:00:50] Okay.

[1:00:52] Typically, the signer is for people that are actually in-person or in attendance.

[1:00:57] And so we handle that part from Board of County Commissioners as far as any signers that are needed for the interior audience, but on the live stream video, you're typically going to have something different than that.

[1:01:11] And close, simply apply and close captioning may not be enough to meet those requirements.

[1:01:18] Again, that's that would be up to the clerk of court in terms of a number of lawsuits

[1:01:23] across the state, across other states regarding ADA requirements and there are some

[1:01:28] loopholes that many counties and cities have paid substantially because of so that's

[1:01:36] just another hurdle that will need to be crossed.

[1:01:39] But if there's a desire to move the meetings to the county on the location, probably the

[1:01:45] Not only building we have that would be reasonably accommodative to the size audiences we have would be the courthouse.

[1:01:55] Or the fairgrounds.

[1:01:56] Or the fairgrounds and the board in 2007, I believe, or six actually did have a meeting, large meeting that was at the fairgrounds.

[1:02:07] Similar problem that would be associated with even moving to the courthouse has to do with sound.

[1:02:12] That's an issue within the courthouse courtroom itself, that's also can be an issue within the fairgrounds, but that's something that, again, if the board directs, that that's where we would head, and we would make sure that we go through the appropriate process, working with the clerk of court to have it set up for meeting all the requirements.

[1:02:31] That would, again, be a potential issue with a clerk about, you know, scoring equipment

[1:02:39] there and so forth.

[1:02:43] Well questions and answers right now, I think.

[1:02:46] Yeah, I'd like to see some of those questions answered in terms of how we comply to all the

[1:02:52] ADA regulations, the costs affected with that and the availability of using one facility.

[1:02:59] Mr. Armani.

[1:03:00] Yes, ma'am.

[1:03:01] I think what Ms. Hayward is trying to accomplish in her letter is actually part of the answer

[1:03:06] to that question.

[1:03:07] In order to meet the ADA obligations for live streaming of video or audio, the video

[1:03:13] or audio caption if it's live, or if it's recorded, has to be of a certain production level

[1:03:20] quality in order for closed captioning services to work at the accuracy level that's required.

[1:03:28] And that's where the need for the production quality equipment comes in.

[1:03:35] So there may be a cost to that that she's not articulated.

[1:03:38] But the rationale behind that is rooted in having a quality audio and video capable of meeting the compliance

[1:03:45] standards if you're either going to live stream video and audio or even record video for later publication on the website.

[1:03:53] Right.

[1:03:53] So some of the questions are counting on site location, county staff, additional staff

[1:04:01] with production skills, they're just a number of hurdles to get across before we can get

[1:04:07] the point that I think we can accomplish this.

[1:04:09] I think every board member would like to see this accomplished, but we need to re-sort these

[1:04:15] issues and solve them before we get to that point.

[1:04:18] So we can take it up at a later workshop and continue working on it and let you all have any ideas tonight.

[1:04:27] We'll continue to work on it and provide additional information and options for the board to consider.

[1:04:32] Okay.

[1:04:34] Okay, the next item is public work department update, Mr. Arnold, I think that's yours.

[1:04:39] Yes, sir, and I'll be brief in regard to this, each year we sort of go through each of the different departments and share some of the things that have been taking place.

[1:04:47] and also direction where we're headed.

[1:04:49] This starts feeding into the budget preparation process.

[1:04:54] So under the design division functions,

[1:04:56] there's just a couple of highlights,

[1:04:57] not to go through all the bullet lines.

[1:05:00] But line-of-side reviews, for example,

[1:05:02] you've recently seen some communication related to

[1:05:04] looking at candidate vote in 14, 117.

[1:05:07] That's a line-of-side issue that we get from time to time.

[1:05:10] That is from our review or from customer requests.

[1:05:15] The utility permits, and there's something that this division does as well.

[1:05:21] And if you look at the graphic, you can see that there was not a whole lot of activity

[1:05:25] in 2012, 13 or 14, and that's because the village of this was coming to close at, say,

[1:05:31] you're out of 44, as they moved into acquiring what is now the village of Finney.

[1:05:37] You can see where some of the development started occurring.

[1:05:41] You can see the approved permits go up.

[1:05:42] And so this is this graph sort of follows and it's indicative of the volume of growth activities when you start seeing utility permits

[1:05:49] A road is constructed of the utilities need to be extended to be able to accommodate that and you can see the bit of the decline

[1:05:56] In 2020 and a lot of that had to do with COVID related issues where some of the development did slow up and related to utility permits coming in

[1:06:04] So one of the next steps which I simply do a review of any type of code updates related standards

[1:06:10] We'll also make sure that we're aligned with Landfellma code related to the engineering standards.

[1:06:15] So that's one of the next steps that that division is moving forward.

[1:06:20] The other is the advanced traffic management system.

[1:06:23] So this is a project that the board has already heard that we're looking at being able to have better flow.

[1:06:29] For example, on poor 66, through traffic signals, you wind up gaining capacity when you do that.

[1:06:35] There is one outstanding license agreement that we're waiting on to be able to move forward

[1:06:41] with that project.

[1:06:42] If we don't get that resolved in a timely fashion, we're going to drop that portion out of

[1:06:47] the entire project because it is grant funded with local match, and so DOT is becoming impatient

[1:06:56] because we've not started moving forward while we've been waiting on that.

[1:06:59] So that's something that we are considering perhaps moving off of that piece of that overall

[1:07:05] advanced traffic management project and moving forward of the balance of it.

[1:07:10] There are several construction division projects that have been completed.

[1:07:16] One of the most recent ones is the signalization at Preston Drive in 466.

[1:07:21] Some of the things that are moving forward right now that you see updates from me are on 478

[1:07:27] on the work activity from 301 all the way to the Southern Limits of City of

[1:07:31] Center Hill.

[1:07:33] Canner Road 525V, the board has recently approved that construction work activity

[1:07:37] to move forward other than the CSX crossing, CSX will be handling that.

[1:07:42] And you've also seen where our team's been working with the church.

[1:07:45] That's near the intersection of Morrison 466.

[1:07:48] That one actually got pushed off of that particular meeting with the church.

[1:07:52] Design division was working with the church during the design phase.

[1:07:55] and now we're into the construction phase and our construction team is working with them

[1:08:01] in regard to addressing any concerns that they have. This has to do with extending turn lanes and

[1:08:06] again it's be able to put additional capacity at that intersection and of course the board just

[1:08:11] recently approved the contract to move forward with the signalization at US 301 and 472. So this

[1:08:17] division as soon as it moves beyond the design and gets to the bid stage that's when the construction

[1:08:23] construction division picks it up and carries it through the end of construction.

[1:08:27] The facilities and parks division, there are several completed projects that the boards recently did some ribbon cuttings

[1:08:33] at the north public works annex addition, fire station number 33, and then we've got an upcoming ribbon cutting at the JL expansion.

[1:08:44] So those are large capital projects that are facility related that this division handles.

[1:08:49] But they also have a parks and recreation activity.

[1:08:53] And so those are some of the things where we've worked on a long time making sure that

[1:08:58] the different types of parks have the consistent level of service.

[1:09:03] So for example, one that's somewhat unique is Lake O'Homca, it's a large regional park.

[1:09:08] But when you start getting to the smaller parks that have just a boat ramp, making sure that

[1:09:12] there's bathroom facilities that are present, those type of things.

[1:09:15] some of the next steps, and actually on your agenda for next Tuesday, we receive proposals for

[1:09:23] facility condition assessment, and so that's where we have, for example, even this building

[1:09:28] we did a condition assessment, we wound up doing some improvement work on the stucco on the outside

[1:09:34] of the building and did some repainting, so it's looking at things that we may have missed in

[1:09:39] regard to our preventive maintenance activities, so this helps us line up for the next predictive

[1:09:44] and maintenance and also for budgeting processes.

[1:09:47] You see some other issues that are in here also looking at our energy star portfolio,

[1:09:53] where we're also looking at energy related reductions for our different facilities.

[1:10:00] Operations division. As we have the regional roads going through the board for acceptance,

[1:10:07] that adds additional paved miles that the county maintains. There's a lot of additional work

[1:10:12] that operation division gets into, but one of the next steps is we're still moving forward with the signage updates within the villages,

[1:10:20] making sure that we're having the appropriate wording, reflectivity on the signs as well as the stacked street signs, so that's still moving forward.

[1:10:29] We also handle the driveway permit activities, and that's not just for the county, but also for three of the five cities we handled the driveway permit reviews for them.

[1:10:40] They also handle solid waste.

[1:10:45] So one of the things that after we had this cancellation of a household hazardous waste

[1:10:51] because of COVID, but then we wound up having it.

[1:10:54] We had vehicles stacked all the way back to Powell Road, trying to get into Lake Humpka for

[1:11:02] that.

[1:11:02] So that's certainly a call for budget consideration coming on to move to three collection

[1:11:09] events per year.

[1:11:11] As we have a lot of development that is occurring, a lot of times homeowners when they take over the house there may be leftover paint and that becomes an issue to where some don't realize that you can actually get it dried and if you get it dried, you can actually dispose it normally with your other trash.

[1:11:27] But there's other household hazardous waste that people do flock to this event because they're trying to do the right thing and we're trying to accommodate it.

[1:11:36] But there's cost and going to three collection of events per year is going to increase the cost for that particular service to the customers.

[1:11:44] We do have an obligation under Florida Statute to pursue a 75% recycling goal.

[1:11:49] There's no teeth other than you have to report and explain how well you're doing.

[1:11:55] And so we, for 2019, we were at 52%, we have been as high as 72% in 2017.

[1:12:03] But 2017, we actually picked up two significant recycle activities that we don't necessarily want.

[1:12:11] So Irma, when it hit, all of the wood debris, we had it chipped and it was used as daily cover at the landfill.

[1:12:19] And so, therefore, it was reused and therefore it has a count for the recycling activity.

[1:12:24] For I-75 DOT, did a full resurfacing and all the milling that came out of that was reused

[1:12:32] for other work activities, so that counts as recycling.

[1:12:36] So it is not just what this organization does, but actually plot the curves throughout the county that we can actually capture in the reports.

[1:12:43] The village is recently stopped doing recycling.

[1:12:47] How does that tie in?

[1:12:49] So that actually is still a recycled activity because rather than it going into a landfill, it's actually going to energy conversion.

[1:12:59] And so you're actually reusing that material.

[1:13:03] The issue in the recycling is if it's simply going to a dump, then it has ended its use.

[1:13:10] If it's moving for some other purpose, that is where you're getting the recycled benefit.

[1:13:15] Thank you.

[1:13:16] We also have the Stormwater Management Plan.

[1:13:19] Watershed Canal Maintenance and Piping Special Repair.

[1:13:22] Of course, Piping Special Repair is the big focus that we do have, where we have underground

[1:13:26] systems versus rural ditch sections.

[1:13:28] And so we've done a really good job of staying up on what are the conditions and doing the repair

[1:13:34] But we're going to continue to do that as pipe does age

[1:13:36] We want to catch it before it gets to a catastrophic bubble and has an impact on the road

[1:13:42] So that is the very brief update in regard to what public works operation divisions are doing and some of the next steps

[1:13:49] Any questions from any commissioners from the start on all this

[1:13:54] Okay, if not we'll accept that update and we'll move to item five

[1:13:59] which is some county-related FDOT projects and FDOT funding for county projects.

[1:14:04] Thank you. This was a request because we know that we have commissioners that are participating on the Lake Sumter Metropolitan Planning Organization, and this sort of brings it back, I'll call it home in regard to those work efforts.

[1:14:17] So you can listed the list of priority projects because that's really what is called near term related to grant funding.

[1:14:25] The big news in here is the big push that we've had outside of the MPO activity is to get

[1:14:33] DOT to refocus on a commitment for the widening of 301 from 44 to 470.

[1:14:39] And so that is a big exciting news is they actually have funding allocated for the design

[1:14:44] for that activity.

[1:14:45] And that's a first large step.

[1:14:48] The next large step would be funding the right-of-acquisition and then the final large step would

[1:14:53] be funding the construction. You can also see where we have other roads that are in that

[1:14:59] I'm sorry.

[1:15:00] There's a priority such as Marsh Bend. The reason why that's important is that's one of the obligations in the regional road agreement that the county has. So one of the benefits when that second amendment to the regional road agreement, rather than it being a required four lane facility, it gave flexibility to the board to choose whether it really need to be a four lane facility. So as we've been looking at the modeling at a state district level, we believe that it may be able to be

[1:15:29] a two-lane facility, maybe one roundabout south of Corbin, all the way down to the future

[1:15:35] roundabout at Central Parkway in Marshbin.

[1:15:38] So that reduces our original projected costs that were out of the preliminary engineering

[1:15:42] study, and also gets us in a position to be able to target county incentive program grant,

[1:15:50] SIGP.

[1:15:51] So that's one of the ones that we are looking at budgeting for the design, moving forward

[1:15:57] with the design on our side so that we can pursue the grant funding for the construction.

[1:16:03] But I was going to ask if anybody has any questions about the list of priority projects.

[1:16:08] Any questions?

[1:16:09] Commissioner of the staff.

[1:16:11] Thank you.

[1:16:12] So there is a linkage from that, as I stated, Marsh Bend is a regional road.

[1:16:17] So that will present to the village's company's regional road agreement and the first two amendments in regard to an update.

[1:16:23] I've given the board a narrative, sort of picking out each one of those rows and I just want to highlight a couple of narrative pieces in there.

[1:16:31] One is, you will have coming before you, probably targeting March, all of the Megas and phases will be coming to you from

[1:16:41] State Route 44 all the way to Bexley Trail, and so those are gone through the punch list and we're doing the final review aspects of that.

[1:16:52] So we'll be bringing that to the board for the board to consider accepting and then the one-year warranty starts at that point in time on that all those phases.

[1:17:01] We'll also be bringing Warm Springs Avenue from the term pi to the more boulevard roundabout phase.

[1:17:09] And again, we'll take on that responsibility for the one-year warranty after that.

[1:17:14] So some of these things are coming to completion in the regional road agreement process.

[1:17:20] Also, we did receive related to number 11 the bridge connecting back to the across the term pipe.

[1:17:26] That's going to be through an agreement with the term pipe and the county because the term pipe is going to be looking for the county, obviously, as in the agreement to take the responsibility not only for the construction of the bridge, but also for the long term care maintenance of the bridge.

[1:17:43] very similar to when the second bridge was added at Worms Springs of the

[1:17:48] term pike then the county became responsible for the maintenance. The term

[1:17:52] pike's doing that for all of the bridges along the term pike where they have

[1:17:56] been the responsible party for it as soon as there's a change even if they're

[1:18:00] doing the work they're requiring the local governments to take on the

[1:18:03] responsibility for the long-term care of the bridge. So that's a contract that

[1:18:08] the attorney is reviewing right now and we will be bringing that to the board

[1:18:12] forward in their future for consideration as part of that obligation of the regional

[1:18:16] road agreement to move forward with it.

[1:18:20] The last part of this update is those projects of the counties directly responsible

[1:18:26] for the design, the rideaway position, and the construction.

[1:18:31] So when it is the boulevard from 44 down to the Megasin roundabout, that is a county's responsibility.

[1:18:38] We are at the point in time to where, but the parcels affected by the sovereign state's submerged lands issue.

[1:18:49] We're going to have the engineer give us the final parcel data so that we can get our

[1:18:56] prazer to work on the appraised calls.

[1:19:00] The county attorney's office will be working on the incentive offer agreement as well as preparing for

[1:19:05] for the imminent domain proceedings as they are required for that process.

[1:19:10] So that is moving forward.

[1:19:12] Very well, I've already talked about Canary Road 525V, and I've already talked about Marshbin Trail,

[1:19:17] that next phase activity, that would be the county's responsibility.

[1:19:21] So I'm happy to answer any questions that the board has related to the update on the regional road agreement.

[1:19:26] We'll remember any questions.

[1:19:28] That's right.

[1:19:29] Okay, move to item 7, cash flow analysis and grab budget amendment.

[1:19:34] So thank you.

[1:19:35] This is one of the things that, when we're talking about the regional road agreement,

[1:19:39] and I believe the time of that contract, there are estimates that are associated with the cost for

[1:19:46] the reimbursement to the villages for the construction of those roads that are listed in the regional

[1:19:52] road agreement, as well as those specific obligations that the county has for the design,

[1:19:57] right, and position and construction.

[1:20:00] Over time, it obligates in the agreement gas taxes is the only obligation within the regional

[1:20:09] road agreement.

[1:20:10] But the gas taxes are not sufficient to be able to carry the weight of that agreement based

[1:20:16] on the estimates over time.

[1:20:19] So it does require road impact fees to also cover that difference.

[1:20:25] There's also, as we've already done, as an organization, contributed money from General

[1:20:31] Fund to help have the initial cash flow to be able to meet the five-year reimbursement

[1:20:37] at the point in time of the acceptance of a road phase, but also in the future, there

[1:20:44] may be an obligation for that.

[1:20:47] What I've proposed in this draft budget amendment is any of the additional cash flow, I'm sorry,

[1:20:52] cash carry forward from last fiscal year, not only from secondary trust, which is a gas tax

[1:20:58] fund, but also from the general fund, that that go into fund 106 to obligate towards that long-term

[1:21:07] debt. By doing so, it pushes off any estimation of general fund having to come in to support the

[1:21:15] difference between what gas tax and road impact fees is not picking up until

[1:21:21] 2027. It also reduces that dollar figure for the balance of that agreement

[1:21:26] from 27 on. This is recalibrated every year fully and we just went through the

[1:21:34] full recalibration of this. We updated as we get a new project in that approved

[1:21:42] the budget under the regional road agreement, those have been coming under the estimates that I have.

[1:21:48] So that's good news.

[1:21:50] The actual construction invoices that have been coming in for those approved budgets have been

[1:21:55] coming under the approved budget.

[1:21:58] That's good news.

[1:21:59] So that is part of that calibration process is to refine the estimates to the budgets and

[1:22:06] the budgets of the actuals, so that we have the cash necessary to be able to meet that

[1:22:13] obligation when it comes to.

[1:22:15] But calls we've been able to and this proposed draft budget amendment to push it off to

[1:22:20] 27, you can see that have also allocated in that proposal additional funds for future grant

[1:22:28] matches for grants to move forward with some of the roads that are not only in the regional

[1:22:33] road agreement but also outside of the regional road agreement.

[1:22:38] So that's important.

[1:22:39] We don't want to miss the opportunities that DMT may have for grant funding but it does

[1:22:43] require a local match.

[1:22:45] Also in there is a million dollars that's discretionary for the board to sign to those

[1:22:50] things that are not local match for road improvement projects.

[1:22:55] So it's not a lot but this is also a consistent activity that we've had in the past of bringing

[1:23:01] forward having this consideration for the board to look at how we can address any additional

[1:23:08] resurfacing road work activity that might be necessary.

[1:23:11] And so that's the reason why this is for direction.

[1:23:14] This is what I have proposed to be able to meet long-term obligation under the regional

[1:23:20] road agreement also to set the stage for having money for local match, for grant projects

[1:23:25] for roads, and then also a million dollars for current fiscal year to start moving forward

[1:23:29] with some resurfacing priorities under the Payment Management Program.

[1:23:34] Any questions or comments?

[1:23:37] I have a comment Mr. Chair.

[1:23:40] I like the foresight of going forward with it and projecting out what it's going to

[1:23:46] be.

[1:23:47] I do see some shortfalls in the graph here.

[1:23:50] But the other thing I like is the local resurfacing issue and I want to see us pay more attention

[1:23:57] to the local roads that need to be resurfaced budget capably being able to do it, so I think that's an important piece.

[1:24:07] Thanks for bringing that up.

[1:24:09] I agree. I think it's a good plan and the way you've took the additional funds and hopefully you can generate less impact on general fund revenue over the next several years as opposed to the impact fees.

[1:24:27] other road monies that are coming in so I think it's a good strategy and again

[1:24:34] like I say recalibrate every year but this one time it's good strategy I think

[1:24:40] to do it this way I agree see our 477 will be to top of one of the top of

[1:24:48] the roads on top of my list for that million dollars discretionary money everybody

[1:24:52] I don't know how to have some, so we don't know.

[1:24:55] And to that point, we do have an objective criteria in regard to the pavement management program.

[1:25:03] I'll share that list.

[1:25:06] But again, there are going to be other, I'll call it preferential issues that the board members may have.

[1:25:12] We're giving you the objective list of following the criteria.

[1:25:16] If you want to deviate from that, I just need the direction for that.

[1:25:20] just like Kenny Road 477 as an example, and so I didn't present that to you because the

[1:25:26] first step is, is the funding proposal appropriate, and if so, then I'll come back with a greater

[1:25:32] detail related to the million dollars for that.

[1:25:36] If everybody's in agreement, I think I would entertain a motion for approval of the budget

[1:25:41] amendment.

[1:25:42] So, Chairman, that's going to be on your February 23rd.

[1:25:48] You just gave me the direction, I just want to make sure that I've explained it, but this will be on your agenda for Tuesday to actually consider the budget a minimum.

[1:25:56] Okay, because we can do it in a special way.

[1:25:59] You can, but it was actually draft, I do want to finalize that before it goes on your agenda.

[1:26:06] Finalize it, and we'll deal with it next week.

[1:26:08] There's no desire to move forward, so we have a desire to move forward.

[1:26:12] Right.

[1:26:13] Good place and only agenda.

[1:26:14] Thank you, sir.

[1:26:16] Okay.

[1:26:17] Automate is a resolution to amend and correct an error in closing and vacating right away

[1:26:21] or Eastman upon the petition by Eugene and Charlene Cason.

[1:26:25] I think this is the case you discussed with me that-

[1:26:28] Yes, so we're trying to accommodate a customer who's trying to close on the property.

[1:26:31] And there's a script that's related to the legal description from 1993.

[1:26:35] And so this is the fastest way to be able to correct that.

[1:26:38] And it's acceptable to the customers trying to close and their legal representation.

[1:26:45] So it's no question to entertain a motion to approve the resolution.

[1:26:49] So moved.

[1:26:51] Second motion by commission search.

[1:26:53] Second by commission from Miller.

[1:26:54] All in favor say aye.

[1:26:55] Aye.

[1:26:56] Motion.

[1:26:58] Any objection?

[1:26:59] Motion passes unanimously.

[1:27:01] The item eight is a voluntary road in fact fee increase agreement and we've heard most discussion tonight on that.

[1:27:10] I'll have the agreement before you tonight, so we'll move to board discussion on it.

[1:27:21] Is there any, or I'll entertain the motion.

[1:27:24] I have some discussion, Mr. Chair.

[1:27:25] Mr. Estep, I would like to thank Mr. Arnold for bringing this alternative opportunity to the board.

[1:27:31] Additionally, I would like to thank Dr. Gary Lester and the villagers for submitting this contract.

[1:27:37] With that being said, I have concerns that the contract submitted by Mr. Lester on February 11th.

[1:27:43] Two items specifically, I believe the amount of the increase is insufficient to show support to all of the Sumter County tax payers that are currently carrying additional costs that should be borne by new development.

[1:27:57] Secondarily, I believe the additional restrictions identified in item two of the executive summary places the BOCC in an untenable position.

[1:28:05] These restrictions may remove the flexibility of the board to be able to meet the needs of its constituents.

[1:28:13] Yeah, the comments on the Mr. Miller?

[1:28:17] Thank you, Mr. Miller.

[1:28:20] I too, you know, at the workshop, we looked for alternatives and asked Mr. Arnold to look at possible ways of doing it.

[1:28:31] So I want to thank you and the staff for the work that you've done and I just want to digress a little bit back to

[1:28:38] to comment that one of our people made and something that I've noticed for years while I was coming to commissioners meetings long before I ever decided to run, is when questions are asked in public forum, and they're never answered, it gives residents a sense of their questions don't mean anything, and I really think we need to look at a policy as a board,

[1:29:07] that if there's questions listed, that we listen to them and provide as good an answer as we can provide at the time,

[1:29:17] or say we'll get back to you with answers, because again, if you ask a question, you feel ignored if it's never answered.

[1:29:26] So I'd like us to consider that as a board number one.

[1:29:30] I don't disagree with that.

[1:29:32] Disagree?

[1:29:33] I don't disagree with that.

[1:29:34] Okay.

[1:29:35] I only heard the word disagree.

[1:29:38] But I think we need to look at that for our residents,

[1:29:41] because if any of our residents had word meeting,

[1:29:44] sometimes it's a simple question with a complex answer.

[1:29:47] It is some that was asked here tonight or that,

[1:29:50] or what I did at previous commission or meetings in another state.

[1:29:55] I'd say, can we let everybody speak?

[1:29:57] will write your questions down.

[1:30:00] May be there is duplicates and will answer them at the end of the public forum. And sometimes we can do that. Sometimes it's going to take more research and get back to them. But if that person knows we're getting back to them because their questions important, we can still we're getting back to them. Certainly, you want to kind of do a short, unofficial policy, but just as a point of order. That was number one.

[1:30:29] And, you know, over the last couple days since the publication of this agreement came out, I stopped counting after 300 emails.

[1:30:41] I answered about 250 of them, and I apologize for the other 50, but I haven't gotten to them.

[1:30:49] There's a lot of, as I read this contract, and three things stuck up to me.

[1:30:56] the stipulations of termination.

[1:31:00] The one I really can't figure out is it's almost like if I don't pay my mortgage, I own the house.

[1:31:08] So if I don't pay my bill, the contract's terminated, I could never agree to a contract like that.

[1:31:18] I also agree with Commissioner Reston, but I think the rate proposed is way too low.

[1:31:24] And I think it ties our legislative hands for three and a half years.

[1:31:29] And in that respect, I have a problem with the contract as proposed.

[1:31:34] Okay. Any other comments?

[1:31:37] Yes.

[1:31:38] Commissioner Miller?

[1:31:38] I agree with Commissioner S. Depp and awardee said, I did some simple math and

[1:31:45] understand I'm a simple person, so a simple math works for me.

[1:31:48] but there's 79,689 parcels in Suntra County that pay real estate taxes.

[1:31:55] If you divide the best case scenario here, the highest estimate range of revenue increase at $965,800,

[1:32:06] divided by at $79,689, that means we'd all get a benefit of about $12 and 12 cents a year

[1:32:12] in a real estate tax cost reduction, and that's just not enough.

[1:32:15] And for the other reason they mentioned what's in the contract would tie our hands for three-and-a-half years, I would not be able to accept that either.

[1:32:24] Any other comments?

[1:32:28] I'll entertain a motion on the voluntary road impact fee increase agreement by the villages.

[1:32:36] Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion to reject the offer by Mr. Gary Lester, Vice President of the villages for the community relations.

[1:32:43] I have a motion by the commissioner asked to have the reject is there a second then I have a second by commissioner Miller all in favor say aye aye aye

[1:32:52] I put the same side no motion carries four to one

[1:33:01] Mr. Chair I have a little follow on with that if I may

[1:33:06] With Mr. Arnold I'd like to request that Mr. Arnold prepare an impact he compares some document similar to the one the board had previously provided us

[1:33:15] three economic development director.

[1:33:18] And I think you're still working on that incremental document.

[1:33:26] I had Paul's for consideration of this, but yes, I'll be back on that.

[1:33:30] Yeah, and this document would contain but not be limited to 5% increments in the 10-day

[1:33:35] allowable report from the current 40% mark, which has been mentioned in our meetings on

[1:33:40] page 23, that report to the 100% mark.

[1:33:43] And I'd like to have five percent increments that will delineately

[1:33:47] eat the market ability is highly competitive, competitive, comparable, and not comparable.

[1:33:54] These benchmarks will be compared against total impact fees for all contiguous counties.

[1:33:59] Sumter County currently only utilizes the road impact fee on new development.

[1:34:05] Other counties may have multiple comprehensive impact fees for

[1:34:09] fire law, recreation, et cetera, that will have to be rolled together and then considered

[1:34:16] as one since ours is only one with the road impact fee to make it comparable.

[1:34:22] And then secondarily upon delivery of the prepared impact fee comparison chart, the impact

[1:34:28] fee issue will be placed on the first workshop date for discussion after that's delivered

[1:34:33] to the commissioners.

[1:34:34] This workshop will also be utilized to set a future public hearing date at that time.

[1:34:40] Currently, impact fee question has been tabled under after July 1st at an early meeting.

[1:34:47] That's why in the first shot I'm requesting that.

[1:34:50] I'm going to bring it up on our shop last time, once you get this document finished and we can discuss it.

[1:35:00] I'd like to make a couple of comments.

[1:35:05] Really up to tonight and tonight we've heard a lot of misinformation.

[1:35:11] It's not been correct.

[1:35:14] There was never any recommendation from any person or company.

[1:35:18] It said we should charge 100% of what's legally possible.

[1:35:23] That is not true.

[1:35:24] We had a study.

[1:35:26] We asked the study what was legally possible, we asked them then what would they recommend to put us in a similar financial and economic development position as we were.

[1:35:39] They recommended 45% at a later time, we lowered that to 40% because we wanted to become economically competitive and remain that way.

[1:35:53] We did have a tax hike, no one likes a tax hike.

[1:35:56] Before the tax hike, we were the fourth lowest combined taxing unit out of 67 in the state of Florida.

[1:36:05] After the tax hike, we are now the ninth lowest out of 67 counties in the state of Florida.

[1:36:14] The fact is, is wherever people came from, they chose to come here.

[1:36:19] and regardless of where they came from in very few circumstances have they come

[1:36:25] here with a increased tax load. If you come from the north east or west your

[1:36:32] taxes were much higher than they are in Florida period. We are the ninth lowest out

[1:36:38] of 67 counties. Our current plan has no plan for any further tax increase for the

[1:36:49] That holds out, because we're already talking about taxing this and taxing that, and then combining all that.

[1:36:56] Well, taxes are taxes, and the one thing that people have not come to accept or realize or even think about.

[1:37:08] Sumter county is the oldest median age in the United States.

[1:37:13] The oldest county in the whole country is Sumter County.

[1:37:17] If you think we can play games with our taxing schedule, our fee schedules, and still draw in economic development.

[1:37:27] Still have companies come here when they see that we are the oldest county in the country, not just the state of Florida.

[1:37:35] So we have some challenges.

[1:37:37] There's 18,000 people that commute in and out of Sumter County every single day.

[1:37:43] Today, I would be much more comfortable if we were talking about how do we build housing for those people?

[1:37:50] How can they bring their families right here to Sumter County instead of this back and forth, back and forth with really no facts behind it.

[1:38:00] The misinformation has been absolutely horrible.

[1:38:07] And the cat calling continues time and time again from the same people who will come up and

[1:38:13] spew the same thing every meeting and then they like to think that's true, but what they're saying many times is not the truth.

[1:38:22] Thank you.

[1:38:24] Anyone else have any comments?

[1:38:27] If not, we'll move to item 10, which is the State of Emergency Decoration Extension.

[1:38:48] I've heard a couple of times now about the IT contracts.

[1:38:53] I'm going to ask if we can consider putting those out for bid.

[1:38:56] This board has a fiduciary responsibility to the assistance of Sumter County.

[1:39:02] Are we getting the best price?

[1:39:03] Can we get a better price?

[1:39:04] Can we get better service, et cetera, et cetera?

[1:39:06] All those questions be answered in the contracts just to review them.

[1:39:10] What's out there?

[1:39:11] What's available?

[1:39:12] Is there something available that's better, cheaper, or what?

[1:39:17] But I'd like to see those looked at.

[1:39:20] But number two, I'd like to see an animal advocacy group put together.

[1:39:29] We've got way too much animosity between animal services and the animal advocates in Sumpra County.

[1:39:37] Too many things have been done in the past that do not help, both groups have a reason to be in existence.

[1:39:46] I would like to see Steve Kennedy, Monica, my wife Angie came for it in Caron Tagler meet

[1:39:55] to discuss what can be done to improve the conditions.

[1:39:59] I would like to ask for Commissioner Search to mediate that group if he's willing.

[1:40:06] This is news to him, I'm blind sighting him with this.

[1:40:10] Yes, you are.

[1:40:11] But with your background, well, if you don't want to do it, I don't.

[1:40:16] I'm okay. I'm saying he's got a background in mediation and negotiating and there's some

[1:40:22] strong personalities in that group so that he can keep peace in the meeting, I would like him to

[1:40:27] mediate that group. I can't use your number. I'm going to legal statutory route. Some of the things

[1:40:35] you're talking about may not be legal. Okay, on the first item, the IT, we do have contracts with this

[1:40:42] organization, so I would need to ask if there's consensus of the board to do what Commissioner

[1:40:50] Miller has requested or not.

[1:40:53] No.

[1:40:54] No.

[1:40:54] Okay.

[1:40:55] So there's not consensus here.

[1:40:58] The contract of obligation is for how long.

[1:41:02] I'll have to pull that out, but I believe it's 2022, if I'm not mistaken, for the current

[1:41:08] contract.

[1:41:09] And it is our intention to put that out for request for qualifications.

[1:41:14] And the reason for that, you're not talking about buying a tire for a truck, right?

[1:41:19] This actually has to do with our cybersecurity associated with part of our operations.

[1:41:24] It is intricate.

[1:41:26] So that's the process that I've already stated to the commissioners during the meeting when this was brought up.

[1:41:33] when you know first came into office and that is the intent is to put that out for request for qualifications as we get towards the end of the current contract permit.

[1:41:45] Mr. German, it should be noted that that company is doing an outstanding job and always have our tap not they have gotten a supervisor elections many kudos from the state.

[1:42:00] We're in the electing process for detecting possible bad activities.

[1:42:09] And every constitutional officer is happy with their service.

[1:42:12] Commissioner Gilpin, I need to agree with you on that.

[1:42:15] But I think for the public, it's always good to put it out for bid to see where they stand and who else is out there.

[1:42:24] It's just good business.

[1:42:33] I think when we make a decision here in the contract, we need to honor that contract until there's been a breach of that contract or there's something that's been referred to us by the county attorney and where the county administrator is too many times.

[1:42:49] Is that contract comes back up, your intent is to put it on the street?

[1:42:55] Yes sir, we're planning to request for qualifications, we're planning to do that in advance of the termination contract because it takes time to go through a review, to qualify, to go through the development of a contract so that you're ready for a transition.

[1:43:09] Again, this is, it is very complicated because of the level of service and the type of service that's being provided.

[1:43:16] And the second item, Commissioner Miller brought up was an animal advocacy group with a number

[1:43:22] of names that he would like to see on that, is there a consensus for that?

[1:43:31] And I would say no.

[1:43:34] So do you want to bring that to a meeting for a vote?

[1:43:38] I would like to see that come up in another workshop, some place to talk about it, if we're

[1:43:43] going to talk about it.

[1:43:44] I'm not sure that doing anything more than that we've already done through resolution and

[1:43:54] changes is warranted until we see how strong it would you get with Commissioner Miller

[1:43:59] and y'all discuss and provide the board with some outline of what he's proposing as a group

[1:44:06] and how they would work between our animal control operation, the advocacy groups, and

[1:44:15] so we do have-

[1:44:16] So everybody would understand what's being proposed.

[1:44:18] I would-

[1:44:19] There's a couple of things, first of all.

[1:44:22] We do have a workshop that's planned for May 4th, I believe, as the day.

[1:44:27] And that's when we will be talking about, again, just like we do with public works, we'll

[1:44:30] be talking about mosquito control, animal services, a couple other operational issues.

[1:44:34] to let you know where we're at, some of the next steps that we are ready for, and we've even gone through the best practices book that the commissioners had.

[1:44:47] We've gone through a comparison and so we are going to be ready to be able to talk about one of the next steps that we think are viable that are also consistent with that checklist of what line.

[1:44:58] the emphasis.

[1:45:00] Advocate group, component, and the names that Commissioner Miller has raised, there's a conflict that's associated with that. There's a conflict that's associated with Sunshine Law issues that we've already run into. The problem that we had was I had a meeting with Commissioner search and he relayed his conversation with Angie Foxx that was advocating for this very solution to be presented to the board.

[1:45:29] I then had a directive email from Commissioner Miller that said go and do this and use Commissioner

[1:45:37] search for that specific purpose. That indicates clearly that Angie Fox is a conduit of communication

[1:45:43] between two commissioners, which is violation of open meetings. So my concern is that where

[1:45:52] you have something that, unfortunately, I became a witness to a violation that becomes

[1:46:00] an ethics-related issue. If that is filed by someone and the investigation occurs, my

[1:46:10] concern is that you may want to wait until that activity has happened and the investigation

[1:46:17] has been concluded before you're involved, anything to do with Angie Fox, who's currently acting as a conduit.

[1:46:25] So that's the first legal issue that I had to talk to the county attorney about.

[1:46:31] And that's the advice was this had to be disclosed at tonight's meeting.

[1:46:34] That's really the reason why the county attorney's here is for that disclosure purpose because we have an obligation to the board as a whole.

[1:46:42] We support each individual commissioner, but that action puts the board and jeopardy related

[1:46:50] to any vote that you may take that's associated with that violation of the open meeting small.

[1:46:56] So that's reason why this particular issue that's been brought up is tied directly to that

[1:47:01] open meeting violation, and therefore I would suggest that you do not take any action on

[1:47:05] that until that issue of violation has been resolved.

[1:47:09] In light of that information, no action will be taken tonight.

[1:47:13] The next item on the agenda is to adjourn, so I'm going to declare this meeting adjourned.

BOCC Workshop - Wildwood

Agenda

Transcript