Regular Meeting @ 11:30 a.m. - Aug 25, 2026

Everybody, it is August 25th at 1130. I'd like to go ahead and call this meeting in order. Before we get started, is Senior Pastor Jesse Bryan with First Baptist Church here? Yep. If everyone could please stand, join us in the invocation, and then after that we will have the Pledge of Allegiance and get going.

Pastor, welcome. God, we thank you for today. Lord, we thank you for who you are. Thank you for the opportunity to be in your presence another day. And, God, I pray that as this meeting is held today, Lord, I pray that you will reign over this, Lord. God, that any conversation that is had, anything that is expressed, Lord, I pray that it will be done in a way that honors you. God, I thank you for those who are willing to be a part of this meeting today, for those who are leading it, for our commissioners, Lord, for everyone else who is participating, Lord. I just pray, God, I just pray that your will will guide everything here today. Lord, we thank you for a willingness to serve. We thank you for a willingness to be involved in this community and to take care of those things that need to be taken care of. God, we just pray everything honors you. I say in Jesus' name we pray. Amen. Amen.

Thank you, Pastor. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America

and to the republic for its name,

one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Okay, Commissioner, we've got a fairly brief agenda this morning, and then we've got another meeting tonight. I know that Commissioner Alfred is going to be leaving us shortly for a canvassing board meeting at noon, and Commissioner Chestnut will be joining us shortly. Y'all might.

Oh, there he is.

Here he is. All right. So, welcome. So, before we get started, are there any changes to the agenda?

Yes, Chair, I'd like to pull item 6A, the contract for street outreach with Keys to Home. Okay, so we'll make that item aye. Also, if we could move all the Commissioner comments, staff comments up to the daytime meeting, just because I know the night we might be busy with other things and there's more people here.

All right, so we've got a motion to approve the agenda, pulling consent item 6A, moving that to aye, moving L2, 3, and 4 to follow that item.

Second.

We've got a second. Any discussion from the board? Anyone from the public? Would you speak to the motion? Back to the board. All those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? That motion is unanimous. All right, we've got an agenda. And Madam Clerk, first item.

First item will be announcements.

Mr. Sexton, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mark Sexton, Communications Director for Alachua County. Mr. Chair, it's been an eventful couple of weeks, and our roving, intrepid video folks, Alan and Josh, have been very busy. So we wanted to share some things with you, beginning with the renaming of a street in honor of Lloyd W. Johnson.

What a great event that was.

Lloyd W. Johnson Sr. built this church and helped build a community, all while forging history as one of Marion County's first black bus drivers on county roads like this one, now named in his honor by the Alachua County Commission.

Lloyd W. Johnson Sr. spent a lifetime building things most people never get credit for. A church twice over, a school inside of a church where no others existed for children, a bus route that got kids to class before the system around him made that easy. He wasn't waiting for permission or policy. He was just building what the community needed.

So he was really a great pioneer. I learned so much from my grandfather. Granddaddy helped build the first church and helped build this second church here also.

Mr. Johnson demonstrated unwavering devotion to his community and to Mount Olive African Methodist Episcopal Church here in Illingston. His legacy will continue to inspire all who traveled this road and all who learned of his remarkable life.

When I turned in, I saw the street naming has already happened. It's already named. And I actually came in on the Lloyd W. Johnson Sr. Memorial Avenue.

He was a bus driver, civil rights advocate, a farmer, and a steward and trustee here at the church. We're just so grateful for all that he means to this church and all he means to this community.

Once we understood and researched the life of Lloyd W. Johnson Sr., it became unanimous that this was someone that not only we needed to celebrate but continue to tell stories about because he truly was a leader of not just Evanston but all of Alachua County.

On behalf of the family, we're just so proud. We're all shaking our head in awe that unbelievable that this happened, to have a memorial streak sign.

And Johnson's legacy lives on in more than just a sign. It's in the lessons and values he passed on to succeeding generations still echoing today.

So I can't thank my granddad enough for all the things that he taught, all the things I learned from him. I can see him today. Say, come on out here, Chris, let's go. It's time to go to work.

Mr. Chair, as you know, we also had an incredible ribbon cutting for the new Black Creek Preserve that we celebrated. We wanted to share that with you.

Black Creek Preserve is 287 acres, and it's located near Melrose, right off of State Road 26. It is adjacent to the outstanding Florida waters of Lake Santa Fe and protects some amazing habitat.

This was a $2.2 million investment by the citizens of Alachua County through the Alachua County Forever program. That investment will, again, protect the headwaters to the Santa Fe River and provide walking trails for folks to enjoy for decades to come.

We're so grateful to the voters of Alachua County for passing the Wild Spaces Public Places Surtax and allowing us to continue our efforts with Alachua County Forever to protect all of these important natural areas. Not only do they protect our drinking water and habitat for the wildlife, but like this one, they provide really important spaces for people to get out and to explore nature.

This land protects something real. Nearly 9,500 feet of wetland boundary tied to Lake Santa Fe and the Black Lake Preserve. It's a sheltered, cypress-ringed lake that's part of a larger Lake Santa Fe system.

This preserve is right in an area within the county and within the state of Florida that's called the Florida Wildlife Corridor. The preserve has got nine different distinct natural communities. Obviously, white-tailed deer, but really cool imperiled species as well, like gopher tortoises, southern fox squirrels, broad range of migratory birds and residential birds. And we also have two species of carnivorous plants that happen to also be threatened plants here, the spoonleaf sundew and the hooded pitcher plant.

I think if you've been here in this area for just a couple of years or lived here your whole life, you know that Florida is a rapidly changing place. And those changes put a strain on our built environment and certainly our natural environment. There's nothing stopping us from becoming the next concrete jungle. The citizens of Alachua County have supported the Wild Spaces Public Places' tax initiative to fund our program to buy places just like Black Lake Preserve and over 36,000 other acres across the county.

It does seem fitting that I am here to dedicate the Black Lake Preserve because it is where it started for me. Working with the Santa Fe Lake dwellers, I became involved with water preservation 30 years ago. We can make acquisitions like this and put these places into conservation so the whole community can claim ownership and also take advantage of what it is that is here. It's peaceful, it's quiet, it's calm, and it's a healing place to be.

Okay, now that you've bundled your boat and RV with your home and auto...

And now a word from our sponsors. And finally, Mr. Chair, as you know, last year we began a series called Sense and Sensibility, and its purpose was to try to educate folks into what can be very complicated information about county budgets. We are kind of continuing that this year with a series of videos showing how costs have gone up in certain areas of the county between 2020 and 2026. Unfortunately, those things have gone up much faster than the consumer price index or the price of eggs or what we consider normal inflation. So this is a video that Fire Rescue and my staff put together that I think does a really good job of demonstrating some of those costs, and it will be part of a series that we're doing. I think we broke the Internet. Okay, Mr. Chair, we're going to leave you in suspense on this one. It has gone up a lot, and let me see if I can go to the very last. Well, we will take an opportunity to show this again. It's posted on social media. So if we've piqued your curiosity, go to Facebook, and you can see the whole thing. And, Mr. Chair, those are the announcements.

Okay, Mark, thank you. Thank you so much. I know we've got a time constraint with Commissioner Alford, so, Commissioner Alford, let's do the approval of the recognitions. I need a motion.

All right. So moved. Second.

Motion and a second to approve the recognition. Any discussion? Any public discussion? In fact, the board, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That motion is unanimous. All right, Madam Clerk.

Presentation? Yeah. Presentation of a proclamation recognized on August 31st as Overdose Awareness Day and September as Recovery Month in Alaska County, Florida.

And we've got Commissioner Alford giving the proclamation.

I believe we have some folks here to accept the proclamation. Melissa Ray, come on up. Bring your colleagues and come up and join us. I don't know a single family that has not been touched in some way by drug overdoses or drug abuse or the things that go along with it. And so I know this proclamation is meaningful to me and I believe meaningful to many folks. So today we have a proclamation declaring August 31st as Overdose Awareness Day and September as Recovery Month in Alaska County, Florida. Whereas drug overdose remains a profound public health crisis, both nationally and locally within Alaska County, impacting individuals, shattering families, and fracturing the fabric of our communities. And whereas International Overdose Awareness Day is observed annually on August 31st to honor and remember those who we have lost to overdose, to acknowledge the deep grief of family and friends left behind, and to reduce the stigma associated with substance-related deaths. And whereas National Recovery Month is observed throughout the month of September to educate our community that prevention works, treatment is effective, and individuals can and do achieve sustainable long-term recovery. And whereas the official color of overdose awareness and recovery is purple, symbolizing a beacon of support, hope, and an unyielding community commitment to expanding evidence-based education, mental health resources, and access to life-saving naloxone. And whereas the citizens of Alachua County are encouraged to participate in local purple-out initiatives, demonstrating to those who are struggling or in recovery that they are seen, supported, and surrounded by a community dedicated to saving lives. Now, therefore, through the authority vested in me by the Board of County Commissioners of Alachua County, Florida, I do hereby proclaim August 31st as Overdose Awareness Day, and September is recognized as Recovery Month in Alachua County, Florida, duly proclaimed this 25th day of August, A.D. 2026, and signed by our chair, Ken Cornell, and attested to by our clerk, Jess Irby. And we have in the county naloxone that's available for free that folks can pick up. I believe that it is being dispensed here in this building somewhere, right outside the store. So feel free to pick that up and have it with you in case you come across anyone that looks like they're experiencing an overdose. It does not hurt someone to give it to them if they don't need it, but it can save their lives if they do need it. It's also dispensed at the Alachua County Jail in the foyer as you're going in, and at several other places around the county. And I encourage people to carry that with them because you never know when you could save a life. So would you like to say a few words? Okay.

Thank you all so much. On behalf of the Nehemiah Project, I want to thank the commission for recognizing International Overdose Awareness Day and National Recovery Month. Today's about remembering the lives we have lost, standing beside the families who carry that grief for those losses, and reminding the community that those that are still struggling deserve hope, not judgment. At the Nehemiah Project, we believe recovery is possible. We stand before you today as proof that recovery is possible. And we also believe that it's up to the community to make recovery achievable. Treatment can be a part of the journey, but recovery is what happens when people begin to rebuild their lives for the rest of their lives. And as someone in long-term recovery myself, I personally know the difference that community can make when people believe in you, the power of someone saying, me too. So thank you for recognizing this important day, for standing with us as we work toward a community where fewer lives are lost and more people have the opportunity to experience recovery. I would also like to take a moment to invite you to the International Overdose Awareness Day vigil and walk that will be taking place at 4114 Northwest 13th Street on August 31st. And we have a recovery festival taking place at Squirrel Ridge Park September 12th. Thank you.

Thank you, guys.

Mary, let's get a picture. While they're doing that, I'm going to do some agenda management. Who is here for just public comments? Raise your hand. Okay. Who's here for the Cross Creek Quasi-Judicial? Who's here for the Hernandez Alfonso Farms Quasi-Judicial? Okay. And who's here for the Grace item? Okay. So I think let's knock out Cross Creek and then we'll do public comment. So if it's okay, let's, Madam Clerk, let's go to the Quasi-Judicial Cross Creek Special Area Study. I think we can knock that out before public comment.

You said I'm sorry.

So that's H1.

Oh, H1? Okay. H1 will be Cross Creek Special Area Study Historic Preservation Area Impacts Land Homestead.

Okay. And the recommended action is to prove the historical preservation area impact based on the finding of consistency with the Alachua County Comp Plan and the Alachua County Unified Land Development Code. Ms. Barish, welcome. You're recognized. Aye. Oh, do we have to do Quasi-Judicial? We'll do the attorney and then we'll see if we have any export day and then we'll swear at some or ask people to swear at us.

So, Mr. Chair, this is a Quasi-Judicial hearing. All persons wishing to testify or present evidence during this hearing will be sworn in prior to speaking during this proceeding. All persons have the right through the chair to ask questions of staff or other speakers, seek clarification of comments made, and respond to comments or presentations. All persons who present written materials to the commissioners for consideration must ensure that a copy of such materials is provided to the clerk for inclusion in the board's record of proceedings and official minutes. While we welcome comments from all persons with an interest in this proceeding, Florida law requires that the County Commission's decision in a Quasi-Judicial action be supported by competent, substantial evidence presented to the board during the hearing on the application. Competent, substantial evidence is such evidence as a reasonable mind would accept as adequate to support a conclusion. There must be a factual basis in the record to support opinion testimony from both expert and non-expert witnesses. Persons presenting testimony may rely on factual information in the record to support their testimony. And then, do we have any party requests?

No parties.

Okay. So, Mr. Chair, we have no party requests, but people can ask to be a party at this hearing so long as they explain why they're a party and explain why their request isn't timely.

Any one wishing to claim party status for the Cross Creek Historical Buffer Area? Okay. Seeing none, let's go ahead and do export A, and then we'll do the swearing in.

Can I inquire of any commissioners if you have received any ex-parte communications, and if so, please disclose of them now?

No.

No.

No. None. I have not.

Okay. At this time, anyone wishing to address this item, if you would please stand and raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you.

Now, Ms. Barish, you're right.

Good morning, Mr. Chair. Christine Barish, Development Review Manager with Alachua County Growth Management. This item has been properly advertised, and I've been sworn in. This one's a little unique. I don't think we were quite aware these types of applications existed until we heard from the lands. This is in relation to the Cross Creek Special Area Study. There's a historic buffer area near Marjory King and Rollins' home. So, this is a request by the board to approve impacts for a fence, a gate, a paved driveway apron, and some landscaping. And this is outlined in Section 40515C. It's located at 18619 South County Road 325. It's 2.1 acres. It's in the Cross Creek Special Area Study Active Use Zone, Future Land Use Designation. And it's in ag zoning, as well as has preservation buffer overlay along the south boundary. This is what I like to call the historic rectangle. This is the preservation area that includes everything within an eighth of a mile north and south of Marjory King and Rollins' home, as well as measured from 300 feet of the center line of County Road 235. And the red square is the land property that we're talking about today. There was a house there previously, and that house was removed. And now the daughter who owns the property and her family would like to rebuild something in the future. And so, that's why we're here today. This is our location map where you can kind of see it in the context of Cross Creek. And this is an aerial view of the property. I also want to point out, this is outlining the land property, but also part of your decision today affects this driveway location. So, her brother owns this property. Both together were the original property. And so, this sort of flag lot area is where the driveway apron will go and where the gate is actually located. So, it also includes that area there. But the driveway has already been cleared. It's been used for years. That was the driveway for the previous home of the mother. And you can see that home there that's no longer there today. So, this is just a photo of Marjorie Kinn and Rollins' historic home. And it's just right across the street. I took this probably just right across from the driveway so you can kind of see how close it is. And then this is turn around and look east towards the land property. This here is that driveway that's existing. It's just a dirt driveway. There's some posts there. And then this is a site plan that shows you. Oh, I see the animations didn't show up here.

We have it in our presentation. We have it.

But you, okay. I can point out the important things. One thing. Last week, the DRC approved some after-the-fact clearing. All properties in Cross Creek need DRC approval for vegetation removal. They had taken some trees out. And one of the things you'll be looking at today is replanting for those. So, the DRC approved last week the after-the-fact clearing as well as a reduction to this preservation buffer that's along the south. Because the south property line also is adjacent to some state lands. So, that was the DRC's decision. Your decision today is regarding, see this line kind of bifurcating here. That's that 300 feet from the center line of County Road 325. Everything that's going in here is what is your purview today.

Gotcha.

So, I'm glad. Oh, I guess the animations are popping up. Here we go. So, there's the buffer. The preservation setback, I would say, is kind of what it is from Marjorie Cannon-Rollins' house and County Road 325. Here's the fence and the gate. And then there's also this asphalt apron that has not been constructed yet, but Public Works is asking. So, they'll have to follow up with the driveway permit to permit that driveway in the County Road. And that's the only part of the driveway that's going to be improved. The rest of the existing driveway will remain the way it is now, which is sort of cleared in mode. And this is just showing the future home that they intend to build at a future date. And that was just part of also the DRC's decision. So, they have space and the future home and septic will be outside of 300 feet. And then here's the preservation buffer that the DRC approved and reduced it to 50 feet. And that's going to allow the existing impacts of the driveway. So, here's just a nice photo that was taken by Public Works in July when they were inspecting the driveway apron. And so, this is kind of giving you an eyeball idea of where the asphalt apron will go. And the gate is already there and the fence has been installed. So, you can kind of see that there. And then here's just another map kind of just showing all of the things together, identifying the different aspects of your decision today. And then the other part that is also your purview is, based on this code, it requires you to approve landscaping. And since they cleared some trees without a permit, they, as part of their DRC approval, have an after-the-fact tree permit requirement and a mitigation requirement. And this is the planting plan for that mitigation. I believe it's 16 or 18 trees total. And the area that you're really looking at today is the longleaf pines and these cedars within that 300 feet. EPD staff went ahead and consulted DEP to obtain concurrence regarding the fence. And the DEP asked that the fence be similar to Marjorie Kinn and Rollins, which it is. It's just a wire fence, farm fence. And asked that they let the underbrush kind of grow up in that 300 feet moving forward. And that they have some similar, like, xeric hammock landscaping in this 300-foot area. So, that's what this planting plan shows, is some species that are allowed, as well as the appropriate amount of mitigation. The lands don't intend to build their house soon. Typically, we would require this by CO. So, we added a condition to the DRC approval that they have one year to complete this installation. And they do, they have, like, a well, and they've got that, the well's there. They've got a way to irrigate the trees, so they'll have to keep the trees alive to meet that requirement. And then they'll have plenty of time to move forward with the house when they're ready. So, really, today, the BOCC should consider materials, signage, and landscaping, and the compatibility of these factors with the architectural and cultural heritage of the historic site, as well as that of the historic district in general. So, that's your decision before you today regarding this historic buffer area. So, the existing and proposed impacts to Cross Creek Historic Preservation Area are consistent with our comprehensive plan, our Unified Land Development Code, and our recommendation is for approval of the impacts to this Cross Creek Special Area, Historic Preservation Area for Land Homestead.

That concludes staff's presentation. Move approval of the impact to the Cross Creek S.A.S. and Historic Preservation Area for the land. Second.

Motion has seconded to approve staff's recommendation. Any discussion from the board? Anyone from the public wish to speak to the motion?

Come on up.

Come on up. Introduce yourself. And go ahead and ask your questions.

Where does it come from?

Yeah, if you'll just go ahead and introduce yourself.

My name is Lily of ATEA.

Okay.

District 2.

Okay, great.

So, where do the funds come from to do this work?

So, those will come from the applicant. Yeah, the applicant will have to provide those funds to do the work. Thank you. Yeah, you're welcome. Anyone else? Okay. We got Democracy in Action here. This is how it works. All right, back to the board. Any further discussion? All those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? That motion is unanimous with Commissioner Alford out of the room. Ms. Parrish, thank you so much. All right, we're going to now go ahead and say it's about noon and open up public comment. So, we've got two opportunities for the public to speak to us during our meetings. One at noon and one in the evening at 530. So, if you'll come up, introduce yourself. You'll have three minutes. The way the light system work is, green means go. Yellow means you've got 30 seconds. And red means the person behind you is waiting. So, when you're ready to go.

If you want that to be seen, it needs to go in this white.

Yeah, if you'll stick that right there. Thank you very much. If you'll go ahead and introduce yourself. And then we'll, what we're going to do is we'll have everyone speak to public comment. And if there's any questions during public comment, when public comment concludes, then we'll all try to answer those questions. All right? Thank you. And so, with that, welcome.

Hi, I'm Joe Prager. I've been asking for help about the last mile of Southwest 75th Street since 2008, 18 years now. I'm here today because this road has somehow become an orphan road. In 2008, this segment was number 26 on the county's paved roads priority list. By 2011, your 11-page prioritized pavement management list ranked our road at number 25 out of 417 road segments with a $1.92 million rebuilding estimate that included shoulders. The last mile of Southwest 75th Street is not some isolated neighborhood street. It's a county collector road that carries 55-mile-an-hour traffic from Southwest Archer Road to more than 520 homes in seven neighborhoods. It encompasses all of the USPS Rural Route 12. That's one carrier's full workday. It's also a shortcut between Archer Road and Williston Road or State Road 121. Yet, in the 15 years since 2011, our road disappeared from the county's list. The Kircher Group's 2023 road survey missed it completely, and despite my March 2023 email to this board, it did not get included in your TCIP program. Meanwhile, our road failed. Today, it is not on your TCIP list. It is not on your TCIP interactive map. It's not even on your excluded roads list, according to CHAT-GPT. It's not scheduled for replacement through 2036. Now, perhaps it was confused with Tower Road, also known as Southwest 75th Street, or someone saw a new pavement in the Brighton subdivision and they never looked further towards the southern end where our road is. Whatever the cause, this omission must be corrected. By contrast, County Road 346A, or Southwest 137th Avenue, was number 118 on your 2011 list. It's on the TCIP. It's on the interactive map. And it's scheduled for replacement. That's the road at Indian Hammock and Grassy Lakes Estates. You guys know where that is? Certainly, that needs work. But our road carries far more traffic and is in a far worse condition. Now, thanks to Commissioner Mary Alford, Alachua County Public Works made temporary repairs to our road in March, and they replaced 48 three-foot-wide asphalt sections. They made patches. But the road was already deeply failed, and now there's new potholes appearing again. We're very grateful for that work, but we respectfully ask this board to direct Alachua County Public Works to do three things. Please formally add the last mile of Southwest 75th Street to your TCIP program, complete and publish a traffic count and PCI evaluation, and identify and commit the funding needed for a full reconstruction.

Thank you, Joe. Thank you for your time. Yeah, thank you. Thanks for bringing that one up. Know the world very well. Appreciate your comments. All right.

I sent all of you a copy of the whole thing.

Okay. Sounds great. Or if you want to give it to the clerk, Joe. Yeah, so it's great to recognize Joe. I appreciate that. But we don't do that in the chambers. If you want to say you really like what he did, just go ahead and do this. And that way, there you go. Perfect. Appreciate that. All right. Next speaker. Welcome.

Hi. My name is Lynette Walker. Nice to meet you all. I'm here on regards to advocates speaking for the students of Alachua County to be able to put up pedestrian traffic lights at schools exiting places like Hawthorne down the highway that way to bring attention to people to slow up so they'll see the kids. And if there's no crossing guards out there, they'll have that button to push this to cross safely. And the other is, I want to bring to you all attention, I have petitions for these, is putting back up back doors and emergency exits at apartment complexes in case of fires. They have no way of getting out people that stay upstairs. So I'm wanting to bring that to your attention to see if I can get help pushing those issues.

Okay. Thank you, Ms. Walker. If you have anything you want to give to us, you can give it to the clerk and get a copy. Okay.

Next speaker, please. Can I, point of order, I just would like to let folks know who haven't been here before, we don't usually respond to people's comments during their comments. We do it at the end. So, if folks have made comments and they want to hear our comments, they may want to stay until the end of public comment.

Well, I came here representing everybody who's fed up with the conditions of our county roads, as you might already think. I'm not here to criticize, there's plenty of that already. Although commenting on documenting and commenting on potholes gets attention and we need that as well. Today, I'm more interested in solutions and encouragement to have you resolve the problems of the pothole ridden roads sooner than later. There have been some neglect in the past on road maintenance, but I propose that we move towards fixing the problem instead of pointing out blame. With that said, we might be mindful of how future funding for roads is spent. Right now, the rural citizens feel exhausted and frankly cynical over the subject. Some have lost confidence that this body is able to manage the taxes earmarked for road repairs. Others think we just don't care. So I'm asking you, please, declare your unwavering commitment to fix our county roads, whatever it takes. It is a tall order, I get it. And it will likely require additional funding to properly resurface all of these rundown county roads going back decades. Patching potholes here and there, which is a temporary and fix, and it's kind of wasteful, is not the goal. If the county board has the courage to actually accomplish this project over the next few years and restrict the funds to be used for road repairs only, I think the public will support your efforts. Briefly, here are some ideas that you might be able to work with. One, create a new referendum and let the voters of Alachua know that the board is committed to repaving the county roads. You might reallocate some current line items already on the budget to roads. Or ask for a vote on funding specifically, only for roads, maybe do both. Two, perhaps a municipal bond would help, or a county-wide special assessment for roads. I bet that the growth in this county creates sufficient revenue to secure a bond, regardless of the homestead exemption issue that is on the ballot in November. Three, require that developers of both housing and commercial building pay a substantial impact fee assigned to roads only. Four, reach out to institutions that could help monetarily, ask the state for a grant, or create a venue to generate funding for roads as donations. It's a little out of, but I'm thinking out of the box. At minimum, slow the speed limit down on the worst roads in order to preserve the patching. Finally, it may help to have an ad hoc committee of citizens involved on the road issues to give input. The road repair challenge can be overcome if we all make a commitment to realize it. It affects everyone in this community. Thank you for listening to the community.

Could you just introduce yourself for the clerk so they have you for the record?

Of course. Thank you very much.

Tell us your name.

Lillia Vaitia.

Lillia.

Thank you, Lillia. Thank you.

And we will address those comments when we're done. Okay, next speaker, please. You are the one that emailed us about public comment. Okay, great. Yes.

I have an overhead.

Hi, Ms. Younger, welcome. Overhead, please. There you go.

Good day, commissioners, county attorney. Thank you all for allowing us to have comment. I'm here today, Sarah Younger, representing the Suwannee St. Johns group and CR Club. I wanted to invite you all to a summit we're having on October 10th in Alachua at the Lions Club from 2 to 5. This is an important time for us all to be considering water as a part of our decisions around this coming election system. And obviously, who makes those decisions about our water is very important to help the informed voters. And then also, I wanted to add my own personal comments on a matter that is going to come before you later. I'm asking you not to transmit the Everly Comprehensive Plan Amendment. And I ask you to look beyond the very appealing name given to this proposal, Farmstead Community. A working farm, trails, conservation areas, and attainable housing all sound good. But the question is whether those features are truly a foundation of this project or they provide a green wrapper around a suburban scale development outside the urban cluster. Calling it a farmstead does not change the underlying request. This is a rural agricultural land applicant is asking you to create an entirely new site-specific future land use designation, allowing for an 882% increase in residential development capacity, thousands of homes, and substantial commercial development. We've been here before. Several years ago, the larger Hickory Sink property was proposed for intensive development. After significant concern and county scrutiny, that vision was substantially reworked and conversation shifted towards conservation. Now development has returned in a smaller package, this time wrapped in the language of farming, conservation, and sustainability. But there's another reason to be extremely cautious today. Florida has changed its agricultural enclave law effective July 1st. Under that new law, qualifying agricultural land that becomes surrounded by development can gain a much easier pathway towards residential development based on surrounding densities. This means decisions like this do not necessarily stop at that property line. Every time agricultural land is converted to suburban development, the remaining farms around it become a little more surrounded by development. And then those properties can become stronger candidates for future conversion. That is how farmland can disappear, not necessarily in one enormous decision, but parcel by parcel, creating a domino effect of development, pushing further into the rural area. This is what's happening at the same time we're confronting an extreme doubt on this same agenda. You're considering asking the water management district for stronger water use restrictions. And we're considering dramatic increasing development in another important aquifer. Where is the data showing this makes sense? Alachua County has spent years developing its comp plan, urban cluster, and growth management plans, specifically to prevent this kind of outward expansion. The applicant should not be able to overcome those policies simply by offering attractive amenities. Thank you for taking my comments.

Thank you, Mr. Younger. Okay. You're welcome. Thank you for those comments. All right.

Next speaker, please. Welcome. Mr. Chair, members of the Board. My name is Tom Mierke. I'm a retired hydrologist and current organic farmer, or current farmer in any case. Mr. Chair, first of all, well, a couple of things. I'm here because I cannot, I'm not able to attend the afternoon meeting, so I'm addressing K-1, the Everly Farmstead. Okay. And I'd like, I've commented both at the Planning Commission and the Environmental Protection Board already. But in both of those, I didn't lead off with, I'm in support of the project in any case. As you may know, I live down, I've reviewed staff's recommendations for this project. They seem like they're quite, you know, much more extensive than others that I've seen in the past. Overall, I'm pleased with those. My primary concern remains water quality and, to some extent, water levels. This is in the extreme, or in the upstream end of the Poe Springs spring shed. Our property is downgrading into that, and so I've asked in previous meetings as well that consideration be given to a dedicated, dedicated in terms of an actual location as well as funding moving forward. Because I think we may end up with funding challenges as a county moving forward. And I'd like to see something that captures the potential for pollution, not just from this project, but from other development in the area as well. So that's a concern for me. And, I mean, the use of reclaimed water is great. I mean, it helps out on the water quantity, the water level aspect of issues. But it does carry a, you know, pretty much a three milligram per liter load as it comes from the treatment plant, which is much more than background. And I've submitted data associated with my previous talks that show that water quality, at least nitrates, have been increasing in our area. And that's my concern on this moving forward. I appreciate your time here, and sorry I couldn't be here later today.

Okay, Tom. Can I ask him a quick question? You said a location, a dedicated funding and a location for?

Oh, sorry. Monitoring. Monitoring well. Water quality monitoring well. Thank you.

Thank you, Tom. Okay.

Please. Roseanne Prager. I just want to add to the subject of repairing our roads. I attended the advisory committee rural roads repair meeting, and they mentioned that chip seal program has been eliminated from our road repair. So your only options are, or public works only option is to completely rebuild the road or just pothole repair. And I think chip seal should be looked at again because it's not as expensive as redoing a road, but it does make a road last a little longer. We have a section in our neighborhood. It was a trial section they did 11 years ago, I think it was. And it's, or maybe it was 18, chip seal, just to see if it would work. Holding up? It's holding up. Yeah. So we would like you to reconsider putting that back in our public works program.

Okay. Thank you, Roseanne. Yeah, it's neighborhood roads don't have as much traffic. They do hold up better. Okay. Kali. Next speaker, please. Anyone else in the chambers before we go to the phones? Okay. Kali and Mark. Overhead, please. Okay. Overhead, please.

Hello. I just want to invite you all to an event this Saturday. Overhead, please. I know it's tough for you. I hope you don't have too many going on Saturday. From 10 to 4 at the Matheson Center, it will be an event called America at 250, African and African American legacies in Florida. This is done by the African and African American Historical Society. And that's a group that grew out of the effort to compel the public system to teach black history in a way that was not partial, episodic, and superficial. Hasn't quite happened yet. But this event will include speakers from UCF, Florida State, and UF, as well as Cornell and Howard, and some community presenters. There'll be some poetry and prose offered along the way, and there's a lunch included. But there's a lot of topics covered about the, it goes all the way back to the American Revolution. And talking about free and enslaved people and religion and impacts in the revolution. A lot of things about the history of African Americans in Florida. And so many people don't know that the Underground Railroad had a major stream coming south into Florida. It wasn't all people running across the Ohio River or trying to get to Canada. So you can register for the event, but you don't have to. And there's three major panels during the day. So if between 10 and 4, you can drop in for an hour, you are going to get something. But there's three major panels happening. And if you go on the site of Matheson Museum, you can find registration for this event, which is free. The registration, I think, is just for a head count for the food provision. So I hope to see a few of you show up at that sometime on Saturday.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for that public service announcement. Okay. Yeah. Okay, Mark. You and your friend, welcome.

Yes, thank you very much. My friend is here, too. Hi, Snert. You just had an episode. You're just too stressed, I think. Hi. Yeah, I was going to talk about soils and how soils are kind of like a factory but also a lab. And there's all these little organisms. And there's, you know, fungi. And there's mycorrhizia. And sometimes there's worms cruising around. And some beetle will go upstairs and grab some dung and take it down. And so there's all this activity going on. And then they actually specialize in various sectors. Not all of them do the same thing. So different parts of the soil actually is, you know, subdivided into categories. And different workers do different things. And then you've got these roots. And once they're done processing and making it very small, it goes into the roots. And then it goes up into, we call it the stem, but it's kind of like an elevator shaft. And so all the nutrients, they go up. And then you've got these flowers. And these flowers open up. And it's kind of like the McDonald's drive-through, you know, next, you know. And then you have these like DoorDash, you know, sort of Uber kind of like drivers. And they come by and they grab the food. And they go over and take it somewhere else. And so it's kind of like this very interesting system. And so the more roots you have, the deeper the soil is. And the more activity you have. It turns out that like per cubic feet, there's like millions of these little critters. I call them critters, but actually they're like bacteria. There's all kinds of different things going on. And then they also keep the soil healthy. And they're also able to contain a lot more water for a longer window of time. And so that's actually very, very important. And anyway, so if you put in a bunch of grass, it's kind of like if you feed it just sugar. It's like if you had a sugar diet where you just ate sugar all day long and ate nothing else. It's still energetic and looks good, but actually underneath it there's not much going on because it's just sugar. And what you really want, you want proteins, you want fibers, you want, you know, all kinds of, you want different kinds of, you know, salts. You want maybe some acidic type things. You want a variety of different things in the soil for the soil to be healthy. And that was my cartoon version of the soil. All right. Isn't that right?

The lesson on soil today. Mark, thank you. Yes. Mr. Sexton. Anyone on the phones? No callers. Okay. Anyone else in the chambers before we close? All right, we'll go ahead and close public comment.

Anyone want to respond? Commissioner Prisky, you want to start? I guess my only, I guess quickly, regarding the school bus. Is she still here? The woman who was bringing up the crossing for children. I do know that that issue of children crossing in Hawthorne has come up several times at our MPO meetings. We have been pushing the DOT, most of those roads are DOT controlled roadways. But we have been pushing the DOT to explore traffic control opportunities and crossings at those locations for our schools. So, if we can maybe get a notch to, if that woman is here, to get back with her about when those meetings are and like any updates we might have on those issues. Or at least they could send it to the MPO in case we have her come again and we can give her a more accurate update on that. And then to the woman who was speaking about our roadways, just wanted to respond to say, I think this commission takes roads very seriously. And it was really interesting to hear some of your ideas because those are all ideas we're already doing. I know Ken wrote some of them down, but we already do some bonding and we've been discussing doing more bonding to be able to move forward with our road priorities earlier. We have been, we do have dedicated funding for roads and we have already put roads into our infrastructure surtax, which is our surtax capability. And expanded by drastically the amount of money that we're putting into roads. We've also moved more of our general fund to road maintenance and road repair than ever before. So I think actually when you look at overall what we've done for roads, it's a lot. I know it's not enough because our roads are crumbling. But we also have a lot of other priorities, public safety, fire rescue, community support services, parks and recreation. All these things that we have to respond to priorities and needs for our community. So given that I want to say like upwards of 20%, was it 20% or so of our budget is dedicated to road maintenance, repair. And we do also have dedicated impact fees for roads for our developers. So a lot of the ideas you have, we've actually already implemented and are doing. And hopefully as the surtax continues to move forward and our priority list continues to get tackled, and our teams at Public Works begin to grow with this road maintenance and repair program that we're putting into place, we'll see a little bit more quickly responses and a little bit better roadways overall in our county. But it's a big thing to tackle. We all recognize it. We all know it. We all hear you loud and clear. But no matter what, roads are costing us about a million and a half dollars a mile to fix. So it's not like we can just find more money. You know what I mean? And I hear you, I wish we could, but there just isn't more money laying around. And so far we have been asking our state for some funding, but it's primarily been for expansion of roadways like Archer to relieve traffic concerns and things like that. I don't know that we have asked for maintenance money for our roads. Thank you.

Okay, we've got Commissioner Wheeler and then I'll make some comments on roads.

I would just add to that too, for folks who are interested that, you know, you were talking about an ad hoc committee. We have the TPO now that it's been newly organized to include the county, not just the city of Gainesville. And those meetings are pretty robust. If you would have a chance to come, Mr. Prager, you all too, come to those meetings and you can hear, you know, what we're doing. And we can hear from you what it is, you know, that you're offering to help. So we have those meetings that include the city and the county commissions as well as a community member from the rural municipalities. So, and we're even talking about expanding that. So please come to those meetings. You can look on our website to know when they are and join us because it is a community discussion. It's not just, you know, for one group of folks. It's open to the whole community. So please come. And I don't know about the Prager's concerns about being on that list, but that's something for us to also check out. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just want to add, I don't know. I know we had that priority list. I know that we used it and it was part of the conversations we had when we were developing the updated TCIP list and all of that. So if Ramon could give us an update on the Southwest 75th Street, if we could understand what happened, where it went, and get an update on that, that would be helpful. Because it sounds like maybe it accidentally fell off or I don't know. Mistaken identity. Stuart, you want to address that one?

I can. Good morning or good afternoon. Stuart Cullen Assistant, Public Works Director. On Southwest 75th Street, we have been spending quite a bit of time with our strip milling and resurfacing program. And I believe even including Mr. Prager's comments, he mentioned that about 48 strips that we have done on that roadway. And so it is not on the TCIP list, but we are actively addressing the surface defects that we see on that roadway.

Yeah, I would say, Stuart, as a real estate agent, you know, when Brighton came online, that was supposed to be a new neighborhood. Everything was done by the developer. A lot of folks passed through Brighton, and there are a lot of neighborhoods, Farms of Kanapa Hall, Meadows of Kanapa Hall. And so it is a widely used road. So I'm glad we're addressing it. I'll speak to the folks that came. First of all, this is your first time coming. Thanks for asking how you speak, Lilia. Your suggestions, we actually had a specific meeting on just roads on August 17th. So for those of you that are here for that, I would ask you to go back, check and look at that meeting, because here's what the purpose of that meeting was, is we hear you loud and clear, that we are spending, as a commission, historical funding on our roads compared to previous commissions that had never really had a funding source. So two things. Thank you, by the way. Yeah, you're welcome. But it's not enough. As Commissioner Prizzi said, it's clearly not enough. Two things happened in the last handful of years. One big thing was we increased our general funding allocation. We're now a little more than $7 million. Clearly not enough. But this board also, when we went back out for the infrastructure sales tax for the second penny, or second half of the first penny, which is the maximum amount that we can statutorily ask for, we dedicated 70% of that half cent to roads. That gave us a funding source, which we have had now for four years. And we have allocated in excess of $25 million for road resurfacing, which is also still not enough. And so at the meeting that we had last week, I think it was last Tuesday? Yeah, it was last. No, Thursday we canceled.

No, Tuesday, you're right.

It was last Tuesday. We had asked our public works staff to take that plan that we developed back in 23, after the infrastructure sales tax passed, evaluate it, and bring us back some recommendations on how can we do more. Because even though we're doing 25 million, as Joe said, we missed some things. And there are some roads that are actually deteriorating at a faster pace than what we knew back in 2022. And so there was a list of recommendations. We adopted them all to Commissioner Prizia's point. We added some more, and they're right in line with what you recommended. Bonding. We had some bonding scheduled for 28. We directed staff to move that up to 27. So our fiscal year for 27, when I say 27, that's October 1st of this year through September 30th of 27. So we directed our staff to move that bonding up so we could accelerate some of those on the list. We gave staff the ability to update information that's in the TCIP if roads are deteriorating faster than they were four years ago to bring those back to us. And so we moved some things around. We moved some things around. We had two pothole crews. Pothole crews. We now have four pothole crews. So there's a lot of recommendations that we brought forward. And we're asking our staff to continue to come up with additional funding mechanisms so we can increase that number from 25 million a year to something that's larger. I will tell you, at the end of that meeting, it was an interesting exercise because our manager actually went through in a very high level what our budget looks like in fiscal year 27, which is October 1st of this year through September 30th of next year. And then she showed us what we are spending on our public works and road maintenance crew out of the approximate $280 million that we have. And that number in next year exceeds $100 million, which has never even been, it's never even been like something we could even contemplate. And so I understand the frustration. I understand the fact that many of our roads are deteriorating faster. We've empowered our staff to give us additional information and find additional funding sources. And this board is more committed than any board I've ever sat on in my 12 years, and I think many previous to that, to solving this problem. So thank you all for being here, and we'll continue to do the work that we need to do to try to make sure that the rural roads, and specifically the one that you're here about, the last mile of 75th, is addressed. Okay? All right. So we're going to take public comment. Anyone else have any comments on public comment? All right. Let's go ahead and we've got more items on the agenda. You're welcome to stay and participate. And with that, Madam Clerk, next item.

To the next item, next part of our judicial item. Okay.

So that's the preliminary development plan for the Hernando's Alfonso Farm subdivision. So we've heard the attorney's disclosure on that. I think we need to do quasi-judicial, we need to ex parte, and see if there's anyone that wants to claim party status. So is there anyone, do we have any party status items? No. Is there anyone here that wants to claim party status that didn't submit it? Okay. Let's go ahead and do ex parte, and then we'll do the swearing in.

Can I, questioners, have received any ex parte communication, and if so, please disclose of them now?

No. None. And I have not as well. Let's do swearing in.

Perfect. At this time, anyone wishing to address this item, if you would please stand and raise your right hand.

If you want to speak on this item at public comment, yeah, just go ahead and stand up, raise your hand.

Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank you.

Okay. And then, Ms. McClendon, you are now recognized.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Commissioners. Leslie McClendon, Senior Planner with Alachio County Growth Management. I have been sworn in, and this resume is on file, my resume, and this item has been properly advertised. This is a preliminary development plan for a rural unpaved subdivision for the Hernando Alfonso subdivision. It's for a nine-lot rural subdivision with an internal road greater than 1,000 feet. It's located at 6311 Northwest 218th Avenue, approximately 48 acres. It does have the rural agricultural future land use and the agriculture zoning district. So these types of subdivisions are typically reviewed by the Development Review Committee. They are meeting the density. It's one unit per five acres. There's a provision that requires board approval if they are proposing an internal road greater than 1,000 feet. So we're tasked with just approving that roadway with a preliminary, and then the DRC will approve the final development plan.

So that's why we're hearing it, because of the internal road.

It's just 1,000, exactly, just along the internal road. So this is the location just northwest here to the City of La Crosse on Northwest 218th Avenue. So this is an existing site. There's an existing home that will remain on one of the lots. The lots will be configured around the home. They will be utilizing the existing drive. The actual drive is just over 1,900 feet. I'll show you another plan in just a moment. And this will be improved to meet the standards for rural-like subdivision as well. Just existing conditions showing the existing road and the preliminary development plan. So they are the existing road here, the existing drive that will be improved to the standards is 1,980 feet. They will also, so it will be approximately nine, it will be nine lots. There's another internal road here to serve these lots. These lots will be restricted to serve, I mean, to access one of these, this road here. They will not have additional access to 218th. So all the, the provision that all the internal roads, internal lots access internal roads. So they are meeting all of the subdivision standards with the exception of the road. So there's a provision that the board can take action on a preliminary development plan. And there's specific things that they can consider that need restrictions that no further subdivision shall be permitted. And that's typical requirement as well for platted lots. So there'll be notes on the plat that they can't further subdivide these lots in the future. Additionally, if they are further than five miles, there's some notes that can be on, can be on, they're further than five miles from a fire station. And there's notes that can be put on the plat. The fire station has reviewed it. They are within five miles and they have approved a tanker shuttle is how they serve these types of subdivisions.

The La Crosse Volunteer Fire Department?

They said five miles, so. Yeah, okay. That's 85. The board can require hard surface material for access road. At this point, staff's not recommending that. This is the second one that we've done that we've brought to you for these longer roads. And with that, staff finds a preliminary development plan to be consistent with the Alachua County Comprehensive Plan and the Unified Land Development Code. A staff recommends approval of the preliminary development plan for Hernan D'Alfonso Farms, Rural and Pape Subdivision, and Resolution DR 2625. That concludes that presentation and the applicant is here as well if you have any questions.

Okay, let's hear. Does the applicant have a presentation or just here for questions? Okay. All right. Yeah. That would be a good time. Yeah. Thank you for being here.

Good afternoon. Hi. My name is George Alfonso. It's spelled with a J, J-O-R-G-E. I am the senior in the family, meaning there's a junior, George J. Alfonso Jr. He is the land owner. We settled here three years ago. I've been to vote three times and I actually went to jury duty lately. So I'm known to accept the conditions of the land as they come by being a homesteader and being here present. This is really a family thing. We are four families. My two sons, my sister-in-law, my brother-in-law, Mr. Hernandez, and myself. It doesn't say that in the title of the land, but that's how we cooperated to purchase the land. And the division of the property is so that we can each adhere to tangible land that we can pay mortgages on. It is very hard to communally divide up the monies that goes to the mortgages, and that's our need to paperwork on this matter. I am a general contractor, State of Florida certified. My number is CGC1517887. My brother-in-law, whose wife is here, Mr. Hernandez, is a utility contractor registered with the State of Florida. So as far as roads, as far as land provisions, swales, grading, anything that has to be done, we're perfectly within our licensing to do such work. Like I said, this is a family item. It will never be sold as parcels for anybody that's been agreed to by the family. This is for our internal use. In my family, I have four kids. My daughter is a NICU nurse in Miami Children's Hospital. I have a doctor's daughter, graduated from Nova University. And I have two sons, which are one IT and the other one now is a Tesla supervisor. And we're good people. We love it here. If I go to the Home Depot, I love meeting people and shaking hands. We love the churches here. We love everything about this area. And we appreciate it if you count us as favorably to get these nine lots out the door so we can all share in the proper sharing. And I personally love the people here. Okay? Actually, one of my in-laws, my grandson-in-law, he's at U.S. Air Force Reserve, was in the 12-day war lately. And he's a BSO officer, wants to come to Alashua, but there's not enough money in the deal. But believe me, everybody that is tied together with this joint venture has very much interest to settling here and staying here forever. I've been in the United States since 1971. I came here under the Kennedy Khrushchev Pact, which allowed one flight from Cuba every day for 10 years. So I love this country. I'm a very much patriot. And I love the people here. So I wish to settle and stay here forever until I pass away.

We are certainly happy that you are here. I would move staff recommendations for the approval of a preliminary development plan. La Crosse would be fortunate to have them in that community. La Crosse needs folks like that in that community.

We've got a motion and a second to approve staff's recommendations. Any further discussion? Any further public discussion? Back to the support. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That motion is unanimous with Commissioner Alford. I'm glad you're here. So thank you all for being here and for going through the process with Osborne County. Okay. All right. So that takes us to the item that we pulled from consent. Madam Clerk, go ahead and announce that.

Yes, that will be the agreement with Task Force for Ending Homelessness, Inc. for Stretch Outreach Services for Community Support Services.

Okay. And we've got a recommended action to approve and authorize the chair to execute the agreement. Okay. But, Commissioner President, you pulled this item, so you are recognized.

Thank you. Yes. The reason I pulled this was because it was brought to my attention that the Task Force for Ending Homelessness, Keys to Home, has a current RFP on the street for street outreach, which I believe is tied to this approval. They seem directly related. They seem directly related. I guess they're just kind of getting started with their RFP while they await the final approval of funding. But there is some concern that I have and others in the community have raised, and that is that while our contract looks great and I was like ready to go approve the contract, it seems to have a housing first approach. It seems to be very focused on what we know that the National Coalition for Ending Homelessness is pushing for and has seen as best practices seems to be outlined in our contract in terms of what our expectations are for delivery of services. So, when we look at the keys to home requests for proposals, it mentions at the very beginning, there's a very short thing that mentions housing first, but after that, it goes into prioritization will be given to a recovery-oriented approach. And then they talk about treatment and recovery-focused care. And rather than focusing on the national standards that we've adopted as our approach for housing, they talk about the federal government's five-step encampment response framework as a framework that they expect these people to follow, which from my perspective is kind of in conflict with our expectations and goals around a housing first approach, recovery first approach sort of says that people have to get clean and be in recovery and be in counseling and everything before they can get housed. They need to show that they need to show that they're making strides. And I think, as we all know, in those instances, it's really hard to do that if you don't even have a roof over your head. Secondarily, I mean, just my own perspective is that our street outreach people should not be involved in the displacement of people in encampments. Like, that should not be their job. They're working with those people. They're trying to help those people get housed. They shouldn't also be, like, primary focused around busting up encampments. And so I was concerned about number three on their approach for their RFP as well. So I know that this is not about approving their RFP. It's about approving our contract with them. But I don't feel comfortable moving forward with approving our contract with them with their RFP having this language in it unless we add some stronger language to our contract with regards to our expectations for housing first. And so I wanted to hear from our team and allow the community to also have a chance to talk. Okay.

Thank you. Commissioner Prizzi.

Ms. Tuck. Chair, Claudia Tuck, Director of Community Support Services. We do have a fine line we're walking right now with the federal government and requirements. Not only are they looking at what we do for outreach, but they're looking at everything we do and we have to respond on what we do in our application. But we do have Jacob Turner, who's the Vice President of Operations, on the Zoom. No mark it. Okay. Can we go to Zoom?

Mr. Turner, can you hear us?

Good morning. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.

Can you hear me? Yes, we got you. You're recognized.

Go ahead. Thank you, sir. Well, I'm happy to take any questions that the Commission may have, Mr. Chair. But I do want to just say thank you for considering this item. And I know one of the great street outreach providers, Grace Marketplace, is there as well in the audience. This, just for background, stems out of the 2024 evaluation that this commission ordered to evaluate how to improve street outreach services throughout the county and the continuum of care as a whole. This project is directly responsible for supporting the county's obligations to responding to Statue 125.0231, which is Florida's public camping law. They're not responsible or this program is not responsible for enforcement of that law. They're responsible for making sure that people, before enforcement occurs, have access to services and get those services and have no arm in directing, encouraging or recommending any type of enforcement action. So I want to be very clear about that position. Additionally, as Ms. Tuck had alluded to, we are not only walking a fine line, but it's my understanding that the Department of Community Support Services and Ms. Tuck can certainly correct the record if needed. It is following the practices and is aligning the practices of community support services with the continuum of care priorities. Those priorities were voted on and approved by the continuum of care board, which is chaired by Ms. Tuck. And so that's really what I would say to that. I appreciate this commission's interest in ensuring that we're making sure services are performed in a way that prioritizes dignity and ensuring that people have the best chance of success. I believe that the RFP that was put out and Commissioner Prizio, Mr. Chair, was correct. That was done to ensure that we're working within the timeline that we have and getting people enough opportunity to participate in that procurement process. But it really is to ensure that people have all of their needs met. And certainly, you know, making sure that people have access to housing, have access to treatment and recovery services, that the services are partnering with law enforcement entities and supporting those law enforcement entities, like our Sheriff's Office in Alaska County and our Gainesville Police Department, in performing their duties so that the service provider can take care of the actual services and hopefully never get to a point where enforcement becomes necessary because the services are of such high quality that people are able to receive assistance. So again, happy to take any questions and thank you for your time, Mr. Chair.

Commissioner Prizio?

Yeah, I guess my question is that we as a commission adopted the national, I might be saying their name wrong, but the National Association to End Homeless, sorry? Alliance to End Homelessness is best practices with regards to how we do street outreach and really all of the work that we do. And it seems that in your RFP, you've sort of taken a right turn from that housing first approach to a treatment and recovery focused approach. And so I'm interested to know why and was that the recommendation of the COC board?

On page six, item E2.

Yes, through the chair, if I may.

Yep, please go ahead, you recognize.

Thank you, sir. Commissioner Prizio. So I would say that we haven't necessarily taken a turn away from housing first. We're just doing more in addition to just focusing on housing and making sure that we're partnering with our LSF, which is the managing entity and all the services that they're providing and that street outreach services are provided collaboratively with recovery focused interventions, making sure that if people have needs that are not necessarily met, that they're being addressed. And the data shows that we have more than 60% of the people in our community who are experiencing homelessness with a mental health or substance use disorder. And so what you see there, and to answer your question, yes, those are the priorities the COC board adopted. And they certainly align with an approach of getting people into housing.

So you're telling me you're still taking a housing first approach and you have no problem with making sure that that's clear to your RFP respondents? I think they cannot require recovery support services or treatment focused care in order to receive housing or to be on the COC list.

Sure, through the chair, if I may.

Yeah, go ahead. Do you recognize? Thank you, sir.

That's correct, Commissioner Prizio. There is absolutely no requirement that participants agree to become sober, that they are sober prior to or during the delivery of services. It's also our pleasure to amend any language in the RFP if the commission would like to ensure that that point is made clearer. But I will note that the RFP does reference a link to the COC adopted policies. And those things are further outlined there as well.

Well, I would just ask that we make sure that we at least like point towards the Alliance to End Homelessness best practices that the county has aligned with. And that we are clear that the person or entity that is, or entities that are awarded funding understand that there can't be any expectation or requirement for somebody to be enrolled in recovery or treatment prior to receiving support. For housing.

So are you moving staff recommendation with that?

With that addition.

I hear a second. Second. We have a motion and a second to approve staff recommendation with that addition from Commissioner Prizio. Any further discussion from this board? Claudia, are you okay with that? Yep. She's good with that. Okay. Let's go ahead and open it up to the public. We'd love to hear from you on any of the thoughts that you just heard or comments regarding the motion on the floor. Joe, welcome.

Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Chair, Commissioners, Joe Jackson. I'm retired now from the UF Law School, but I still represent Grace Marketplace. Right on. Thank you. And if I could get the overhead. Overhead, please. And organize my notes here. Here we go. This image is on the RFP website on the front page. And it makes very clear that the approach that the RFP is seeking is one that is focused on as the text of the RFP itself says, A central objective of this RFP is the timely and coordinated resolution of homeless encampments. This is not person-centered, housing-focused street outreach. And I would suggest that moving staff's recommendation with a requirement of additional language is not sufficient to ensure that this county's approved and the national alliance to end homelessness vetted approach to housing-focused street outreach is in fact implemented with the county's dollars. To say that the agreement that is before the commission will provide for housing-focused street outreach will, in fact, amounts to abate and switch. That agreement leaves it to Mr. Turner's organization and his board of directors to specify the procurement procedures for how the street outreach will be actually implemented. This commission needs to maintain control over those procedures in order to ensure that the approach to street outreach that this commission wants to have implemented with this commission, with this county's dollars, is in fact implemented. The RFP, as it's drafted, contains section after section that refers to seeking a recovery-based or treatment-based approach, which, in fact, is favored by the Trump administration and is antithetical to the National Alliance approach to street outreach. I quote, respondents should describe a treatment and recovery-focused approach that actively connects individuals to appropriate mental health, substance use, medical and recovery services, rather than relying solely on housing or basic needs interventions.

Joe, do you want to have someone see their time to you so you can continue for three more minutes? Is there someone here that's not speaking? What's your name, sir?

Mark Bonner. Mark Bonner, our interim CEO. Okay.

All right. Three more minutes. Mark's three more minutes. Go ahead, Joe.

Thank you. Thank you. So, the RFP specifies that these requirements, I'm sorry, respondents, the text of the RFP states, respondents should demonstrate an approach consistent with the federal government's federal government's 2026 five-step encampment response framework. That is explicitly a treatment-focused approach to street outreach. And these requirements are not optional. The RFP scoring sheet awards certain points only if the proposal implements treatment and recovery-focused care and follows the federal government's 2026 five-step encampment response framework. The project narrative section of the RFP describes these as required best practices and further states that applicants must describe their, quote, proposed recovery-oriented service model and approach. This is not a housing-focused approach to homeless outreach services. It is instead an RFP that seeks to fund homeless encampment sweeps coordinated with law enforcement agencies. As the introduction to the RFP states, and again, this image makes abundantly clear, a central objective of this RFP is the timely and coordinated resolution of homeless encampments. Ultimately, saying that this agreement will lead to housing-focused street outreach amounts to abate and switch. The core components of effective housing-focused street outreach, to quote the National Alliance report, are housing-first, harm reduction, and person-centered service delivery, all of which are evidence-based best practices that Grace has consistently operationalized in providing homeless outreach services for the county. The point is not that Grace should be the agency that provides these services going forward. The point is that these are the county's dollars, and the county is entitled to specify that they be used for homeless outreach that actually implements the county's preferred housing-focused approach. As drafted, agreement 15116 fails to achieve that objective. The commission should reject it and direct staff to come back with a contract that ensures that this commission's preferred housing-focused approach to homeless outreach services is in fact implemented. Thank you.

Thank you, Joe. Okay, next speaker. See, you practice trying to make six minutes into three at home, and you just need to have someone here to help you.

That's right, that's right.

Hey, welcome.

Welcome. My name is Mark Watson. I've definitely met a lot of you all along the way, and I'm sorry that I haven't spoken in front of you guys yet. We've been busy out on the streets helping folks get inside. So, basically, I've been doing outreach for the past 15 years, the past six years at Grace. Prior to that, I was at Three Rivers Legal Services, and then I did some time at St. Francis House as well. Over the past six years at Grace, well, I guess initially John, who was the director at that time, asked me to come on board because they got extra money that came down through COVID dollars. And he said, I know you've been talking about starting the street outreach team forever. How about you just do it now, and we'll see what happens? So, I said, yeah, and we did it. I showed up, and we ran it, and it's been running for the past six years. Our goal is to meet people where they are at, on the streets, wherever that may be, under overpasses, you know, sidewalks, parks, tents, woods, you name it. We get mosquito bites all the time. We protect ourselves from ticks as much as possible, but, you know, you can only do so much, with the ultimate goal of getting everybody who is on the streets inside. If not inside to their own place, but off the streets and in a shelter if needed. Of course, it's a really hard thing to do, right? And it's a hard thing to do if you're not focusing on the individual person and what their specific needs are. Any blanket approach does not work. A treatment-first approach is a blanket approach to street outreach. We need to have an individualized plan that focuses on our community members, because it's our money, after all, right? So, I want to finish or summarize everything up with our recent successes just over the past year. So, and this is only in Alachua County, because we briefly tried to, you know, had a balance in the other counties. But, yeah, we'll try it again in the future. So, the total number of people that we met with just in this past fiscal year, so 25 to 26, was 337 people. Of those 337 people, we got 119 of them inside into permanent housing, right? That means out of all of the people we exited from our program, our permanent housing percentage rate is 55%. That's amazing. Which is a huge success rate. That's way above what it was in 2024 when the National Alliance and Homelessness did their evaluation of our program. Other than that, we got nine people into temporary housing, because we know that sometimes people just need a change. And sometimes that change in their situation allows them to gain the skills that they innately have to rise up out of that situation. So, temporary housing is also important. We definitely focus on permanent, but we got 29 people this past year into the shelter. That means of the people we exited from the program, 13% of them ended up off the streets. And then finally, all of the folks that we've exited from housing, right? Of those folks, 75% of them are currently not on the streets. So, we had a 75% success rate of all the folks we exited from housing. Thank you, Mark.

Thank you. Anyone else? All right. Let's bring it back to the board. Commissioner . And then Commissioner .

Yeah. I mean, I hear them loud and clear, and I agree with them. I guess I want to hear from our staff, from TJ and from Claudia, how this RFP will be changed and be put out on the street, or how we would adjust things to ensure that it's aligning with our priorities. And if, in fact, the COC is concerned about their need to align with the federal government priorities versus the National Alliance priorities due to their funding requirements, then are they perhaps not the right contracting partner for this contract?

I will defer the latter of your questions. I can speak from the RFP standpoint. I have not seen that RFP. It doesn't go through ours. That's why we hired this company to do that. Well, we haven't hired them.

I mean, we haven't even signed the contract.

Well, we have them under contract currently because they've been the one that we've used for the last two years since 2024. Okay. So they're the ones doing the service. I see. From that standpoint, this is a new agreement that's adding amendments for the work that the board approved back in 2024. Okay. This is just that new amendment. I can defer to Claudia to answer your other questions about the scope of service and things of that nature if needed. Okay.

Let me ask a question too. So this outreach services is the thing that we took over three years ago from the city not funding it and the county expanded it. Right. We took that on and then we expanded that. And so now this is the proposal for the upcoming fiscal year, October 1st through September 30th. Um, I, I do have a concern about encampments popping up around our county. I don't like that. I don't want that. I think that's bad. Um, and I do have a concern also about the number of folks on the sides of the road. I know the mayor, the sheriff and GPD are working on something related to that. That's not related to outreach though. Outreach is, are we going to be housing first focus? Are we going to kind of align with what this RFP is doing and why, why, why the shift? So Ms. Tuck, you're recognized.

Claudia Tuck, director of community support services. Again, any entity that would put out an RFP for outreach or be providing outreach is going to have to look at what the federal government is saying now. They're looking at anything that communities are putting out when they're looking at your federal funding. And that's the fine line we're walking. The, the COC is not negating that we believe housing first is the model. Um, you heard Jacob say, um, that, you know, Grace has done a great job. We'll release re-entries. We've been working on it as well. Um, housing first is the model we align with. We have to make those other services available to align with what the federal government, who's providing over a million dollars to this community just in homeless services is saying. So what we're trying to do is walk that fine line in the middle. We're not negating. We don't want someone going in, breaking up campgrounds. We're not saying you can't come into housing if you don't do this and this. But we have to offer. That's not the way this RFP is worded.

So I think that's the problem. I'm not having a problem with the fact that you need to thread the needle. What I'm having a problem with is the way that this RFP is worded and that it's worded in such a way that it seems as if the people you're soliciting for this proposal are people who are recovery first programming. Like, so they are going to require recovery or enrollment in programs in order to receive housing support and that they're going to be coordinating directly with law enforcement to bust up encampments when that's not the goal of this program. I mean, there may be, you know, so I, I guess those are the two things that I'm concerned about is the way that the wording in this RFP is versus what our goals are for the street outreach program that we're funding. And we can work with them on that. Is this already on the street? This RFP is already on the street, correct? We can still work with them on it.

Okay. Commissioner, any other questions?

I do.

I guess, well, I was just going to say, I mean, I guess I would like to see the revised RFP before we approve the final funding. I mean, it doesn't feel, I don't feel comfortable being like, yeah, we're just going to.

You made the motion with your adjustment. Are you withdrawing your motion? I'm withdrawing my motion.

I think we need to see a revised RFP so that we can know that our funding is being used the way that we anticipate it being used. I just, I don't want to, you know, I think this is, I mean, this language is very problematic from the perspective that we've all adopted consistently for the past, you know, since I've been on the dais at least. And I know when Hutch was here, he also was very much a Housing First focused commissioner.

Okay, so we don't have a motion currently on the floor. You've withdrawn your motion. Is there a substitute motion?

Yes, I would move that we ask staff to bring back a revised agreement along with the draft RFP or revised RFP from Keys to Home for the unsheltered street outreach services in Elantra County.

You realize that with that motion you are not going to have funding for outreach on October 1st because there's no way they're going to be able to revise the RFP, put it out on the street, get responses, and fund it. So you're essentially putting off out, I mean, I don't know, you tell me you're putting off the outreach program by revising the motion until we get this back.

Possibly, or they can amend their existing contracts with existing service providers to continue that service until such time as this is done. I mean, it's like, I mean, you say that, but I feel like, I feel like what you're saying is that-

I liked your first motion. Your first motion was to basically direct staff not to take a, not to take a- We're supposed to take a housing first approach and to include that-

Reaffirm the housing first model. Right, in our contract with- I mean, I'm okay with saying we're going to affirm our housing first approach in our alignment with the Alliance to End Homelessness and require that our contractor demonstrate that their procurement processes are following those. But then we need to see a revised RFP. Like, I still want them to email us the revised RFP.

Yeah, I mean-

I'm still going to have to get revised and re-submit it, re-advertised, either way.

No, I don't think it would. I think- Well, let's hear from Christopher Wheeler, Chester, then we'll come back to me and then we'll come back to you for a new motion. Or they can make a motion.

Thank you. Is there a time- Is this time-sensitive then in terms of actually getting this funding and is it just for a million dollars? No. Federal funding is a million.

This is our funding. Okay.

Of three, up to three, not three.

$350.

We're giving to the outreach team. To do this work.

Okay. Well, but I'm- Okay, so what is it we're applying for then? I thought it was funding that we were trying to apply for. No.

Greg. Mr. Chair, we're applying through the continuum of care for federal funding, drawing it down. So anything that we do locally, when we do an application, the federal government has made it clear, not just for homeless funds, for any HUD federal funding, that they will be looking at communities and how they're handling their approach to services. One of them is homeless services. One of them is homeless services. And the federal government has changed. I mean, I'm the strongest advocate of Housing First. I think Mark knows for sure. I'm the one that brought it here. So this is tough for all of us. This is not an easy day. But they're looking at everything. Yeah.

Let me talk to Commissioner Wheeler. So, Commissioner Wheeler, we get through the continuum of care, federal funds of about a million dollars. Okay. We are putting an RFP out on the street to do outreach services with our $350,000. The concern is if we put out an RFP that doesn't follow federal guidelines, then that could put the other million that we get at risk. But we are directing the $350,000. So, Commissioner Prizzi is like, it's our money. We can say how we want it to use, and we want to make sure it's a Housing First model. I haven't heard anyone on our staff or the continuum of care say that they're not going to follow a Housing First model. But this RFP doesn't necessarily say that. Right. It says the opposite.

That's what I want to be clear about. This doesn't just not say that. This says the opposite of it.

When you were talking about the times when Hutch was on the board, and we were looking at all of this, and that was a different time. It's a different climate coming, too, out of Washington. And this is the problem, I think, that we can overthink this. Yes, we can talk about it and make it picture perfect, but you can't ignore the fact that the rules have changed out of Washington, and the focus now is going in a whole different direction. I'm not sure that any of us are going to be looking at it as closely as you do. You are really good about digging into the fine details, whereas most of us are just, I particularly, just tend to go along with what it is that staff is that I feel like that have looked at it as closely as possible. So, you know, as far as I'm concerned, I'm ready to let it go with whatever staff is recommending, particularly if it's going to put us late in terms of getting the funding we need or draw scrutiny to the questions we're asking at all.

Well, I think what's going to draw scrutiny is when suddenly our housing-first model and the Q groups and organizations that are out there doing street outreach are now being asked and expected to have a recovery-first approach. And suddenly we're requiring people to be in recovery to get housing services and or our outreach people who are supposed to be trusted by the community they're trying to serve are coordinating with law enforcement to bust up encampments. Like, we're going to see that and our housing advocates are going to fill this room and we're going to be, I mean, this is our money. It's not federal money. And we can do the RFP ourselves and have the same requirements and the people can apply for it and do it in a housing-first model.

Do we not have to justify how we use our money? So we have to say this is how we're using our money in order to continue getting it or?

No, this is general fund dollars. This is our taxpayer dollars. We justify it to us and to the voters who gave us the power to be here to spend those taxpayer dollars. Like, this is our money. This isn't federal funding. It's our taxpayer dollars.

So do you want to move forward with the staff's recommendation or no?

I do. I think I do want to move with staff recommendation. If it will move it, I trust these people. They put the energy into it and they know what the community needs. So, yes, I would support the staff recommendation and would move.

So that's a motion? Yes, it is. Is there any second?

I'll second.

That's a second to staff's recommendation. I'll look for your substitute motion after we hear from Chuck and then me. Okay, Chuck.

Well, you know, I've always trusted staff. I don't think staff would bring us something to not follow our policies. I just don't feel that that's going to happen. And I'm kind of upset with this kind of last-minute stuff here. If there have been issues, why haven't this been addressed early on in this process? But once there's something out there, then someone comes and complain that it's not fair, it's not right, it's not following this or that. I have issues with that. I have issues with that. You know, I've been here long enough to see this kind of stuff continues to happen, at least when I've been a commissioner, that this kind of stuff continues to happen. Look, I don't like what the federal government is doing. I don't like it, but if it's going to affect our funding down the road, I do have issues with that because now we have to come up with that money. And where is that money going to come from? That's my issue right now, and I just don't think it's fair at this last minute to do something. And if the language can be changed to address that, I don't see anything wrong with this. I mean, what's the issue here? I'm just trying to figure it out, but it's just not right to do this kind of stuff here at this last minute to me. It's just not right. You know, I'm getting kind of fed up with this. This has been happening a lot in our community, the last minute stuff. We have bids out there. People are not satisfied how the bids went. They come here, protest before us. We try to change it or try to make it better, and we've done that. So I'm getting tired now that now here's something else that's not right and it's not following something. But if we put it in the language, whoever it is has to follow it. So I don't understand why we would send it all back out and do it all over again. And I just don't understand. Okay, let me make my comments. Can I respond directly to that first?

Yeah, as soon as I comment. As soon as I'm done commenting, you can respond to all of them and mine. So in the RFP, I hear what you're saying, and I feel like it actually says that. So in the introduction, it says services should emphasize proactive field-based engagement with people living in places not meant for human habitation, including streets, sidewalks, parks, wooded areas, vehicles, and other public-private spaces. It says the selected provider will be expected to conduct consistent street outreach, build engagement with individuals experiencing unsheltered homelessness, assess their immediate needs and barriers, and connect individuals to shelter, housing, behavior, health, healthcare, benefits, employment, and other resources, and provide follow-up necessary to support successful transitions for homelessness. It then says, next sentence, a central objective of this RFP is a timely and coordinated resolution of homeless encampments. We know from Dignity Village, homeless encampments don't help. The last sentence on the introduction says services funded through this RFP should be housing-focused, outcome-driven, coordinated with the broader keys to homeless response system, with the ultimate goal of reducing unsheltered homelessness and promote long-term economic sales efficiency. Under the local priorities, the first sentence says, consistent with COC strategies for preventing and ending homelessness, applicants must propose activities that assist individuals and families experience homelessness to acquire permanent housing and provide ongoing supportive services to increase the likelihood of these individuals and families will be able to retain permanent housing once housed. And then the priorities are, one, end homelessness, two, use a recovery-oriented approach, and three, partner with law enforcement. That's what I think I'm hearing objection to.

I mean, the door.

And so I guess my question for Claudia and for Jason is, I heard, Jason, you say we're still going to continue to take a housing-first approach, and we're not going to redirect the outreach team to basically be the notifiers of law enforcement to come break up the encampments. The encampments. Is this wording necessary in here because of what the federal government requirements are, or can it just be, can we just take this wording out?

Mr. Chair, I defer to Jacob.

Jacob? I'm sorry. Did I call the wrong name? Jacob? Yeah, Jacob. Sorry. Mr.

So, Mr. Chair, thank you. We're happy. First, I just want to acknowledge all the great feedback that's come out because we're listening to it very closely, and, you know, it's our objective to make sure that this commission and the community's needs are met through this proposal and this program. We're happy to amend any of the language that this commission directs, whether that's the language consistent with Commissioner Prizzi's original motion that was withdrawn, or any additional clarifying language to ensure that what those very same points you just mentioned, that are very clearly and boldly stated in the RFP are further clarified for anyone who may desire that, and we're more than happy to do that. And if this is approved today, we're happy to make that amendment expeditiously, get it republished today with amended language unless there's an approval request, or you want perhaps county staff to review it first, and make sure that we avoid any delay or disruption in service.

Yeah, so, Jacob, that would be my priority would be for us to approve something today, give staff the authority to make those changes to the RFP, get it on the street so that we are providing services on October 1st. I don't want to require that this comes back to us for another meeting, Commissioner, I'm just telling you if you're going to make a substantive motion, because that's going to cause what Chuck says, which is at least a month delay and maybe longer, and I don't want them not funded on October 1st. Okay, Commissioner Prizia and Commissioner Alford, welcome to the conversation. Are you up to speed or do you need a summary?

I would like to hear the motion that we're-

So we have, the motion was SAS recommendation. Commissioner Prizia had a motion that added to that, but she withdrew it, but she's about to make a substitute motion after she gives us her comments.

Then I will be up to speed after that. So what I want to, I do want to respond to Commissioner Chesna, I agree with you, and I think this is very last minute, and it's actually really frustrating to me that an agreement with an organization to give them the money is coming to us when they already have an active RFP on the street. Like that's problematic to me. Like we haven't even approved the money for them to do this work, and they're already soliciting the work to be done. And I understand that they've had the contract multiple years and that this makes things more efficient, but why didn't we get the agreement like a month ago or two months ago? Or is it because, you know, like I guess that's, to me, that's the problem is like how like misaligned timelines are with the need to put RFPs on the street to get timely services for support. Like there is something wrong there. I don't know what it is. I don't know if it's the procurement timelines or if it's the budget approval timelines aligned with procurement, aligned with the services, but it is weird to me that there's an RFP on the street and we haven't even approved the agreement. And I guess the bigger thing for me is that I understand, and I understand the threading the needle piece. I understand needing to make sure that, you know, we don't jeopardize additional federal funding that's necessary for our community to be able to do this work. And I think that this is an RFP for the funding that we're giving them, and I think it needs to align with our priorities and strategies. So I'm willing to make the motion that we move forward with the agreement, with the addition of the national, like aligning any procurement processes and strategies in their street outreach services with the Alliance to End Homelessness, Housing First priorities, and that we ask for a revised RFP, ASAP, that ensures that that's the focus and that we're not requiring treatment and recovery to receive housing services or coordinating for encampment, breaking up, break-busting encampments of housing as a part of the work with the street outreach individuals are doing.

Okay, that's a substitute motion. Do I hear a second to that? Second. Okay, I got a motion, a substitute motion, a second. So do you conclude?

I do.

Ms. Tuck, I'm going to ask you a question. I don't see any more lights if there's a discussion. With that motion, do we put anything at risk with the federal government? Point one and point two, do we delay any of the funding?

Not if we can get it back out on the street, Mr. Chair.

Okay, so no and no. Okay.

Just like for clarification, this RFP is being managed by the vendor we hired to do that. This is not a county RFP, and so if it is on the street, they do have the ability to amend or issue an addendum that would address your concerns while it's on there with not reissuing it. They can amend it, fix what they need to be fixed, and then allow the ample time for vendors to be able to submit what they need to be submitted. That would be our process.

Jacob, you heard the amended substitute motion. Are you able to amend your RFP on the street to not prevent any funding gap from September 30th to October 1st?

Thank you for the question, Mr. Chair. We are more than happy and able to do that as quickly as today, if desired.

And my two questions to Ms. Tuck, do you agree with her answers? It won't. First of all, it won't threaten any federal funding. Second of all, it won't delay any funding on our current local outreach team.

Yes, sir. I do highly agree with her experience, Judge McGill.

Okay. Got my support. That's what I need to hear.

I just wanted to make a quick point, and I'm sorry if it's already been made, but I just wanted to say for the public's benefit because I've been getting a lot of comments on social media about, you know, the money that we spend on social services when, for instance, our streets are in such bad repair. But the money that we spend here is going to pay for itself very quickly when you look at the fact that more than half of the people sitting in our current county jail are estimated to be unhoused. And when, you know, at $127 per person per day, that adds up pretty darn quick. So this is money that I expect will come back to us anytime, and I just wanted to make that point.

Okay, thank you. So, Commissioner, we're not going to see this again. They're just, we're giving them, Commissioner Prizio, we're giving them the authority to amend it based on our Housing First approach. That's what your motion was.

And I'll be sure that it's amended or I'll be bringing it back to the board. I'll put that out there. But yeah, that's the motion. It's not for it to have to come back to a board meeting.

Sounds good. Okay, so everybody understand the substitute motion? Which I'm happy with now.

Yeah, that's fine. I withdraw mine.

Okay, so we're first going to vote on the substitute motion, which is Commissioner Prizio's amended motion, not staff's recommendation. If that fails, we'll go to staff's recommendation. All those in favor on the substitute motion, say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? That motion is unanimous.

So, yeah. Can I ask a question of staff? How could we make this so that we can align our contract with them to come before the RFP is released? Is there a way that we could back that up?

Mr. Chair, typically we're all aligning with federal requirements. I mean, this is just an unusual year. It wouldn't be the case. And they were trying to put it out quickly so that there wouldn't be a break in service because we're not signing or agreeing to the contract until today.

Right. That's what I'm asking. I'm asking TJ, in essence, like how do we bring this agreement back to us more quickly so that it's not such a rush job for them to have to put out the RFP prior to even having the ink dry on the money for the contract?

If I'm following your question correctly, so this is an agreement that's in place. These funds were here. They're working to try to be proactive for next year in issuing those funds. This falls within a normal standard timeline of working together to get an RFP on the street, get awards back, and make those awards with those contracts with the vendors, with this vendor. From our standpoint, when we look at doing these agreements and doing this, these, when they expire, we start sending these out notifications in January, February, March, asking the departments to review upcoming expiring contracts. When are we looking to amend those contracts? Are we looking to move forward with those agreements? And so we're working diligently from the start of the year. A lot of times they get bumped depending on the necessities of the board's directions, whether something else comes up and takes priority. But ultimately, right now, coming in August for an October renewal is a good timeline from that standpoint for this board sees. So if we're looking for programs that are trying to be active in October, trying to get these in place in April, May, is a good timeline to get those done. So if we can work with the departments to get those out earlier and renewed, and with that information, or if we need to update the scope of these, working with the departments is our job to try to help get those to you guys earlier.

So just bumping it a couple months ahead for these ones where they have to procure services externally or subcontract.

Right, and that's also where we've been in line with in the previous process where we've worked on bringing those ones that are annuals or potentially ones like that earlier in the year, trying to get them on those reports and get them to this board sooner to make those judgments throughout the year.

Okay, thank you. Okay, that concludes item 6A. Thank you all for being here. We're now going to move on to L2. County Attorney Thomas, any comments, Madam Attorney? Mr. Chair. Okay, county manager comments? Mr. Crosby?

No, Mr. Chair.

Okay, you guys are doing really, really good. Now we see how the commission does. All right, commission comments. Mary Helen, you got anything?

Yes, very quickly. I would like...

Not as good as y'all, but that's okay.

No, no, no. I really would like to ask staff to request a list of improvements that are needed to maintain the shelter until we have a new one built. That could take up to three years, I think, but in the meantime, the interim director is putting together a list.

She's going to provide that to us anyways, right? Yeah, I think we've requested that.

Well, I just want to make sure that we have direction to do that.

Okay. So you want to move that we get... What's your motion?

Well, if I need to make a motion, I move that we ask staff to request a list of improvements that are needed to maintain the shelter until a new shelter is built. That includes lighting and air and floor coverings and, you know, whatever is needed. And that list is she's coming up with. Mr. Crosby?

If I recall during our discussions during the CFP process, that request that we are already working on that request, they'll be part of your facility's renovation plan. And Travis is well aware and has been... And selfishly, we have been leaning on the interim director quite a bit to bleed her out of all the knowledge we can before she's no longer interim. So we appreciate that aspect of what she... So you already have that direction?

She has not been requested, though. Yeah, I think we already have that direction. When I spoke with her last week, she had not had that request. And that's why I'm putting it out.

It doesn't need to be a motion. We are following up, but we will make sure.

Okay, thank you. Yeah, thank you.

Okay.

So are you good, Mary Ellen?

Yes. Yes, I am.

Thank you very much.

No? Okay, good. Anna, you got anything?

I do. I just... We passed on... She's not here anymore. We passed on consent all the rankings for hunting on our conservation properties. We can just get it via email, but if they could just confirm that those hunting leases do not allow for, like, feeding, that we don't allow, like, them to set up, like, feeding plots or anything like that, like, it's just...

Like a deer stand with...

Right, like a deer stand with a corn or with, like, a bin that's full of, you know, some kind of grain that then attracts the deers that's baited. Yeah, so no baited hunting. If they could just confirm it, that's true. Got that, Tommy? Second is just to say a big thank you. I don't know if all of you know this, but our conservation land staff, Andy and Jean, actually prepared contracts for... Or applications for the agricultural land easements program through NRCS for several lands in our community. We just approved one on consent for us as a 50% match, but they also managed to land two that are a 50% match with rural and family lands. So two very large agricultural easements will now get rural and family lands and ALE money to protect thousands of acres in Alachua County. And that was staff work that was done without any county funding having to go, necessarily, but having... I mean, they may ask for 20%, but, you know, the great thing is it's just really stretching our funding, our conservation funding to protect more land. So just a big thank you to them for that hard work. And then last but not least, it's just a request that we identify until we have our assistants replaced in the county commission office, if we could please request that there be a single point of contact for commission-related events and programs that are involving the entire board, that there be one person that gets those and puts them all on our calendar and gets the reminders and gets the changes for those calendar updates so that we're all getting the same information when it's like a board-related event, that would be really helpful. I know we each have our own person that's managing our day-to-day calendars, but I think when it's a commission-wide event, having a point, a single point of contact will help our staff be sure to get that information to all of us.

Got that one, Tommy? All right. Thank you. Good. Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Alford, how was canvassing board?

Canvassing board was good. We concluded the audit and the audit statistics look amazing and tomorrow we should be certifying the elections.

Best supervisor in the state. All right. Sounds good. Do you have anything, Commissioner?

I just wanted to thank the road crews for the outstanding work they've been doing on getting caught up on some of the potholes and work orders that are out there and thank Ramon for sending out last night the updated list of work.

And during public comment, we had a group from the last mile on 75th, Southwest 75th, come and they personally thanked you and they thanked Ramon for that work on that street. So you can go back and watch all that if you're bored. You actually have a few minutes. You got three and a half hours. So, all right, I don't have anything. So we will reconvene with the Transmintal Healing for Everly Farmstead at 501. We'll take a little break for public comment and that's the only thing on the agenda tonight. We good? We good. All right. We are on recess. It's at 501.

Was public comment long?

30 minutes. Are we on roads? Four of them on roads. Four of them on roads. Yeah.

Less than one. Let's go.