5. Approval of St Johns River Water Management District request to replace expiring License Agreement with Easement at Lake Geneva boat ramp

[9. Clay County Public School Concurrency Proportionate Share Mitigation Agreement between the School Board of Clay County, Florida, Feed Mill Road Holdings, LLC and Clay County]

>> MOVING INTO NEW BUSINESS, NUMBER NINE. THE PUBLIC SCHOOL CONCURRENCY.

>> NUMBER NINE IS A SHARED MITIGATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SCHOOL BOARD OF CLAY COUNTY AND THE LAND OWNER THE COUNTY IS INCLUDED BECAUSE WE HAVE TWO HELP FACILITATE THE CURRENT VOUCHERS ASSOCIATED WITH THE AGREEMENT. THIS PARTICULAR AGREEMENT IS IN CONNECTION WITH A DEVELOPMENT ALONG THE ROAD. THE REASON WAS LAKE ASBURY ELEMENTARY WAS SHORT AS FAR AS CAPACITY BUT THEY ENTERED INTO THE AGREEMENT AND THE SCHOOL

BOARD AND LAND OWNER ARE ASKING FOR THE BOARD'S APPROVAL. >> I WILL MOVE APPROVAL.

>> I WILL SECOND THE MOTION. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND PERIOD ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION

COLLECTS ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. IT CARRIES 5-0. >> THE FIRST RENEWAL BID OF

[10. First Renewal Bid 18/19-27, Waste Tire Management Services]

18-19-27, WASTE TIRES MANAGEMENT SERVICES. >> GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

I SERVE IN YOUR ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT. I AM HERE THIS EVENING FOR TWO

[00:45:01]

ITEMS. THE FIRST IS THE RENEWAL BID FOR WASTE TIRES MANAGEMENT SERVICES.

SO, OBVIOUSLY AT ALBERT DISPOSAL FACILITIES WE ACCEPT WASTE TIRES FROM COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS. WE HAVE TO ENSURE THAT THOSE ARE PROPERLY PROCESSED OR REUSED IF THEY CAN BE RECYCLED. SO WE DID A FORMAL BID IN MAY OF 2019, ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT AS A COST-EFFECTIVE BIDDER AND WE ARE ASKING FOR A ONE-YEAR RENEWAL.

THEY HAVE AGREED TO HOLD THEIR PRICE. ANY QUESTIONS COLLECTS I WILL BE

HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM. >> I HAD A QUESTION. THE STATE COLLECTS 1 DOLLAR PER TIRE FOR DISPOSAL. ICP CAFÉ CONTRACT WHICH IS $89,000.

IT WILL COST US TO DISPOSE. CAN WE TAP THE STATE FUNDS TO HELP US DISPOSE OF THE TIRES.

>> I UNDERSTAND. THERE IS A STATE TIRE DISPOSAL FEE.

THAT IS CONTROLLED BY THE STATE LEGISLATION. THOSE ARE USED FOR TIRE CLEANUPS

OF MASSIVE CLEANUP SPIRIT. >> IN THE PAST THERE WERE TIRE GRANTS AND THOSE WENT AWAY.

>> WE HAVE BEEN COLLECTING THE MONEY FOR 15-20 YEARS SO WE SHOULD BE WORKING THROUGH THE SUPER SITES. IS THERE ANY RELIEF IN SIGHT FOR ASSISTANCE FOR US COMPLEX WHERE

PAIN TWICE. >> THERE'S NOTHING IN THE WORKS. WE KNOW THE STATE

REPRESENTATIVES AND WE WILL TALK TO THEM ABOUT THIS. >> WE PUT THIS ON THE LIST.

LIKE I SAID WE HAVE BEEN PAINT TWICE. I HAVE BEEN PAYING 1 DOLLAR PER

TIRE AND OUTWARD PAIN AGAIN. >> ANY QUESTIONS? >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.

IT HAS BEEN EIGHT YEAR WE DID AND ADJUSTMENT AND THE RATE. THAT REALLY SLOWED DOWN THE INCOMING AMOUNT OF TIRES. I THINK NOW WE ARE RECEIVING THE TIRES GENERATED WITHIN CLAY COUNTY AND NOT THE TIRES COMING FROM OUTSIDE OF THE AREA ONCE WE ADJUSTED OUR RATES.

I AM COMFORTABLE TO SAY, THE AMOUNTS NOW ARE THE TIRES BEING GENERATED IN CLAY COUNTY.

>> CAN YOU DESCRIBE TO THE PUBLIC HOW TO GET RID OF A TIRE COLLECTS WHAT IS THE PROCESS

COLLECTS. >> ANYONE WHO'S COMMERCIAL COMES AND DROP IT OFF THERE WILL BE A FEE. AND IF YOU ARE A RESIDENT OF CLAY COUNTY AND YOU RESIDE ON THE BILL, YOU ARE ALLOWED TO DROP ALL FOUR TIRES PER MONTH AT NO ADDITIONAL CHARGE AT OUR FACILITY. BEYOND THE FOUR TIRES, THEN YOU WOULD PAY THE APPROPRIATE FEE FOR THE TIGER. ALSO WE EXPLOIT -- WE ACCEPT TIRES.

>> THEY ARE NOT COLLECTED CURBSIDE. >> YOU HAVE TO TAKE THEM TO THE

FACILITY. >> WE MAKE IT AS EASY AS WE CAN. SO WE HAVE FIVE LOCATIONS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY FOR RESIDENTS TO USE. ONE LOCATION FOR COMMERCIAL

BUSINESSES TO USE. >> OKAY, GREAT. IF YOU HAVE TIRES TO GET RID OF

DO IT THE RIGHT WAY. >> DO THAT OR LEAVE THEM AT THE TIRE STORE.

>> OKAY. >> I WILL MOVE WE APPROVE THE RENEWAL BID 18, 19-27 TO EXCEPT

THE ONE YEAR WITH NO INCREASE IN PRICE. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND PERIOD ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION COLLECTS ALL IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE.

[00:50:07]

OPPOSED? IT CARRIES 5-0. >> NUMBER 11 I IMAGINE THAT IT

[11. Approval of (7) Franchise Agreements for Container Services]

IS YOU TOO. >> I WILL JUST STAY PUT. >> THIS ITEM, AND I WON'T READ EVERYTHING BUT, I WILL REFER TO IT. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FRANCHISE AND COLLECTION ORDINANCE WHICH IS NUMBER 90 -- 24. ON SEPTEMBER 22 OF 2020 THE BOARD DIRECTED TO SOLICIT APPLICATIONS FOR FRANCHISES AND TO DEVELOP AGREEMENTS WITH THOSE QUALIFIED APPLICANTS. SO, THAT IS WHY WE ARE HERE. BEFORE YOU ARE THE AGREEMENTS WITH SEVEN QUALIFIED APPLICANTS. A LITTLE MORE HISTORY. IT WAS A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE.

WE RECEIVED THE SECOND ONE WHICH IS QUALIFIED. WE BROUGHT FORTH ON SEPTEMBER 29 THE FIRST THREE APPLICANTS. THEY IMMEDIATELY RETURNED AN APPLICATION.

ONE WAS GFL. THE REASON WE BROUGHT THEM FORTH IN REALLY QUICK WAS BECAUSE ADVANCED DISPOSAL. THIS WAS IN ORDER TO ALLOW THE MERGER TO PASS.

TO PASS THE SCRUTINY WITH THE GOVERNMENT. SO, THAT WAS A TIME SENSITIVE ISSUE. AT THE TIME THE MERGER WAS GOING TO BE COMPLETED WAS OCTOBER 1.

SO THE OTHER TWO WERE ALSO SUBMITTED IMMEDIATELY BEFORE THE BOARD.

THOSE WERE APPROVED ON THE 29TH. THE DAY OF APPLICATIONS WASN'T UNTIL OCTOBER 21. BUT THOSE ARE THE APPLICANTS WE ARE BRINGING FORTH TODAY.

THERE WAS AN ADDITIONAL EIGHT APPLICANTS AND WE ARE BRINGING FORTH SEVEN.

ONE WAS APPROVED ALREADY. >> I DON'T HAVE A QUESTION I JUST WANT TO COMMEND THE EFFORT THAT COMPETITION MAKES EVERYTHING BETTER. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE

COUNTY TO PROVIDE BETTER SERVICE SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR EFFORTS. >> IT WILL CERTAINLY ALLOW FOR MORE CHOICES. PRIOR TO THIS PROCESS WE WERE AT 16 FRANCHISEES AND THIS WILL TAKE THE TOTAL UP TO 25 FOR THE SHORT TERM. THERE ARE OTHER MERGERS HAPPENING TOO. ONE WILL BE FULLY OPERATIONAL. BUT IT WILL STILL PUT US AROUND

23. >> ANY QUESTIONS COLLECTS TAKE A MOTION.

>> I WILL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT FOR THE SIX LISTED WASTE PROVIDERS,

FOR A CONTRACT THAT BEGINS TODAY THROUGH NINE-30-21. >> I WILL SECOND PERIOD.

>> IS THERE A REASON HE ONLY DID SIX? >> SEVEN.

IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE SEVEN. I HAVE IT IN MY BRAIN. IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE SEVEN.

>> I WILL SECOND, SEVEN. >> OKAY WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND PERIOD ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. IT CARRIES 5-0.

[12. RFP #20/21-1, EMS Medical Billing Bid Award]

>> 12, EMS MEDICAL BUILDING BID AWARD. >> HELLO.

GOOD AFTERNOON I AM KAREN THOMAS THE PURCHASING DIRECTOR. I'M PRESENTING THIS ITEM FOR THE EMERGENCY MEDICAL BILLING SERVICES. THIS IS A COMPANY THAT WILL BILL AND COLLECT OUR TRANSPORT FEES FOR EMERGENCY SERVICES FOR AMBULANCE SERVICES.

SO WE PUT OUT A RFP WE RECEIVED THE THREE PROPOSALS BACK. SO OUR ACTING FIRE CHIEF, I WORKED 911 MANAGER AND DIRECTOR WERE ON THE COMMITTEE. THIS IS WHERE WE SCORE BASED ON

[00:55:04]

QUALIFICATIONS, TECHNICAL APPROACH, COMPLIANCE, REPORTING AND BOOKING FEES.

IT'S NOT A LOW BID. SO, CHANGE HEALTHCARE WAS SCORED NUMBER ONE THEY WERE CONSISTENT.

THAT INFORMATION IS PROVIDED IN YOUR BACKUP. CHANGE HEALTHCARE IS OUR CURRENT PROVIDER. THEIR CONTRACT EXPIRES AT THE END OF JANUARY.

IF THE BOARD APPROVES THIS BIT OF WORK WE WILL BRING BACK A NEW AGREEMENT AT A FUTURE BOARD MEETING. THE TERM OF THAT CONTRACT WILL BE FOR THREE YEARS.

I AM HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. I KNOW THERE WERE QUESTIONS ABOUT, THE RFP PROCESS ITSELF SO HOPEFULLY I EXPLAINED THAT. I ALSO SAID CHANGE HEALTHCARE IS OUR CURRENT PROVIDER. THEIR RATES LOOK LIKE THEY WENT UP FOR THE THREE YEARS BUT I DO WANT TO MENTION WITH THE RATES WE HAVE NOW THAT INCLUDES AN ON-SITE BILLING LIAISON WHICH I DID NOT INCLUDE IN THE BACKUP BUT CURRENTLY THEY CHARGE A SEPARATE RATE.

ULTIMATELY THERE IS NO INCREASE IN THE FEES. >> ANY QUESTIONS?

>> THAT WAS MY CONCERN. THE CONTRACT WENT UP 16%. I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT WAS THE REASON FOR THE INCREASE AND I THINK THAT EXPLAINS IT RIGHT HERE.

>> CHIEF, COULD YOU TALK TO US ABOUT WHAT THIS ACTUALLY DOES, WHAT KIND OF A COLLECTION RATE WE HAVE PICTURED SO THE CURRENT COLLECTION RATE VARIES BUT IT'S ABOVE THE 40% RANGE WHICH IS AN INDUSTRY STANDARD. WE HAVE AS THAT'S RIGHT WE HAVE HAD HIGHER BUT IT DEPENDS IF IT GOES TO MEDICARE OR SELF-PACED OR THINGS LIKE THAT. IT GIVES US REVENUE.

WE TAKE PEOPLE TO THE HOSPITAL HE DOESN'T PAY FOR THE ENTIRE FEAT BUT IT DOES PAY A PORTION

OF THAT. >> THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO DO THE BUILDING AFTER WE DO AN

AMBULANCE CALL? >> THAT'S CORRECT. THEY DO THE CODING AND FINITE WORK OF BUILDING THE INDIVIDUAL INSURANCE COMPANIES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

>> WE ARE COLLECTING 40% OF THE BILLING AGAINST WHAT WE ARE DOING.

>> DON'T QUOTE ME EXACTLY. >> THAT IS A TOPIC THAT EVERYONE NEEDS TO KNOW ABOUT.

>> IN INDUSTRY STANDARD WAS WHAT? TRANSPORTED PERCENT.

IT'S BEEN RUNNING THAT FOR MANY YEARS. BUT THAT DEPENDS ON WHAT IS BEING BUILT. WHETHER A PRIVATE PROVIDER OR WHAT.

BUT I CAN BRING THAT BACK TO YOU AND GIVE YOU THE SPECIFICS. >> THAT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA.

FOR THOSE OF US WHO THINK WE MAKE A LOT OF MONEY RUNNING THE AMBULANCE SERVICE, -- THE ONLY THING I WOULD ADD IS YOU HAVE DIFFERENT AREAS THAT YOU HAVE DIFFERENT RATES.

YOU GO BY COST PER RUN. THAT IS AN AVERAGE OF WHAT YOU RECEIVE BACK FROM EACH RUN.

THAT IS A BETTER COMPARISON ACROSS THE BOARD OF WHAT THAT WOULD BE.

I CAN SHOW YOU WHAT THAT HAS BEEN IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS SO YOU CAN SEE THAT.

>> GREAT. >> CAN I ASKED ONE MORE QUESTION.

SO, HERE IS MY QUESTION. DO THE BILLING PEOPLE DO THE COLLECTIONS AS WELL COLLECTS.

>> THE BILLING PEOPLE DO THE BILL BUT THE ACTUAL MONEY COMES IN TO THE COUNTY WHICH USED TO

BE PART OF FINANCE WHICH IS NOW AT THE CLERK'S OFFICE. >> WHO FOLLOWS UP TO ASK IF THEY

WIL PAY THE BILL OR, THAT TRACK. >> THEY DO THE CONCURRENT BILLING. X AMOUNT OF DAYS IS THAT GO OUT. WE HAVE A BILLING LIAISON THAT IS CONTRACTED FROM THE BUILDING WITH US. THEY ARE THE MIDDLE PERSON.

THEY TRIED TO STREAMLINE THE PROCESS. THEY ALSO HAVE THE BACK AND FORTH FOR THE INDIVIDUAL THAT CALLS IN THAT HAS PROBLEMS WITH THE BILLS OR SAY I JUST GOT MY THIRD BILL AND I NEVER GOT ONE BEFORE. SHE GOES IN AND RESEARCHES TO FIND OUT. THERE IS A THREE-TIER SYSTEM. YOU HAVE THE PROVIDER BEING THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. YOU HAVE THE CLERK'S OFFICE AND THOSE RECONCILING THOSE TO MAKE SURE THE BUILDING IS BEING DONE FOR EACH RUN. THEY ARE LOOKING TO SEE THAT

COME BACK AND THEN THEY PUT IT TOGETHER. >> I GUESS I WAS THINKING, STAYING WITH THE SAME PROVIDER OR CHANGING PROVIDERS, WOULD THAT PROVIDE US AN OPPORTUNITY

SOUNDS LIKE, PROBABLY NOT. >> THAT IS WHY WE DID AND RFP BECAUSE WE HAD A PROVIDER

[01:00:09]

BEFORE. WE DID PUT THE RFP OUT THERE. WE DO KNOW, THE WEIGHT THIS HAS BEEN WHEN SHE ALLUDED IT WASN'T JUST BOTTOM LINE. A LOT GOES INTO THE COMPLIANCE AND AUDITS BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY WE STILL CARRIED THE LIABILITY OF THAT.

WE INDIVIDUALLY. SO THAT OUR BEST RANK THEY ARE DOING THAT ON THEIR BEHALF.

THIS IS THE RATE BUT IF THEY DO IT INCORRECTLY THINK YOU HOLD THE LIABILITY.

WE HAVE HAD A VERY GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM. WE ARE LOOKING AT MINOR TWEAKS.

WE THINK WE CAN DO IT. YOU CAN'T TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ONE OF OUR EMPLOYEES AND

HER. SHE WORKS VERY HARD. >> YOU WILL GET A CALL SOONER OR LATER, I GOT PICKED UP BY AN AMBULANCE AND I GOT A 600-DOLLAR BILL AND TWO MONTHS LATER WHAT

IS GOING ON. THIS IS WHAT IS GOING ON. >> RECENTLY MY DAUGHTER WAS TAKEN TO THE HOSPITAL AND I DID NOT SAY A WORD. I WANTED TO SEE HOW THE PROCESS WORKED. WHEN IT CAME THROUGH MY INTERNAL PERSON DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING.

IT WAS MY OWN PERSONAL AUDIT AND IT WAS GOOD. >> I DID WANT TO SHARE LAST YEAR WE PAID THE COMPANY OVER $215,000 AND THEY COLLECTED OVER 4.7 MILLION SO THAT GIVES US AN

IDEA WHAT WE ARE GETTING FOR OUR MONEY. >> THAT IS HELPFUL.

>> I WILL TAKE A MOTION. >> I MOVE APPROVAL. >> SECOND PERIOD.

>> A MOTION AND A SECOND, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION. ALL IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING

AYE. IT CARRIES 5-0. >> ALL RIGHT, I THINK WE WILL JUMP TO THE 5:00 P.M. TIME SERIES. SINCE IT IS 5:00 P.M.

[25. 5:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter can be heard: Ordinance and Resolution to Amend the Capital Improvement Element (CIE)]

ITEM 25. THIS IS THE RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT.

>> I AM THE BUDGET MANAGER. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE CAPITAL PLAN THEY -- VERY RIGOROUSLY.

IN WE CONSTITUTED, BASICALLY THE WHOLE YEAR. WE HAVE 7.9 MILLION AND PROJECTS THAT WILL INCREASE CAPACITY IN PROJECTS THAT TIE INTO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THAT IS KNOWN AS ABOVE THE LINE. SO THOSE FIGURES ARE SHOWN. THESE ARE JUST MAINTENANCE AND REPAIRS. WE ARE ALSO SHOWING $30 MILLION THIS WILL COVER MANY OF THE ROAD PROJECTS. THESE ARE FROM FEDERAL FUNDS AND STATE FUNDS THROUGH MANY AGREEMENTS. THIS IS A FIVE-YEAR LOOK THAT IS BALANCE.

I THINK IT'S A VERY AMBITIOUS PROGRAM. >> QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS COLLECTS COMMISSIONER MIKE CELLA DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING? WE ARE GETTING $3 MILLION FOR A SPORTS COMPLEX. WE WILL GET $2 MILLION, A LITTLE OVER $2 MILLION FOR THE OTHER PROJECT. WE WILL GIVE MONEY FOR THE FAIRGROUNDS. WE WILL GET MONEY FOR THE COUNTY ROAD.

ANOTHER $3 MILLION FOR THE STATE ROAD FRONTAGE. I GUESS THESE ARE ALL FROM THE

[01:05:06]

STATE. 80,004 COUNTY ROAD 220. >> THIS IS STATE ROUTE 21.

THAT'S NOT BONDED. WE ALSO HAVE A PIECE OF THAT ROADWAY THAT WILL BE IN IN THEIR. THERE ARE SEVERAL FUNDING SOURCES FOR THAT SECTION OF THE ROAD. THEY ARE ALL REVENUES. AND THEY CAN CARRY IS THE PROJECT SCOPE. THIS WILL GO TO THE STATES AND THE FEDS TO GET THE MONEY BACK.

>> THE ONLY THING THAT I HAVE FOR THE CHAIR IS ON OTHER PROJECTS IT SAYS SCHOOL BOARD EIGHT. IT IS $1.1 MILLION. I GUESS I'M COULD CURIOUS CONSIDERING WE JUST PASSED A SALES TAX TO PROVIDE CAPITAL TO THE SCHOOL BOARD AS A COUNTY.

SO, I GUESS I AM CONFUSED. TAGE IT'S AN AGREEMENT WE HAVE FOR $1.6 MILLION.

THEY SPENT UP TO 500,000 THIS PAST YEAR. THIS IS THE REMAINDER OF THAT.

IT WILL EXPIRE AT THE END OF THE YEAR. >> BASICALLY THE $1.1 MILLION

WAS THE REMAINDER AMOUNT. >> THERE WERE COMPUTERS AND TROY CAN GIVE YOU MORE SPECIFICS.

>> IT WAS THE MONEY THAT WAS BEING PAID FOR THE SALES TAX. THIS WA THE 1.6 TO GET THE SCHOOL BOARD UNTIL THE REVENUE PASS. IT WAS APPROVED FOR TECHNOLOGY NOT NECESSARILY THE OTHER STUFF BUT IT WAS FOR TECHNOLOGY. JUST FOR THE BOARDS KNOWLEDGE THEY HAVE SUBMITTED THEIR FINAL INVOICE TO TAKE THEM TO THE FULL 1.6.

WE ARE BETTING THAT INVOICE CURRENTLY. THAT WILL COME THROUGH AS A

COMPLETE. >> I THINK, THE SCHOOL BOARD PAST THERE SALES TAX.

I THINK THEY ARE ON THEIR OWN. THAT SEEMS APPROPRIATE AT THE TIME TO BOTH SERVE THE TECHNOLOGY. I THINK THEY USED A LOT OF IT TO DO DISTANCE LEARNING.

I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE ANIMAL SERVICE BUILDING. WHAT ARE WE DOING FOR $700,000

THERE? >> LET ME FIND THAT. >> THE COUNTY MANAGER -- TRACK.

>> I'M LOOKING FOR A LIFELINE FOR JAMES. >> JAMES IS NOT HERE NEITHER IS

JANE. >> SO, THAT WAS SET ASIDE FOR THE DESIGN WORK.

SO, WE WOULD DO THE DESIGN. WE ARE WORKING ON THE ORDINANCES AND BRINGING THEM TO THE BOARD.

THE PLAN NEXT YEAR WAS TO DO THE DESIGN ELEMENT FOR THE BUILDING. ONCE WE KNOW THAT, WE CAN WORK

ON THE COST OF THE ACTUAL BUILDING AND FILL IT OUT. >> THEN WE WILL DESIGN IT AND FIGURE OUT HOW TO PAY FOR IT OVER TIME. DO WE HAVE A LOCATION IDENTIFIED

COLLECTS. >> ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THAT LOCATION THE COUNTY OWNS IT.

THAT IS WHERE THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT AND ANIMAL SERVICES WERE GOING TO GO BUT THE HEALTH

DEPARTMENT WILL GO SOMEWHERE ELSE. >> IT WILL BE UP TO YOU AT THE

[01:10:05]

END OF THE DAY BUT THAT IS THE PLAN. >> WE WILL TAKE A MOTION.

>> PUBLIC HEARING. >> >> JAMES OTTO.

I KEEP DRIVING BY WHERE THEY ARE DOING THE MEMORIAL FOR A SISTER THAT GOT HIT.

I WANT US TO REMEMBER THAT THE PAST WE STARTED WORKING ON NEEDS TO BE TAKEN CARE OF BEFORE OUR WISH LIST. I'M HEARING A LOT ABOUT A WISH LIST RIGHT NOW.

THERE ARE $129 MILLION LOAN THAT THE COUNTY IS TRYING TO PUT INTO FITS OF THE COUNTY FOR THE MOST PART WITH $30 MILLION AND INTEREST. I DON'T THINK THAT IS RIGHT.

I ASKED THE MAYOR TO SPEAK OUT AGAINST THIS. THIS WILL BE COMPLETE GRIDLOCK.

THE SLOW GROWTH WOULD BE BETTER GROWTH. FAST GROWTH DOES NOT MEAN GOOD GROWTH. YOU'RE TRYING TO KEEP THE JOBS LOCAL SO I WOULD THINK YOU WOULD WANT TO DO A SLOWER JOB THAN PUSHING ALL OF THIS. I WAS TOLD BY ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS WE LOST $60 MILLION IN IMPACT THE MONEY. WE WILL HAVE TO DEAL HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT. WE DON'T NEED TO SPEND MONEY ON THE FAIRGROUNDS THAT'S NOT HELPING THE HOMELESS RIGHT NOW. THAT IS NOT THE RIGHT THING. JUST LIKE COLLATE TRANSIT GOD LOVE PLAYING ON. WE ARE STILL DEALING WITH THAT. WE NEED A HUMAN SHELTER BEFORE BEFORE A PLAN ON ANIMAL SHELTER. I ALREADY BROUGHT YOU AN IDEA. WE CAN HUNT AND THEY ARE BOTH HUMAN PROBLEMS, HUMAN BEINGS MADE THESE TWO PROBLEMS. SO IF YOU GO TO THE ANIMAL SHELTER AND YOU WATCH THESE MEETINGS THEY ARE TRYING TO SAY A PITBULL IS A BOXER AND THEY TALK BABY TALK TO GET THE ANIMALS ADOPTED AND IT IS NOT RIGHT.

THE FIELD OF DREAMS, WE DID NOT WANT THAT. NOW WE ARE TALKING $6 MILLION.

I'M NOT ALWAYS HEARING THESE FIGURES BEING THROWN AROUND. $6 MILLION, SOME OF IT IS FREE MONEY. IT IS ALL THE TAXPAYERS MONEY. SO, WE HAVE KIDS GETTING IT AT THE BUS STOP. WE DON'T NEED TO SPEND MONEY ON A WISH LIST.

I ASK YOU AND I BEG YOU TO STOP SPENDING MONEY ON FOOTBALL. IF YOU WANT TO RUN INTO EACH OTHER AS AN ADULT, GO AHEAD. BUT, THE BULLYING AND EVERYTHING NEEDS TO STOP.

WE NEED TO STOP FUNDING IT. YOU KNOW MR. WAYNE BOLLA YOU SAID YOU DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE MONEY BUT WE'RE SITTING ON THE CARE ZACH. I'M ASKING YOU TO PASS ON THE $700,000, LET'S PUT THE SAFETY OF THE ROADS IN FRONT OF THE WISH LIST.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE THAT WANT TO

SPEAK COLLECTS. >> I APOLOGIZE. I FILLED OUT A CARD BUT I DIDN'T REALIZE I WAS GOING TO SPEAK. ONE ITEM IS THE PROPERTY ON 220. NEED SOMETHING DONE WITH IT.

THAT PROPERTY WAS BOUGHT AND THE DEPARTMENT SAID THEY WOULD BUILD SOMETHING.

THERE ARE 20 ACRES I THINK. ON THE BACKSIDE OF IT, IS ONE OF OUR SITES FOR COMMUNICATION, I

[01:15:01]

CAN'T REMEMBER. BUT ALSO I SAW A GROUP AND I DON'T KNOW IF THEY ADD SOMETHING ON THE CONSENT AGENDA BECAUSE IF SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IS ADDRESSED IF IT HAS TO GO BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. THANK YOU.

>> WE KNOW WHO YOU ARE. WE EVEN KNOW WHERE YOU LIVE. >> ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT COLLECTS WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT AND BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD.

WE WILL TAKE A MOTION. OR, IF WE HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION.

ANYBODY QUIRKS. >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE ELEMENT AS PROVIDED.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION COLLECTS

IF YOU WANT TO BUY SOMETHING. >> ALL IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE.

ANY OPPOSE SAME SIDE COLLECTS. >> AGAINST WHEAT PAST IT. I DIDN'T HEAR FROM MIKE CELLA.

IS HE STILL UP WITH US? IT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. ITEM 26.

>> BEFORE YOU MOVE ON, ITEM 25 HAD TO PART SO WE NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CAPITAL

IMPROVEMENT PLAN AS WELL. >> DO HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND PERIOD.

>> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ALL IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. IT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

[26. 5:00 pm or as soon thereafter as can be heard - First Public Hearing to consider CPA 2020-09 to change 21 acres from Rural Residential to Rural Fringe]

>> ITEM 26. >> CHANGE RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO RURAL FRIENDSHIP.

>> THANK YOU EVERYONE. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A LARGE-SCALE AMENDMENT FOR 21 ACRES LOCATED ON COUNTY ROAD 315 AND GERMANY'S DRIVE. THIS IS FOR THE TRANSMITTAL.

SO IF YOU DO APPROVE IT WILL GO TO THE REVIEW AGENCIES INCLUDING THE STATE.

THEN IF THEY HAVE NO COMMENTS WE WILL TAKE IT IN THE SECOND MEETING IN JANUARY.

THIS IS THE PLANNING DISTRICT. THE AGENT IS KELLY HARDWICK. >> HERE IS THE LOCATION.

THESE WERE ALL FRENCH. HERE IS THE MAP THAT SHOWS YOU THE AREA.

GERMANY'S DRIVE BISECTS THAT TRACK DISSECTS THE PROJECT THIS IS TO THE NORTH OF THE PARCEL.

IT IS LOCATED WHERE COUNTY ROAD 15 HAS A CURB THAT GOES WEST TO SOUTH.

THAT IS IN THIS AREA. IF THEY HAVE POINTS MEANING WATER AND SEWER WHICH IS WHERE YOU COULD GET ONE UNIT PER AREA. HOWEVER WITH POINTS, THIS IS WATER AND SEWER THAT HAS BEEN EXTENDED TO THE AREA. THEY HAVE THREE ADDITIONAL UNITS.

HERE ARE SOME PICTURES. WE ARE FAMILIAR WITH THIS AND THE OTHER PICTURE IS A PICTURE OF GERMANY'S LANE THIS IS LOCATED IN THE WATER AND SEWER AREA.

WE DO HAVE 53 NEW DECALS OR TRIPS. THERE WILL BE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT REQUIRED. A SHORT SUMMARY AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE AREA WE HAVE TO THE SOUTH WLLOW SPRINGS UNDER CONSTRUCTION THE LITTLE BLUE AREA YOU SEEING, IN THE LOWER LEFT SIDE IS THE PART OF THE DRI WHICH WAS APPROVED AND IT IS A LARGE PROJECT WHICH HASN'T BEEN CONSTRUCTED. THIS IS A DEVELOPMENT AREA. WE DO HAVE A FAIR AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT. WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND TRANSMITTAL OF THE LAND USE AND

I WILL SEE THE REVIEWING AGENCIES. >> I GUESS WE WANT TO HEAR FROM

[01:20:08]

THE APPLICANT. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. >> MY NAME IS KELLY HARDWICK.

I DO WANT TO APOLOGIZE FOR THE MEETING. TUESDAY IS A DIFFICULT TIME.

I AM OUT OF TIME -- TRACK OUT OF TOWN EVERY TUESDAY. I WANTED TO GIVE YOU A HISTORY ON WHY WE'RE DOING THIS. WE WANTED TO DESIGN WE WENT TO ZONING AND EVERYTHING WAS FINE.

THEN WE GOT TO PLAY UTILITIES AND THEY SAID, YOU WILL PUT WATER AND SEWER IN.

YOU WILL CONNECT. THAT THROUGH A WRENCH IN THINGS BECAUSE NOW WE HAVE TO BRING IN RECLAIMED WATER A NEW LIFT STATION. THINGS LIKE THIS GET EXPENSIVE.

SO WE LOOKED AT THE SITE AND THERE IS A SECTION, A WESTERLY SECTION, WE DECIDED TO DESIGN AND BUILD IT AND LIMIT IT TO 26 LOTS. WE FELT LIKE THAT WAS THE NUMBER WE NEEDED. I HAVE MET WITH THE OWNERS. WE WILL PUT THAT ON RECORD.

THESE WILL BE BIG LOTS. WE ARE LIMITED TO 26. THE NEXT STEP WILL BE THE REZONING. THIS IS WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO.

>> AT THE LAST MEETING, NEIGHBORS WERE NOT HAPPY WITH YOUR PROPOSAL HAVE YOU SAT DOWN

AND SPOKEN ABOUT WHAT YOU WILL DO COLLECTS. >> I WENT TO THEIR BOARD MEETING AND TOLD THEM I WOULD COME BACK AND SHOW THE FINAL DESIGN. ONE OF THE THINGS THEY ASKED FOR WAS TO LIMIT THE ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES. WE WILL BASICALLY MEET THEIR

GUIDELINES PRETTY MUCH. THAT IS WHAT WE ARE SAYING. >> THIS IS MY HOPE.

WE NEED MORE IN DISTRICT FIVE.

REPEAT THAT. I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE DOCUMENTING THAT AND THE 26 LOTS

THAT WE CAN'T GO BACK AND DO THE ACRE. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> WE HAVE TO DO PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ONE. PUBLIC HEARING IS OPEN.

>> JAMES OUT OF. I WAS AT THAT MEETING TOO. I WOULD ASK THAT THE BOARD ON THESE PROPERTIES THAT ARE COMING UP, THERE IS A HISTORY CIRCLE BACK TO THE BEGINNING AND BRING THAT TO THE CITIZENS AT THESE MEETINGS. SOME OF THESE ARE GETTING FLIPPED. A LOT OF TIMES THEY COME BACK HERE AND THEY JUST WANT A LITTLE BIT MORE AND MORE. WE HAVE MAJOR DRAINAGE ISSUES. I HAVEN'T BEEN TO THE LAST FEW MEETINGS THE COMMISSIONERS USUALLY LISTEN BUT IF YOU GO BACK TO OLD HARD ROAD AND OF THE ROADS, YOU WILL SEE, IT IS A HUGE ISSUE. NOW WE SEE THAT PART OF THE COUNTY IS GETTING THE MONEY. AND NOW OUR DISTRICT AS THE LOWEST IMPACT FEE.

[01:25:01]

I SEE THAT TO RUN PEOPLE THAT WAY. WE LIKE THIS.

IT'S AN AWESOME POOL. I APOLOGIZE. >> WE DON'T KNOW WHY THEY GET IT

DONE TIME AND TIME AGAIN. >> ANYONE ELSE? SEE NO ONE WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONER, THIS IS YOUR SANDBOX.

>> I MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION COLLECTS ALL IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. THOSE OPPOSED COLLECTS IT

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. >> THIS IS A COMMENT, WE USUALLY LET THE COMMISSIONER TAKE THE LEAD ON THESE WHOSE TERRITORY IT IS. YOU GOT ALMOST TWO VOTES.

[27. 5:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as can be heard - Final Public Hearing to Consider a Land Development Code Change to Remove Screening Standards for RV & Boat Storage in IA and IB Zoning (PC voted 6-0 to approve)]

>> ALRIGHT, NEXT WE HAVE ITEM 27 WHICH IS FINAL PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHANGE TO REMOVE SCREENING STANDARDS FOR RV AND BOAT STORAGE IN INDUSTRIAL A AND

INDUSTRIAL B. >> THANK YOU. THIS IS THE SECOND READING.

MR. WILLIAMS PRESENTED THIS TWO WEEKS AGO SO I WILL GO INTO A LITTLE DETAIL.

A FEW MONTHS AGO THE BOARD VOTED FOR LAND USE. WE THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD SUGGESTION. ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE RV AND BOAT STORAGE IS TO HAVE AN OPAQUE SCREEN. WHILE WE THINK THAT IS NECESSARY, WE KNOW THAT INDUSTRIAL TO INDUSTRIAL DOES NOT REQUIRE THAT EVEN FOR HEAVY MACHINERY.

IT SEEMED TO BE INCONSISTENT THAT YOU COULD STORED TRACTORS AND HEAVY MACHINERY.

THAT SIMPLY THE CHANGE THIS IS FOR RV AND BOAT STORAGE. >> THERE WAS ALSO AN ISSUE, THAT

EACH ONE WOULD COME UP TO US TO DETERMINE IF A FENCE WAS NEEDED. >> THAT IS THE NEXT ONE.

>> I'M SORRY. >> AS LONG AS THEY MEET THE CONDITIONS THEY GET APPROVAL.

BUT IF IT IS COMMERCIAL, THEY HAVE TO MEET THE QUALIFICATIONS. >> ANY QUESTIONS?

I WILL TAKE A MOTION. >> PUBLIC HEARING. I WILL GET THAT.

I SHOULD HAVE UNDERLINED THIS. WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. MR. OTTO.

>> YES, I WAS PAYING ATTENTION TO THIS MEETING ALSO. I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE BUFFERS AROUND THIS. WE DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH OUR NEIGHBORS HAVING TRAILERS AND BOATS AND THINGS, BUT THESE DEVELOPMENTS, WE DON'T WANT TO SEE, HUNDREDS OF THEM IN ONE SPOT. WE GO BY THE ONE ON 17TH AND IT LOOKS HIDEOUS.

WHY CAN'T WE GET BUFFERS FOR TREASON FENCING SO, IF YOU HAVE TO STORE SOMETHING YOU HAVE TO STORE IT. WHY CAN'T THESE DEVELOPMENTS PUT THEIR OWN STORAGE IN FOR THEIR BOATS AND VEHICLES. I UNDERSTAND, PEOPLE DID NOT LIKE MY SIGN.

WE WANTED TO GO OVER IT. WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO THESE, WE HAVE NICE HOUSES GOING IN THIS

[01:30:22]

WAS THE RESIDENTIAL. THE LINING.

I THINK YOU CAN ALLOW SOMEONE TO LIVE ON IT FOR SECURITY PURPOSES.

I THINK THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT. BUT I ASK YOU, PLEASE DON'T LET THESE GO IN WITHOUT TREASON FENCING. THEY CAN HAVE A SIGN LIKE EVERYONE ELSE. WE HAVE CODES WE HAVE TO DO FOR THE BUILDING.

WE DON'T WANT TO LOOK AT THIS. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC HEARING COLLECTS WE WILL CLOSE IT AND BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD.

WHAT IS YOUR PLEASURE COLLECTS. >> I MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> I SECOND PERIOD.

>> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION COLLECTS ALL IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE.

OPPOSED COLLECTS IN THE -- IT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. >> WE ARE AT 28.

[28. 5:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as can be heard - Final Public Hearing to Amend the Land Development Code to Remove Solar Farms as a Conditional Use from AG Zoning (PC voted 6-0 to approve)]

LAND CODE DEVELOPMENT TO REMOVE SOLAR FARMS AS A CONDITIONAL USE FROM AG ZONING.

>> IN 2012 IT WAS ADDED AS A CONDITIONAL USE. OUR CONCERN IS THEY TAKE UP A LOT OF PROPERTY. WE ARE NOT CONCERNED PER SE BUT WE DO KNOW THAT THE IS IMPORTANT IN THE COUNTY. SO IF SOMEONE MET THE CONDITIONS YOU COULD PUT A SOLAR FARM IN ANY PART OF THE COUNTY. WE THOUGHT IT'S BEST TO GO BACK TO BEFORE 2012 AND REQUIRED THEM TO CHANGE ZONING. THEY COULD GO TO LAND USE BUT THEY WOULD HAVE TO GET A CHANGE.

THEREFORE THEY WOULD HAVE DISCRETION ON COMPATIBILITY. THESE ARE NOT OBTRUSIVE OR ANYTHING BUT THERE MAY BE OTHERS WHERE YOU MAY NOT WANT IT. SO WE ARE NOT SAYING THEY CAN'T BUT WE ARE SAYING IT IS NOT A CONDITIONAL USE. THAT IS THE CHANGE.

>> ANY QUESTIONS COLLECTS. >> GOOD. I THINK THERE WAS SOMETHING ALREADY APPROVED. YES THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE COUNTY.

>> HASN'T BEEN BUILT COLLECTS IT IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION. IT IS ALMOST COMPLETE.

MAGNOLIA SPRINGS. >> WHO HAS THE SPIRIT WE APPLAUD THIS, THANK YOU.

WE WOULD JUST LIKE TO KNOW WHERE THEY WILL PUT A FARM. WE HAVE A LOT OF PLACES WHERE WE

WANT ACE SOLAR FARM TO BE. >> THEY COULD COME IN AND BUY HALF OF THE COUNTY AND JUST PUT EXCELLENT FIREMEN. THE LAST ONE GAVE ME HEARTBURN. WE HAD 1,000 ACRES OF PRIME INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY, WE DON'T HAVE MUCH. THEY CAME IN AND PUT IT ON THE INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY. THEY SAID THEY WOULD BRING IN SIX JOBS BUT I AM SKEPTICAL ON THAT. THIS WAY WE DON'T HAVE TO COMMUTE TO JACKSONVILLE AND I

THINK THIS WILL GIVE US CONTROL OVER WHAT IS PUT THERE. >> I IMAGINE THERE WERE JOBS.

BUT THEN THEY ARE GONE. >> THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING AS WELL.

WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DOES ANYONE WANT TO SPEAK TO THIS, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD AND I WILL TAKE A MOTION. >> I MOVED TO APPROVAL.

>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND PERIOD ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION COLLETS ALL IN FAVOR INDICATE

BY SAYING AYE. >> ARE YOU SAYING AYE? >> I CANNOT SEE YOUR FACE AND

YOU ARE WAY DOWN ON THE MONITOR. >> IT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THIS BRINGS US BACK TO, THAT IS

[13. Second Renewal to Agreement #2017/2018-54 with the Wantman Group, Inc. for Continuing General Engineering Consulting Services for Planning and Design]

THE IN. THIS BRINGS US BACK TO ITEM 13. >> THIS IS THE SECOND AMENDMENT

[01:35:03]

FOR THE ONE MAN GROUP INC. FOR CONTINUING GENERAL ENGINEERING CONSULTING SERVICES FOR PLANNING

AND DESIGN. >> THIS AND THE NEXT AGREEMENT, FOUR YEARS AGO WE WENT OUT TO PROVIDE GENERAL ENGINEERING SERVICES. WE USE THEM TO DESIGN SMALL PROJECTS FOR THINGS UNDER $2 MILLION. WEEK CAN'T DO THIS IN-HOUSE.

WE ALSO USED IT TO SUPPLEMENT THE STAFF. THE GRANT AGREEMENT THAT WE GET, AND WE ASKED THEM TO DO THE PRELIMINARY WORK AND I HAVE USE THAT FOR THE MITIGATION.

AND WE DID HAVE SOME INSPECTION SERVICES AND WE USE THE EMPLOYEES AS THE STAFF.

SO WE DID THIS FOUR YEARS AGO AND THE CONTRACT WAS FOR TWO YEARS.

WE HAVE ALREADY USED THE FIRST RENEWAL SO THIS IS THE SECOND ONE AND THEN WE WILL GO FOR

ANOTHER ONE AFTER THAT. THE RATES WILL REMAIN THE SAME. >> I WILL BRING UP THE FACT THAT FOUR OUT OF THE SIX RATES WERE CALCULATED WRONG. I ALWAYS WONDER HOW GOOD OF A JOB THEY WILL DO. THERE SHOULD NOT BE ANY DISCREPANCY THERE.

I JUST WANT TO CAUTION, I CHECKED THESE THINGS, I AM NOT HAPPY THAT WE ARE AWARDING THE

CONTRACT TO THEM AND THEY CAN'T DO BASIC MATH. >> IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, THERE

WAS DISCUSSION IN OUR FAVOR. >> I BELIEVE THIS WILL BE CORRECT IN THE EXHIBITS.

THERE MAY BE TO OTHERS THAT THE IT'S NOT LIKE THAT HAS TO BE CORRECTED.

>> THE PURPOSES WHEN WE HAVE TO DO A CONTRACT WE DO NOT HAVE TO BID IT AND PLEASE USE THE SAME FOLKS FOR THE SMALL ONES. WHEN DO WE GO OUT FOR A MAJOR BID?

>> ONCE YOU GET A CERTAIN AMOUNT YOU HAVE TO GO OUT. >> I GUESS THE QUESTION WOULD BE HAVE YOU HAD ANY OTHER ERRORS THAT YOU HAVEN'T BEEN SATISFIED. IF YOU'RE BRINGING HIM BACK YOU

HAVE BEEN SATISFIED WITH THE WORK. >> WE ARE SATISFIED THAT WE

SELECTED THEM. >> AND TO ADD TO THAT, WHEN THEY DID THE CALCULATIONS I THINK THERE WERE FOUR OR FIVE DIFFERENT NUMBERS. WHEN IT CAME OUT TO A ROUNDING

IT WE WILL ASK THEM TO EXPAND THE SPREADSHEET. >>

>> XL IS EASY TO ADD THAT DECIMAL POINT. >> WE UNDERSTAND IT SHOULD BE ONE 100% CORRECT BUT WE ACCEPTED IT BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN IN OUR FAVOR.

WE WILL GET IT CORRECTED, THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM. >> THERE IS A NEW COMMISSIONER

IN TOWN. >> I'M ALSO A MATH MAJOR. >> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS.

[01:40:03]

>> I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THEM FOR THE LAST APPROVAL. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND PERIOD ALL IN FAVOR INDICATE BY UNANIMOUSLY.T CARRIED- MOVING ONTO 14.

[14. Second Renewal to Agreement #2017/2018-40 with Eisman and Russo Consulting Engineers, Inc. for Continuing Engineering Planning and Design Services]

>> 14 IS THE SAME. I SAID EARLIER, THEY PROVIDED THIS FOR US.

>> I WILL MAKE A MOTION WE APPROVE. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND PERIOD ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION. ALL IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE.

IT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. >> ITEM 15. MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT FOR THE

[15. Approval of the Construction and Maintenance Agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation Regarding the Implementation of District Wide School Zone Improvements and the Authorizing Resolution]

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF DISTRICTWIDE SCHOOL ZONE IMPROVEMENTS AND AUTHORIZING RESOLUTION. I THINK THIS IS ADDRESSING

MR. OTTO'S ABOUT MAKING CROSSINGS SAFER. >> THEY ARE WORKING AND SPENDING ONE AND HALF DOLLARS UPDATING SCHOOL CROSSINGS. THERE ARE 20 AND CLAY COUNTY.

THIS IS THE STANDARD AGREEMENT THAT THEY GIVE US AFTER THEY DO THE WORK.

WE JUST COMMIT THAT WE WILL DO THE WORK. THIS WAS DESIGNED IN CLAY COUNTY

OPERATIONS.HE DESIGN OF OUR- >> OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS COLLECTS.

>> HAVE WE BUDGETED FOR THE NEW MAINTENANCE, THE NEW BATTERIES I DON'T KNOW IF THE SIGNS ARE

LAID. >> SOME AREN'T REPLACING. IT IS HANDLED INTERNALLY IN THE

BUDGET. THIS IS NOT MUCH OF AN IMPACT. >> I ASSUME THE SCHOOL BOARD HAS

BEEN FÊTED ON THIS. >> SOME OF THEM ARE IN THE COUNTY RIGHT OF WAYS.

>> WAS NOT A GUESS COLLECTS. >> IT IS A PROJECT. DLT EXPLAINED IT IN A SAFETY MEETING THAT THE SCHOOL BOARD AT REPRESENTATION. SO YES IT IS, YES, SIR.

>> RICHARD SMITH IS OUR REPRESENTATIVE HE IS TAKING OVER FOR THAT.

HE CAN ANSWER SPECIFICALLY IF A SCHOOL BOARD REPRESENT THE MEAT. TYPICALLY THEY ARE THERE AT THE

ONES I HAVE ATTENDED. >> PERFEC. >> ALL RIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A HEARING ON THIS ONE.

I WILL TAKE A MOTION. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FOR APPROVAL.

>> SECOND. >> I'M A MOTION AND A SECOND PERIOD ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION

COLLECTS. >> MAKE SURE IT INCLUDES THE AGREEMET.

>> I WAS GOING TO ASK BECAUSE THE QUESTION LOOKED LIKE IT WAS WRITTEN TWICE.

>> ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> ALL OPPOSE SAME SIGN. IT CARRIES.

>> BUDGET TRANSFER TO ALLOCATE FUNDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1920 HEALTH INSURANCE COSTS.

[16. Approval of Final Budget Adjustments to Allocate Funds for FY 19/20]

>> AS THEY LOOKED AT LAST YEAR'S BUDGET, AND BOOKING THE FINAL ENTRIES WE CAME ACROSS THE HEALTH INSURANCE LINE. WHAT THIS DOES IS PROVIDE THAT BUDGET TO MATCH UP WITH THE FINAL COST OF THE HEALTH INSURANCE. THE SECOND LINE IS ISSUING COSTS AND BANKING FEES IN REGARDS TO THE BOND AND THE BONDING WE DID LAST SUMMER.

THAT JUST CAME OUT TO A FEW THOUSAND DOLLARS. THE THIRD ONE IS, A BOOKING OF THE CARES MONEY THAT CAME IN, WE ANTICIPATED IT WOULD COME IN THIS YEAR BUT WAS BOOKED LAST YEAR. SO WE ALSO HAVE A RESOLUTION FOR THAT FOR THE $7 MILLION.

[01:45:02]

SO, IT IS BASICALLY THE FINAL CLEANUPS FOR FISCAL 1920 -- 19/ 20.

>> THIS IS THE SECOND PAYMENT THAT WAS RECEIVED. THE FIRST ONE WAS 9 MILLION.

THIS IS THE SECOND ONE. SO, IN CONNECTION WITH NUMBER 16 WE DO NEED RESOLUTION WITH THE

CARES ACT FUNDING. >> OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS.

>> SEPARATE FROM THE BUDGET TRANSFER AS LONG AS WE INCLUDE IT TOGETHER.

>> I WILL TAKE A MOTION IF THERE ARE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. >> I MOVE WE CLOSE OUT 19/20 AND THAT WE HAVE A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE TRANSFER OF THE $7.6 MILLION FOR THE CARE ZACH

FROM 1920/21. VICE VERSA. >> ALL RIGHT.

>> CAN YOU PUT VICE VERSA IN THERE. >> I WILL SECOND THE MOTION.

>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND PERIOD HEARING NINE, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> OPPOSED, SAME IT CARRIES 5-0. >> ITEM 17. APPROVAL OF EXTENSION NUMBER 12

[17. Approval of Extension 1 to Agreement #2019/2020-67 with the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Division (FDACS) Regarding the Construction and Renovations to the Paul E. Reinhold Agricultural Fairgrounds Exhibit Hall]

AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES DIVISION REGARDING THE CONSTRUCTION RENOVATIONS TO THE PAUL E REINHOLD AGRICULTURAL

FAIRGROUNDS EXHIBIT HALL. >> SO, WE RECEIVED A $500,000 GRANT FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE TO DO RENOVATIONS TO THE FAIRGROUNDS. THEY INCLUDE A KITCHEN AREA AND A RESTROOM THAT WILL SERVE ALL THREE EXHIBIT BUILDINGS. THERE WILL ALSO BE A SEATING AND DINING AREA ALONG THE OUTSIDE OF THE BUILDING. THE EXHIBIT BUILDINGS WERE USED FOR STORAGE AND WAREHOUSE SPACE. WE ALSO ENGAGED AN ARCHITECT TO DESIGN THE RENOVATIONS AND THEY ARE 60% COMPLETE. THE STATE HAS ALLOWED FOR AN EXTENSION TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT. ONCE THE DESIGN IS COMPLETE WE WILL PUT OUT A BID FOR THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION. WE SEE NO ISSUES MEETING THE DEADLINE.

>> ANY QUESTIONS COLLECTS. >> THE -- THE RENOVATION WILL ONLY COST $500,000 OR THE GRANT

WILL EXCEED $500,000? >> ONCE THE DESIGN IS COMPLETE WE WILL GET CONSTRUCTION CALLS

BUT WE FEEL WE CAN DO THIS WITHIN BUDGET COLLECTS. >> WITHIN THE 500,000 COLLECTS.

>> HOW DOES THIS FIT IN WITH THE TOTAL PLAN. JUST SPEAKING FOR THE REGULAR COMMISSIONERS WE AT THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA DEVELOP A PLAN FOR WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN WITH THE FAIRGROUNDS. WE ARE CHEWING AT THIS ONE BITE AT A TIME.

THIS IS ONE PIECE. >> THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP.

THIS DOES MATCH THE MASTER PLAN. IT IS ONE STEP IN THAT DIRECTION.

>> THIS IS MOST LIKELY THE MOST EFFECTIVE PLACE WE CAN INCREASE REVENUE COMING BACK TO US FOR

IMPROVEMENT. >> IT WILL EXPAND AND ALLOW EXTRA REVENUE AND BETTER USE OF

THE FACILITY. >> THE RESTROOM FACILITIES WILL BE ASSESSABLE, I'M THINKING IT'S NOT THAT FAR OF A WALK BUT SOMETIMES IT'S TREACHEROUS WHEN IT IS RAINING A LOT.

>> THEY WILL BE ADA COMPLIANCE AND THEY ARE LOOKING AT THE REAR SO IT ALLOWS FOR ANOTHER

RESTAURANT CLOSE BY. >> OKAY. NO PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS.

ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS COLLECTS DIRECT, I WILL TAKE A MOTION. >> I MOVE WE APPROVE THE

EXTENSION OF THE AGREEMENT. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND PERIOD ALL IN FAVOR INDICATE BY

SAYING AYE. OPPOSED COLLECTS IT CARRIES 5-0. >> NUMBER 18, CARES ACT UPDATE.

[18. CARES Act Update (Troy Nagle)]

>> TROY NAGEL. IN YOUR POCKET YOU SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED ONE PAGE -- A ONE PAGE SUMMARY OF THE CARES ACT EXPENSES. FOR THE NEW COMMISSIONERS, THIS

[01:50:03]

IS WHERE THE PROJECT SHOW HOW MUCH WE BUDGETED AND HOW MUCH WE HAVE ACTUALLY SPENT ON EACH OF THE PROJECT SO FAR. TO COMMISSIONER WAYNE BOLLA WE STAYED UNDER THE 17 MILLION.

THEN I HAVE A CARES ACT UPDATE AS FAR AS WHERE WE ARE AT. JUST TO CATCH EVERYONE UP.

TOTAL ALLOCATION WE WERE ALLOTTED FROM THE STATE, THE MONEY CAME FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO THE STATE THE STATE ALLOCATED THE MONEY BASED ON POPULATION THAT DID NOT RECEIVE A DIRECT ALLOCATION. THEY GAVE US AN ADDITIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF 9.5.

THE SECOND 20% WE RECEIVED WAS 7.6 WHICH IS WHAT YOU NEED TO CLEAN UP.

WE RECEIVED $17.2 MILLION. THAT IS WHERE WE ARE TRYING TO KEEP THE BUDGET THE REST OF THE MONEY WAS REIMBURSEMENT, WE ARE TRYING TO RECOVER THE COST FOR THE REIMBURSEMENTS WE ENTERED INTO THE SYSTEM ARE THE $21 MILLION TO MAKE UP THE DIFFERENCE.

WE HAVE $21 MILLION IN REQUESTS FOR REIMBURSEMENTS. THE STATE HAS APPROVED 12.4 MILLION OF THOSE REQUESTS. SO IT IS A REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT.

JOHN HAS SIGNED EACH ONE. TO DATE, IN ADDITION TO THAT 17 MILLION WE HAVE AN ADDITIONAL $2.7 MILLION OF THAT 12. SO THEY PROCESS IT THEY SUBMITTED THEY REVIEW IT THEY SAY YES IT IS A VALID EXPENSE THAT IT HAS TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF THE PROCESSORS CUTTING A CHECK, ALL OF THE STEPS THE TREASURER AS TO DO. THAT IS WHERE WE ARE AT ON THAT THIS IS A $12.2 MILLION IS GOING TO THE GENERAL FUND. THAT IS WHAT WE ARE USING TO BUY THE BUILDINGS AND WE WILL DO THE REFURBISHING. THIS WAS ALLOCATED FOR NONPROFITS WHICH WILL BE THE NEXT ITEM. THEN YOU HAVE 7 MILLION GOING BACK THAT WOULD BE YOUR FIRE AND SHERIFF. THOSE ARE RESTRICTED FUNDS BECAUSE PART OF THE MONEY CAME OUT OF THE RESTRICTED FUNDS AND LEGALLY IT HAS TO GO BACK INTO THE RESTRICTED FUNDS. IF YOU DO THE MATH IT IS DIFFERENT.

THE DIFFERENCES AS WE CLOSE PROJECTS OUT, IF WE DON'T SPEND AS MUCH YOU WILL GET MORE REIMBURSEMENT SO THIS WILL GO UP, WE ARE NOT FINITE ON THE NUMBERS ARE.

WE MAY BE ABLE TO CLAIM ABLE TO CLAIM MORE BUT AS WE GO THROUGH THE DIFFERENT EXPENSES.

THAT IS WHY THE NUMBERS DON'T ADD UP TO EXACTLY 21 MILLION. I KNOW THAT'S A LOT OF INFORMATION. WE HAVE DISCUSSED THIS INDIVIDUALLY.

ANY QUESTIONS ON THE REIMBURSEMENT OR THE VALIDATION OF THE MONEY WE STARTED WITH.

>> >> BE CAREFUL. >> SO, AS I LOOK AT THIS ONE PAGE AND THIS ONE SHEET, THE REQUEST IS BLANK, BUT WE HAVE A NUMBER, DOES THAT MEAN THE PROCESS IS THERE, THE ITEM UNDER THE TOTAL PAYMENT IS DIFFERENT. DO THEY GET A REQUEST?

>> ACTUALLY, SINCE I GAVE THIS TO YOU ON FRIDAY WE HAVE SIGNED THE FIRST REQUEST.

THEY HAVE ASSURED ME THE PROJECT WILL BE DONE BEFORE DECEMBER 30. BUT ITEMS ARE THE ONES WE HAVEN'T HAD PAYMENT PROCESSED ON. I KNOW WE SHIFTED AWAY TO WHAT

WE HAVE SPENT SHOWING, WE DID NOT OVERSPEND THE 17 MILLION. >> THE MUNICIPALITY SHOWS WE HAVE A $1.2 MILLION PAYROLL THAT WE ARE REVIEWING FOR THEM CURRENTLY AND MAKING SURE IT'S IN LINE. SO THEY SUBMITTED THEIR FIRST PAYROLL APPROVALS AND WE ARE

[01:55:06]

WORKING TO MAKE SURE IT WINDS UP. THOSE ARE ALL IN THE PROCESS.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE QUIT STANCH I HAVE ONE QUESTION ON THE CAPACITY. WILL WE DO THE REST OF IT QUICK STANCH WE HAVE PURCHASED ALL OF THE ITEMS. THEY HAVE JUST NOT COME IN SO WE CAN'T BILL THEM.

THIS LEADS TO AND I WILL ANSWER, THAT LEADS TO THE REASON WE CANNOT VALIDATE THE FULL 17 MILLION. UNTIL WE GET A CHECK WRITTEN, I CAN'T DO THAT.

WE ARE SLOWLY MOVING THIS THROUGH. THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT SIDES.

THE ONES WE ALREADY MADE. WE HAVE TO PROVE WE ACTUALLY SPENT THAT LEGALLY.

AND ASKING FOR PAYROLL. WE ARE WORKING BOTH SIDES OF THOSE.

>> I THINK THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. I JUST WANT TO SHOW YOU THEY ARE

WORKING ON THIS AT THE DISTRIBUTION CENTER. >> I SEE THIS AS AN EXAMPLE.

OBVIOUSLY, WE WANT THEM TO SPEND MONEY, NO PROBLEM. >> I HAVE A QUESTION.

THE $7 MILLION, HOW DID THAT WORK. WE BORROWED THE MONEY FROM THERE AND THEN WE ARE PAYING IT BACK QUICK STANCH NO, SIR, THE SPLIT, 75% OF THE MONEY COMES OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND. AND 25% OUT OF THE OTHER. AS WE ASKED FOR REIMBURSEMENT, THAT MONEY HAS TO GO BACK TO THE FUNDS. AS WE RECEIVE REIMBURSEMENTS BACK WE TAKE IT AND PUT IT BACK INTO THE GENERAL FUND AND IT GOES BACK.

THAT IS WHAT KEEPS YOU LEGAL FROM A BUDGET AUDIT STANDPONT. AS I TOLD YOUR FINANCIAL PEOPLE, TO MAKE SURE WE DO IT PROPERLY. THE MONEY HAS TO GO BACK INTO THE FUNDS.

>> AND THAT, THE $17 MILLION THAT WE ALREADY HAVE IN THE BANK AS IT RELATES TO, TO .4 MILLION

WE JUST COLLECTED. >> TWO SEPARATE MARKETS. I GUESS THE QUESTION IS, IS THAT

REAL MONEY THAT WE GOD. >> IT IS REAL MONEY. SO REMEMBER THE FIRST 45% WAS CASH ADVANCE. YOU HAVE TO JUSTIFY. THE REST IS MONEY YOU HAVE ALREADY SPENT SALARIES AND OF THE OTHER 55% SO THAT IS ABOVE AND BEYOND YOUR INITIAL DRAW.

>> WE ARE WAITING FOR THE REST OF THE SALARY MONEY BEFORE WE EXECUTE ON THE BUILDINGS.

I WILL DEFER THIS TO JOHN. SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS PART, CARES ACT CONSULTANT.

NOTHING REQUESTED WHAT DOES THAT MEAN WE WON'T PAY THE DIET OR WE WON'T HIRE THE GUY, THAT MEANS THE COMPANY HAS YET TO BILL US. WE HAD SOMEONE INITIALLY. THEY ARE A CONSOLE AND WE HIRED ORIGINALLY. THEY ARE WORKING WITH US TO MAKE SURE WE FOLLOW THE RULES BEFORE THE STATE PUT THEIR RULES OUT. AT THE POINT THE STATE PUT THEIR RULES OUT, WE HAVE A NEW AGREEMENT AND WE PUT THEM ON NOTICE THAT WE DIDN'T NEED THEIR SERVICES.

IF WE DID WE WOULD COME BACK. THEY HAVE YET TO INVOICE US FOR THE SERVICES RENDERED.

>> AS A BACKDROP. WE COULD BE LIABLE TO PAY SOME OF THIS MONEY BACK IF WE DON'T DO THIS BY THE NUMBERS. AT WHAT POINT ARE WE CLEAN ON THIS STUFF.

WE HAVE THE MONEY BUT WE DON'T GET TO KEEP IT. >> WE ARE ACTIVELY SUBMITTING OUR PAPERWORK. SO THEY HAVE VALIDATED 1.5 MILLION.

THIS IS FREE AND CLEAR. AS WE SUBMIT DOCUMENTS AND THE STATE REVIEW THEM THEY WILL SEND US A DOCUMENT AND SAY THIS IS VALID AND GOOD AND WE AGREE WITH EVERYTHING.

THAT IS HOW WE VALIDATE OUR EXPENSES. THAT HAS BEEN UPLOADED TO THE

STATE AND WE ARE WAITING FOR INVOICES. >> WHAT THAT IS THE REAL NUMBER.

>> IF YOU TAKE THE 17 MINUS THE 1.5 THAT IN SHORT EXPOSURE. THAT NUMBER WILL CONTINUE TO GO

[02:00:09]

DOWN. EVERY TWO WEEKS I WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH THE UPDATE.

>> HOW DO WE DO DO IT IN RELATION TO THE COUNTIES. >>

>> TO THE POINT, THE CONSULTANT, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THIS FROM THE ASPECT OF IF THEY ARE DELAYED ON BUILDING AND THEY WAIT PAST DECEMBER, WE MAY HAVE TO PAY THE INVOICE BECAUSE WE

HAD SERVICES RENDERED AND THEY ARE BEHIND. >> AS LONG AS THEY ARE RENDERED BEFORE DECEMBER 30 AND PAID, IT IS A VALID CARES ACT EXPENSE. I WILL TELL YOU, ON A WEEKLY BASIS I WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE INVOICES ARE. WE DID NOT SPEND 75,000.

IF I ONLY SPENT 20,000 I WANT TO CLOSE THE CONTRACT, AND SAY WE ARE BASICALLY DONE AND WE CAN USE THE PHONE FOR SOMETHING ELSE. THAT IS MY GOAL.

EVERY WEEK I E-MAILED THEM AND I ASKED THEM. I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY ARE NOT

BILLING US. BUT THEY HAVEN'T. >> THANK YOU.

>> SO WE WENT NO HOW MUCH THE INVOICES QUITE. >> WE KNOW HOW MUCH HAS BEEN BILLED. I DO NOT KNOW BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOT BILLED ME AT ALL.

SO THERE IS NO WAY TO RUSH THEM. >> THE LATEST RUSH I PUT ON WAS, WE HAVE A NOVEMBER 30 DEADLINE TO ACCOUNT FOR THE MONEY IN THE YEAR IT WAS INCURRED. I REMIND THEM WE HAVE A DEADLINE

THAT THEY NEED TO GET ME AND INVOICE. >> LIKE I SAID, THIS IS A WEEKLY

THING WITH ME ASKING FOR THE INVOICES. >> BRINGING UP THE MONEY IS

IMPORTANT. >> THAT MEANS YOU WILL MOVE MORE MONEY BACK INTO OTHER FUNDS FOR OTHER PURPOSES. THIS CAN BE DONE AT THE GENERAL FUND.

>> ISN'T IN OUR CONTRACT BUT IF THEY DO NOT PAY, IF THEY DON'T DO IT THEY DON'T GET PAID?

>> WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT BUT I THINK WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT SO WE HAVE TO LOOK AT IT.

>> THAT MAY BE A GOOD THING TO CHECK. >> WE WILL STAY ON TOP OF IT AND

I WILL GET BACK TO YOU. >> JOHN, WELCOME THE COMMISSIONERS FOR SETTING THE STAGE OF WHERE WE ARE. DETROIT RUNS THE CARES ACT TEAM LOCALLY.

I'M THE ONE WHO GET THE MONEY BACK. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION AS TO WHERE WE ARE WITH THE STATE, CLAY COUNTY IS NUMBER ONE OF THE 55 COUNTIES, THE 500,000 OR BELOW WHO HAVE BEEN AWARDED THIS MONEY. THERE'S NO ONE CLOSE TO CLAY COUNTY AS FAR AS THE MAJORITY. SOME ARE JUST GETTING 20%. THE 20% WE GOT, THEY ARE JUST GETTING THAT. WE ARE LITERALLY AT THE LEAD FOR REIMBURSEMENTS.

THE DOCUMENTS THAT WERE JUST THROWN IN FRONT OF YOU, I LITERALLY JUST GOT AN E-MAIL 45 MINUTES CULT THAT WILL CHANGE SOME OF THIS. MY APOLOGIES.

THE REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT IS LIKE A FEMA REIMBURSEMENT. THEY DEVELOP A PROJECT AS A PAYROLL PROJECT. THE BIWEEKLY PAYROLL EVERY TWO WEEKS OF PUBLIC SAFETY.

THIS IS TURNED IN AND VALIDATED. THEY SEND US A PROJECT AND WE AGREED TO IT THEN IT GOES TO THE OFFICE OF POLICY AND BUDGET. SO, THE BACK SHEET THAT YOU HAVE THERE IS THE RFR WE HAVE SUBMITTED TO DATE. THE FIRST FIVE OF THOSE, WE HAVE GOTTEN REIMBURSED.

THIS IS THE 2.759 THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. THE NEXT ONES YOU SEE ARE IN YELLOW. WHEN WE FIRST STARTED TALKING TO THE STATE THEY SAID IN 7-10 DAYS

[02:05:05]

THEY WOULD HAVE THE MONEY TURNED AROUND. THESE ARE THE ONES I PING THEM ON. I SENT THEM AN E-MAIL AND SAID WHERE IS THAT.

LITERALLY, THE FRONT PAGE, WHAT YOU HAVE IS THE E-MAIL I GOT ON FRIDAY WHEN I SENT AN E-MAIL.

THE OTHER ONES WILL BE PAID NEXT WEEK. THAT WAS FRIDAY.

THIS WOULD HAVE GOTTEN US ADDITIONAL MONEY BURNING WHICH WOULD HAVE COVERED THE AMOUNT WE NEEDED FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE FACILITY. HOWEVER I GOT AN E-MAIL 45 MINUTES AGO THAT SAID EACH ONE WILL BE PAID BY THE GOVERNORS OFFICE BUT THE STAFF IS OUT THE ENTIRE WEEK FOR THE HOLIDAY. IT WILL BE PAID MONDAY AND TUESDAY OF NEXT WEEK. I SAY THAT TO SAY, WE WILL NOT SEE THIS MONEY THIS WEEK BUT WHEN WE APPROVE THE RFR'S, THAT IS LIKE A BANK DRAFT THAT WE ARE GETTING.

AND IT IS DEVELOPING AND IT GETS INTO THE EBT TRANSFER. I SAY THAT TO SAY, THE OFFICE OF POLICY AND BUDGET TOOK THE ENTIRE WEEK OFF AND THEY ARE PROCESSING THIS AND IT SHOULD HIT OUR BANK, THE MONEY SHOULD HIT MONDAY OR TUESDAY BECAUSE IT PROBABLY WON'T HAPPEN DIRECTLY ON MONDAY. SO STEPPING BACK AS TO WHERE WE ARE AD, AND COURTNEY WILL THROW SOMETHING AT ME IF I MISSPEAK PIXEL SPEAKING ON THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT WHERE WE HAVE GIVEN THE HONOR $50,000 AND WE HAD UNTIL NOVEMBER 30 TO MAKE THE DECISION IF WE WILL STAND HARD AND MOVE FORWARD. AT THAT POINT WE WOULD OWE THE OWNER $150,000.

THEY HAVE 30 DAYS TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE TENANTS IN THERE AS TO WHAT WILL HAPPEN AND WE HAVE A CLOSING DATE FOR DECEMBER 14 WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH FACILITIES.

SO THAT BEING SAID, WE RECEIVED THE 2.759, WE HAVE THE COMMITTED PAYMENTS FROM THE STATE THAT WILL PROBABLY BE PAID TUESDAY. WE ALSO HAVE REMAINING RFR'S FOR 4.7 SO MY ASSUMPTION IS THAT WILL COME ONE WEEK AFTER TUESDAY AND THAT MONEY WILL MAKE US HOLD ON THE ENTIRE REIMBURSEMENTS COMING BACK IN FOR PUBLIC SAFETY WE ARE APPROACHING THE DEADLINE. WE ARE COMMUNICATING WITH KAREN AND COURTNEY AND THE BUILDING OWNERS, THEY HAVE TO START NEGOTIATING WITH THE TENANTS TO BREAK THE LEASE OR DO WHAT THEY DO. THEY ARE HESITANT TO DO THAT UNTIL WE MAKE A COMMITMENT THAT WE WILL DO IT BY TRANSFERRING THE MONEY TO THEM OR DOING AN EXTENSION. IF WE DO THAT THAT WILL HOLD OF THEM NEGOTIATING WITH THE OWNERS AND IF WE GET THE MONEY AND WE EXECUTE THE PURCHASE THAT PUTS THEM IN A SHAKY AREA, SO COURTNEY CAN CORRECT ME IF I AM ASKING THIS INCORRECTLY BUT SINCE WE HAVE THOSE COMMITMENTS AND I'VE GOTTEN THESE ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS THAT THE MONEY IS COMING IN, CAN WE GO FORWARD AND LEAVE THIS IN THE DECISION OF THE COUNTY MANAGER IF HE SEES SOMETHING DIFFERENTLY HE CAN CUT THAT OFF BY THE CLOSE OF BUSINESS. BUT LET'S CONTINUE FORWARD WITH THE PURCHASE SO THEY CAN IN FAIRNESS START COMMUNICATING TO BREAK THE LEASE AND WE CAN START PUSHING FORWARD WITH THE PURCHASE AND THE CLOSING. COURTNEY THAT I SAY THAT

CORRECTLY? >> BASICALLY IT IS YOUR DECISION FOR THE NOVEMBER 30.

DO YOU FEEL COMPETENT GREAT -- FOR US TO STAND WITH THE NOVEMBER 30 DATE AND LET US MOVE FORWARD AND MAKE THE DEPOSIT AND GO HARD OR DO YOU WANT TO AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER TO

DO A REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION? >> IF I DID NOT HAVE THE SIGNED RFR'S, IT WOULD BE DIFFERENT BUT THEY ARE AN AGREED-UPON AMOUNT AND IT GOES FOR PAYMENT. THERE'S NO ONE WHO CAN PULL THAT BACK. IT HAS BEEN AGREED UPON BY BOTH PARTIES.

MY ASSUMPTION IS IT WOULD HAVE BEEN PAID. SO, WE DO HAVE A BANK DRAFT THAT

[02:10:01]

WILL BE PAID. IF IT WAS OUTSIDE OF THAT I WOULD BE HESITANT.

WE HAVE TALKED ON FEMA AND HOW I DISAGREE. WE DO HAVE THE RFR'S THAT ARE

SIGNED AND THEY ARE READY FOR PAYMENT. >> THE CHECK IS IN THE MAIL.

>> THAT IS IT. AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED WE DON'T MOVE UNTIL WE GET MONEY.

I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM GIVING THE MANAGER OF AUTHORITY TO DO THAT.

BUT BASED ON MY EXPERIENCE WITH THE STATE, I COUNT MY FINGERS. WE DID NOT GET OUR FEMA MONEY.

I'VE BEEN WRONG ON THIS. WE HAVE COLLECTED MORE MONEY THAN I THOUGHT WE WOULD PICK AT THE SAME TIME WE WAIT UNTIL WE HAVE THE MONEY IN HAND BEFORE WE SPEND IT.

>> IT SO, ARE SUGGESTING IT'S BASICALLY A 24 HOUR EXTENSION. >> KNOW IT'S A 30 DAY SUSPENSION -- EXTENSION. THE AGREEMENT PROVIDES FOR A 30 DAY EXTENSION.

WHEN WE MOVE FORWARD IF WE NEED TO DO A NOTICE WE WILL ASK THEM TO DO IT BY A DAY BY DAY.

THEN WE WILL MOVE FORWARD. THAT WILL BE YOUR AUTHORIZATION FOR THE COUNTY MANAGER THAT ONCE THE MONEY HITS THE BANK WE WILL RECEIVE A NOTICE THAT WE CAN NOTIFY THEM AND MOVE FORWARD.

>> I THINK I SUPPORT THE PURCHASE OF THE BUILDING. I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE THE MONEY

IN HAND. >> SO, ONE ANSWER IS YES, THE OTHER IS THE TENANTS.

WE DON'T WANT TO BE LANDLORDS. THEY HAVE TO PAY MONEY TO BREAK THEIR LEASES AND THEY DON'T WANT TO DO THAT UNTIL THEY HAVE A COMMITMENT FROM US. OTHERWISE THEY ARE LEFT WITH THE

FACILITY IF WE BACK OUT. >> MAYBE YOU WOULD NOT HAVE FELT AS SAFE BUT NOW YOU FEEL SAFER

NOW. >> I FEEL SAFE BECAUSE OF THE REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT.

WHEN THEY COMMITTED, WHEN I ASKED BECAUSE I WILL ALWAYS ASK. THEY SAID 7-10 DAYS.

SOME OF THEM, SAY 14 DAYS AND THEY HAVE NOT BEEN PAID. THAT IS WHY I SAID WHERE IS THIS

AT AND DATE STATED, IT IS AT THE OFFICE OF POLICY AND BUDGET. >> SO IF THEY DON'T GET THE

TENANTS WORD NOW,. >> IT BACKS US UP, YES, MA'AM. IF THE APPROVAL IS GIVEN TO THE COUNTY MANAGER IT CAN BE DAY BY DAY. GIVE THE COUNTY MANAGER HAS THAT AUTHORITY IF YOU GIVE HIM THAT AUTHORITY WE CAN MONITOR THAT IF WE NEED TO EXECUTE THE EXTENSION AND HOPEFULLY WE SEE IT FLAGGED IN THE SYSTEM ON MONDAY NIGHT OR TUESDAY MORNING AND GENERALLY IT IS 24 HOURS LATER, ONCE IT SHOWS IT IS COMING IT SHOWS WE HAVE CASH IN HAND.

AT THAT.WHEN CASH IN HAND IS THAT THE BANK WE CAN SCHEDULE AND GET THE HARD FAST MONEY.

>> SO RIGHT NOW WE ARE SAYING IF WE DON'T HEAR FROM THEM WE WANT THE EXTENSION TO HAPPEN.

WE ARE ASKING THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE THE DECISION. YOU ARE GIVING HIM THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE THE DECISION. WE COULD ASK FOR THE EXTENSION, THE MONEY COMES IN AND WE WILL HAVE IT THE NEXT DAY. LET ME KNOW IF WE ARE SPEAKING CORRECTLY.

>> I WANT TO PROVIDE MORE DETAIL ON THIS. THERE'S A LOT OF NUMBERS THAT HAVE GONE AROUND. THERE IS A DEAL AND A CONTRACT. ALL OF THESE THINGS.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT, IT IS $7.6 MILLION WHAT JOHN IS TALKING ABOUT.

WE HAVE ALREADY ADDED IT. THE TOTAL DEAL OF THE PURCHASE OF THE BUILDINGS, THE CLOSING COSTS, ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL COSTS WOULD BE $6.2 MILLION. THAT IS THE AMOUNT OF MONEY WE

[02:15:04]

WANTED IN BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE MONEY THAT COMMITS US TO THE PURCHASE.

WHAT I PROPOSE TO THE BOARD, UNLESS I SEE ON MONDAY, A& PENDING ACH, I WOULD ASK AND HAVE READY, THIS WOULD SEND THEM TO EXTEND WHATEVER I CAN. WHETHER IT IS DAILY OR WEEKLY OR A 30 DAY, THAT WOULD NOT BE OPTIMUM, BUT I WOULD INITIATE THAT WITHIN THE CONTRACT.

THAT PROVIDES ALL OF THE DETAILS AND HOPEFULLY CLARIFIES ANY CONFUSION.

>> I'M.

THERE ANYONE WHO DOESN'T KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON YET? >> SINCE WE FIRST ANNOUNCE THE ADDRESS, THEY ARE IN THE UNKNOWN. THIS IS WHERE THEY ARE RIGHT NOW. I THINK THIS IS A FORMALITY. I AM NOT COMFORTABLE SPENDING IT UNTIL WE HAVE IT. I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF THE COUNTY MANAGER RECUSING.

>> DO YOU NEED A MOTION? >> I MOVED THAT WE APPROVE EXACTLY THE WAY THAT I WORK

COUNTY MANAGER AS STATED THE WAY WE WILL EXTEND. >> THIS IS PENDING THE RECEIPT.

>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND? ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION CORRECTS ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

IT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. >> I THINK I AM BACK UP. >> I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT

NUMBER WE ARE ON. >> SO 19 IS THE NONPROFIT SECOND-ROUND.

[19. CARES Act Non-Profits Round 2 Awards (Troy Nagle)]

WE ISSUED ROUND ONE NONPROFITS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE CARE ZACH.

WE AWARDED $750,000. AT THAT POINT, THE GUIDANCE WAS THAT IT HAD TO BE DIRECTLY RELATED TO A COVID SURFACE. THEY CHANGED ON THAT A LITTLE BIT AND LOOSENED UP AND SAID IF YOU CAN SHOW YOU HAD A LOSS OF REVENUE FROM CONTRIBUTIONS, THEN YOU COULD ASK FOR THAT MONEY AND IT WOULD BE AN ALLOWABLE EXPENSE. THEY WANT TO DO ROUND TWO OF FUNDING, THEY WANT TO SOLICIT FOR APPLICATIONS. WE PUT THE APPLICATION OUT.

WE RECEIVED THE 40 APPLICANTS THAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU. EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN THE PACKET. THE TOTAL REQUEST IS 1.9 MILLION.

THERE ARE A FEW OPTIONS. YOU CAN FUND THEM AT 40% WHICH IS 765,000.

YOU COULD FUND THE FIRST ROUND. YOU COULD DECIDE TO FUND AT A MAXIMUM OF 35,000 WHICH WOULD BE $1.1 MILLION. OR, YOU COULD CHOOSE TO GIVE OTHER KINDS ON OUT YOU WANT US TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THESE. IN ADDITION THERE WERE TWO COMMENTS I MADE AT THE BOTTOM.

THE RECOMMENDATION FROM MYSELF AND TALKING TO THE COUNTY MANAGER WOULD BE WHENEVER YOU APPROVE WE WILL TAKE IT AND SUBMITTED TO THE STATE GOVERNMENT GET THE STATE TO BLESS IT AND GIVE US REIMBURSEMENT. THIS WOULD BE ON A REIMBURSEMENT BASIS. IF WE ALLOW PEOPLE TO TAKE THE MONEY AND SPENDING ON SOMETHING, WE WOULD PUT THE COUNTY AT RISK. SO INSTEAD, WE WOULD SAY SHOW US YOUR EXPENSES, GET APPROVAL AND ONCE WE GET IT WE WOULD ISSUE A STATEMENT TO THE NONPROFIT. SO, ON THAT, I DID.OUT, WOMEN

[02:20:07]

EMPOWERMENT WAS ASKING FOR AN ADVANCE. I KNOW THEY ARE IN THE AUDIENCE.

I DID.OUT, THEY WANTED AN ALLOTMENT AND THEY ARE NOT A NONPROFIT THEY ARE A CROISSANT GOVERNMENT IN THE. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE OUTLINED THAT, THEY ARE NOT NONPROFIT. SO I LOOK FOR YOUR DIRECTION AND QESTIONS AND YOUR STATEMENTS OR

ANYTHING ELSE. JUMP IN. >>

>> WHAT CONSTITUTES NONPROFIT? >> THERE ARE A FEW AVENUES. EITHER BY THEIR RNS.

THROUGH THE STATE OF FLORIDA, WHICH MEANS YOU SHOULD HAVE IT VALIDATED OR IF YOU ARE AN ORIGINAL ORGANIZATION, YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED TO BE LISTED AS A NONPROFIT, THE RELIGIOUS

EXEMPTION PASSES THROUGH. >> THE REASON I'M ASKING IS, I HAVE INVESTIGATED ALL OF THE NONPROFIT AND THEIR ARE 20% THAT ARE NOT LISTED AS NONPROFITS. SO, WHAT ARE THEY? WHAT DOCUMENTATION DID WE REQUIRE THEM TO SUBMIT TO APPLY FOR THIS.

>> I WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO GO THROUGH THE FILE. THE NAME THEY OPERATE UNDER MAY BE DIFFERENT THAN THE NAME THEY ARE REGISTERED UNDER. I WILL GIVE YOU A PRIME EXAMPLE.

THEY ARE LISTED AS JOHN HALL CHARITIES BECAUSE THAT IS THEIR NONPROFIT NAME BUT THEY ARE DOING BUSINESS AS JP ALL. WE HAVE THE DOCUMENTATION THAT SHOWS, THEIR NONPROFIT STATUS.

THIS IS BASED ON THE DOCUMENTS WE RECEIVED. OF COURSE, WE DON'T INVESTIGATE, THAT IS THE NEXT PHASE. WHAT WE DID BEFORE, AFTER YOU GIVE US THE GUIDANCE, WE WILL DO A SECOND ROUND OF BETTING. WE DID A FIRST ROUND TO MAKE SURE THEY MET THE REQUIREMENTS BASED ON THE DOCUMENTATION. AND THEY DID SUBMIT THEIR 990S SHOWING THEY ARE A NONPROFIT OR

THE CERTIFICATION. >> SO, TO ANSWER MY QUESTION YOU LOOKED AT 990S AND THE IRS.

DID YOU LOOK AT ALL OF THEM? >> SON VISIT REGISTRATION WOULD BE THE NEXT PHASE.

BEFORE THEY CAN BE A REGISTERED VENDOR WITH THE COUNTY WE MAKE SURE THEY ARE REGISTERED.

>> WHAT IF THEY ARE NOT? >> THEY CAN'T RECEIVE THE FUNDING.

THEY SIGNED A DOCUMENT SAYING THEY MET THE REQUIREMENTS. >> SEVEN OF THEM ARE NOT

REGISTERED. >> THAT WOULD BE THE SECOND ROUND BEFORE WE GIVE THEM THE

MONEY. >> ANYONE ELSE? >> YES, MR. CHAIR.

[02:25:38]

COVERAGE SOME OF THE CITIES IN FLORIDA, THE FOOD LINES, THEY WERE SURPRISING.

SO WE NEED TO BE READY FOR THAT. WE NEED TO BE READY FOR THE NEXT PHASE WHETHER IT IS A SPIKE OR EVERY FOOD PANTRY EFFORT. I WANT TO SEE THIS AND HOME DOWN ON THE NONPROFITS THAT ARE DOING

COVERAGE IN TERMS OF WHAT WE HAVE LEFT OVER. >> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE NAME OF

THIS IS. >> WE HAVE PEOPLE THAT WILL NEED THE FOOD.

SO THAT IS WHERE THIS LINES UP. >> >> I DON'T THINK I'M TOO FAR OFF WHERE THE COMMISSIONERS. I WILL SAY THAT IT IS AN DISTRICT AND THEY ARE PROVIDING MEALS FOR SENIORS BECAUSE THE SENIOR CENTER HAS CHANGED HANDS AND WE ARE AWARE THAT MANAGEMENT CHANGED AND THERE'S NOT A LOT OF AGREEMENT THERE. I AM JUST SUGGESTING THAT THEY ARE PROVIDING MEALS FOR THE SENIORS. THE MEALS ARE NOT BEING PROVIDED

SO THAT STRIKE I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES EXCEPT THAT ONE. >> IT IS NOT REGISTERED AS A

NONPROFIT. >> IT USED TO BE A PRESBYTERIAN CAMP.

>> THIS SHOWS WHETHER THEY ARE A NONPROFIT AND WHILE WE ARE SITTING HERE BY TEAMS THAT WE DO HAVE THE TREASURY JUSTIFICATION FOR EACH ONE ON FILE FOR EVERYONE WHO SUBMITTED.

THEY MAY NOT BE REGISTERED IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, BUT WE WILL WORK WITH LEGAL TO SEE IF

THAT IS ALLOWABLE. >> >> ISSUE. IS THAT SOMETHING WE ARE ALLOWED TO DEAL WITH CLICKS.

>> I KNOW THERE ARE A LOT OF RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS THAT DID NOT ACCEPT CARES MONEY FOR THAT

REASON. >> IN YOUR OPINION IT'S OKAY FOR US TO DO THAT?

>> YES. >> WE CAN SUBMIT IT TO THE STATE AND IT CAN BE REIMBURSED.

[02:30:05]

WE HAVE OUR ANSWER. SOMEONE ELSE CAN MAKE SURE THEY ARE CLEAR.

I THINK THAT MAY BE THE WAY TO GO ON THIS. >> IF YOU LOOK THAT FUNDING, THE ONES THAT ARE COVID EXPENSES AND THE ASSOCIATIONS THAT ARE IN YELLOW, I THINK THAT IS WHAT YOU ALLUDED TO. THAT IS ABOUT $600,000, IF WE ADDED IN MONTGOMERY YOU WOULD BE 635 AND TO THE COMMISSIONERS. OLIGARCH OR CURRENT GIVING THE MONEY TO THE FOOD PANTRIES I RECOMMEND WE BUY SO WE MAKE SURE GBYTES DECEMBER 30 I DID ASK KAREN TO CHECK AVAILABILITY OF THE VENDORS HOPE THEY COULD DO IT IF I WAS IN THE DIRECTION OF THE

BOARD. >> IF WE TOOK YOUR RECOMMENDATION WE DON'T HAVE TO BUG ANYONE. THE STATE TAKES CARE OF IT. WE SUBMIT A REQUEST SUP WILL BE SPENT PRESSURING WILL BE BEST SERVED FOR US TO MAKE THE PURCHASE AND GIVE IT TO THE FOOD PANTRIES AND DEPENDING ON THEM TAKING OUR MONEY AND EXECUTING THE BUY AND TIME, GETTING US THE DOCUMENTATION BACK, IF YOU DON'T WANT THE RISK, THAT IS A WAY TO PREVENT IT.

>> IS THERE A BACK LOG OF THE STATE TO REVIEW THIS? THEY HAVE A CONSULTANT SO THEY ARE REVIEWING THEM EXPEDITIOUSLY. IF I SUBMIT A REQUEST TODAY I

WILL HAVE AN ANSWER TUESDAY OR WEDNESDAY. >> I WOULD HAVE BEEN THREE DAYS.

>> SO, IF WE APPROVE WITH THE MONTGOMERY CENTER WITH THE CAVEAT THAT WE DON'T FUND LIKE

THAT WITHIN 3-FRIDAY WE WILL GET THE THUMBS UP OR THUMBS OUT. >> AND REMEMBER, IT IS EXPENSIVE AND THEY'VE ALREADY HAD IT. THE NONPROFIT IS ALREADY OUT OF THE MONEY.

WE ARE TRYING TO SAY, DOES THIS MEET CRITERIA SO WE CAN MAKE IT WHERE WE CAN REIMBURSE YOU ON

WHAT YOU SPENT ON COVID. >> I'M SORRY, MY MEMORY IS FAILING ME, SO WOMEN AND EMPOWER MEANT WOULD HAVE AN ANSWER IN 305 OF THEM ASKING US TO BREAK THE MONEY -- THE STATE.

>> THE STATE WOULD HAVE TO APPROVE IT. THE STATE WILL STATE TO ME AN INVOICE AND I WILL LET YOU KNOW IF IT WAS VALID. THAT IS WHY WOMEN'S EMPOWERMENT IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT. IT'S A GREAT PROJECT BUT THE BOARD HAS UNDERSTAND THEY ARE

TAKING THAT RISK. >> IF WE APPROVE THE WAY COMMISSIONER MIKE CELLA DESCRIBED IT, THERE WOULD BE OTHER MONIES WE COULD USE. I'M JUST THINK ABOUT THE FAMILY MEMBERS IN THE NURSING HOMES AND CAN'T HAVE THANKSGIVING FACETIME I'M SURE THE ORGANIZATIONS DO

THEIR BEST BUT THAT ONE JUST HITS ME. >> WE ARE UNDER THE $750,000 NUMBER. THE IDEA IS IF WE SPEND LESS WE CAN USE THE MONEY TO BUY FOOD THROUGH THE PROGRAM. WHAT CONCERNS ME IS THE LIABILITY ASSOCIATED WITH HAVING TO PAY IT BACK LATER. I LIKE YOUR IDEA, THAT IF WE DO IT AS YOU RECOMMENDED WE ARE COVERED ON THAT, THAT IS PROBABLY THE BEST OF OUR WORRIES.

[02:35:03]

>> WHAT ABOUT THE CLINIC LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT. >> IT WOULD DEPEND ON THE BOARD'S DIRECTION. I THINK IF THEY ARE DONE AND COMPLETED, THEN WE WOULD TAKE THEIR RECEIPT SUBMIT THEM FOR REIMBURSEMENT YOU WILL DECIDE IF THEY WILL BE CAPPED AT $35,000.

IF THEY CAN SHOW $35,000 IN INVOICES WE WILL GET REIMBURSED. >> OR IF THEY COULD SHOW A LOSS OF REVENUE -- BECAUSE IT SAYS MAJOR CANCELLATION OF FUNDRAISING EVENTS.

>> IF THEY CAN SHOW TANGIBLE, UP TO 35,000, YES THAT WOULD BE ELIGIBLE.

WHICHEVER WAY THEY WANT TO PROVE THEY HAD $35,000 IN EXPENSES OR LOSSES WITH REGARD CAP AT $35,000. IF THE BOARD CHOOSES NOT TO, WHATEVER MEASURES THEY HAVE IF I CAN BE DONE IN A TIMELY MANNER AND WE CAN GET IT SUBMITTED TO THE STATE, THEN WE WAIT AND

REIMBURSE THEM BACK. >> I DON'T KNOW THEIR PROJECT OR TIMELINE.

MAYBE SOMETHING YOU CAN INVESTIGATE IF YOU CHOSE CHOOSE. >> WE NEED A DECISION HERE.

>> WERE TRYING TO SAY AT $600,000 WE CAN'T GIVE IT TO THEM BECAUSE WERE TAKEN AWAY

FROM OTHERS. >> IF YOU COPE WITH THE, WITH THE BLUES AND YELLOW AT A MAXIMUM OF THIS WE CAN DO IT AT $35,000. WHAT ABOUT THE FOR-PROFIT COMPANY TANGIBLE AND FAYE IS FOR-PROFIT IS SQUAD LIKE GOVERNMENT GROUPING.

>> IT WAS THE GROUP WE ENTERED WITH FOUR OTHER COUNTIES WITH VETERANS AND SUICIDE WATCH.

SO ONCE PER YEAR WE CONTRIBUTE FUNDING WE START AT THOUSAND DOLLARS THIS YEAR WAS MAYBE

$15,000. >> THEY CAME AND PRESENTED IN SEPTEMBER.

>> IF IT IS A FOR-PROFIT AND WERE PUTTING IT WITH NONPROFIT. >> AND BABY WERE ABOUT TWO DIFFERENT COMPANIES THE ORGANIZATION WAS JACKSONVILLE -BASED.

IT IS A GOVERNMENT CONSORTIUM BASICALLY. BEFORE.

>> AND THEY HAVE AN EIN NUMBER TO THE IRS. >> WE SHOULD NOT BE FUNDING CLUBS. THIS IS NOT A CLUB. HAVE THEY GONE THROUGH THE RIGHT

WICKETS TO GET THE IRS DESIGNATION. >> THEY MAY BE JUST THROUGH THE

CITY OF JACKSONVILLE. >> >> THEY ARE NOT REGISTERED WITH

THE STATE OF FLORIDA. >> YOU WANT TO TAKE THIS OFF-LINE TO DO MORE RESEARCH?

>> IF YOU CHOOSE NOT TO FUND FIRE WATCH AT THIS TIME, THAT IS I JUST WANT TO KNOW HOW YOU WANT TO PROCEED. HOW DO YOU WANT TO SAY HAPPY LIQUID EXPERT IS SO COMPLICATED, I GO TO YOUR. LETS CAP IT NOT TO EXCEED 750. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE MONEY LEFT OVER TO GIVE DISCRETION LATER ON IF THERE IS A FOOD ISSUE BIKE COMMISSIONER MIKE CELLA SUGGESTED. I THINK WE WILL NEED TO DO MORE RESEARCH ON THESE COMPANIES TO

SATISFY THE ISSUES. >> TOPIC QUESTION. FIRE WATCH IS NOT ON THIS LIST

BUT WOMEN'S EMPOWERMENT WAS BIG. >> FIRE WATCHES ON THE LAST ONE IN RED.

[02:40:03]

>> OKAY. SO I SEE. >> I WILL TAKE A MOTION.

>> LET ME EXPLAIN A LITTLE. I PULLED UP THE INTERLOCAL AND WHAT IT IS, THE NORTHEAST FIRE WATCH COUNSEL THAT CREATED A MULTIPLE ENTITY THAT WAS CREATED OUT OF THE FIVE-COUNTY BODY WITH THE PURPOSE OF EFFORTS TO REDUCING SUICIDE RATES AMONGST VETERANS.

SO IT HASN'T INTERLOCAL THAT GOVERNS IT. >> WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT?

THOSE ARE -- WERE NOT GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE GREENS AT ALL. >> I WOULD LIKE MONTGOMERY

CENTER TO CHANGE FROM GREEN TO BLUE. >> IF THEY ARE A NONPROFIT I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM. JACK I CAN'T GO THROUGH THESE LIST HERE I MAKE A DETERMINATION. IT MAKES SENSE THAT WE SET THE CAP AT 750 LIKE WE HAVE OUR LESSON SAY SOMETHING LIKE, 30,000 DOLLARS OR $35,000 WILL BE PICKED DIVIDED EQUALLY.

I DON'T KNOW HOW WE DETERMINE WHICH ONES ARE IN WHICH WAS ART. I KNOW SOME BECAUSE THEY ARE GOOD. WE ALL HAVE OUR PET PROJECTS OR MAPS.

HOW DO WE DO THIS AS A COUNTY. IT IS REALLY TOUGH. WE HAVE TO STAY WITHIN THE

ENVELOPE TO KEEP THE BUDGET STRAIGHT. >> WE ARE TRYING TO GET AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE.

>> COMMISSIONER BIG DATA SATA MOTION? >> IF YOU WOULD LIKE IT TO BE.

>> I AM NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND THE MOTION. BEFORE.

[02:45:16]

THEY CAN FIGURE OUT WHETHER THEY THE PROPER STANDING TO DO THIS. >> I THINK THIS GOES FOR THE REST OF YOU. IF YOU HAVE SOME RUN-ON SPIRIT THIS IS A BIG DEAL.

WE CAN'T GO THROUGH ALL OF THE DETAILS. >> LET'S GET A FULL YEAR.

ALL IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. ALL OPPOSED'S?

IT CARRIES 5-0. >> THAT WAS LIKE MAKING SAUSAGE ON TELEVISION.

THAT WAS TOUGH. ITEM 28, NOTICE OF INTENT TO AWARD BID ON ATLANTIS DRIVE

[20. Notice of Intent and Award of Bid #19/20-66, Atlantis Drive Roadway Improvements-Phase 1 and Agreement with Besch & Smith Civil Group, Inc.]

ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS PHASE ONE AND AGREEMENT WITH CIVIL GROUP INC.

>> I'M WITH THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR AND ENGINEERING. I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS. >> COULD YOU OUTLINED THE PROJECT.

IT IS 82800-FOOT ROADWAY. IT IS AT THE TRAIL RIDGE ROAD EXTENSION COMING OFF OF THE EXPRESSWAY EASTERLY. AND IT WILL PROVIDE AN ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY FOR CLAY COUNTY AND

OPEN UP LAND FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. >> WE ALREADY HAVE A TAXING

SCHEME IN PLACE SO WE WILL GET MONEY BACK FROM IT. >> YES WE HAVE A STATE GRANT AND

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT. >> THERE IS ALSO THE MST YOU. >> CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO US HOW

THAT WORKS. >> MAY BE MR. SMALL WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS IT.

>> JUST TRYING TO FILL IN SOME BACKGROUND HERE. >> GIVE HIM 3 MINUTES.

GIVE ME FOR I'M A LITTLE OLDER. >> WHILE HE'S COMING UP, THE CHALLENGER CENTER, IS THREE-POINT KNOW AND GENERATED FOR THIS CURRENT BUDGET YEAR $741.

SO WITH THAT,. >> THINK YOU COUNTY MANAGER I APPRECIATE THE SUMMARY.

THAT COS US 27 PINE TREES. NINE OR TEN YEARS AGO THE COUNTY DECIDED THEY WANTED SOMETHING BAD COULD TAKE JOBS AWAY FROM DUFAULT COUNTY BECAUSE WE DID NOT HAVE ANYTHING CLOSE.

WE HAVE PLENTY OF STUFF DONE IN KEYSTONE BUT NOTHING CLOSE. SO THIS PROPERTY PRESENTED AN OPPORTUNITY TO CHANGE ALL OF THE ZONING TO MIXED USE. SO IT IS A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT. ABOUT THE SAME TIME, THERE WAS A LITTLE THING CALLED BIG LEAGUE DREAMS THAT ARE WORTH THE COUNTY THERE WERE EXTRA DOLLARS LEFT OVER ABOUT 19 MILLION AFTER SOME GOOD ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION WORK BY THE COUNTY. THEY SAY 19 MILLION.

SO WE DECIDED HOW WOULD WE SPLIT THE MONEY. AND OF COURSE I AM AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GUYS SO I THOUGHT, LIKE SPEND $6 MILLION AND BUILD A ROAD.

IF WE CAN OPEN THE PROPERTY WE CAN GET JOBS. WELL THAT DID NOT FLY TOO GOOD.

THERE WAS A LOT OF COMPETITION. SO WE CAME UP WITH AN IDEA THAT IF WE FIND A WAY TO BUILD A ROAD, THAT THE COUNTY WILL BE PAID BACK FOR WHICH IS WHAT WE HAVE, BUT THERE IS NO VERTICAL ON THE PROPERTY, WITH THIS ROAD YOU WILL HOPEFULLY IMPROVE, IT WILL GENERATE, I THINK 60-$70 MILLION WORTH OF DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE NEXT TWO YEARS.

THAT GENERATES $200,000 PER YEAR WE CAN SEND THAT MONEY BACK TO THE COUNTY TO PAY YOU FOR THE

[02:50:13]

ROAD THAT YOU HAVE BUILT. SO IT IS THE PROPERTY OWNERS WILL PAY FOR THE ROAD TO EUROPE AND THE BANK. THAT IS THE WHOLE IDEA. YOU HAVE BEEN THE BANK.

HOW MANY OF THE ROADS DO YOU BUILD WHERE YOU GET PAID BACK. THAT IS WHAT THIS DOES.

IT PAYS YOU BACK AND THE END RESULT, THE PLAN IS, WE HAVE TO GET JOBS.

WE WILL GET JOBS THAT CAN NOW STAY IN CALAIS. THEY WILL SPEND THEIR TAX DOLLARS HERE. THERE SALES TAX MONEY, THEY WILL SPEND MORE OF IT HERE SO IT WILL BE A GREAT REVENUE GENERATOR. THAT WAS THE CONCEPT. HAVE YOU HEARD OF A TAXPAYER WHO BEGGED YOU TO IMPOSE A TAX ON THEM. WELL WE DID.

WE ASKED THE COMMISSION TO IMPOSE THIS AND, THE PRIOR COMMISSION, VERY INTELLIGENT PEOPLE I HAVE TO TELL YOU. THEY AGREED TO TAX US. SO THAT IS HOW IT STARTED.

HOPEFULLY YOU CAN GET MORE THAN $712. >> THANK YOU.

ANY QUESTIONS. HE OBVIOUSLY IS THE DEVELOPER. >> SIR I AM THE RETAILER OF SAND. DON'T TELL THE IRS WE ARE DEVELOPERS.

>> ALL RIGHT. >> I GUESS IT IS THREE AND HALF MILLION DOLLARS TO PAVE A HALF

MILE. >> I'D LIVE WHERE MOST OF THE ROADS ARE NOT PAVED IN OUR COUNTY. THREE AND HALF MILLION DOLLARS TO PAVE A HALF MILE IS A LOT TO CHOKE ON. THIS INCLUDES UTILITIES AND THE ROAD CONSTRUCTION.

IT IS A NEW ENVIRONMENT, THERE'S NO ROAD THERE. THIS WAS A LOW BID AMONGST SOME

COMPETITIVE BIDS. >> MANY ARE INVOLVED. >> IF THIS IS APPROVED WE WILL SEND AN INVOICE FOR THAT AMOUNT. WE WILL CHECK TO SEE. AND IF I MAY ADD THERE WAS UPGRADE INVOLVED OF 2.065 MILLION. THAT IS ALSO PART OF IT.

THAT IS AN ECONOMIC GRANT ABOUT JOBS AND THE CREATION OF JOBS. SO, WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT IS THREE-POINT 4 MILLION. WHEN YOU TAKE MORE OF BASICALLY DOLLARS LEFT THERE.

THERE WAS AN ALLOCATION OF $1 MILLION IN THE PAST FOR THE COUNTY TO SUPPORT THIS ROAD AND

ANY ADDITIONAL MONIES. >> SO THE $1 MILLION WAS ALREADY COMMITTED.

>> THE JOBS GRANT, THE CURRENT ONE THAT IS OUT THERE DID NOT GET CUT IN THE STATE BUDGET CUTS. WE CAN DOUBLE CHECK THAT. WE CAN HAVE SOME PEOPLE DOUBLE

CHECK. AS FAR AS I KNOW IT WAS NOT CUT. >> PLEASE UNDERSTAND, I AM NOT ANTI- ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OR ANTI- CHILD, I JUST HAVE TO LOOK AT CONSTITUENTS THAT LIVE ON BACK -- BAD ROADS. I GET IT. BUT TO A NAP MILLION DOLLARS FOR

A HALF MILE IS A LOT. >> THE CONSTITUENTS DON'T HAVE PAID ROADS.

YOU WILL FIGURE THAT OUT OR WE CAN FIX IT. GO AHEAD.

>> IT IS TWO AND HALF MILLION DOLLARS. THIS IS A FOUR LANE DIVIDED HIGHWAY. THE COST FOR THE ROAD IS $5 MILLION PER MILE.

>> SO IT IS VERY EXPENSIVE. A FOUR-LANE ROAD GOES INTO IT AND IT ALLOWS THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY TO DEVELOP AND I THINK THERE ARE APARTMENT COMPLEXES THAT CAN EXTEND TOO.

THIS IS JUST THE FIRST PHASE OF THE PROJECT. >> WILL WE BE ON THE HOOK FOR

THOSE AS WELL? >> IF WE VOTE YESTERDAY ARE WE ON THE HOOK FOR THE REST OF THE PHASES? ONLY IF YOU WANT TO ADD MORE. THIS IS JUST THE FIRST PART TO

[02:55:07]

GET THE DEVELOPMENT STARTED. ONCE THE APARTMENT IS IN, I WOULD HAVE TO TALK TO KEN I

THINK IT IS RESIDENTIAL AFTER THAT. >> WHAT WAS THE MOBILITY FEE ON THAT. IS NOT A GOOD MOBILITY FEE, THERE HAS NOT BEEN ANY LAND DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS JUST FOR THE ROADWAY. THE MOBILITY FEE WILL START WHEN

THE BUILDING STARTS RISING FROM THE GROUND. >> IF I UNDERSTAND WE ARE NOT ON THE HOOK. $2 MILLION FOR THE GRANT. SO, WE WILL FAST-TRACK THE PREVIOUS BOARD APPROVED $1 MILLION STEUBEN THAT'S RIGHT BUILD THE ROADWAY THEY APPROVED IT WITHOUT LOOKING AT THE ENGINEERING COSTS. SO WE SPENT $270,000 ON ENGINEERING FEES. WE HAD TO MITIGATE AND WE PUT THIS OUT TO BID ORIGINALLY AS JUST FOUR LANES COMING IN. THEN A TWO LANE ROAD AFTER THAT. THE BIDS CAME BACK HIGHER THAN THE $700,000 THAT WE HAD. THE PROJECT SET IN FOR THE GRANT CAME IN.

WE LOOKED AT COULD WE EXTEND FURTHER ECONOMICALLY WE COULD NOT EXTEND FURTHER BECAUSE WE WOULD HAVE TO GO INTO A DIFFERENT WATER TREATMENT SO WE DECIDED TO BUILD THE FULL WIDTH FOR THE SAME LENGTH. SO, THERE WAS $700,000 LEFT OF COUNTY MONEY PLUS THE DEAL GRANT

PLUS THE COST. >> AND WE WILL SPEND THAT MONEY BEFORE.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. >> I HAVE TWO ISSUES. CAP WE USE THEM BEFORE?

>> ARE THEY UNKNOWN QUANTITY. THEY HAVE NOT WORKED SINCE I HAVE BEEN WITH THE COUNTY.

>> AND I'VE BEEN WITH THE COUNTY FOR FIVE YEARS. >> THE REASON I ASKED, ONE OF THE BIDS, IT IS A 36% INCREASE. ARE THE REQUIREMENTS PRETTY WELL ESTABLISHED.

DID THEY NOT UNDERSTAND GREG'S IT SEEMED LIKE A GREAT WAY TO HAVE THE SPLIT.

NOT NECESSARILY IN ROAD PROJECTS WE DID USE SPECS, SO TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW ONE ESTIMATES HIGHER OR LOWER, IT IS WHETHER THEY NEED THE WORK RIGHT NOW, THEN IT WILL BE LOWER.

IF YOU DON'T NEED IT RIGHT NOW YOU GO HIGHER. >> THIS IS MY DISTRICT AND I THINK IT IS A GREAT PROJECT I'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS TO GET THIS OFF OF THE GROUND.

I APPRECIATE IT IF SOMEONE WOULD MAKE A MOTION. >> I MAKE A MOTION.

TO APPROVE THE VOTE. THE FIRST PHASE, AND I GUESS, YOU WILL COME BACK AT OPTION CONTRACT AT SOME POINT. THAT IS ALSO PART OF THE ARGUMENT.

SO IF YOU'RE MOTION COULD HAVE AN AGREEMENT. SO WE WILL ADD THAT.

>> I WILL SECOND. >> OKAY I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND NY FURTHER DISCUSSION

ALL IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? IT CARRIES 5-0. IS THERE A WAY MANAGER, FOR THOSE OF US ON THE BOARD TO KNOW IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER COMMITMENTS I FELT OBLIGATED TO VOTE YES FOR ALL OF THE REASONS I HAVE HEARTBURN, YOU WILL HEAR ME TALK ABOUT IT. IS THERE WAY WE COULD FIND OUT

WHAT OTHER COMMISSIONS HAVE COMMITTED TO? >> YES, WE CAN SET ASIDE SOME TIME TO EXPLAIN IT. WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT WE HAD EARLIER WITH REGARDS TO THE

[03:00:10]

FUNDS OUT FOR THE FIVE-YEAR PLAN, A LOT OF THAT WORD FOR PREVIOUS BOARDS.

I WILL BE COMING TO THE BOARD IN THE 1ST QUARTER TO IDENTIFY ANOTHER FIVE YEARS OUT.

SO OUT TO 2026. THEN YOU WILL BE MORE FAMILIAR WITH WHAT IS GOING ON.

AND THE PREVIOUS BOARDS DECIDED AND THEY WILL DECIDE FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.

BUT OFF-LINE I CAN GET WITH YOU. >> THANK YOU. OKAY.

[21. Agreement with VIA Consulting Services, Inc. for Engineering Inspection-Consulting Services for Atlantis Drive Roadway Improvements]

>> THE NEXT ITEM IS THE INSPECTION FEES ASSOCIATED WITH MONITORING THE ROADWAYS AND

THEIR UTILITY SYSTEMS. >> IN CONNECTION WITH THAT, THE BID WAS ALREADY AWARDED TO THE

CONTRACTOR ON OCTOBER 27. >> OKAY, ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT QUICKSAND THEY ARE JUST NOW SUBMITTING THE INVOICES BUT WE WERE NEGOTIATING AND CAME UP WITH THE ACTUAL CONTRACT.

>> THEY WERE SELECTED BASED ON QUALIFICATIONS. AND ARE THERE ADDITIONAL FEES QUICKSAND THESE ARE ADDITIONAL FEES. DO WE HAVE THE MONEY BUDGETED

AND WHERE IS IT COMING FROM? >> THE SAME SOURCE. >> SO, THE COUNTY IS ON THE HOOK

FOR THE $600,000 OR THE $1 MILLION. >> WILL SOMEONE SUMMARIZE WHAT

THE FINANCES LOOK LIKE? >> IT IS SPLIT. THIS ONE, THE CLAY UTILITIES PORTION IS 129 AND THE COUNTY'S PORTION IS ALMOST 245. THAT WAS ALL INCLUDED IN THE

CIP. >> IS THAT MONEY ALREADY COVERED.

YET IT IS COVERED. SO YEAH. >> OKAY, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS?

WE WILL TAKE A MOTION. >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION I WILL SECOND PERIOD WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN. IT CARRIES 5-0.

[22. Memorandum of Agreement with the Clay County Sheriff's Office Regarding Inmate Work Crews]

>> ALL RIGHT, NUMBER 22. MEMORANDUM WITH REGARDING INMATE WORK.

>> THIS REALLY NEEDS TO BE CREDITED TO A PREVIOUS COMMISSIONER BECAUSE HE WAS COMPLAINING ABOUT HENRY ROAD AND HOW BAD IT LOOKED. I SAID UP UNTIL COVID HIT WE WERE GETTING FOR PRISON CREWS. AND HE SAID, WHY ARE WE USING CLAY COUNTY.

AND IT WAS -- THERE WAS A FIGHT AND AN ARGUMENT, AT ONE TIME WE DID GET THE PRISONERS BUT IT STOPPED. HE FOSTERED A MEETING JUST BEFORE HE LEFT AND NOW WE WILL START WITH VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT, THEY ARE SUPPLYING THE GUARD AND UP TO FOUR PRISONERS PER DAY. THEY WILL BASICALLY DO THE SIDEWALKS AND GUTTER AND

MAINTENANCE WORK. >> THIS IS EVERY DAY? >> THIS IS FIVE DAYS PER WEEK,

YES, SIR. >> AND SPECIFICALLY, WE DO HAVE ONE CORRECTION, WE WILL NEED TO ADOPT THE BUDGET RESOLUTION TO CORRECT THE FUNDING SOURCE. IT WON'T COME OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND RESERVES. IT WILL COME OUT OF THE DETENTION DIVISION, 102 -- 4106.

THAT MONEY WILL BE TRANSFERRED TO THE TRUST AND DRAINAGE. SO WHEN WE APPROVE IT WE WILL

ASK FOR THE BUDGET RESOLUTION TO BE APPROVED AS WELL. >> ANY QUESTIONS?

>> DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. >> WE DO HAVE A SPARE FAN. LIKE I SAID WE WOULD NORMALLY

[03:05:16]

GET FOR PRISON CREWS WE HAVE A SPARE FAN SO WE WILL PUT THEM IN THE VAMPIRIC WE WILL BY A TRAILER. WE WILL BY A PUSH MOWER AND SOME WEED WACKER SPIRIT IS NOT A

LARGE EXPENSE. ANYONE ELSE? >> I AM ALL IN FAVOR IF WE CAN GET ADDITIONAL WORK. THIS HAS BEEN LONG COMING. I KNOW THE PREVIOUS COMMISSIONER ALLUDED TO THIS. SO I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MEMORANDUM WITH THE CLAY COUNTY SHERIFFS OFFICE AND THE BUDGET RESOLUTION AS INDICATED BY THE COUNTY

ATTORNEY. >> I WILL SECOND PAIR COPPER MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ALL IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. >> 23, RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD

[23. Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Clay County, Florida, supporting affordable and reliable high-speed internet throughout Florida]

SUPPORTING AFFORDABLE AND RELIABLE HIGH-SPEED INTERNET THROUGHOUT FLORIDA.

>> THIS IS A REAL ISSUE. IT AFFECTS ALL OF OUR RURAL AREAS.

I WANT TO SHARE THAT MARK WILSON WHO IS THE PRESIDENT OF FLORIDA CHAMBERS SPOKE AT A CONFERENCE I ATTENDED AND THE CHAMBER HAS IDENTIFIED THE RURAL AREAS OF NORTH FLORIDA AS, A TARGET TO BE THE TELE- COMMUNICATING CAPITAL OF THE WORLD. TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN, WE REALLY NEED TO PROVIDE AFFORDABLE AND RELIABLE HIGH-SPEED INTERNET SERVICE.

THOSE OF YOU WHO LIVE IN THIS AREA AND THINK IT IS NOT AN ISSUE IT IS.

IN THE 21ST CENTURY, IT NEEDS TO BE AS COMMONSENSE AS ELECTRICITY BUT IT IS NOT.

WE HAVE HAD A LOT OF RESIDENTS WHO WERE NOT ABLE TO WORK FROM HOME DURING COVID.

A LOT OF CHILDREN COULDN'T DO SCHOOL FROM HOME. PEOPLE WERE SITTING IN PARKING LOTS TO GET WI-FI. WE HAD PEOPLE, THE CITY USE SOME OF THEIR CARRIERS ACT MONEY TO PUT IN WI-FI AT THE PARKS RIGHT AROUND CITY HALL. IT HAS FILTERS AND A TIME LIMIT BUT TO PROVIDE RESIDENCE, THIS IS A PROBLEM IN CLAY HILL, PLEASE, I WOULD ASK THAT

EVERYONE SUPPORT THIS. THIS IS A PASSION. >> WE HAVE BEEN DOWN THIS ROAD BEFORE. I APPRECIATE YOUR PUSH FOR THIS, THIS IS A GOOD THING.

I SPOKE TO TROY ABOUT, WE STARTED A PROGRAM, I DON'T KNOW IT WAS A PILOT WE WERE CHECKING OUT INTERNET AND HIGH-SPEED INTERNET AND I SUGGESTED THAT WE TAKE SOME CARES MONEY AND INCREASE THE NUMBER AT THE LIBRARY SO PEOPLE COULD CHECK THEM OUT AND PLACE THEY HAD AN EMERGENCY. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT IS GOING IF WE COULD DO IT OR IF WE NEED

MORE FUNDS,. >> I COULD GIVE YOU A VIEW AND IF YOU WANT MORE DETAILS, WE RECEIVED A GRANT FOR THE AREA. THIS WAS A GRAND FOR A WI-FI HOTSPOT.

WITH THE CARES ACTIVE MONEY WE DID PURCHASE ADDITIONAL ONES. SO WE DO HAVE THE HOTSPOT CHECKOUTS AT ALL FIVE LIBRARIES. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ON USAGE I WOULD DEFER TO KAREN, SHE'S

PROBABLY MORE UP-TO-DATE ON THAT. >> I WOULD BE INTERESTED TO HEAR IF THE PROGRAM IS WORKING AND IF WE EXPANDED IS IT MONEY WELL SPENT AND HOW MUCH MONEY DO WE