Regular Meeting @ 11:30 a.m. - Jun 24, 2025

I'd like to call to order Alachua County Board of County Commissioners' regular meeting for June 24th at 11.33 a.m. Madam Clerk, first item. First item will have the invocation by Pastor Chris Coleman. Good morning. Good morning. We begin today in the name of the Father and the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Let's pray. Almighty God, Heavenly Father, we thank you for gathering us here today. We thank you for the county commissioners and all the hard work they do to benefit our communities. We pray that you'd bless this meeting today, that you would give them wisdom as they go through the agenda items, and we pray that everything would go smoothly. All these things we pray in Jesus' name. Amen. Amen. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, one God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Madam Clerk. Next, we have approval of the regular and consent agenda. I move approval of the agenda as presented. Second. Got a motion and a second. Are there any further discussion to the motion that's on the floor? Are there any citizen comments to the budget? I mean, the agenda. To the agenda? Yeah. Okay. To the agenda. Thank you, Mr. Chair, commissioners, Madam Manager. My name is Eric Godet, President and CEO of the Greater Gainesville Chamber of Commerce. I just want to thank you for all the work you've been doing in our community that's really visible. The roads, the construction, what's been happening, the stormwater, the infrastructure. I call Ramon my hero over here in Alachua County. I tell them I've seen more fire stations go up than I think my whole time here. But I really appreciate it. And we are really blessed as a community to have commissioners focus on infrastructure. It was great with our partnership, collaborate. And we're just very excited. I did say I have one complaint. I'll say it until the end. And I really want to thank the collaboration with the staff. The staff has been amazing to work with. And I'm very excited on all the work you guys have done from an economic development standpoint. I can't even say enough what you did with the sports arena, the world masters, what you're doing with all of our parks and everything in the community. It makes us a great place to live. I think two years in a row we're in Livability's top 100, again, in terms of places to live. And a lot of that has to do with the infrastructure that's happening. We have challenges in our community like housing and stuff like that that everybody has. But I see our community working together, and I thank you for your leadership. And we're really excited to collaborate with the county from an economic development standpoint and are really excited to make sure that we can move forward and have the type of community that we want to be here, our kids and our grandkids for the future, with all of our sustainability, with all of our infrastructure, with all of our medical devices, health care, education, high-wage jobs, manufacturing that fit what we want to have in our community. We're very excited about that, working in collaboration with you. And I would love for us to have an MOU at some point where we can formalize this even more to make sure we're taking care of the whole county. And I say we're very excited to see the county even embracing economic development the way you guys did. My complaint is a simple one. I think more signs. We need more signs showing all the good work that you're doing. Every road, every stop that we have where something's been built, it needs to be there. Because we, as a people, tend to have short memories when it's time to vote. And I want to make sure that we re-up and continue this infrastructure and this quality of life that we have in our community. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And, Mr. Chair, he was speaking to the EDO, the economic development resolution that was on the consent agenda. Oh, okay. All right. Okay. Thank you. Yes, you can. Yeah, if I could just make a quick comment, Eric. Thanks for the comments. I will tell you, and I know I have told you privately that this board, I think, is more focused than any board that I've sat on on economic development. And having a partner with the chamber and many of our private partners throughout the community makes a big difference. And so thanks for being here today and always kind of leaning in. And if I can say, we all think that Ramona is our hero. So, yeah. I wanted to chime in quickly. Well, yes, Ramona and facilities. You mentioned some of our construction projects. We have a lot going on in facilities, too. So, Travis gets a second as a local hero for all the work he's doing in that front. But we have so many heroes in our staff. I just wanted to quickly say, I'm also very excited about the EDO. I love the idea of a formal, you know, agreement with all the chambers and other economic development organizations that are in our community so we can make sure we're all kind of marching in the same direction. And I am excited that this board is interested in economic development more than ever. I think, you know, it more than anything else in a lot of ways is the path to addressing our root causes of issues. Because if we're providing high-wage jobs and opportunities and workforce training, then we're building a foundation of a good economy for people and people who can help their own families, their own selves, and be self-determined rather than having to rely on us to make the decisions for them. So, I'm excited about that. And I just hope that we think about the framework. I'm excited to hear more from Jessica and John as they develop this plan on what it looks like in terms of a framework on how we sort of reflect our values as a community and the decisions we make for the kinds of companies we're attracting here and the ways in which we're investing in our own small local businesses to make sure that they can thrive and be the foundation of our economy. So, thank you. Okay. Back to the board. Those in favor of the motion, vote by the sign of aye. Aye. Those opposed, same time. Motion carries. Madam Clerk. Next, we'll have announcements by Communications Director Mark Sexton. Okay. Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, speaking of heroes, I would like to share with you that one of my heroes is Jen Grice, who is our Emergency Management Director. We, who work with her, and you know that we have the best Emergency Management Director in the state of Florida, but the state of Florida has now taken the time to recognize that. She was awarded with the emergency management program of the year, Alachua County is proud to share this with her, and as you can see, Manager Lieberman and Chief Theus went down to Orlando last week to be there, to witness her receiving that award. The award is given out by the Florida Division of Emergency Management, and it was done at its second annual Florida Training for Emergency Management Conference in Orlando on June 11th. This award recognizes a local emergency management program that has demonstrated exceptional performance in responding to an emergency or disaster. It highlights programs that deliver timely, effective, and impactful responses to ensure affected communities can recover quickly and return to normalcy. And Jen was not able to be here this morning, but she is watching, and I told her we'd give her a round of applause. And, Mr. Chair, that is the announcement. Okay, I'm clear. Next, we'll have approval of recognition. If I could speak to that real quick. I know it's an odd comment, but several people asked me why, during this Pride Month, we didn't have a Pride proclamation, and I just wanted to remind the public that in order to get a proclamation, you can go to our county website and go to the BOCC page and request a proclamation. Anyone can request a proclamation and submit a proclamation, and so that is why we don't have a Pride proclamation, because one was not submitted. We don't go out and look for proclamations. People that want proclamations look to us, and so I could have submitted one, and that's my bad, but I just wanted to remind everyone how you can submit a proclamation and why we don't have a Pride proclamation during this month of Pride. So thank you. Thank you. Yeah. To that, Mary, I think you're right, though. I mean, to your point, like, I do think that it isn't coming upon us, too, to realize that it's government speech, and there are opportunities for us to step up, and when we see something that's important, I mean, Juneteenth is another one, you know, like just sort of making sure that we're recognizing these really important milestones in our community, and perhaps that's something we can just ask that, you know, each of us all kind of hold each other accountable for and ask our team to help flag those things where we don't have, you know, where we have big milestone celebrations in our community. I take full responsibility for this one. Same, yeah. I think that, you know, I should have done it, but I did want to remind the community that anyone can submit a proclamation. Thank you. Thank you. Next we'll have the Human Rights Board's appointment. Appoint four new members for the Human Rights Board, including three citizens at large positions, with a term ending May 31st, 2028, and one for the alternate position with a term ending May 31st, 2028. Did you see it? I want to speak. Okay. Are the applicants here like to speak? I didn't know if there would be a presentation first, but my name is Soria Lindberg. Happy to see you all again. And I apply to the Human Rights Board because I love being involved in community. And when I was looking at what was around, I was like, I can relate to human rights. So just to give you, also I was looking at the other applicants, and wow, like what a great group of applications and their passions involved. If anyone's here today, I would love to start a group chat with them because I think we all have like-minded interests. And also thank you to staff, Jackie and Neff, for organizing this. So really respect the decision you guys make as it comes out. So just a little bit about me when I'm not talking about the environment or water. I am first-generation American. My family was immigrants from Afghanistan. Pretty easy process back in the 80s, luckily. So they became citizens. But I was raised in just a melting pot of African and Asian cultures. Unfortunately, after the Bosnian War, we had like a great influx of those immigrants too. So just, I was raised with a lot of good people and good food. So being raised here with that kind of home life, I got to see where people felt intimidated or shy when it came to reaching out to public processes and just speaking up for their rights. And that's where I got really activated. I was like, well, I'm going to find out how we can do this, like before the Internet too. So like, who can we write? Who can we speak up to? And that just kind of pulls at my heartstrings because I don't want people to have that intimidation. I want them to know what their government resources are, what their community resources are as well. And if I could be a part of this board, I'd love to bring agenda items to spread awareness of how the Human Rights Board can help people in the county, whether it's word of mouth, signs, et cetera. So it's just a really great cause. So thank you for your time. Okay. Thank you. Any other candidates? Okay. Back to the clerk. Okay. I'll call on each commissioner for your vote. We have Rachel Atkins, Pablo Costas, Andrea Ingep. I'm sorry if I mess up anybody's name. Soraya Limber and Jessica Shuler. Can I start with Commissioner Alford? We're doing four. Is that correct? The three citizens at large. The three at large. Okay. Ingep, Teva, Lindbergh, and Shuler. Commissioner Prezio. Commissioner Cornell. Atkins, Lindbergh, and Shuler. Commissioner Wheeler. And Chair Chestnut. Atkins, Lindbergh, and Shuler. Ingep, Lindbergh, and Shuler for the three citizens at large positions with terms ending 5-31-2028. Who was the first one? Ingevita, Lindbergh, and Shuler. I think Ingevita got two and Atkins got three. It will be Atkins. Oh, Atkins, Lindbergh, and Shuler. Second. And you want to move Ingep, Teva, for the alternate? Ingep, Teva, for alternate. Second. Second. Great. Those in favor of the motion vote by the sign of aye. Aye. Those opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Welcome. Thank you. Thank you. Chair, did you want to go on to presentations? Yes. So, next we'll have the Recreation and Open Space Committee Annual Presentation. Hello, Commissioners. Good morning. Thank you, Chair. I'm Stephen Scott. I've been here a few times. I'm the long-term chair of Roscoe, which is Recreation and Open Space Advisory Committee. Doesn't quite add up on the letters, but that's what we call it, because it's cute. My daughter's dog that she adopted was named Roscoe, so she lives in kind of our backyard. And I'm here for our annual presentation. I need to kind of tell y'all who I, y'all should know who I am. I'm a native Gainesvillian. My mother was born where the civil courthouse is sitting in the McCrary house that just sold, I believe. It was moved down the street on University Avenue at 8th on East University Avenue. Nice house. It has round windows even, curved windows. Hopefully, somebody will fix it up. It's got bare wires in the wall, so bringing it up to code can be really difficult. So, as for our Roscoe board, it was established in 1983, and I've got all these things from Chantel, which is our board liaison, but I'm going to skip a bunch of that. It's about our responsibilities and duties, and y'all can look that up if you'd like. It's about our mission statement to represent the citizens of Alachua County, promote community awareness of recreation and open space projects under consideration, and assist and advise the board of future policies and directions concerning recreation and open space projects for Alachua County. We've done a lot of things, and it was just mentioned in the beginning of the meeting. A lot of things have been going on in Alachua County. Great things. West End, for one. A lot of projects. You have a great staff. There's one part of it right there. Gina Pebbles. Chantel's great. And Ed and Jason. I'm sure y'all all know. Last year, in the prior year, we gave regular updates were given on park improvements as well as progress on risk assessments. Meetings were held in November, January, March, and May. Our next meeting is not going to be until August, even though it should have been in July, because we found we couldn't get a quorum in July, so we postponed it for a month. West End hosted the cross-country javelin discus and hammer events at the World Masters, and that went over great. There was stuff right at the end that was tough, like for parking and stuff. But they really pulled it through and pulled the whole thing off. Second community engagement meeting was held on April 29th to obtain input from citizens. It was well attended. Two of our Roscoe members were there to help out and get information and learn about what we could do and what the public wants. Y'all just approved, I think it was last week, the first phase and partially the second phase for working on it. I'm really proud of that. The park looks great already. You know, it was an eyesore for many, many years. The county really jumped on that, and it's something to really be proud of. Right now, all our committee positions are filled, as far as I know. Update was given on the department's tentatively approved budget enhancement requests and park amenity replacement plan, which includes a 10-year staffing plan. Many master plan projects were completed, including there's playground and parking lot improvements at Veterans Memorial Park. I was there for that. There's a beautiful new playground. I haven't been able to get my five-year-old grandson out there yet, but I live in the High Springs, and we don't like driving on the west side of Gainesville that much. But I was there for the opening ceremony, and it was really awesome. There's a new playground, restroom, new playground and restaurant. The restroom was installed at Santa Fe Lake Park. I launched my boat there many times. I'm an old-time. I used to have it in high school. I had a girlfriend who lived on Melrose Bay, and I was always a lake guy. Now I'm more of a river guy. There's a really nice restroom. It's not down at the boat ramp, but they demolished the old restroom that was at the boat ramp and the associated septic and stuff that's there. And I believe we're trying to work on maybe establishing another one in the future. Pavilion was installed over at Coscoilla. Over the existing sports thing, I've seen that. It's beautiful. And from what I've heard, there's some great camp stuff going on there right now. Less issues as another camp we all know of. And Roscoe, we have our meetings at all these parks. We try to go to a different park each time. Right now we try to find ones that have air conditioning. But it's awesome. Future improvements are underway, including a restroom and dock at Post Springs. That's been slow, but there was problems on establishing the ground bore or whatever to put that weight of the restroom thing down by the spring. Marjorie Kinnon-Rollins' Kate Barnes plan was approved by the state finally, so we can move on with that and the boardwalks and stuff. We have goals for the upcoming year to add a restroom at Squirrel Ridge Park, formalize a youth advisory board position on Roscoe. We've been discussing that over and over again. We'd like to get more youth involved in all of our government and try to bring them in. Because I'm getting old and I'm not going to be around forever, so we need youngsters coming in and moving up. But legalities and transportation and all kinds of stuff for that are kind of hard to work on through. We provide input on park needs. We need to initiate, which is kind of already going on, the West End Phase 2 development plan. I'm not sure what all. I've gotten conflicting things on what all is actually approved and what's going to happen, but it's all going to be good. So, complete the Kate Barnes dock replacement. Felt up a new project park in Pinesville Park. It's St. Peter, St. Paul. It's over near Archer, I believe it's just north of Archer. And that's going to be a great partnership. Also, construct a new soccer stadium. Additional parking, better accessibility, and pickleball courts at Jonesville Park. So, that's the really busy park. And all these things are great things that Alachua County has. And if you have any questions, I'd be glad to answer them if I can, or I'll ask Gina or somebody to help me out with them. That's what we've done in the last year, and I'm still chair, and I probably still will be next year. Okay, we have some questions. Commissioner Affrett, then Commissioner Wheeler, and then Commissioner Prizia. Not really a question, just you guys have been incredibly busy, and I'm so proud of the accomplishments that we have in Parks and Rec. It's just I get comments all the time from citizens pleased about the direction that we've taken with respect to increasing the number of parks and the amount of recreation available across the county. So, we're still trying to even things out, but we're getting there. And thank you for your service and for the great work that Roscoe's done. So, I also have a dad and dog named Roscoe at my house. Okay, Commissioner Wheeler. I was out at camp at Cuscoella yesterday, and the kids were all underneath that pavilion enjoying the shade for sure, but also the pickleball courts that are on there now. I hear that's one of the popular places for the kids to play as well, which is amazing to me. But thank you so much for checking on. And I really like that you all are meeting at the different parks. You can really have your eyes on the prize. So, thank you very much to the whole crew. Let them know how much we appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Okay. Commissioner Prizia? Same, just a big thank you to the board for all their work and to you for continuing to serve as chair. And also, just a note that, you know, we also just, I think, recently talked with the city about bringing on Palm Point as a possible county park. So, excited about that. And just want to put that on your radar as a possibility of something we may be able to work on thinking about amenities there. And we have some public-private partnership opportunities around maybe some dock facilities there. So, just bringing that up is another great opportunity for continuing to provide better access in the community. And just thanks. Okay. Commissioner Cornell? Kevin, I'll just conclude. Ditto all those comments. You know, it wasn't long ago when the county didn't even have a parks plan. And this commission has taken, really, not only with the allocation of funds, but time and effort to really develop the parks that are outside the cities. It always was. That was a city thing. And the county would focus on conservation lands. And I really appreciate your committee's work and the community engagement that our staff has really reached out to find out what is necessary. Obviously, pickleball, 8 to 88, everyone wants it. But I think shade is also really, really important. And as we're developing West End, you know, we're keeping a lot of that shade. So, lean in on that next one. It's a big one. And thanks for your work. Appreciate it. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Okay. And thank you. Thank you for your presentation. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, Madam Clerk. Next, we'll have public comment. Public comments. 1158. Mr. Chair, Jim Connish, I'd like to have the overhead, please. Sir, when your father was on the commission, he served with Chuck Clemens, who has been hired as UF Vice President for Governmental Affairs. During the Florida Rock controversy, I encouraged Moon Magazine to designate Chuck as Knucklehead of the Month first and then Knucklehead of the Year. And then when the Perry referendum came around, I found myself working with Chuck. And I went and I apologized for this Knucklehead designation. And he told me he cherishes the award. But more importantly, Chuck is not from Tallahassee. He's from Alastair County. His family came here in 1824. So he's as local as it gets, contrary to misrepresentations. And I don't think anyone would understand better the disparity between what UF receives from local government and what UF pays. And when I say UF, I mean the direct support organizations like UF Health. I mean their private partners that bootstrap their exemption from ad valorem taxes and shelter their business enterprises. And I would be happy to work with the county to put aside our political, partisan, social, and ideological differences and ask the University of Florida, do they want a community that's a slum or do they want a community that is vibrant and healthy? People are sending their kids to the community to get an education. They're going home and, as you would know, dead, sir. They're getting run over by vehicles, violent crime, all sorts of issues that can be traced to a fundamental structural imbalance in the ability of our local government to fund the services it has to fund and that UF receives for free. So I would be happy to work with anybody before Fuchs leave and another SAS comes in to reorganize the financial relationship between UF and local government. Because if you don't, I think you're going to have more and more problems building new jails and things like that. I think it would make you an absolute disaster that nobody is talking about. So our big, beautiful, bundled GRU bills, 3% of GRU customers are being disconnected for nonpayment every month. It's very easy to disconnect them with the remote control meters. They just push a button. These numbers are going to go up during the summer. And these are meters. These aren't the human beings behind the meters. Somebody's better take a close look at this. Thank you. Thank you. Hello. Morning. I'm Kathleen Rupert. And I want to thank the chair, commissioners, and staff for the opportunity to endorse the idea of searching for a new site for an animal resources facility. As you know, I have a number of concerns regarding a potential lease agreement with the University of Florida. As such, I have submitted for public record the four draft documents associated with that location, which I received earlier this year. These should be included in the minutes of this meeting. These documents contain a number of questions and concerns I have noted in the margins of each document. In addition to asking you to consider other sites, I'm also asking for the criteria needed for the site of a new animal resources facility so that your constituents can assist in the search. For the results of my public records request last year, I was informed that there were no documents containing the criteria for a new site. Is this true? Both the public and the animals in our charge need a new facility. Your constituents need transparency. We can't help facilitate the location of a new site without knowing the criteria. So I look forward to the opportunity to assist in this endeavor. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Hello. Soria Lindberg. I just wanted to share a quick update. When you had the county-City of Alachua meeting, I used my public comment to bring up live streaming options for the city. And I'm excited to say at the commission meeting last night, they voted 5-0 to pursue options for that. And I'm bringing it up now because I just happened to be here anyway for the vote earlier. And to thank Mark Sexton and Ms. Jackie Chung for helping me understand your processes and the cost involved so I could turn that on to help with the city. So thank you, Mark, and all your openness. And we're very excited to pursue that. Okay. Thank you. Where's the phone mark? No one on the phone? Okay. We'll go to our next item, Madam Clerk. Okay. Next item, we'll have the annual report presentation. Good morning, Mr. Chair. I'm Mark Sexton, Communications Director, and it is my privilege to cue up and press play on the county manager's report to you and the residents of Alachua County. And if we have the audio ready, gentlemen. Happy birthday, Alachua County. That's an anniversary. Each year, this report provides an opportunity to reflect on where we've been, celebrate our progress, and recommit to the principles that guide us. Responsive service, fiscal responsibility, and stewardship of public resources for both current and future generations. Hello. I'm Michelle Lieberman. It is an honor to bring you my eighth annual report. An opportunity to share how your local government is working for you today and where we're headed together. It has been an extraordinary year of milestones. From kicking off our bicentennial celebration, Discover 200, to welcoming the world to our doorstep for the 2025 World Masters Indoor Championship. This has been a year defined by community pride and collaboration. Under the leadership of the Communications Department, we kicked off the new year with a bicentennial celebration at Depot Park and Heartwood Soundstage, featuring local and national music acts, displays from county departments, food trucks, and activities for children. Our year-long celebration includes sponsored events such as the Big Culture and Arts Festival, the Fifth Avenue Arts Festival, the Matheson Museum's Bicentennial Exhibit, and the Tom Petty Birthday Celebration. Discover 200 has been an excellent opportunity to renew and affirm our pride in our unique and caring community. Speaking of community pride, we welcome the world by hosting the 2025 World Masters Indoor Championship at the county's Sports and Events Center and the newly acquired West End Park. Thousands of athletes from nearly 100 countries competed and connected here, boosting our local economy and showcasing Alachua County on the international stage. This event involved incredible collaboration between community partners and multiple county departments with hundreds of dedicated individuals contributing to create a first-class experience for athletes and spectators alike. This year, we also commemorated the 50th anniversary of Alachua County Fire Rescue, half a century of brave, compassionate service that continues to keep us safe every day. It is fitting that we have begun work on the county's new fire rescue headquarters and state-of-the-art emergency operations center. We are also very pleased to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the Alachua County Forever Land Conservation Program and the 100th property acquisition since the program's founding in 2000. We have also made great progress on our long-term capital projects, such as the construction of a new civil courthouse and renovation of our two motels, transforming them into permanent supportive housing. Tackling our road issues is a huge priority for our residents and our commissioners. Since the voters approved the wild spaces and public places surtax, we have completed 22 projects at a cost of $13.6 million, with 55 more projects in progress totaling over $75 million. Our parks department has completed upgrades at Veterans Park, acquired and begun improvements in public engagement at West End Park, and started design work for both a new pocket park and major renovations at two neighborhood parks. I'm proud to report that Alachua County's financial health is strong and that financial policies and internal controls are in place to keep it that way. For eight straight years, we've lowered the property tax millage rate, even as we balance the demands of a growing community. We rank fifth among counties with the most property off the tax rolls, and yet are the 31st lowest of the 67 counties in the state in property tax per capita. None of our accomplishments would be possible without the behind-the-scenes work of our internal teams. The success of our work relies on their support. I'm grateful for the talented and dedicated employees of information and telecom services, budget and fiscal services, human resources, communications, and equal opportunity. As always, I want to acknowledge my partner on the dais, County Attorney Sylvia Torres, and her dedicated staff, for their exceptional legal support. Over the last year, they processed over 1,300 public records requests, providing over 23,000 individual records. They provided legal support for projects such as the appointment of an interim medical examiner, the creation of a central receiving facility, the purchase of the former West End golf course, and provided timely responses to significant federal and state legislation impacting county ordinances, operations, and processes, especially mandates and preemptions. So today, I invite you to see the work, see the progress, and see how we're working for a community that reflects the very best of Alachua County, our past, our present, and our future. 2024 has been a year of planning and progress, setting the stage for major projects in the coming years. Architectural and engineering work for several key projects has been completed, with construction set to begin soon. The design for the new judicial center, including the central energy plant, is near completion. The plant will feature an ice storage system, which will produce ice during off-peak hours to provide cooling during the day, reducing energy strain and operational costs. This investment will enhance sustainability and ensure reliable climate control for the county's judicial facilities. Plans for the armory renovation, which will become the new fire rescue headquarters and emergency operations center, have also been finalized. This project is part of our facility's master space plan and marks a significant step forward. Also, architectural and engineering work for the permanent supportive housing renovation projects at the Budget Inn and Scottish Inn has been completed. While focusing on future growth, we're also improving aging infrastructure. In 2024, we replaced several tillers and prioritized long-term reliability and maintenance, ensuring efficiency, and avoiding future costly repairs. This proactive approach helps safeguard long-term reliability and functionality. Looking ahead to 2025, our focus will be on the construction of the new judicial complex and completing housing project renovations. With these accomplishments and future plans, we are prepared to move forward, strengthening our facilities and building for the future. The work done in 2024 ensures we're on track for meaningful progress in the years ahead. Over the past year, Public Works completed 15 roadway rehab projects, totally $5.7 million. We also began the construction of the Northwest 23rd Avenue Rehab Project, which included eight turning lanes and a multi-use path. Road Department crews successfully completed the cheap seal project on Quail Street and implemented a sidewalk repair program in the Ellis Park and Longleaf Park subdivisions. By the end of 2025, we will have completed or begun construction on an additional 36 roadway rehab projects, totaling $55.7 million. This includes the rehab of County Road 234 between U.S. 441 in Micanopy and the entrance of the Payne's Prairie Maintenance Office, as well as Northeast Northwest 53rd Avenue between U.S. 441 and State Road 24, known as Waldo Road. Additionally, we're continuing the design and permitting of stormwater resiliency projects in Pine Hills and Hills of Santa Fe. In an effort to improve efficiency and safety, Public Works upgraded equipment while providing ongoing worker safety training and established a more efficient tree trimming operation while improving safety for the travelers. Public Works crews introduced a new sandbag distribution system, which significantly increased both efficiency and safety for our teams and the public during the 2024 hurricane season. Our goals include constructing a new potable waterable distribution system for the Hills of Santa Fe. Though the county does not own the system, state mandated that the county maintain it. Once completed, it will be transferred to the City of Alachua. We're also implementing an electronic permitting system for all public works required permits. On October 26, 2024, Alachua County Fire Rescue proudly celebrated its 50th anniversary of dedicated service to the residents and visitors of Alachua County. The event, held at the Alachua County Sports and Events Center, welcomed over 300 attendees, including friends, family, and esteemed guests. It provided a meaningful opportunity to honor the men and women who established the department in 1974, as well as those who continue its mission today. To better serve the community, the department introduced a mobile integrated health team aimed at assisting citizens who face barriers to primary health care access. Supported in part by grant funding, this initiative addresses social, environmental, and medical challenges impacting individuals who are in need. In its ongoing commitment to employee satisfaction, the department has prioritized initiatives to enhance retention and recruitment. These efforts have resulted in a 66% reduction in firefighter departures to other departments and a significant rise in dual certified applicants. Looking ahead, the department plans to expand its mobile integrated health team into a comprehensive community health program. This expansion will include community health workers, a coordinated opioid response network, and medication-assisted treatment services. Additionally, the department continues to advance critical infrastructure projects. This includes the opening of Station 21 in Alachua, the groundbreaking of Station 25 in Tech City, and the transition into a state-of-the-art headquarters and emergency operations center on Northeast 8th Avenue. These developments mark a significant step forward in enhancing emergency response capabilities and community health services. This year marked a significant step forward as the tourism and economic development offices merged into a single department. This will optimize resources, streamline operations, and amplify the effectiveness of marketing, funding, and community engagement efforts. The merger strengthens the county's ability to attract both visitors and businesses. A pivotal moment in this transition was the first ever joint meeting of the Economic Development Advisory Committee and the Tourist Development Council, where new collaborations began to take shape. Tourism achievements include the launch of the redesigned Visit Gainesville-Alachua County website and winning the coveted Visit Florida Flagler Award for marketing excellence. Over $3 million in bed tax funding supported over 80 organizations, and the introduction of the Certified Guest Service Professional Pilot Program set a new standard for hospitality industry training. Alachua County hosted the World Masters Athletics Indoor Championship, and we are preparing to host the Florida Association of County Innovation and Policy Conference in September. In economic development news, a new partnership with Santa Fe College created the Diesel Systems Technician Program at the county's Fleet Operations Facility, supporting the U.S. Army Reserve's need for skilled mechanics. The county launched a Food Hub Initiative and Small Farmer Grant Program, benefiting over 65 local farmers. Additionally, we are participating in the Forward Focus Initiative and exploring economic and quality of life opportunities in eastern Alachua County. Looking ahead, the department will develop a data-driven economic strategy aligned with the comprehensive plan and launch targeted tourism campaigns to continue to break records and visitor numbers. I'm happy to report on our accomplishments, including the addition of the Resiliency Office to our team, reaching over 16,000 community members through 134 water education programs and public events. The Natural Resources Team reviewing over 1,300 administrative permits and 79 development review projects. The Petroleum Compliance Team completed nearly 700 compliance inspections in our 16-county service area, and the Petroleum Cleanup Division completed cleanups at 16 sites in our 7-county area. The Hazardous Materials Team inspected 660 facilities, responded to 26 hazardous material emergency calls, and completed over 100 development review projects. Using Wild Spaces and Public Places funding, the Alachua County Forever Program protected 1,445 acres of environmentally significant land through eight land purchases. The Tree Planting Program planted 193 trees in community parks and public spaces, with the help of over 600 volunteer hours. Our goals include celebrating the 25th anniversary of Alachua County Forever and the completion of our 100th land acquisition. We are also working on implementing the Agricultural Land Protection Strategy, updating our stormwater code, and drafting a meaningful climate action plan, with stakeholder buy-in and presenting that plan at a summit this fall. Our biggest challenge this coming year will be moving our department into two new locations, a new office and field support building for the Land Conservation and Management Program at Four Creeks Preserve, and the rest of EPD into the existing fire headquarters building. 24 was a period of exceptional growth and achievement for animal resources, and we are incredibly proud of what was accomplished. We cared for 2,700 animals, an increase of 375 from the previous year. 300 pets were reunited with their families as well. Our adoption events include the Jax Mega Event, where 20 long-term dogs were adopted, our annual Summer Love and Adoption Drive, with 87 adoptions, and the Whisker Wonderland Drive, where 47 animals found new homes. In total, 1,800 pets found new families, resulting in a 91% live release rate for the year. Collaboration was also key as we worked with 34 rescue partners to send over 300 animals to other facilities, reducing crowding in our own shelter. 1,200 animals were placed into foster care. And our team successfully emptied the shelters twice due to storms Feline and Milton, allowing us to assist with emergency sheltering efforts for the community. Our officers responded to over 6,400 calls for service, and our first-ever Bark in the Park event vaccinated and microchipped over 130 animals. We are grateful for our collaboration with Petco Love and their donation of vaccines for the event, and the student chapter of the Association of Shelter Veterinarians at UF. Looking ahead, we remain committed to advancing our mission and planning a new shelter that will further support community engagement. We are deeply grateful to all who contributed and look forward to continuing this journey in 2025. Our dedicated staff, with the support from the Board of County Commissioners and community partners, have made substantial strides that allow for sustainable and responsible growth. Over the last year, the Department approved 62 development projects, allowing for over 1,000 new residential units and 300,000 square feet of non-residential development, all while maintaining rigorous and environmental community standards. Our commitment to preserving green spaces led to the protection of over 80 acres of tree canopy in new development projects, enhancing our county's natural beauty and promoting healthier ecosystems. Over the last year, the Department developed comprehensive plan amendments that allow for increased affordable housing through inclusionary zoning standards. The building division issued 9,000 building permits and performed over 24,000 building inspections. Our expanded community engagement efforts increased public participation, fueling more informed and inclusive decision making. Looking forward, our goals for the coming year include expanding our digital tools to allow for more virtual building inspections, increasing efficiency and convenience for contractors and homeowners. The Department's transportation planning staff will be completing a bicycle and pedestrian master plan and a safe streets and roads for all safety action plan. The Department will also be spearheading an evaluation and appraisal of the county's comprehensive plan. Community engagement in this process will be critical so that every citizen has a stake in shaping our county's future. Together, we're building a vibrant, connected and sustainable Alachua County for generations to come. This year, Alachua County Parks and Open Space made great strides and enhancing our community's recreational opportunities and park spaces. At Veterans Park, we completed a new parking lot, a Gold Star Memorial honoring the families of fallen service members and an inclusive playground designed for children of all abilities. At Jill McGuire Lake Santa Fe Park, we installed much-needed restrooms and the Lake Alto parking lot underwent critical renovations to improve accessibility and safety. In addition, we revitalized two soccer fields at Jonesville Park and completed essential upgrades at West End Park in preparation for the prestigious World Masters Track and Field event. One of our most exciting achievements was earning accreditation from the American Camp Association for our Cusco-Willis Summer Camp. The acknowledgement of our commitment to excellence, the camp saw a surge in participation, welcoming 550 campers eager to explore, learn, and grow. We also introduced two innovative environmental education programs, homeschool junior naturalist, and preschool environmental programs, both of which exceeded expectations, reaching full capacity every week. Looking ahead, we are committed to further enhancing our parks and facilities. Plans for the upcoming year include replacing the dock at the Cape Barnes boat ramp, completing the restroom replacement and boat launch improvements at Poe Springs, and initiating major renovations at Copeland and Montaoka Parks. Additionally, we will wrap up community engagement efforts and begin architectural and engineering design for the transformation of West End Park. Alachua County remains dedicated to preserving and improving our parks for generations to come. It has been a milestone year for community support services, including both exciting new projects and significant progress made on existing long-term projects. The CSS Housing Team launched the Alachua County Living Spaces and Thriving Places Program to develop workforce housing and boost economic opportunities. Developers are invited to submit proposals for utilizing wild spaces and public places surtax funds for this program. We're excited that Alachua County was selected to be part of the Florida Housing Coalition's Public Land for Affordable Housing Cohort to address housing development challenges. Contracts were awarded to renovate our two motels into permanent housing for vulnerable residents, with completion slated for September 2025. Additionally, a third housing complex was acquired for affordable housing, with extensive renovations planned. Two former court services programs moved to CSS this year to better align with treatment services. OPUS and META staff will have easier access to CSS programs, like the Crisis Center and Social Services, that can assist those struggling with life-sustaining issues. Additionally, funding was provided to two non-profits for homeless outreach and jail re-entry programs. Looking ahead, key goals include the completion of the motels and a container pilot project and implementing a new cloud-based phone system for the Crisis Center hotline to improve call response and accuracy. While we have made significant progress, our biggest challenge remains providing support for the unhoused population. 2024 was a busy year for the department. Last year, we managed 204,000 tons of solid waste, 14,000 tons of recyclables and 560 tons of hazardous waste at the Levita Brown Environmental Park and the five rural collection centers. To expand our outreach in the community, we conducted 10 remote hazardous waste collection events, added additional hours to our business rural collection center, and conducted two community reuse and recycle days. We also continue to be our regional resource by partnering with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to conduct hazardous waste collection events in nine counties and by managing recyclables from several neighboring counties. We made progress in the implementation of the Zero Waste Plan and goals adopted by the Board of County Commissioners. We completed the first round of the Zero Waste Grants and are getting ready to receive proposals for the second one. We also conducted a recycling pileup project and multifamily residential complexes. Finally, this year will be the return of the EcoChase Challenge, our very popular Zero Waste Scavenger hunt, an important goal for next year is to continue to address infrastructure needs, including repairing the roof at the transfer station, resurfacing the tipping floor at the materials recovery facility, development of a temporary disaster debris management site at the closed northeast landfill, and the building of a new hazardous waste collection facility in the EcoLoop and a new rural collection center in the Newberry Environmental Park. In 2024, the UF-IFAS Extension Office hosted over 300 educational programs covering topics such as agriculture, commercial horticulture, environmental horticulture, family and consumer sciences, natural resources, and 4-H youth development. During this time, 300 dedicated volunteers contributed over 20,000 hours to the community, providing an estimated value of over $600,000. The UF-IFAS Extension Educational Garden is set for completion in 2025, thanks to a three-year project funded by a grant from the Florida Department of Agriculture. In 2024, progress included site preparation, the installation of a well, and the creation of sidewalks. Electrical work and outdoor classroom will be finalized in 2025. This teaching garden will feature Florida-friendly landscaping, a pollinator garden, turf grass demonstrations, vegetable gardens, and fruit trees. The 2025 Alachua County Youth Fair and Livestock Show was a huge success. About 400 4-H and FFA youth showcased their livestock and exhibits, with an additional 300 students participating in agricultural learning through school tours. These young exhibitors are not only gaining hands-on experience, but also developing crucial life skills that will benefit them in the future. These dedicated students represent the best of the best, and they are our future leaders in agriculture and beyond. Our six faculty members and volunteers continue to enhance and sustain the quality of life by making research-based information accessible to our community. Everything we do is to improve the quality of life for you, our residents. We know government works best when it listens, when it's transparent, and when it puts people first. We take your trust seriously, and we know it must be earned, every day, with every decision. Together, we're building a stronger, more resilient Alachua County, one that honors where we've been, where we are, and looks boldly. Okay, Madam Clerk, we move to our next item. I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm trying to move the meeting along. I love our chair, he's moving us along. I just wanted to briefly say to our staff, you know, as I was watching each of the different departments, I was thinking to myself, any one of those things would be a major thing for the entire county. A lot of incredible work. I mean, this is, I guess, the 10th or 11th one that I've seen, and I can't remember one that was better. So, to all of our staff that made that happen, thank you so much. And I just continue to look forward to the next year. You guys continue to kind of up your game, and that's what makes Alachua County special, is really that last comment that Michelle said, improving the quality of life for our citizens. So, thank you, guys. Commissioner Wheeler, I mean, I'm sorry, Prizio, Wheeler, and Alfred. I'm sorry. Yeah, just echoing Commissioner Cornell's comments. I, you know, in listening to that, you know, there's things that we forget are even happening because, you know, we set them in motion up here through budget processes, through policy decisions, and then they fall into your hands, and you all take them and run with them. And, you know, more often than not, you just really rise to the occasion and create really, really beautiful and meaningful programs that are changing people's lives. So, just a huge thank you to every team that represents us out there and that's really doing the day-to-day operations of the county. I think this report speaks to how many major projects we have going on and all the roads projects, all the facilities projects, all of the new programs were rising up out of the ground. I mean, we've really, I think this commission has, in an unprecedented way, sort of pushed forward thinking about the future of how we are setting a tone for the infrastructure and the community impact we can have. So, thank you, and thank you to the manager and to the attorney and to Mark's staff for telling our story. Just a big thank you to all the hard work. Okay, Commissioner Alfred. I mean, Wheeler and then Alfred. I'm sorry. I've got to get used to this thing. I know it's a weird thing. I'm impressed with how you were able, all of you guys, to get these usually very modest and quiet leaders of our departments to be so forthcoming on and relaxed on this video. Seriously, I know when I interact with these folks, they're very modest and very quiet and self-deprecating. So, to be able to have these people, you know, tell their story so gracefully. If I may, I would just say they all love doing it. Oh, I can only imagine. I can only imagine. But, no, truly, this is a very, this force that works for the county are wonderful and they're modest and they share the glory and deflect it off themselves. And I appreciate that. That makes everybody really easy to work with because there's nobody leading the group. Everybody's a team. But I also want to say thanks to the community for the Wild Spaces Public Places funding because there are so many references to Wild Spaces Public Places in terms of what we are able to offer our community. And that is as a result of our citizens trusting that we were going to provide what it is we said we were going to provide. And our crews are doing that for us. And you guys make us look real good up here. So, thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Okay. Commissioner Alford? Yes. Thank you. Yeah, we could not do this without the help of our staff or our citizens. It's everyone's support that helps us be successful. I was honored to serve as chair during the first half of this annual report. And amazingly, we committed to having no new projects during that year. And even with no new projects during that year, a lot of these were winding up things that we had already committed to doing because we had to give staff a chance to catch up because we had so much going on. So, the fact that we've been able to get these many things. I took a whole page of notes of things because I want to talk about it later with folks on the things that we accomplished. So, I shouldn't say we accomplished. Our staff accomplished. We just sit up here and make decisions. We're not the ones getting our hands dirty, you know. So, I really, we could not do this without the incredible support that we have, both with our staff and with our community. So, thank you. Thanks to all of you. And I hope you all, as residents of Alaska County, are proud of what we together have accomplished. Okay. I'd like to thank the manager, the attorney, and I'd like to thank our staff and all of the departments. By showing this presentation every year, it gives the citizens the opportunity to see the progress that we are making for them in Alachua County. And I just take my head off to staff. I think they're doing a great job to meet all of the needs of our citizens of Alachua County. And I think that one of the things that I think that the County Commission has done, along with staff, is to support our small cities. And I think that that's one of the great things they're doing. And we're creating a better relationship with the small cities. So, I just want to thank staff for this presentation and for all they do. Thank you. Okay. Our next item, Madam Clerk. I'm not rushing, am I? I usually don't mind rushing. Okay. Good morning, everyone. Michelle Lieberman, your county manager. And I will be quick. I know we have a lot of items on the agenda today. I did want to say with regard to the annual report, obviously, this is not me. This is staff who is working very hard. And while, of course, we're not all perfect individuals, we work very hard. And we've got a lot on our plate. So, we are working diligently to meet all of the needs of the community and the policies of the board. And I want to thank them for all of their hard work. All right. On to the budget message. So, the fiscal year 26 tentative budget reflects our continued commitment to fiscal responsibility and service excellence. It is a balanced budget that honors the public trust through disciplined stewardship of taxpayer resources. I am pleased to recommend for the ninth consecutive year a modest millage rate decrease. These decreases are tangible reflection of our prudent financial planning and strong economic foundation. We are living in an area – in an area – in an era of heightened fiscal uncertainty that includes inflationary pressures, escalating labor and materials costs, and the looming possibilities of more federal and state funding cuts. At the time of this report, it is unclear if FEMA will continue disaster support for local governments. And the governor is right now considering signing a budget bill that would abolish the sales tax on commercial leases that could have millions of dollars in negative impact on the county's infrastructure surtax, as well as our share of the state sales tax. This challenging and uncertain environment underscores the need for us to find new ways for our programs and services to be sustainable and, where possible, self-sustaining. These uncertainties also highlight the need to manage the expectation of our residents, nonprofits, and other public entities. While this budget was created with increased scrutiny on all spending, it remains responsive to our core services and county commission priorities. The core services requiring the most resources include public safety, which is fire rescue and law enforcement, and transportation infrastructure. In this budget, we have devoted over $343 million to these two critical service areas. This budget also continues funding the services that are fundamental to the values of our community, such as our permanent supportive and affordable housing projects, social services, environmental protection, land conservation, parks and recreation, animal services, smart growth, economic development, recycling, and others. This tentative budget upholds our long-standing standards of fiscal discipline by delivering a balanced budget with a lowered tax burden. It is a blueprint for responsible governance that meets today's realities while safeguarding tomorrow's promise. So just a couple highlights for you, and you will find your budget books on your desks that you can go peruse at your leisure for the next six-ish weeks, until we start all of our more detailed budget discussions, but they will be on your desks after this meeting. Or actually, they're probably there now as I'm speaking. So fiscal year 26 represents the ninth consecutive year that the property values are rising and the general fund millage is being lowered. The tentative budget demonstrates a 6.85% increase in general fund values and a 5.48% increase in the Municipal Service Taxing Unit for law enforcement values. These, of course, are based on the property appraiser's estimated balances of June 1st. We will have on July 1st the submit – she'll submit the certified values, and we will adjust as necessary then. The board will adopt its tentative millage on July 8th, 2025, in that evening commission meeting. So in the general fund, I'm recommending reducing the millage rate to 7.6 mills. This provides – the general fund provides resources for most county departments and constitutional offices, and this is the sum of all property tax revenues is $180,773,649. The total of all general fund revenue sources is $319,481,440. And as I mentioned, of course, just our two priorities are budgeted at $343 million, which the two top – not priorities – the two highest cost priorities, I should say, which are public safety and transportation. There is a recommendation for a cost of living and minimum wage increase that you will see in there. I am recommending a – across the board, 4% cost of living adjustment for employee compensation, which also includes the equivalent funding set aside for bargaining and employees, as well as employees of the constitutional and judicial officers. I am also recommending that we go from the $18 minimum wage to $18.50 minimum wage. In public safety, the fiscal year 26 budget reflects a commitment of $143 million to law enforcement and $96 million to fire rescue services, and in transportation, $104 million to maintain and improve the county's road and bridge network in total. This also contains the board's commitments to housing initiatives, as well as addressing the county's critical building needs. So, in conclusion, the fiscal year 26 tentative budget reflects a disciplined, pragmatic response to the current economic conditions and long-term obligations. The budget emphasizes fiscal restraint, realistic expectations, and a focus on core responsibilities. However, it does not lose sight of the county's mission, vision, values, and the commission's strategic plan, and I appreciate the commission's guidance and look forward to the continued direction during our budget process, which will begin after you all come back from summer break. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Any comments? Okay, Commissioner. I get two outfits, though, but okay. Is that you, Ken, I guess? Yeah, that's good. Yeah, that's me. Michelle, thanks for that. I think it's wise to have our books on our desks so we're not flipping through it as you're reading. So that makes sense. You know, it struck me in the video that we are the fifth in the state with property off the tax rolls, but you're right in the middle, 31st, when it comes to tax burden. And I think that shows a real concerted effort with Tommy and your group and this board of really, you know, lowering that millage rate to get it to where we're not the highest in the state. Certainly, we'll never be the lowest because we've got the university and many of the property off the tax rolls. But when I got on the board, I remember a number either in the high eights or low nines. Yeah, and I know Tallahassee has kept theirs really level for a decade at 8.3, and to see that we're potentially at 7.6 shows a real stewardship of the taxpayer dollars, which is what we are housed with spending. The number that really jumped out, though, is we talked a lot about when the surtax passed, really investing in roads and continuing our investment in public safety. And Ramon, to hear $104 million in roads, you are in your stride right now, and there's going to be a lot of smelling of asphalt around this community, which has been asking for that for decades and decades. So I look forward to getting into some of the details, working with my colleagues who have each of us, I think, have our own strengths and amazing priorities. You know, some of the stuff, like the mobile integrated health team that I think about, you know, Anna and Mary, what you guys brought when you came onto the board about solving kind of root problems and having the funds to be able to invest in those things for our citizens. So I really look forward to the budget cycle this year and balancing those priorities. I think we should try to make another commitment of no big projects because we still have lots to finish with housing and facilities. You know, the do-si-do that Mary Helen kind of called our facilities plan. I remember when Jim Harriot said we've got $19 million of deferred maintenance on roofs, and we are chipping away at it. But there's a lot of big facility projects in the coming decade, many of which will be done when we're all off the board, but what we're starting now. So thank you, Michelle, and thank you, Tommy, to your staff. It's a lot of work to get us to where we are right now, and we will attempt to not screw it up over the next two months. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Okay. I guess I'll make a comment about the budget. I think that what impressed me is the minimum wage that I remember. I think Ken's remember when we had that struggle to go to $15 an hour. But we did it gradually. We got there, and we continue to increase. And so I just think that our citizens need to know that what we're doing is great to increase the minimum wage for our employees so they can have a living wage. So I just want to make that comment because I think that that's important, and I hope the press pick up on that. Thank you. Okay. Commissioner Prizia? Yeah, no, I just agree with you. I just wanted to thank Tommy and his team. I know this is a heavy lift for them, and to all the departments who have to sort of submit these budgets and go through this process. So thanks to them and to continuing to focus on our employees. You know, we are a major employer in the community, and when we raise wages and we raise benefits and we think about recruitment and retention, it reflects, I think it has ripple effects out into the broader community about the expectations with what they can hope for in other positions. And so just a thank you for continuing to keep that as a focus as we also think about how we do things externally. I think how we do things internally really matters. So thank you. Commissioner Alfred? Given the political state of being in, you know, and the unknowns that we're having to face right now, the fact that we are able to present this budget is important. I agree with Ken. I think this is another year where we should probably hold back on major projects while we sort of see what the lay of the land is going to be for us financially. But, you know, as folks come to us and ask for help, as, you know, other communities have done across the county, I hope that they hear us when we say, you know, we have to be careful this year. We have to be responsible. When people ask me what a county commissioner does, it's a simple answer to me. We manage taxpayer dollars. That is our number one responsibility, and we could not do it well without the incredible help of our staff with Michelle and Tommy's dedication to keeping us financially viable and financially responsible. So thank you. Okay. Okay. Not yet. Not yet. Not yet. I said we would try not to screw it up. We haven't seen the numbers. That would save us a lot of time. That's good. Good try. Okay. Madam Clerk, next item. Great housing on Alachua County-owned land for community support services. Okay. Yes, Mr. Chair, I'll kick things off on this item. Initially, when this item went out with its scope, the scope was fairly broad. And there was, when it was initially discussed by the board, a lot of desire to hear from the community. There was even a portion that was built in at the back end about doing community engagement at the back end of the process. After the RFPs, and we did, of course, go through the process, follow the process that is set out for our RFPs, and we had a ranking of the, I should say applications, of the proposals that were submitted. After reviewing them all, there were some concerns after reviewing them by staff that there wasn't enough detail, and based on further discussions that we've had with the board over the time since this was out, and what the board really wanted to see for its goals and what was important, that there just wasn't enough detail in what was received back to be able to move forward with the negotiation, which is why we have made the recommendation today to reject all, refine that scope, and go back out. It is not specific to anyone or any entity that submitted, just that there was concern that there wasn't enough detail to make sure that the proposal met all of the board's goals and intent that it wanted from the project. With that being said, it did follow the process as far as the RFP process went, we provide you the recommendation, and we will do whatever it is the board directs us to do. You have our recommendation set out and the basis for the recommendation on the agenda, and we have several staff here that can answer questions for you if you would like. Okay. Commissioner Cornell. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I've been involved in this for a long time, last couple of years, and I agree with staff's current recommendation. I would like to put this back out. I would like to really focus in on the qualifications of a developer to create a truly legacy project that the community deserves. I've been involved from the time prior to Ability Housing coming to the table. We spent a lot of time with the community to listen to them, and I want to make sure that we build something that they want and that they deserve. So I would move staff for a recommendation. Second. I've got a motion and a second. I guess I had some questions, but okay. We have Commissioner Alfred, then Commissioner Wheeler, and then Commissioner Prezio. Yes. I spent a lot of time looking at the proposals and also looking at some things that have happened in other places, trying to understand what could happen and what the county could offer with respect to making this project viable. I found out things like if a neighborhood already has roads and they already have utilities, then the overhead per house for infrastructure is still $15,000 a house. And adding those roads and adding all the utility connections, it can be as high, depending on lot size, as $80,000 per house. And that is incredibly high. Historically, cities owned the streets. They put in the streets. They put in the infrastructure. They put in the stormwater. I would like to understand as part of this what the county could offer because any new neighborhood these days requires a homeowners association, and that homeowners association becomes responsible for stormwater, for sidewalks, for roads. And one thing that I saw that's happened in some other communities is that in affordable housing communities that the government does what it has done historically and has historically done in this neighborhood and basically manages those facilities and that takes that keeps the cost to the homeowner down because they're not having to pay homeowners association fees that manage that upkeep. And that would help maintain that property is affordable going into the future. So that's a question that I have to staff. If that is something that could be included in this RFP going forward, that that would be something that we could provide that would allow those costs to be lower ongoing. What's that? What money? I mean, we're offering subsidies, and every single one of the proposals there was a request that the county, you know, subsidize the project in some way. And this is a way that we can subsidize that project to make it maintained as a workforce, you know, market rate. But it would be consistent with the neighborhood around it in that, you know, those extra costs aren't part of the house, if that makes sense. Okay. Okay. All right. Next will be Commissioner Wheeler. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I seconded this motion because if our staff feels like that there is any weakness at all in what we are trying to do, and who we're trying to do business with, I would urge us to slow it down to the point where we are crossing every T and dotting every I. As the person who voted twice in two different meetings to put the kibosh on a $20 million project, it gave me nightmares. I mean, for a year after that because our staff was disappointed. You know, there were several of us who were disappointed. And I was the vote that broke it every time. And that was really stressful for me. Even talking about it now makes me wring my hands a bit because I realize how it divided the community and how it set our staff who've been working so hard for this project back. It set them back. And so I just want to make sure if staff now has any concerns about any of these elements that have not been particularly addressed well, I want to make sure we slow this down. It's not going to be to anybody's disadvantage to wait and do this right. And I just want to make sure that the community, you know, the community has the input that we are asking them for. And I'm looking forward to hearing from the presentations of the gentlemen who are here. I know they're here to present. I'm anxious to hear what they have to say about their projects because I think we have not had access to maybe some of the concepts that they were not required to put on paper. So maybe they can tell us now. But I hold with my second for the motion to put this back because I want to make sure that our staff is comfortable with what we are going to be contracting for. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Okay. And we have Commissioner Prizia. I'll support the motion for sure. I think that I guess I just want to say that I feel like this is on all of us. And in particular, it's on our team. Like, we really expected to have proposals at this stage that would be ready to move forward. And, you know, in digging into them and understanding that they aren't ready because we don't have all of the details that are necessary to negotiate, I agree we need to put them back out and we need to get more detail so that we can make sure that we have doable projects, that we can get out of the ground in a reasonable amount of time and we can negotiate fair terms with the people who are going to have to do that work. But I really am disappointed that we had to get to this point. It's frustrating. It's difficult for the people who had to put all those proposals together, but time and energy and work into those proposals. And it's unfortunate for us to have to dig into all of this work and then have to go back to the drawing board. And I just want to make sure that this time when staff go forward with this, that every single person on our team that has something to do with building and development, our facilities team, our growth management team, our housing team, our public works team, they're all at the table to make sure that we're writing a scope of work that makes sense. Because we can list out all the things we want to see in it, but the reality is we have a team of experts behind us for a reason. And I want to make sure that all of their expertise goes into that scope so that we get a doable project that's going to make our community proud and that's going to deliver the kind of project we want to see in that location. That includes budget, financial plans, timelines, permittability, you know, infrastructure, qualifications, all of those things need to be in that next round of proposal requests. And I really hope that our team does an autopsy of what happened in this scenario so that we can understand how we got here and make sure it doesn't happen again. Okay, then we have the manager. Yes, no. Mr. Chair, I just wanted to be clear. It wasn't a concern about any one entity. It was a concern whether or not the ultimate what we received back was enough for the board to make an adequate decision on whether you felt it was going to meet your goals as a board. Okay. I guess I have some questions for staff. I guess my first question is, can this be done through a development agreement with the current vendor? So, Mr. Chair, whatever kind of agreement we used, my understanding is in the scope, it's said that there would be a developer's agreement. But whatever kind of agreement we use should be memorializing the essential terms that are in the proposal. Our issue here is that we are still in a place where we would have to negotiate essential terms of an agreement. A proposal isn't complete unless it has all the essential terms of the ultimate agreement, and then the agreement is solely memorializing it and the county entering into it. I think the idea that we could continue to negotiate timelines, number of units, cost of units, financial responsibilities, those kind of things, that's not this vehicle that was used. It's not this procurement vehicle that was used. This procurement vehicle that was used creates an agreement where the proposal has all the essential terms and the agreement works out the minor things. Okay, my next question is, when did staff determine there was a concern with the proposals that were submitted, and what was the concern of staff, some basic concerns? I think you kind of stated it earlier, but I didn't know. So, Mr. Chair, I think ultimately, obviously, it is no secret that it was printed on the agenda last time and we asked for it to be pulled. So I think, you know, to be clear, it wouldn't have ended up on the agenda if we had made the decision prior to the date the agenda was published. Unfortunately, that's not the case. And we can, you know, hindsight's 20-20, we can Monday morning quarterback all day long, but ultimately, we decided to make a different recommendation out of concern that there were not enough details with enough specificity for the commission to be comfortable with making a decision. We, and that is the basis for the recommendation. However, you all have had time to look through it, look it over. If you feel differently, there is a ranking. There is the, you've had time to review everything, and that's there as well. But we made our recommendation based on the fact that after a more extensive review, we were concerned that the detail just wasn't, the specificity wasn't there. Okay, and I guess my last question, what would the future process look like? Would it be an RFP? Would it be an invitation to bid? That kind of stuff. What would it actually look like? And will all the I's be dotted and all the T's crossed before we go any further? I guess that's the question I have. I'm Chair Tommy Crosby, Assistant County Manager, Procurements, under my area responsibility. So the process we used, we followed, I think several commissioners have talked about how long this has been going on, how this came about, you know, as a result of what happened with the building of housing and having the property. The board was very extensive about we want community input. We wanted to hear from the community what's going to happen if that makes the property. What do they want? We had surveys. We came back, single-family housing, et cetera, et cetera. So there's a lot of things that went into this. The board was involved in it, approved the scope, actually, back when it happened. If the board's request is to go back out and address those concerns to make sure we have a product that comes back in a format that we're ready to take next steps and that has the specificity that is needed to prepare a contract or developer's agreement, whatever we end up with, I would recommend, and the procurement manager, we would put together probably an invitation to negotiate more than likely. Some of this is semantic. Some of this is how much you can negotiate after the fact versus how much information you have to get and are memorializing in the contract. If the concern is that we want to get back those things like timelines, specificity, number of units, financing options, is the financing in place, we can still do an RFP. But just understand that we will have to get back the solicitation. We'll have to produce that document back to us or we'll be back in this hole again. So I don't think it's a failure of the process. I think it's more of we ask the public in general, even in what we put out, there's still a need to have a community input before we came up with an agreement. That was part of the scope that we put out this time. And so that alone tells you that we were still looking for more input from whatever vendor it was. So if we're asked to tighten it up into a point of putting out a scope that's very specific, we want to know, like we would, say, building a building. We want to know your timeline, your financing structure, your insurance meet, all those requirements are met. You've already done your due diligence on what the requirement we're proposing, single-family residence, this size home, these type market rate values, some of the things that the board said. We'll build out the scope and we can do an RFP again and expect those responses. If it is the board's desire, which is why the recommendation is to get more direction from the board. The board's desire is, no, we want to get qualified vendors that we can then talk about those terms. We'll put out an RFQ request for qualifications or an invitation to negotiate. And then that kind of is a more open book opportunity for us to come back. In my 11 years here, this is probably the third such broad type solicitation that we've done. If you'll remember the solid waste facility, the solid waste, right, this building, the solid waste issue that came up seven, eight years ago, and this is probably the third one of those type events where it has so much community interest and so much community input that it becomes challenging from just having pure definition of what we're asking for specificity. I mean, the scope wasn't that defined. So if we wanted to find out, we can, which is why we said bring it back to the board for you to tell us. No, we want you to come back with a homed-in scope that we can review, and that's what we'll put on the street at RFP. No, we want you to come back, see what's in the market. We're going to do ITN and RFQ. We'll do some other mechanism, procurement mechanism, that then we'll bring that back to the board and say this is what we got, and we've narrowed it down to we believe these things are what you're looking for. But this is going to take a lot more work on the back end again to get that contract negotiated because there's still open doors to that. So that's kind of your two paths. We'll go whichever path the board wants to do, but those are the two paths we would take so that we're not back at this spot of rejecting all and trying to reboot again. So that's the path we would take is based on how strong of a scope do you want to put out at the beginning of the process. If you want it honed in, then we need to have more meetings with the board to hone it in. If you want to just find out what's in the marketplace, we'll do a different format of solicitation, and that's kind of where we'll get to. I guess I have another question, I guess. In terms of the last proposal, I think it was a motion that was made June 28, 2024, and I think Commissioner Cornell made the motion to move forward. And I guess it's been a year and a half since that point. If we're going to redo this process, how long that process? Will it be another year and a half or maybe more? So this will be, again, this depends on the path. If the path is bring us back a honed-in scope because the board wants to be integrally involved in the scope development, then, yeah, it'll take another six months because we'll have to have meetings with you. It'll be through the budget process. It'll be probably September, October before we even get anything out there at the earliest. So it will be another year. If it is put out an invitation to negotiate, similar to the scope we have, maybe some caveats to financing, some things that we do solidify as staff, it'll be a quicker process. But it'll still be a six- to nine-month process. The quickest we will get this back to you if we reboot this process would be seven to eight months. That would be the quickest we could turn it around. So it would be a December earliest. And if we go the first route, it'll be close to June. But I think I've heard some expressions of the board, you know, defining the timeline and what the timeline needs to be. So that needs to be your consideration as well. Are you under a pressure timeline or not? And we'll take your direction. Okay. And the reason I say all of this really and to ask those questions is because, you know, we spent, I guess, between $5 million to $6 million with the settlement with Ability Housing and all of that stuff. And I'm just concerned that some of the citizens in the area where the project is is going to be disconcerned because they have voiced their opinion to us on many occasions about what they would like to see there. And then I think that Commissioner Alfred was right. I think that there should be a homeowners association because if I remember when the city of Gainesville did Cedar Grove 1 and 2, they created a homeowners association. And I think they still meet monthly, I think. I'm not sure. But I think that they eventually want to see something happen. And I think that, as Commissioner Cornell said, it has to be some type of legacy, too, also to the community. And I'm sure that we will eventually hear from the residents in that area, too, once we come up with a final product. But anyway, those are my comments. I've got a lot more questions here. Commissioner Prizia, and then the manager, then Commissioner Alfred, Wheeler, and Cornell. Well, what I was going to say wasn't related to that, actually. I guess I feel like this is like a volley right now. I feel like I'm playing volleyball with you a little bit. And I don't mean to be rude, but we gave you what the community said they wanted, right? They wanted market rate housing. They wanted single-family housing. And then you came back to us and said that some of the developers and builders said that some of that stuff may not be possible without some commercial or multifamily, something that gave more density. That is exactly what you all came back to us and said, that there needed to be some level of flexibility in the project. They brought that to AHAC. They brought that to us. We said, yes, we'll give some flexibility for them to propose something. Of course, it's going to be with community input. But that was one of the things that was said in this process. We said, okay, we'll give more flexibility. So I think everybody came with like flexible ideas. And the number one proposer had like mini homes and things like that to bring more density. Like there was different ways that that was proposed, right? I feel like we were asked to hear what the community had to say and give you all the information so that you all could create a scope. Now I feel like you're telling the board that we need to create the scope. And what I'm trying to say to you is like, I'm not interested in creating scope. I'm not an expert in building and development. What I'm interested in doing is holding us to what we said we were going to do for the community, which was create a market rate development on that property. And I feel like I need the experts to tell me what needs to go into that scope, right? The number of units. And I hear what you're saying. You're saying request for qualifications versus scope, specific project scope. But I don't really know what request for qualifications means in terms of what are we going to get back. Because what I want to make sure is that whoever is doing this project has, number one, our community values and expectations at the forefront. Number two, that they have the financial capability and wherewithal to do this project and do it well in a reasonable time frame. That we're not going to 10 years down the road and the project is still hanging out and there's still lots sitting around. So those are the things that I care about. And I feel like we've said that multiple times on the diet. So I'm not sure what else you want from us in order to be able to do this. That's one. And you can respond in a second. The other thing I want to say is I don't, we've already spent over $2 million on this project just buying the land and paying for the engineering and stuff for projects that aren't going forward. And they, and the community specifically said they want market rate housing in this area. We've now seen a private developer come into this area that's doing market rate housing, you know, with the rezoning that's coming forward. We know it's possible. Right now, I'm not interested in putting any more money on the table. I'm not. I think right now we have land that we're giving for free to a developer to build a project. And I want to see what they can bring forward with what we have on the table. I, I hear you, Mary, but like the idea that this isn't to build affordable housing, this isn't to build subsidized housing, this is to build market rate housing for families at entry level. And, and we have now proof that a developer can do that kind of project and that it's, that it's feasible. And so, you know, I want to see what somebody can bring forward before we start putting additional money on it and become master developers of the site. Because that to me is going to be very expensive and it's, it's not really in keeping with what the community is asking for economic development, private sector development in East site, East Gainesville, single family housing, market rate housing. Like those are the things that we're hearing, right? Bring developers, bring private investment into East Gainesville. And so a subsidized affordable housing development isn't really what they're asking for. And, and I want to make sure that we're not going down that path. I get you. I'll, I'll address it when it's my turn. So that's, that's, those are my comments. Okay. Okay. Sure. Yes. Mr. Chair. First of all, let me apologize if it felt like I was following back into the board's court. I'm just trying to make sure we understand clarity. The recommend, you know, the manager was pretty clear of why the recommendation was made. Um, you, you've had opportunities to read the solicitations. Now they've been in the, in the board packet and you've had opportunity for a couple of weeks to look at them. Now, um, if the board says we have proposals, they were ranked, um, we believe the top proposal staff, go see what you can negotiate, go see what you can moralize. We'll do that. Um, I mean, I, I'm not following it from a standpoint we can develop scope for sure. There's no doubt. Um, we're happy to do that. And I'm, so when I offer the two avenues, it's not trying to follow it back, volley it back. It really isn't. It's just to make sure that when we get to this, when we get back to this stage, that we have something that meets your goals. And if what you have now, you believe we can get there, you're like, Hey, there's enough here for me, for staff to go finish it and memorialize and get it done. Um, so we'll do if that's the policy decision you make, if it's, we, we agree, there's a lot, there's too many concerns. There's too many holes in this, um, staff go out and you've heard enough. Like you said, you've heard enough from the board, from the dias to have enough direction, to build out a scope, get it done. Bring us back. Like you would any other solicitation with, with what you understand now, we'll do that again. We've done that. Like you said, a couple of times before, um, sorry that it's taken us, you know, that we've had to close this communication and get up and we've had to listen a little better on what exactly where we need to go. Um, we're happy to do that. The board, what you're right, market rate housing, what the community came back with. I think the board was clear about what they wanted to accomplish on that piece of property. And so we can accomplish it. If it's move forward and do what we can here, we will take the next couple of months. We will sit down with the number one vendor and we'll see if we can't work it out with what the information that we have to the, to legals, um, to where they're comfortable with. We haven't violated procurement direction, if you will. Um, if it's not, we'll let you know. We're happy to do that, but we're also happy to go back out, plug these holes that we saw and what was, what's came back to you and try to go from there. Either way, I think, um, that's a process that we can go either direction. So we're here to support your policy decision. And that's the only thing I tried to, to put back. So I mean, I, my response is, I don't, I mean, we supported the motion that the, that the staff, I don't, I didn't mean a volley in terms of that. What I meant is a volley between RFQ versus RFP versus all of these things. I mean, I guess, well, I'll just be clear from my own perspective. What I want is a project that's doable. What I want is for when a proposal comes forward that it is clear to me that that project has the financing, the capabilities, and the permittability to be able to come out of the ground and actually be a real legacy project on that property. That's, that's what I want out of this at the end of the day. You know, I, if it's, if it's, if the best process, if procurement thinks the best process is RFQ, then negotiate the number of units and the this and the that and the details of that project with a group that proves that they're financially capable and have the experience and the development capabilities to do a project like this. Great. If procurement thinks that we need to get a tight scope with exact number of units and a preliminary development plan, whatever else we want from it. Fine. I'm, I'm immaterial of that. I just want to make sure that we have a solid idea that what is there is doable in a reasonable amount of time so that we're not leaving the communities. Fair enough. Another 10 years. Okay. So we have the manager, then we have Commissioner Alfred, Cornell, and Wheeler. Yes, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to state that we followed the process as it relates to the RFP process itself. To the extent that that process has not resulted in sufficient detail or information to, for the board to be comfortable that, as Commissioner Prezio stated, that a project was going to be feasible, viable, and be coming out of the ground in a certain period of time. Obviously, I am your manager, and county operations is 100% my responsibility, as is ensuring that we meet the goals of the board. So to the extent that the process itself was followed correctly, to the extent that it didn't result in something that the board feels comfortable moving forward with, that is my responsibility. And we will ensure that we meet that moving forward. I will only add that, of course, it is an important project. It is a legacy project for the board. And in that regard, the recommendation is based on the fact that we want to be deliberate about ensuring that we have something that is feasible and that the community will be proud of. Okay. Commissioner Alfred. Thank you. So having looked at a lot of development and having been involved in market rate workforce housing in other cities, one of my concerns is that, you know, we're getting to the point when you have – if you were to take a historic overlay and put it, you know, on top of this neighborhood and say, you know, this is an idea about what you could build, you would probably have lots that were 25 feet wide and 100 feet deep or 50 feet wide and 100 feet deep. And I believe, you know, at least one of the proposals had something like that. Well, the city of Gainesville requires an apron for a driveway to be 17 feet wide. So if you have a 25-foot lot, you're looking at just a sidewalk full of driveway aprons unless you do something creative and put, you know, entries to the back of the house from an alleyway, which, you know, I would love to have seen something like that. But the closer and denser you make the neighborhood, the more feasible the overhead becomes, you know, we've seen what the city has done at Hartwood, and those houses are not selling for the cost of construction. And so, you know, we have to look at all of those things when we figure this out. Otherwise, we're putting out an RFP that's not feasible. And that's what I'm concerned about is that when we put this together – I really was hoping that by being more open, you know, to creative ideas when we put out this RFP that we would get some mixed use. I mean, this is on a fairly busy thoroughfare, and we have opportunities for, you know, an insurance agent, for a nursery school, for a community center, for other kinds of uses on this space besides the neighborhood that helps make it more commercially viable, too. And so, you know, when you have a high thoroughfare neighborhood, you want the highest and best use for that property. And that may not be, you know, single-family residency, but we need the input from the community before we make those recommendations. I don't want to say to the community, this is what you need if the community doesn't want that. But on the other hand, you know, I hear from Eastside residents that they want to see business development, and they want opportunities for office space that is, you know, that is nice, that can host an insurance agent or a barbershop or whatever. And so there's this opportunity to utilize this space in a really great way. And to me, that's the legacy project that I feel like, you know, I would love to see left. But, you know, putting that out into an RFP is a difficult process unless we, you know, are willing to put the back work into it. I would rather spend the time to do this right than to do this in a hurry. And I think part of that is going to be some community engagement and some more talking to the community. That's my thought. Okay, Commissioner Cornell. Okay, I'm going to agree with Commissioner Prizia and Commissioner Alford here. I, too, appreciate staff's recommendation because I think it's more important that we are deliberate and we get it right than we rush through it. From Commissioner Prizia's point, put the community interest first and make sure that whoever we negotiate with has a financial capability and qualifications. We literally just approve one that the whole community supported. And from my perspective, what the community has told me they want is they want single-family residential developer that has a history of building market-rate housing that the community would support and be proud of. That's what we want. We want the community's buy-in. Like, when we approved the development on Noonan's Lake, this place was packed with the community supporting that developer who had engaged, had a history, a long history, had the financial capability, long financial capability, and who had engaged with the community, the same community that stopped the ability housing. Not a new community, not a new community, not a new community, that community, the same exact community. And so that's what I think we should do. I think we should make this very clear for our staff. Put out an RFQ, request for qualification. Have qualified developers who have done that submit their qualifications. We, you rank them, we pick the one we want to work with, and then we, we get with them and the community, and we develop single-family residential development that the community supports, and, and if it takes an extra six months to nine months, that's fine. This thing's going to be there for 30 to 40 years, and it's been on the market for 15 years, and it's taken us two years to stop them building affordable housing, because that's what the community doesn't want. They do not want affordable housing, and I haven't heard anyone say they wanted modular housing, not a one person. I haven't heard any of that. So I think Anna's right. I think Mary's right. I think we just be deliberate. We get qualified developers to submit that they want to do this. We look at them and rank them, and then we pick one, and we ask them to move forward. RFQ. Is that your motion? I mean, if this board agrees with that, I would add that to the motion that we move forward under an RFQ scenario. Okay. Is that the direction you need, Tommy? From staff direction, I think you will be more successful in that avenue, because it allows for that, those things that y'all have been talking about. Well, we gave you the direction to just put it out there and see what we get. Like, to Mary's point, we were hoping to have lots of different creative ideas, but the community's been really consistent of what they want and what they don't want. And how it will help us is the other occasions that we've had this kind of incident happen. It's frustrating to everyone, the people that, like you said, the people that have taken the time and effort to prepare these responses, to the board that have been doing this a long time, to staff that have been working on this, to not see the fruit at the end of it. I mean, that's very challenging. But sometimes saying this, and then the responses you get, we don't control. We just get the responses we get. We have to deal with those. So I think an RFQ path will help us be a better path to get where you're trying to get as a board. Okay. So I'll add that to the motion if that helps. You okay with that, Mary Helen? Yes. Okay. Anna, you good with that? Or no? Yeah, I'm fine with that. I guess, you know, I just, I don't, I don't, I don't know what all goes into an RFQ. I just, I just want to be really clear that we get enough quality information that the people we're negotiating with are going to be able to stand up one of these projects and are going to listen to what the community wants and needs. And if there is some flexibility and maybe they want some, maybe they say, you know, single family alone isn't going to cut the mustard in terms of making this thing financially feasible. What do you all think about a small commercial area that has a barbershop or a bank or, you know, child care facility on the corner that ties into E-Hedi and what CRA is trying to do on the other end of the street? Like, you know, that sort of thing. Like, I just, I want that to be a part of it if the community is okay with that. But what I want to make sure is happening is that we're, we're getting the detail that's enough that staff feel confident we can move forward with negotiation of a contract to get this thing moving. And I, that's, that's my main concern. So if an RFQ will do that, then I'm on board. Okay. Commissioner Wheeler. Yes, very, just very quickly. I, I do support, I, I think that the staff recommendation has been very carefully worded. And, uh, I, that's, that's why I was quick to second the motion, uh, turnkey project, clearly defined outcomes. These are key words in this recommendation that I think everybody can relate to. Number of units, project timeline for us, that's been important in financing. Um, because the economy is, is really uncertain right now. And if, if there's someone who's trying to build as, um, uh, you know, as speculation, you know, then, then we're at risk. I think I'm not getting what we want in a timely way. And I'm coming off this board in 2026. I'd sure like to see something going on before I leave. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Okay. At this time, I guess we'll hear from the, uh, proposers who have participated in the process. And then we'll have public comment after that. Good afternoon, Chairman Chestnut and members of the commission. I'm Rodney Long. I'm president and founder of the Long Foundation. Dr. Les Snead, who's our business partner with Evolve Green Solutions, wanted to be here today. He's in Detroit handling another project. He just got called into the meeting dealing with another RFP with providing up there. So he won't be, uh, able, Mr. Chairman, to have any comments today. Okay. But on behalf of the Long Foundation, uh, and AGS, we'd like to thank you for the opportunity, uh, to speak to staff's new recommendations to reject all responses submitted under request per proposal, uh, for development of workforce and market rate housing. Uh, today as commissioners, you're being asked, uh, under your rules of procurement, uh, to reject all the proposals. Uh, your decision to accept staff's recommendations should be determined on whether or not there is necessary and specific, specificity for staff to proceed with what they consider to be meaningful, uh, negotiation for a development agreement on those key elements, uh, that's listed in the recommendation. And those key elements that they have in the recommendation is number of units, project timeline, and financing. Uh, now, unlike the normal project where you're dealing with development rights, uh, your decision today, uh, should not be determined by comments for or against this development because it's under the rules of procurement. So the issue of community engagement that you mentioned earlier, and I think Tommy mentioned as well, is a concern in this process because I think under the RFP, that process should have been up to the front and not on the back end. And I'll talk about that in just a few minutes. Uh, the board, as you know, you all originally wanted to take this issue up on June 10th, the rankings from your, um, committee, uh, but you moved it to this meeting. And in reading the new recommendation, it says, while your proposals received, followed, they received the, followed the procurement process, they were ranked appropriately, which is good. Uh, I think Mr. Hutchinson is here from the Hutchinson Foundation. He participated in that process, and he had a very good proposal, uh, as well. But you said they lacked the necessary specificity for staff to proceed with meaningful negotiations. Uh, the intent of the RFP was to move closer to a turnkey project with clearly defined outcomes. Instead, according to your staff, the proposal included too many uncertainties, key elements like number of units, project timeline, the financing were flexible or dependent on future decisions. Although, uh, according to staff, the proposal addressed the general scope, it did not provide the level of detail necessary to establish clear terms for contract negotiations. We strongly disagree with the new staff's recommendations. Legally, all the respondents submitted their proposals in response to the scope of work that you, as a board, approved in the RFP. Specific questions from respondents were asked of the procurement staff in advance of submitting, uh, proposals. Now, we have specific questions we ask about the number of units, the project timeline, and financing. And if you go back and look at the intent toward the RFP, the questions 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 10 addresses those questions. Now, as it pertains to staff's concern regarding the number of units, a question was submitted on January the 7th. The question was, I'd like to know the exact number of houses that are going to be built since we have sent proposals for this project to be divided in three types of population density, medium, low, and high. I would appreciate if you could clarify how many housing units you want built. Uh, the answer we got from your staff was, refer to 6.1 project scope. And all that is, it tells you what it is the county commissioner is looking for in the project. Another question submitted by a respondent was regarding the number of units and also the number of options you want for this project. The question was, is there an opportunity for a developer to present more than one option for this development? Could it be submitted like option one and option two? The response we received from your staff was, yes. Now, with this response, the Long Foundation and AGS, we submitted a proposal that had two options. One option had 56 units and one option had 95 units. The units were based on the lot sizes allowable under the City of Gainesville subdivision ordinance and their new land development regulation that allow small dwelling units. Now, to address staff's concerns regarding this particular key element, we could easily propose that benchmarks be placed in the developer's agreement that will require the developer to construct a minimum of 56 units in this development. The question that's pertaining to the project timeline, one question was asked, what is the expected completion timeframe once the property is transferred, and will the project timeline officially begin after infrastructure or drainage approvals? The response that we got back from your staff was, the developer should present a reasonable and realistic timeline as a part of their proposal. And it also stated that the contract will include a revert a clause. Now, based upon this response, the Long Foundation and AGS presented a reasonable preliminary development schedule with realistic benchmarks and timelines. However, there are timelines of benchmarks that are beyond our control. For example, we have no idea how long it would take for the county to transfer a title after executing a contract, whether you gave us the land or we bought the land. Now, as you may know, we can't even begin the permitting process with the City of Gainesville until we have title of ownership and we have site control of the property. Now, in our pre-submittal meetings with the City of Gainesville planning staff, it was determined by them that the permitting process is going to take between 12 months and 18 months. Now, to address this concern that staff has raised regarding this key element, contract language can be placed in a developer's agreement that would have benchmarks that would include negotiation by both parties on the conveyance of the title, the submittal of the project to the city for permitting, site development, and the construction of units. The final area of uncertainty raised by staff was concerning financing of the project. AGS is an international corporation that has the financial resources to bring this project to fruition. But the question was raised by a proposer. It said, we understand that if the proposal is an exemplary proposal, the county may provide land at no cost to the developer. In addition to this potential contribution, the county will provide grant funding for the infrastructure development and homes targeted at 80% or below. Are there any low-interest loans for the programs? The response that we got back was, refer to the county's website regarding an infrastructure surtax application. The other concern and the final concern from staff was this. So we decided that what staff can do is you can put in the developer's agreement a provision that says you must have proof of funds in order to construct the units. In this case, the maximum units that we put in place, which was 95 units. So as you can see from these questions that we submitted to your staff in this process, they were specific, trying to get specificity before we submitted these proposals to you all. Now, it can best be summed up by the following response from your staff. Allotwood County's goal and criteria for this development is for it to be successful and that it have workforce and market rate housing while taking into consideration the surrounding environment of the community. Now, let's talk about community engagement because that was very, very important. As I stated earlier, there was uncertainty in this RFP regarding Section 4 Community Engagement Meeting. Our development team had planned to have a community engagement meeting prior to our submittal so we could receive input regarding our proposed development, especially since what we were proposing was unique and it was much different from traditional stick and brick development. Now, as you can see from the copies of the emails that I provided to you earlier, that's on your desk, we started this process early. On March 14th, I contacted Beverly Perry of the City of Gainesville for a facility rental agreement for T.B. McPherson Center that we were going to have a community engagement meeting on March 2nd. Now, on March 21st, I also sent some information to Ms. Doris Edwards because she's the Lincoln Estates Neighborhood Association Chair, informing her of our proposal and the upcoming community engagement meeting. A follow-up email was sent back to Ms. Perry at the City of Gainesville letting her know that we wanted to have this project and this meeting. So, on April 1st, we sent an email to all the community and faith leaders regarding the April 3rd meeting of the county because at that time, the County Procurement Department was beginning to start ranking the proposals. So, we wanted them to know, since we were not going to have a community engagement meeting, come and see what's being proposed in your neighborhood. Unfortunately, no one from the community showed up at this meeting. So, the response that we received to our specific question, and here was the question that I wrote to your staff. Please clarify when the community engagement meeting should occur. Should it occur after the bid is submitted or prior to pre-development by the selected proposal, or should it be prior to the proposal date of March 5th being submitted? Now, here's what we got back from your staff. The developer is responsible for leading a community engagement effort, and they should take in consideration the input from the community. Since our response was received, it did not have anything specific. We didn't know if we were supposed to have it before we submitted it or after we submitted it. But what we determined, since she said by pre-development, we said, well, that means it cannot happen unless you first, you were actually awarded the bid, and prior to pre-development, you need to have community engagement. So, I suggest going forward, since you look like you may be going forward, you all need to clarify that process to people. When should the community give input on this process? It shouldn't be done on the back end. It should be done on the front end. And it appears to us none of the proposals had any community engagement at all to receive any input at all to put in our proposals at all. And that was a concern because I was here at the August 27th meeting, and I heard the neighborhood say they wanted to have community engagement. But the way your proposal was structured, it was after the process. So, in conclusion, can I have Elmo, please? We used to call this Elmo back in the days. I don't know what y'all call it nowadays. One, we believe it's not fair for y'all to change the rules at the end of this process. Legally, all the respondents, they followed your procurement process approved by this board, and they were ranked appropriately. Additional housing is needed in East Gainesville in order to achieve economic development and other amenities that we want. This will be the second housing proposal rejected on this property in three years. The county commission recently approved housing development for East Gainesville Preserve, which I truly support. It's going to be a great development, and I commend this commission for actually approving that proposal. We believe that we can negotiate terms with the development agreement with your county staff. And we're asking this county commission that you approve the original recommendation to accept the evaluation committee's rankings and direct your staff to negotiating good faith with us. Here's what I think you could do. If you were to accept the rankings, you could still move forward with the motion you'll get ready to eject. You don't know what we can probably work out with your staff. So we thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your indulgence and allowing me to give comments here. And as I said, Dr. Sneed would not be a part of the conversation. And if you all have any questions, I'll be more than happy to answer any questions with any staff. Hi, Chairman. Good evening. Chairman, how are you doing? And commissioners, county manager and attorney. I want to thank you for the opportunity to be here. State your name for the record, please. Donnie Redd. I'm sorry. I thought I said that. That's all right. That's all right. Donnie Redd. I'm going to raise this up a little bit so I'm not bending over. Thank you. Before I say a word, I want to say that I'd be remiss if I didn't congratulate you guys on that annual report. That was, as a former Gainesvillian, I was born in Alachua General in 1960. It's a proud moment to sit and see how far this community has come. So thank you for that. I'm not going to belay you the point. I think Mr. Long hit all the points that I would make. I'm with Twin Oaks Facilities International, and we're a partner with AGS and with the Long Foundation. And we specialize in market rate workforce housing, providing a green housing solution, using a product that's fire resistant, water resistant, mold resistant, pest resistant. Just a quality product that we look forward to getting the input from the community in the design and development. We're not interested in bringing a home in here that the community is not interested in purchasing. So our piece of the pie, we're constructing the houses and designing the homes, and we're interested in sitting down with the community and helping with them helping us and providing input on how, you know, what is the square footage you want? Do you want exterior parking? You know, do you want, what do you want to see? What design, exterior design do you want, you know, so that it fits in the community? Believe me, we've ridden the neighborhoods around here, around there in that area. And we want to see what the community wants. We look forward to engaging with the community. But more specifically, we look forward to negotiating. I think we, you know, as Mr. Long said, we ask the right questions. We ask for specificity. So you know we've thought about it. You know, we've gone down that road. So now we're prepared to come in. And I think, in good faith, be able to negotiate with your folks to provide a development that not only the citizens in that community, but the entire Gainesville community in Alachua County can be proud of. So thank you very much. Thank you. Good afternoon, board. My name is Kessler Hutchinson. I stand here on behalf of the Hutchinson Foundation. We do support the decision to rebuild the project to kind of gain a little more clarity than what was initially given and in an effort to provide the community with what it is that they are looking for. I know our proposal did offer a little bit more creativity than some of the other ones and the fact that we submitted more of a mixed use. So we provided some homes, market-rate housing, but we also offered the ability to have the commercial space up front and also try to provide a daycare. So we do support that decision, and, you know, we hope that you guys move forward with it and give us an opportunity to kind of rebid and get in touch with the community and provide what it is that they need. Thank you. Yes, sir. Mr. Hutchinson, can you tell me about the development you're building for the city in the city right now? Are you developing? Chess's Village. Yeah. Can you talk to me about that? That is a 22-unit development. That is one that's being spearheaded by my brother. He's partnered with this facility, I mean, with the city, and I don't work too closely on that project with him, but that is something that he's a part of, and he is definitely one of the leads on this one. How many acres is that? If I'm not mistaken, I think it's not quite sure, maybe two and a half, two acres. Okay, 22 homes on two acres? 22, correct. Thank you. All proposals present. Is there public comment now? No, I think there were four companies. They're not here? So it just was Hutchinson and the Loan Foundation was here? Okay, okay. At this point, we're going to now go to citizen comments to the motion. Bridget Johnson, we just wanted to speak briefly on that, yes, we wanted single-family homes and some businesses put in that area, not multifamily development at all. We spoke on that several times. Okay, I live in Lake Forest Farms. It is 11.18 acres. There are 44 homes there, single-family homes. We have two, two-bedroom homes. The rest of them are three- and four-bedroom homes. Okay, Hartwood is 15 acres, and they have two, three-bedrooms and four-bedrooms homes. So we're talking about 13 acres, and then you're looking at putting 95 units there. That is not what we asked for. That is not what we came and sat up in here for many meetings about. And as far as community engagement, community engagement announcements cannot just be sent to the churches. A sign has to be put up in the neighborhoods. Flyers have to be sent out. There has to be notices so that everybody on the east side of town can be notified of these meetings and this engagement, or it's not a true engagement because we were not aware. I know my family members were not aware because I discussed this with them. I discussed this with my neighborhood. I'm the HOA president in my neighborhood, and I discussed this with the people in my neighborhood as well. So I know that we did not know about any community engagement, about any 95 units or 56 units. We discussed single-family homes and businesses, and we would like to keep it that way so that our side of town begins to develop and grow like the west side of town. And I think that's what we came to this board about several times, and we never wavered on that. Thank you. Good afternoon, county commissioners. I'm sorry. My name is Sherry Roberts, and I live in Azalea Trails. I did have a young lady from Hartwood that wanted to come to speak, but it took so long. But we are here to say we are totally against modular homes, if that's what they're planning on bringing. We want quality homes built in East Gainesville. I've been living in East Gainesville for almost 50 years, and you know only two quality neighborhoods have been built there since, and that's, I think, Lincoln Park and Hartwood. Just imagine living 50 years in East Gainesville, and you've only seen two quality neighborhoods built. We want quality neighborhoods built, and we want community engagement. Mr. Long now need to put the boots on the ground and get people out, knock on the doors, and say, hey, like my cousin said, we need to put signs up. Hey, we need to put signs up. We don't all go to the same church. We don't, I don't, I'm not a big person. I'm just a small person in the community. So to reach all of us small people, like I said, we're not famous. We don't have big names. So we're asking for anybody to do community engagement, please, please, knock on doors, send out flyers, put signs up in the community. We all want to be involved in this. We've been here for two and a half, I think, years about this. So please listen to the community first. No one wants modular homes. We want quality homes. We want to make our community look good, just like West Gainesville. So please consider us, okay? Thank you so much. Can I ask her? Well, I'll just wait until community. I'll wait until community. All right. We got somebody over here. Okay, Khali, I'm sorry, I didn't see you, man. Hello, Khali Blount. Although I'm not speaking on behalf of Alachua County Housing Authority, that's one of several housing and development bodies I'm involved with. And I think you should be consulting those as far as you are talking about the issues of finance, Habitat for Humanity, Neighborhood Housing Development Corporation, two housing authorities. You've got a lot of expertise about how to solicit finance and keep costs low. And I'm not saying that there should be public housing on that site. I'm saying that there is expertise in all these agencies that know how to get this done. And if you've got to get more details in your RFP, as everybody's been saying, I hope it will go back out to the community. They certainly have the experience of knowing how horrible hyperdensity is, those who are old enough to have been around when Kennedy Holmes was there. And they know what kind of development they want to see. They know, and as far as developing timeline, they can speak to how long can they tolerate the traffic disruption and the noise that a major project would be. So that should be part of your consideration. I'm disappointed that it's not going further at this point. But I do understand, you know, a lot of studying of urban development. I understand the need for mixed income, mixed use development. But I also understand it needs to be everywhere. Mixed income and mixed use ought to be as possible at Tower Road and Archer as it is on the east side. So you can't just say that, okay, we'll do the experiment over here and see how it works, and then maybe it'll happen elsewhere. We need to see mixed income, mixed use universally. Good afternoon to the chair of the county commission. My name is Jansi Vinson. I'm here in support of the east side citizens. I think it's very important to spend time to do things right. Input from the community is very, very, very necessary to have a great legacy. And I think that sometimes it might take time, but I support the staff, and I think it's time for go back and look at it. And I'm not sure, you know, again, about the ratings. I know they won't reject all the responses, but if, you know, the developer can accommodate them, that's great. But, yeah, listen to the citizens. And just spend the time. I mean, two years, yeah, but, you know, it's worth it on the end to have that great legacy. And thank you. Mr. Chairman, Donnie Redd with Twin Oaks Facilities International. For the record, I just wanted to clarify that I think there's a misconception our homes are not modular. We do not do modular homes, okay? So I wanted that to be entered into the record, structurally designed homes. Okay. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman Chestnut. Just want to make a couple comments. I think Commissioner Parizia is correct in that this is much of a cluster in that there are things that should have been done that were not done. And when the county comes out and puts out a request for certain things, and those things are given, then to go back in now and come and say, okay, we've got to relook this issue. Well, maybe, perhaps, before we go any further, let's get some clarity on what you actually want, what you actually need, what this community actually needs, and then come forward. Commissioner Wheeler, the last time we were at this state with you, you said, okay, let's just go ahead and push us through. It's been a long enough time. I wanted a proposal. Now we're backing up. So my thing is, with the office there, to get with them and say, hey, this is what we want, this is what we hear. I haven't heard that yet, and I know you've got to feather that out. But it makes no sense to continue to be coming back and forth after years of deliberation on this issue. So I say, you know, if you're going to move forward, make sure that you get those things ironed out. Make sure that all of those specifics. And when staff is requested, okay, how many units you want, what do you want with this, and what do you want with that, give direct answers so that I can be clear and that person can be clear in what they need and they want so that you don't come back and say, you didn't give us what we wanted. You didn't give us the scope of what we thought was necessary to move forward. Those are the things that I, as a person who lives in East Gainesville, would want to understand moving forward. And, again, I thank each one of you for your role in this. But you have some difficult decisions, and the right decision is to start in that office and try to figure out what you want and what you need. And then the second thing is who's going to do that. Like you said, is it your job to do that? Probably not. But it is their job, and working with the manager. So that is what I would recommend so that we don't get to this point because we've been to this point too many times. We keep overdoing things, and it makes no sense. And citizens, they don't understand why it takes this long to do something. Again, thank you for the moments, and I hope that we'll move with a decision that is applicable to what we need in this community. Thanks. Mr. Chair, can he state his name for the record? Oh, yeah. We all know who you are, but if you will. Larry McDaniel. Good afternoon, commissioners, Mr. Chair and commissioners. This was a very exciting experience for me today because I've never sat through the proposal that our county manager gave a while ago. I was a little disappointed. It was a great presentation, very good. But then I was disappointed because there was one thing missing, and I don't know if you all detected it or not. I don't know if you did, but there was not one person that did a presentation, and they were all fantastic, not one that looked like me that represent our part of the community. And I was a little disappointed, and I was a little disappointed about that, but it was a good presentation, but there was not a person that looked like me in any of the presentations. But as far as the project that we're discussing at this time, I think it is confusing that the RFP was put out, and they complied with everything, and then to come back and say that we need to go in-depth with that. So I think the staff need to be specific. I think it's very unclear to all of the people who submitted proposals for them to be told one thing, and then today they come back and there were some additional things. But you're just not sure that it had all of everything that you needed. There were some holes, as Commissioner Alfred said. So let's be clear, so this will never happen again because it takes a lot of time and effort for the people that did the proposal, plus our staff that we pay, they spend hours and hours of our tax dollars trying to comply with it. So let's try to be a little more clear, and I just hope that we can go forward. And then the other thing that I was concerned about, about the modular homes, but the gentleman there made it clear that it was not going to be modular homes. Is that correct? Okay, because that's what I've been hearing. It was going to be these prefab houses, and it was not. Okay, well, you're saying disinformation. But that's what I heard, and the community was concerned about that. They do not want prefab modular homes in our community. I can say our community because I live there as well. So let's try to get this thing going, and it looks like it's going to take another year or two based on what I've heard today. Is that correct, staff? We haven't had the vote yet, so. Oh, okay. All right. Well, I hope you vote. You'll find out after. Okay, I'll wait for the vote. Thank you all. Harry Parker Warren, and it has been very difficult for me to sit through this today because I'm under a cone of silence. But I just want to say thank you to the people that deserve thanking. Further citizen comments? Okay, back to the board. Are there any comments? I got a question. Okay, sure. Commissioner Cornell? Sure. So I added an RFQ because my thought was we would put out an RFQ to find out if there were a group of folks that were qualified, had done these projects in the past, had the financial wherewithal, and so on and so forth. But am I thinking wrong? Should it be an ITN invitation to negotiate, which gives everybody the opportunity to put in their qualifications and history? I don't want to make it more confusing. It's a question. Both methodologies will result in similar responses. An RFQ, basically an RFQ ranking is coming back to the board saying that we've determined these firms or entities are qualified to do what we've asked them to do. And then we'll negotiate with the first one of those. If we do an invitation to negotiate, it will be the same thing. They're going to submit. But there are probably more specific plans to negotiate. I don't want to. And would the community engagement piece that the county went through for a year be included so that the developers could see that community engagement? Yes. And based on what we've heard today, I believe it is clear that we need to have much more specific community engagement and then narrow it down from the, I mean, we know market rate housing, we know single family housing, we know some of these things we've talked about. But I think we also need to go back to that same community that you've identified and say, are we talking about mixed use? Are we talking about any commercial? You know, what is that? If we really want to know what that community wants, we need to hone in on what that community wants. And then include, yes, I think we should include that in whatever we release to the public to respond to. But I want to set the bar of expectation to be reality. Whatever we put out to, a commissioner has already made the point about infrastructure and uninfrastructure. The board was real clear last time the property is kind of what the offer is. Yeah. We're only going to get back what the economy tells these developers or these qualified people that they can afford to do. But we've already mentioned some successes in East Gainesville. We've mentioned not success, things that haven't been successful. So the economy is going to drive that as well. Yeah, I mean, I think the fact that we actually have a very public successful approval of a development that was just recent that wasn't there a year and a half ago when all of this started has actually changed the environment. I think I've heard from other developers that perhaps didn't communicate with me two years ago, three years ago. So I think the RFQ is right, but I'm also fine with an ITN. I don't have a preference, Commissioner. Do any of y'all have a preference? I don't. Honestly, I don't know enough about the differences. I almost feel like I need like a little bullet points of the difference between an ITN and an RFQ. But what I can say is that I've gone through an ITN experience on multiple occasions at the University of Florida. And what I appreciated about the ITN experience was that we were able to negotiate with multiple firms at the same time, gave us a chance to get the best possible product, because we could talk to those multiple firms and we could be having conversations about what's possible. Okay, I would move that I change it to the ITN. I just heard enough. I would move that I change the RFQ to the ITN. Is staff okay with that? Dave, do you have a comment? I want to ask you directly, because I know you like to cross T's and dot all I's. I resemble that remark. Yes, and I've suffered the pain and the benefit of those remarks. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Dave Orziano with the County Attorney's Office. With the RFQ, it's really a two-step process. The first is you qualify folks, and then you still have to give them a scope or specifications. Then they submit a proposal. The main benefit of that is that you're not going to get 30 proposals. We're not going to get 30 anyway. You're qualifying only a certain number of folks that actually submit a proposal. All right. So that doesn't get you around the issue of having to identify at some point what it is you want. And I think equally as important what you are offering as a way of subsidy for this project. Okay. And that should be clarified, I think, as well. All right. So, Mary Helen, are you okay with changing it to ITN? Yeah. Okay. Go ahead, Anna. I want to make one. Go ahead. You finish. Mr. Chair, if I kind of pardon me for interrupting. Sure. I would suggest that you let the County Attorney's Office and staff work and bring back what we agree to be their proper vehicle for you, whether it be an INT or just a grant request for grant applications or whatever the vehicle. The ITN or whatever the vehicle the staff recommends. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Bring it back. I like that. I like that, too. The last point I want to make to the public is we've talked about what the community is looking for. What's really important to me is that the community is behind, supportive of the developer. And because the last thing I want is to award this to a group that the community says we did all this work and now we don't trust that person or that group of people. And so that's very, very important to me. And I will speak directly to Mr. Long regarding this point because just because you give notice for the community to attend, if they don't attend, that's actually not on the community, I would argue. That's actually on you. You should ask yourself the question, why didn't they come when I invited them? And you're welcome to respond. You don't need to. But that's what I heard from the two citizens that spoke after you. Mr. Chair, if I may. Sure. Commissioner, you're right. But we weren't permitted to have a community engagement meeting. I was just doing it as an FYI. I think the community engagement actually happened before the RFQ actually went out. Like we went through, I know I attended two or three meetings, and there were like five or six meetings. So that was the community engagement. No, no, Mr. Chair, if I may. Not according to the RFP, Section 6-4, there was a specific requirement. And the RFP was probably the wrong vehicle. All I'm trying to tell you, Commissioner, we were responding to what was in the RFP. I understand. And that's all I'm saying. We wanted to have a community engagement process. I understand. The RFP just didn't allow us to go out and do it. We were going to do flyers and direct mail and all those things. I just want to be clear for the record with that. Okay. Commissioner Prezio. I guess what I want to say is similar, I guess, in a way. And, you know, I'm open to stop bringing back other vehicles, RFQ, ITN, grant proposal, whatever it might be. But I guess my biggest thing here is that, and this is more for the community, is that we've tried really hard to listen to what it is that you want. I think that it's really important for you to listen to the developers and the builders because this has to be commercially viable. This has to be a commercially viable project. That means that there has to be density enough that they can sell enough homes to make the money back that they invested in the project. That means it has to have the right combination of types of housing or some commercial or whatever it might be that gives that developer the ability to make the money. Because we've spent a lot of tax dollars already on this project because we were listening to what you said you wanted. And now we're asking the private sector to step up and do what we've shown is possible, right, with this new project that's going on for them to do it. But there's a balance to be struck there, and I think it's up to you all to communicate your wants and needs and that developer to listen and to find common ground. And I think the new project going on in East Gainesville, Alachua County, is a really great example of that. You know, the developer really listened and struck a balance between the maximum density they could have had there and what the neighbors wanted, right? And they found that balance, and they're able to build attainable workforce housing the best they can in that spot. And so I just want to make sure the community hears that as they do that community engagement piece, I have the communities listening, and they're finding common ground around what's possible and makes this project commercially viable and successful. Because I am honestly not – I hear what you're saying, Mary, about the idea of creativity, and I want to see that in the developments. But I want it to be a project that can stand on its own two feet. Oh, absolutely. I agree. I don't want to become the master developer of this site and be building the roads and the infrastructure and the underground utilities and spending a bunch more tax dollars on this project. I want to see it happen because it's a commercially viable project because that's what's going to drive investment in East Gainesville. We have to show that it's commercially viable to make these kinds of investments in this area without a bunch of subsidies. We're donating the land. And we're donating the land, which is a lot of commitment already. So that's all I wanted to say is I just hope that there's some give and take here in the conversation. I don't want the community to have something they don't want in their backyard. I also want to make sure the project is going to be successful in the long run. And we're not going to have a bunch of lots sitting around not selling like we have in some of the other projects. Okay. I have a question for staff. When will it come back to the board in reference to the RFQ or the ITN? Would that be several months from now, six months from now? Because I know Tommy said from seven to eight months. Does it be six months? We can bring back that conversation in August. Okay. End of August, 1st of September. I mean, we need to go back and review all those community engagements and see how we want to build that into this process. Give us time to make a strong recommendation to you. The seven to eight months was the total of the process. So I think we can come back with some viable options by early September. Yeah. I'm just concerned about, you know, the time frame. You know, I think we should really start moving right away to, you know, to get closer than another year and a half. That's all I'm trying to get to the point. Yeah, so that's all. So Commissioner Prezian? I mean, Alfred? Yeah, I was just going to respond back to my comment. You know, I didn't do a very good job of describing under what circumstances that would be appropriate. If we are going to make a neighborhood that looks like the other neighborhoods that, you know, most of these folks come from, then that's what it's going to take to make that happen. If we are going to do something like the Eastwood Preserve, I think that's what it's called, over by Deer Dunance Lake, that's a pretty dense development. And so that's why they're able to make that commercially viable is because those houses are pretty darn close together. And so, you know, I think the community needs to see that and they need to maybe go drive around and look at some of these neighborhoods and see because it costs money. When you put the utilities far apart from house to house, that used to be financially viable. It's not anymore. It was more financially viable, of course, when the city and county were paying for it. And so if we wanted that again, that's how it would have to happen, is that would have to happen. But I don't think we can – I don't think that can happen now unless we were to do that. So anyway, that was my point. So thank you. Okay. Back to the board. Those in favor of the motion, vote by the sign of aye. Aye. Those opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Okay. Next item, Madam Clerk. Next, we'll have the animal shelter update. Mr. Chair, that's me, but I can wait a moment. Okay. All right. All right, Mr. Chair, I can go ahead and get started as people are walking out of the room. So, Mr. Chair, as you're aware, with regard to the location of the proposed new animal shelter, we have been discussing one particular site for an extended period of time. And the current direction of the board is to work and negotiate with the University of Florida. That is the site that is in the University of Florida property, on the University of Florida property. The standing direction that is currently out there is for us as staff to work with UF to bring back a negotiated agreement. Where that stands now, we don't have one finalized. We are looking on both a lease and an operational agreement. In the meantime, we have had basically a backup site B that has been a potential. I've communicated with you all about that individually in the past and kept you up to date on that. That site, up until now, we have not publicly been discussing because it is not readily available to us at the moment. That is the current Wiesman, what we've referred to over time as the Wiesman Track on Waldo Road, which is adjacent to the La Vida Brown facility. That was intended to be the fairgrounds. Many years ago, we had the original fairgrounds site that has since been donated to the Army Reserve was given to us by the Department of Environmental Protection with a reverter clause on it that said if it was not used as a fairground, or that it, let me rephrase that, it does not, it doesn't say we have to use it as a fairground, didn't say we had to use it as a fairground, said we couldn't use it as anything else. There was a point in time where the board wanted to, had bought the Wiesman Track and was going to move the fairground site there. We asked the governor and cabinet, who sits at the Internal Improvement Trust Fund, to move that reverter to the Wiesman Track. So that reverter was moved from that site back in the early 2000s to the Wiesman Track. That is where it still sits. We have been working for two years now to get that reverter moved. We actually started back in 2020, then we had COVID, put us all on the, put this on the back burner for a little bit. We picked it back up again in 23, and we started this process back in 2023 to remove that reverter. That reverter, we are seeking to move it to the equestrian facility where the youth fair is now held. That property has the same reverter clause on it that says, while we don't have to use it for a fairground, we can't use it for essentially anything else. So that reverter's got to come off that property regardless of whether there's an animal shelter there or not. And we are on track now. We were hoping to be before the governor and cabinet at the June meeting. We worked as hard as we could to get that done. But unfortunately, we've been bumped to the September meeting, and that is being held on September 16th. Our ability to utilize that property for anything other than a fair is dependent on what will occur at that cabinet meeting before the governor and cabinet. We need their approval. DEP has been supportive. You all have taken some interim steps along the way. Back in 2023, there was a letter that you all approved stating we wanted to move the reverter. We recently came to you, if you recall, about we had an item on the agenda about adding a park. The DEP wanted a little bit more property in the mix. So we threw a park in there that was surrounded by state land to get them to move the reverter, which you all approved that in concept on an agenda. So we now think we're ready to go. Actually, we just got one other piece back finally today we've been waiting on, which was a survey of the park property. So we should be ready to go for that September meeting. All that being said, that is currently staff's intention for an option B, but it is contingent on the cabinet's approval. So we can't guarantee that site. And I have not wanted to move forward with any kind of site design or anything on that property until that happens, because I do not want to waste taxpayer money if we do not get that approval. That being said, in my discussions with the university, I had discussions with them actually yesterday with staff there. They still would very much like us to move to the property that is the UF property that we have been talking about, which has been site A. They believe we're very close on a lease agreement and an operational agreement based on the very last ones that we did some time ago. We have not been back to those to work on them in some time. And they believe we're very close. They are also authorized to reduce the lease price from the original $3 million that we have been discussing to $1 million for the lease price for the 40-year term for the entirety term of the lease. That being said, we discussed shifting some of that to the operational agreement. There are agreements with other counties and governments where they staff a vet into a shelter. There is a shared portion of that vet cost, and that's where we would shift that to. They have done it for free for a number of years. So I'm not going to say that there's – that's simply a complete savings of $2 million. So that's the status of where we're at now. What my recommendation – and I'm bringing this to you now without a final answer on either because I know you all have gotten a lot of questions. We have talked about it individually when you get those questions, but we haven't talked about it publicly. So initially when we thought we were going to the cabinet in June, it was always staff's plan to have this discussion with you at this meeting date, which we had been telling you. So we decided that we would go through with having this discussion at this meeting date and go ahead and make that site be public even though we don't have any approvals yet to move forward. So with that being said, my recommendation for today would be allow me to continue the discussions with the University of Florida. If we don't get something that staff both sides are comfortable with bringing back to this board prior to that September 16th meeting with the cabinet, then I think that's our answer there for sure. But if we do, I will bring that to you, and you can either say, this is really great, and we want to move forward with that. You can say, this is okay, let's see what happens on the 16th, and then we can decide between the two. But I would also hate to sit here and do nothing over the next three months, and then if something doesn't go our way in Tallahassee in September, we've done nothing to work towards the other option either during that time. I want to be able to be putting a shovel in the beginning of 2026, if at all possible, and I don't want to have to, you know, be waiting another few months to come back and finish something to get that done. The, you know, when we, assuming we have two options on the table by September, you know, there are pros and cons to both sites that we can put forward to you, but that is where we're at today. And I'm happy to answer any questions or take any further direction. You want to make a question? Okay, I have Commissioner Cornell, Alfred, and Wheeler. Thank you for the update. I am in favor of allowing staff to continue discussions with UF and bring back options back to us after the September Florida Cabinet meeting. Yeah, so we would have this. Yeah, I mean, I, like many of our citizens, have a sense of urgency about the animal shelter. Until we know about the reverter, though, I could see that just falling off the calendar and be put off another year. And so I don't see any harm in continuing. I think UF, when I met with the UF folks when they came here, you know, they brought, actually brought this up as a priority because they knew it was a priority of ours. So I'm going to take them for their word. I know there's been a lot of shifting chairs over at UF, and I also know that the Tallahassee has had a lot of shifting chairs. So, you know, I think flexibility is what you're asking for, and so I have no problem giving it. And if you need that direction, I can make that motion. I just, like, keep going down both paths, I guess, is my input. Commissioner Alfred. I was going to say pretty much the same thing that Ken did, but I like having this hard deadline to sort of light a fire under UF a little bit because I think that if we don't have an answer by September 16th or whichever day it was, then we need to go down path B, even though I don't see that side as being as beneficial to the community. So, yeah, thank you for bringing that to us. And do you need a motion, or are you okay with the guidance? I mean, right now we have considered the UF site as site A and the Wiesman track as site B. If, and the standing, internally, and the standing direction, the last direction, I should say, we've had from the board is for me to, for us to negotiate that agreement with UF. With only one. With UF, correct. There, there's no other entity to negotiate on the Wiesman side because we own the land. It's just a matter of now getting our item before the governor and cabinet and making that request. They moved it back in, I believe it was 07-ish time frame, 04 or 07, early 2000s, the first time. DEP is supportive of moving it, so I'm, I have high hopes that it, like I said, regardless of where the shelter goes, we need the reverber gone from that site. I ask about a motion because I, I see folks in the audience that I believe are here to speak to the, to the item. So I just would, thought I'd mention that. Okay. Commissioner Wheeler. Yes, I would move staff recommendation. It's a matter of just opening up the possibility of working the way that we've got right, the direction we've given our board right now and the manager is to only deal with the University of Florida. That's all. not to pursue the other, but if we expand to consider other sites, then we can be talking about both of them at the same time. So that is my motion. Yeah. So I would second that if you add that we need a decision by September after the cabinet meeting. You're correct. That's the 23rd, September 23rd. Yeah, of course, comment. Commissioner President. My only comment is, yeah, I mean, I agree with you and I think it should be to explore other sites because, you know, if, if plan A, falls through and plan B falls through, we, we still have to build a shelter. Like we gotta, we, we have to put a shovel on the ground and soon. Um, and so, you know, there, there is a chance that negotiations could fall through with UF and that the Weisman track reverter gets held up for another year or two and committee. And I don't want that to happen. So I think have asking staff to pursue other alternatives from plan A so that we have options and to bring us back any and all options by the second meeting in September makes a lot of sense. And I would definitely support that motion and second if everyone's okay with just having it be alternative sites with the Weisman track, obviously being the most seems like the most viable one. But, you know, there are other options out there potentially, maybe there's other public private partnerships. I don't know, um, pieces of property we own that we could explore. And I just, I, I know we've done a search. I just want to give staff the opportunity to do another search or look at other options that maybe have popped up since then. You're going to do an RFQ. No. Just kidding. Just kidding. You know, we're looking for sites too. And even the Lee brothers had offered land, you know, but it's a matter of where we want to put it in the county too. So there are, there are private, you know, as to where, if, if they're building out there to have more housing, you know, just saying it's been offered, you know, so that's all. What's been offered? The Lee brothers have offered land. Oh, out there. Well, this gives her options. That's exactly, that's all I'm saying. If it, it, it's just away from the university of Florida, not totally, but it, it just softens it. Yeah, that's all. I think it puts a fire in there. I think, I think it's a message to UF that we have a sense of urgency and we would love to work with you if you also have a sense of urgency. If you do not, we will move on. Well, I can, we can save the taxpayer dollars by using land we already own. Exactly. We should save taxpayer dollars by using the land we already own. I mean, that's, that's just fiscal. They're a moving target too at this point. That, that whole thing. I mean, if we're having the legislator, the state and also the federal influence now. At the University of Florida, that makes me really nervous. I mean, if we have the federal government in, engaged in how we select our president at the University of Florida, which he's already been engaged. I just, it makes me a little bit nervous. I just want to make sure we have options. That's all. Because when I talked to the chair, it sounded like he could take or leave it. You know, if you all have another site, go for it. I mean, that's what he said. Oh, really? That's not what he said to me. That's all he said to me. Well, I was the one who wasn't excited about being there, right? I mean, having it there. So that's probably why he was responding to me that way. Well, if you've got a better offer, you know, then take it. We have a motion and a second on the floor. Are there any public comments to the motion? No? Thank you. Well, you could say, you've been sitting there all that time. You could say something. You could say you support the motion. It's good to see you. Why not? Okay. All right. All right. All right. Seeing none, those in favor of the motion, vote by the sound of aye. Aye. All right. Those opposed, same sign. Motion clear. Madam Clerk. Yes. The next item will be acquisition of Fairbanks Rural Collection Center site. Move staff recommendation. Second. Got a motion and a second. Are there any further discussions? You going to talk us out of it? Are there any citizen comments to the motion? Seeing none, back to the board. Those in favor of the motion, vote by the sound of aye. Aye. Aye. Those opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Madam Clerk. Okay. That'll bring us to land conservation projects. Watermill and Pond. Hawkins Track Option Contract to Purchase Real Property. And a second. Thank God. Move staff recommendation and a second. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion to that motion that's on the floor? Are there any citizen comments to that motion that's on the floor? Back to the board. Those in favor of the motion, vote by the sound of aye. Aye. Aye. Those opposed, same sign. Motion carries. I'm sorry, Commissioner President. I'd like to say a big congratulations on our 100th acquisition. That's a very exciting milestone. And this is hard work. It shows in our community. And I know we often bicker over a tree here or a conservation space here or open space and a development here. But the real way that we're going to protect our environment is by buying these large parcels of beautiful, wild spaces that protect our water resources, that protect our natural ecosystems intact the way that they are. So I just really appreciate all the hard work we've done and that our voters have given us the resources that we need to be able to do it. And our trust for you as a parent. Andy, in addition to those beautiful words that Commissioner Privia said, what would you like to tell us? Well, I'm Andy Christman, Program Manager for the Land Conservation Program. I'd like to tell you thank you and that you should receive applause yourselves because 25 years of Alachua County forever, 100 acquisitions. We've actually gone past that 100 point already at this point. And we're proud to be able to do this important work that is the will of the citizens and the leaders. So thank you. Okay. How much more land do we need to meet our goal? 30 by 30. Yeah, quite a bit. Oh, really? Okay, never mind. Yeah, yeah. How many acres? Right, 36,000 within the, like, ACF program and with partners acquisitions. But the 30 by 30 goal adds another 40,000 basically. So it's a big, we have a big, good-sized county. 30 by 30, we already have met 30. 30%. Oh, not 30,000. Right, right, sorry, yeah, 30%. 40,000. Yeah. Okay, county. Yeah, I know, I know. Yeah. Big goal. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Okay, next item. Next chair, that brings us to public hearings. We have fiscal year 25 budget amendment to reallocate funds. Good afternoon. Moe Ricchitelli, your budget manager. At the same time we bring you the budget, the clerk has completed their audit, and we bring you back any budget adjustments that we need to do to true up for FY25. You should appreciate it. Yeah. The step down, Gainesville, so it's on line one under general fund. Am I to understand that we're moving 1.377, basically $1.378 million from the step down CRA funds into general fund? It was in general fund. We've created its own fund as a special revenue to identify it. Okay, so it's setting in its own space so that we can use it for economic development or other projects. It continues its original purpose. It's just in its own fund. Okay. And then the retiree post-employment benefits, that's just moving retirement funds for the already retired separate from? We have two categories. The first is our retirees. We've had that in our health, let me make sure I give you the right one, health insurance fund. So we have, that fund has been funding it in the past. For 25, we have created that funding to be in each department in general fund and the other funds that it relies in. And then we're also supplementing what we've used in the past for the health insurance fund by putting an infusion of dollars back into that fund. That's, we have both retirees and then we have, our plan is to fund current employees so that we will have funds for that future obligation. Okay, thank you. And then quick, the, under emergency services and other special revenue, it just says fund balance adjustment. What does that mean? Is that just like truing up? Yes. Okay. And then other, same thing with the, it looks like other capital projects, 2.5 million paying off, is that paying off, I'm like trying to draw a line. It looks like it's fund balance adjustment. That's a big fund balance adjustment, I guess I'm interested in understanding. So with regards to the projects that we have, as we move through projects, as they spend money, save money, we keep moving that needle as we go. And the biggest one isn't the roads, right? Yes. We have these projects, they didn't finish them, so that's why we have 103 in this year's budget, because it's last year and this year and the year before. I guess I'm just trying, I guess ultimately what I'm trying to get at and understand is like what is fund balance that's like unencumbered money that you have moved into the general fund that's sitting there that's now being allocated into the new budget process versus what is encumbered and just being moved around is what I guess I'm trying to understand. You know, like, it's a moving target based on that factor, but as we go through the summer, I can identify that a little bit better for you. That's no problem. Sure. Thank you. Mark's going to help me do that because he's been working on fund balance as we crafted the message. Is there an actual, I mean, I'm happy to move adoption of the resolution and the budget. The resolution, yeah, of the budget adjustments for 2025. Second. Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion to the motion? Are there any citizen comments to the motion? Seeing none. Back to the board. Those in favor of the motion will by the sign of aye. Aye. Aye. As opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Thank you very much. Okay. Thank you. Madam Plurk. Next, that'll bring us to adoption hearing for Z25-00006, comprehensive plan amendment for tree protection and open space. Did we get any comments from the state? No, Mr. Chair, Jeff Hayes, growth management director. So this is your comprehensive plan amendment for your open space and tree changes that we've transmitted. And we got zero comments from the state or any other state agencies. Great. Move adoption of the ordinance, authorizing application Z25-50-06. Second. Okay. Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion to the motion that's on the floor? Are there any citizen comments to the motion that's on the floor? Back to the board. Those in favor of the motion will by the sign of aye. Aye. Aye. As opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Madam Clerk. I'm sorry I'm rushing you. I'm talking about it. Yeah, but she's typing in. Okay, this will bring us to item three. Adoption hearing Z25-00009 amendments to the Unified Land Development Code, ULDC, for trees and native vegetation and open space. Okay. Yes, and Mr. Chair, the only, this is a similar situation. So this you've seen at the request to advertise, and the only substantive change, this is the tree in the open space code revisions, was that you requested for some provision for affordable housing. So you'll see that there, that for developments that are guaranteed to include 10% or more of the housing units which were affordable for 30 years, the households out or below 80% of the household median income. The mitigation rates would be 50% of what they would otherwise be calculated as for tree mitigation. Do you want to speak about what we spoke about this morning on this one, that we hope we can use our housing funds to incentivize? Yeah, I mean, so Ken and I had a sunshine meeting this morning, and one of the things that I brought up was just that I think our, the infrastructure surtax dollars, you know, we had a big conversation about home ownership versus rental and all that kind of stuff. But I think what was missing from that conversation is that we can do home ownership opportunities and still create new units, right? By working with developers that we've got bringing in preliminary development plans to you every day, right? And if those developers want to use our inclusionary housing provisions, if they want to look at ways in which they can build attainable housing and mixed types of mixed income housing in their developments, we have funding available that's, you know, low interest or zero interest financing that they can bring, that we can bring to the table to help them make those goals possible. So just asking, you know, letting our consultants know that money's there, and, you know, hopefully our growth management staff can maybe coordinate with our housing staff to make sure that those developers get the information about how to apply for that funding, should they be interested, because I really do feel like, especially, you know, if they use things like this, that lowers the cost, they use other pieces we have in there for inclusion, that lowers the cost, they get some low interest or no interest financing from us, that lowers the cost, suddenly what was a $300,000 house maybe is a $250,000 house, and then we've got the down payment assistance maybe that we do with a little bit of this money or more, and with our ship, they can start buying down that mortgage as well, and we've really begun to diversify housing options and incomes within neighborhoods all over the county instead of just on the east side, like we've seen in the past. So I just wanted to throw that out there. Thank you. So do we, at this point, convene as the Land Development Regulation Commission and find the amendment consistent with the Alachua County Comprehensive Plan and then reconvene? I'm happy to say that, but it looks like... I'm sorry, you had a question? I'm sorry, Mary. I do have a question, yeah. My question is, is the 50%, the mitigation rates at 50% of the required replacement rate, is that a figure, do you think, high enough to actually be a real incentive, or is it just kind of a nice thing? Mr. Chair, it is hard to tell, so we don't know. It is very site-specific, I understand. It is site-specific, so we do have mitigation numbers that come in that are quite substantial in the million-dollar range. So depending on the site, depending on the project, it could be significant. Okay. Yeah, I mean, I was going to say, I mean, I was, you know, I spoke with one of the developers that's doing a project with us recently, and I mean, their mitigation was calculated upwards of $100,000 on a reasonably, I mean, it's a decent-sized project, but, you know, it's like, I mean, if they can cut that down to $50,000, that translates to real savings. Well, it does, but I, you know, I'm looking for incentives, not just nice, not just money. Yeah, yeah. So I was just curious if that, you know, if the 50% number was just sort of like, eh, let's do 50%, or if there was some strategy behind it. And, Mr. Chair, we looked at a lot of different options, you know, tree for, one tree for one tree. This sort of balanced, you know, we still want to have that incentive for people to avoid removing the trees, but we also understand that we're trying to provide an incentive for folks to apply for some affordable housing. And, I mean, in the way that we have it here, this would be sort of a mixed income development, potentially. You could have 10% of the units that are affordable, 90% are market rate. Right, exactly. So, you know, maybe it's that incentive. Maybe it might be just enough incentive for them to provide that 10% of the units. Yeah, that's what I'm hoping for. All right, thank you. Okay. I'm moving to the LDRC and finding amendments consistent with the electric bill. I can't move. Second. Okay, I'm moving to second. Those in favor of the motion, vote by the sign of aye. Well, I guess I'm jumping to aye. Okay. Aye. Aye. Those opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Any further discussion? I think we reconvene as we have to see the ordinance amending LDRC, could you have a second? Second. Second. Is there a motion in that second? So, those in favor of the motion, vote by the sign of aye. Aye. Those opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Okay. Thank you. Next, we'll have adoption hearing, county-initiated amendments to the Unified Land Development Code for Street Design Specifications. Sorry. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Board. Allison Moss, Transportation Planning Manager for Alachua County. Similar to the last item, we have just one substantive change since the item was last presented. I will zoom right to there, and if anyone wants to discuss any more of the Code Amendment in detail, we can do that. So, essentially, there's a provision for one side only of a shared use path to be proposed, and per commission comment, we've specified that the location must be justified, why it would be on one side of the street versus the other, and that appropriate crossing treatments must be provided in that case. So, this would be primarily out on the rural roads, where we have a shared use path on one side of the roadway. Question, I guess, Commissioner Alfred? Yeah. So, is this really the only change, or are we working to make all of our codes consistent with the Green Book? This is the only change since the request to advertise. So, I'll go back to the beginning. Yeah, you don't need to do that. Yeah, I think I made a, yeah, I just wanted to ask a couple of quick questions about it since I wasn't here. Yeah, I could just start with the sort of framing of the impetus for the change and why they've been here. I kind of, I looked at the presentation, and that's why I add the question. Are we looking at, so, Chapter 19 of the Green Book references the Traditional Neighborhood Development Handbook. Are we, we're not, like, throwing that out, we still have, is that still part of what we're looking at, is that traditional neighborhood development? I would say it's highly consistent with that, rather than, however, having, as the county code has, road designs, content within street sections, and then also in the TND-TOD code, we're putting it in one place, and then having the TND-TOD code reference. Okay, I just want to make sure that we have context-specific design criteria, that, you know, we still take that into account, and that we're not writing that out of our code in any way, shape, or form. I would say it's very context-sensitive, and it's including land-use context more than the current code does. That's what I felt like it was saying? I just wanted to verify that, because I wasn't here for that discussion. Sorry to be all nerdy. Yeah, that was great. Very impressive. I looked at it and said, like, Mr. Pruzziot? Yeah, thank you. I know this isn't directly related to street subsections and designs, but it feels like the time to bring it up, because we're having the conversation. I think at the last one, I talked a little bit about, like, landscape buffers, strips, and things like that, like, not just being in St. Augustine turf and all of that, you know, being able to use, for our own roads, for sure, to start using alternatives that don't require irrigation and supplemental watering and things like that, but also, and fertilizer, but also allowing that kind of thing in developments. The other piece I was wondering about, and this is, like, I guess, you know, we talk a lot about wanting to see more things like these T&D standards, where there's, like, you know, where there's places where they don't incur in gutter, or they don't have it, and where the roads are narrower, where they can be, and so we have less impervious surface and things like that, but I feel like we're moving away from that with a lot of the standards that we have these days, where we want roads to be wider, we want pathways, we want this, we want that, so I guess I'm just interested to understand, maybe not right now, and I'm definitely still voting for this, it's not that, but I guess I just am trying to understand how we build into our codes and some flexibility to allow for that sort of thing in the context where it makes sense, so that we can bring LID into conversations with developers, and as, in terms of stormwater management, where we can think about how we're using our water and fertilizer resources efficiently, and I just, you know, I feel like we've moved away from those developments that kind of have that type of development and more into the sort of, like, big roads, wide streets, big sidewalks, even when it's not necessary, because it's sort of a standard requirement in every context now, and I just, I want to make sure we're not moving so far in that direction that we're, we're kind of just costing a bunch of money and not using logic and best practices when it comes to design. And being context-specific, because there are places where it's appropriate for people to be able to walk down the street. Right. You know, Hale is full of those neighborhoods. Exactly, exactly. So, anyway, that's just a comment more than a question, and I guess it's another conversation for the EAR. But, anyway, we keep throwing that back. We're going to have a lot to do in that. But, anyway, thank you for this, and I guess I would move staff's recommendation. Oh, convene as the LDRC and find the LDC amendment consistent with the Latchell County Comp Plan. Second. Is there a motion? Is there a second? Those in favor of the motion, vote by the sign of aye. Aye. Those opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Mr. Chair, did you get public comment on that? Oh, no. Oh, I sure didn't. I'm sorry. I didn't see it. Is there any public comment? It looks like there's a public comment. Oh, okay. Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't see it back there. Yeah, I thought he came in for one of the items. You're right, yes. Just a general comment. Even though we like this new street design, keep in mind that this is going to make the rightways wider, which means we're going to clear more. We're going to remove more trees because now, like, I'll give you an example. We typically do 50-foot rightways. We squish everything in 50 feet. The minimum rightway with minimum standard is 51 and a half feet. And you say a foot and a half is not much, but, yes, it makes a difference. So just keep in mind that, again, we like this, but you've got to be sure the rightways are going to get wider. Driveways are going to get wider? Excuse me? Did you say driveways? Driveways. Driveways. The clear of the road. That's my point. For all type of streets, not just regular streets and all of them, they're going to get wider. They're going to get to the point of 60 or more. Yeah, I guess that is what I was talking about. I guess I want to make sure we're not driving in a situation where we're always increasing impervious surface, even in areas where we don't need to be. So, Mr. Chair, in response to an assertion or concern that the proposed changes as a part of this land development code change would increase right-of-way, we prepared tables that show proposed width versus currently proposed width. That's in the blue. And then current minimum impervious width versus minimum proposed minimum impervious width. So as you can see, in general, actually, the proposed width is narrower than is currently required, and this was us detailing out all of the features required in the table. So there are areas where presently in our single-family residential neighborhoods we have an eight-foot-wide path required on one side of the road and a five-foot path on the other. This code kind of code update right-sizes the improvements, so we would just have two five-foot sidewalks, and then we would reserve the more significant improvements for the corridors where they matter, so the collector roadways, the arterial roadways where people walking and biking need more space and need more separation from motor vehicle traffic. So there are a couple instances where either the right-of-way or the impervious right-of-way goes up slightly. It's definitely not across the board. This is sort of showing as you go through the different roadway classifications. These are collector roadways. I will point out this main street option is an option for developers. Conversely, they could do the through-way design, which would require less right-of-way and less impervious. And same thing in the four-lane collector. So again, the main street is kind of all the bells and whistles if somebody would want to do on-street parking, separated bike lanes, sidewalks, parkway strips, the whole thing. This all looks like it goes down. In general, it does, yes. And that's just generally, there's been a goal with this code update to right-size the improvement. So rather than have wider facilities interior to the developments, residential and commercial, and then narrower facilities on the major roads, to flip it to better serve people walking, biking in Alachua County. Additionally, travel lane widths have gone down in this table uniformly. So Public Works directed us to go ahead and put the maximum travel lane width to 11 feet. So it's between 10 and 11. And before, you would have seen some 12-foot lanes. Okay. I think we had the vote before we did the public comment. So then we had the public comment. Now we're back to reconvening. I guess we can make that. Reconvening as the Board of County Commissioners approve the ordinance and authorize the chair's signature. Is there a second? Second. I can do a public comment again. Okay, public comment. Come on. All right. Yes, I agree with Allison. We are reducing the impervious area in the roads. You know, the pavement, we used to normally do 24 feet. Now it's 22 the maximum. But again, keep in mind, you know, again, the right way, the part that we're going to clear, we can do subdivision. We have done most subdivisions in the county right now. It's 50, 5-0, with 10 footies, months, and inside. So we are clearing 70 feet right now, today. You see the subdivisions, any subdivision, recent subdivision. Now we still have to have the easements for the GRU. As you guys know, that's a different story. I don't know what we're talking about here. So when you reduce the crunch everything in a smaller area, in the impervious area, the utility allocation doesn't work in there and there. And now we are planting trees. And again, we like the driveways, the cross-section, they come out with it. I think this is good. But it's going to be wider. That's a matter of what, it's going to be wider. Less pavement, now it's going to be a little harder. Excuse me. When you don't have parallel parking in the road, by the way, they have cross-sections from parallel parking, which is good. The emergency vehicles, just think about, we can have 10 foot driveways, sorry, 10 foot driving lanes, pathways, 20 feet wide. It's not possible to park in the side and still have emergency vehicles going through parking both sides. So even though it reduces the impervious areas, the right way is still wider. So it's, we've got to keep, and we talked about the trees before, the other item in there, and the idea is trying to save the trees and all of that thing. So it's just something to consider. I think we should keep working on this a little bit more. That's my point. Yeah, I mean, on the tree piece, hopefully the reduction of the drip line and putting these roads, like, within the drip line will help mitigate that. But, yeah, the fact that we're going to be able, for example, to impact the canopy, that's going to help with the cross-section. Right. Because if we have a tree that we're going to try to save within the right way, now probably we can do it before. No. Right. So. Chair. Okay, thank you. I just have a question. In an urban situation where you have GRU easements and you have sidewalks, there are situations where they allow the overlap, but in, like in downtown, but when we're doing new development, GRU wants all their own space, right? That's what you're saying. That's correct. That's what I think we need to be working on, is how we work with GRU on what they are demanding for their right-of-ways, because that is causing a lot of wide spaces, I think. Yes, it does. It does. And just to give a visualizer, you know, normally the sewer, it goes in the middle of the road. We cannot put anything within 15 feet of the sewer. So now you're 15 feet. The water has to have a 10-foot clearance from anything, and the electric has to have at least 7-foot clearance from everything. Now you have to accommodate all of that, plus all the new communication, you know, all the new communication. And when I say all the new communication, now it's not just one company. It's three, four companies, communication companies. They want to be in the right way. Can they go vertical, or do they have to be horizontal? You can go vertical with the electrical, the gas, and the communications, but they still need the clearance. So are you saying that because the roads are narrower, you can't put the utilities underneath them? You cannot meet the clearances, because remember that you have the driving part, 20 feet, 22 feet. You have the tree and the sidewalks, but the utilities have to be accommodated in that area, the same area. Everything is there. So now it's going to get wider. And I'm saying that the utility clearances they're asking for are a little bit ridiculous. More than that. Yeah. We've been fighting for that for years, as you know, Mary. Yeah, yeah. I do know that. I just wanted to say that out loud, because I feel like I want to make sure we fight the right fight. Like I said, you know, we probably need to keep working in these cross sections to be sure that everybody is in there. Well, I mean, I don't think it would be, this is an aside, but I don't think it would be wrong of us to ask GRU to consider this conversation. We all are trying to work towards affordable housing, and we're all trying to work towards attainable housing. And every inch and every foot of space and every time you widen areas that are rights of way and general use, that's less area they can do lots. That's more costs they have to spend on clearing and managing. Like, I mean, I know, you know, we may not see eye to eye on everything, but I think that we all see eye to eye on that. And we have a Realtors Association and a Developers Association and a bunch of people that have been filling this room to talk to us about affordable housing. That's a lot of political weight and muscle we can put behind the conversation to ask GRU to please consider the reduction of these rights of way, like, requirements. So maybe it's a conversation worth having with the GRU authority. Well, they came to the table for downtown stuff, so maybe they'll come to the table for this if we, you know, but I think it's going to be. A chair letter? Is it a, what is the. I mean, I just, I don't know how to start that conversation, but I think that conversation. It might be a working group to start with or something like that with staff. We've been working in downtown for at least 15 years, to remember, and we still have issues with the transformers. You know, you see transformers in front of the buildings, which is not a good thing, you know. Try to work and put it in the back, but, again, they have the clearance, the requirements, and so on. So space is becoming premium, as you guys can see, for everybody. So you think the one and a half foot, or even a foot is not too much, but it makes a difference, believe it or not. Okay. Well, we can address that. Yeah, let's address that another time. Thank you. Okay. Back to the board. Those in favor of a motion, vote by the sign of aye. Aye. Those opposed, same time. Motion carries. All right. Next item, transmittal hearing Z2500007, comprehensive plan amendment for water supply planning. Hear your name, Amy. I have questions. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Mike Kasteen, Senior Planner with Growth Management, bringing you the comprehensive plan amendment to amend the comprehensive plan and adopt the water supply plan. This is required by Florida statutes. It's part of the planning statutes. And staff has worked with the city of Gainesville and GRU staff to develop the water supply plan update, and also with a lot of great support from the water management district. These are amendments to the existing comprehensive plan, and they update policies in potable water and sanitary sewer, conservation open space, and intergovernmental coordination elements. And they incorporate, by reference, the Joint Water Supply Facilities Work Plan, which is required by the Florida statutes. This started in 2000. Whoops. I'm sorry. I've got a timeline here. I'm getting ahead of myself. In May, we brought this to the local planning agency, the planning commission. We're here today, June 24th, for the transmittal hearing. And we anticipate an adoption hearing in August. The state has its review period next. It goes to the Department of Commerce. 2005 is when water supply plans became part of the growth management statutes. And the Suwannee River and St. John's River Water Management Districts adopted a regional plan in January 2017 and an update in December of 2023. And so then Florida statutes require local governments to adopt their plan within 18 months following. As you know, we've just been talking about this, GRU is the water supplier for most of the urban cluster. For all of the urban cluster, there are a few small water suppliers, and they're identified in the water supply plan. They are factored into this overall. Can I ask a question? Sure. How did they contribute at all to the plan? Were they contacted or were they included in any of the discussion? They were identified as water suppliers. When we first wrote the plan, there were efforts to contact them, and they were not particularly successful. Was that in 2005? That was in 2017. In 2017. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. They are still regulated also by the Department of Environmental Protection. We are. Okay. So as detailed in the staff report, there's some more background on how the joint facilities plan was originally created, again, with GRU, EPD, the city. Particularly pages two and three of the staff report go into a good amount of detail. The principal updates to the joint facilities plan were some data analysis of population projections, demand projections, mapping updates, as well as identifying new capital projects in the plan. Once they're in the plan, they can be eligible for, for example, water management district additional funding, that sort of thing. The county and GRU will continue to implement their water conservation projects to reduce demand. And Stacey can tell you that's where we get the most water conservation for the least amount of dollars. But GRU will also do its capital projects, again, for their water and wastewater systems. So the proposed changes really do amount to changing the date referring to the work plan and adopting the plan by reference in four places in the plan. So we're changing it from 2018 to 2025, 2035 for the water supply facilities work plan. And the local planning agency did recommend the board transmit the proposed comprehensive plan amendment to the state land planning agency and other agencies for review and comment. And that is staff's recommendation as well. And I'll be glad to answer your questions. And, again, Stacey Greco from GPD is here and Rick Hutton from GRU is here if we get out of my league. We have Commissioner Alford and then Commissioner Wheeler. I'm sorry I asked my question. Oh, okay. All right. Commissioner Wheeler. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The capital projects that GRU would engage in, what is an example of a capital project? Whoops. If I have the right slideshow, I can show you those. A lot of them are related to the expansion of the reclaimed water system to continue serving reclaimed water, as well as the wetlands project out all in southwest 122nd Street. Those are a couple of the big ones that I highlighted. I can show you a couple more in the slideshow. How far out would GRU be anticipate those projects? Is it only where they have water accessible to the outlying areas? I mean, there is a limit to where GRU serves, so does that also limit then the involvement in the county in terms of water conservation or use? I would say this. The county's water conservation programs really can be implemented countywide. There is a focus within the urban cluster in order to reduce irrigation water demand. With regard to GRU, they are limited to the urban cluster unless someone comes to the board for a certain limited type of exception. Other than that, you can't extend water and sewer out beyond the urban cluster. So GRU's expansions all would be within the urban cluster. Okay. So their impact is only where they are servicing? Yes, that's correct. I got you. Okay. Because I know that, you know, I was pushing real hard for a while for us to purchase the Lime Rock Lakes about High Springs because it's such an incredible body of surface water bodies. And mainly it wasn't really for recreation. It was mainly as a resource, you know, that we would have. And I know that the Suwannee River Wanda Management District was interested as well, you know. And, of course, we weren't able to make that purchase. But I think it went to a private possibility of purchaser before I could get to Suwannee River to say, won't you just buy the whole thing and hold it? You know, because I just didn't know how far we would go in the county to purchase a body like that and just hold it and keep it out of the public so that it's not a liability issue, which is what the problem was with that land. Yes. And, frankly, the water supply plan doesn't address that sort of circumstance. I don't really think it's designed to. Most of these are really – ours is fairly unique in Florida. That is a joint plan. There are a few but not very many of them. Okay. So the plan that we would have for our water then just as a county separate from this, from working with the city and the county, is that what – there are two different – We address them in different ways. So we have a public – potable water and sanitary sewer element. That is essentially a – primarily a urban cluster focused plan element. And then our conservation open space policies address conservation, including water bodies in other means, in other ways, including through acquisition. All right. Thank you. There's a whole lot of water concerns that I have. Certainly. And I guess I'll have to wait until I get back out on the streets with yard signs and people where I can actually dive in the way I want to and then educate this board the way I'd like to. Thank you. Commissioner President. Yeah. You know, I have to admit, I dug into the edits. They were just date edits. I sort of started to dive into the regional – the partnership plan. But I guess I'm most interested in just – maybe it's from GRU or from Stacy's perspective. You know, it talks about increasing by 117 million gallons per day by 2035. That's the relevant regional interest. Water demands would increase by 117 million gallons per day by 2035. And it outlines water conservation opportunities to offset 54 million gallons a day. I guess I'm just interested to understand where we feel like we're going with our water supply. Like, are we in line with our consumptive use permit? Do we feel like we're going to be in a place where – you know, we are seeing counties bumping up against their consumptive use permits. We're seeing places where development is literally being constrained by the amount of water they have available, which in my mind isn't really necessarily a bad thing. But I would love for us to not be in that reactive situation and for us to be proactively thinking about what is our water supply, what are our constraints, and how are we living within those natural constraints. Yeah. Stacey Greco, Water Resources Program Manager at the EPD. I'll start, and then I think Rick will probably talk about consumptive use permitting. Um, so you are referencing the regional plan that was done for the larger region, which then triggered us having to update our plan. And those numbers are scary, and I've been using those numbers in my PowerPoints when I go and talk about water conservation, um, because it is very expensive to try to provide that water for that increased, um, growth. And it shows very much so in that that it is much more cost-effective to do water conservation, and when we're talking about water conservation there, we're not talking about, you know, five-minute showers, which we all want to do. It's really about the way we develop and grow so that that new growth does not need that amount of water. So, I mean, that's exactly why, for example, in the chair letter that you sent to the City of Alachua, it recommends that they put in for new development, um, you know, in their agreements to have no permanent irrigation because they're a utility and they can do things like that. So, we are in a unique position as being a county without a utility that we don't have a consumptive use permit. So, I mean, we are trying to have policies and education and outreach to reduce that demand, but, you know, we personally do not have a consumptive use permit. And when you dig into that plan that you're mentioning that drove all of this, um, a lot of those projects in areas beyond Alachua County are direct potable reuse. So, treating wastewater to a level of then it becoming drinking water, which I don't think, you know, GRU is considering right now. But, I mean, that is the bulk of that billions of dollars to provide that water if you do dig into that plan. That is what this is about. And I hear you that our plan is really just mostly changing dates. We did get into this one, a water conservation missed opportunities section on page 16, where we did kind of talk about some of the things that we've been trying to do as a county. Like, um, doing once a week irrigation restrictions and our concerns about wells. So, we did get that in here, um, as things that we would like to do. But I think really for thinking about those real bigger things, you know, it's definitely on our list to be looking at as we go through the EAR if there's other things. Thank you. I appreciate that. To my colleagues, I just, you know, I've been looking at some of the developments that are building in those areas where they've bumped up against their consumptive use permit. And, I mean, the developers can't build all the houses they have entitlements for because they literally don't have water for them. And so, they're having to, like, quote, find water, right, and doing that by reducing irrigation in landscapes, not including it, by adding more native plants and seer escaping, by putting compost into their landscaping, by really, like, thinking creatively about the way they handle where 50% of our water goes, which is onto our lawns and landscapes. So, I, you know, I guess I would just love for us to be, as we are doing EAR, to be, like, looking at proactive and talking with the consultants and the developers and that, you know, like, what are the ways in which we can do this that aren't going to break the bank and turn it, flip it, you know, to where we're messing with affordable housing even more, but also making sure that we're really doing these things in ways. And they're proving that it can work, you know, they're doing it on large scales in other places. So, I think there's opportunity there for us to be thinking differently about this. And I know that's what Stacey wakes up doing and goes to bed thinking about. So, I just want to thank her and encourage us to be thinking about that proactively as we go into this EAR process. Commissioner Alfred? Oh, yeah. You know, I appreciate the work that we do at GRU, and obviously, that's where the vast majority of the water in our community comes from. However, we have a lot of small communities that are growing, that are building new subdivisions, that are setting a precedent for what their water use looks like. And some of them have water quality issues. And, quite frankly, the ability to have conversations with these other communities has changed a lot since 2017. And I'm hoping that going forward, we can include them more in our water planning, because I feel like we can, you know, help direct how this goes forward in some of these smaller towns by using lessons learned from GRU and by taking into account, and from these outside communities where, you know, where they are limiting development due to consumptive use permits. And we have that, you know, that could be something we face in the future. But I think helping these other communities and their water systems become part of our planning process, I think, would be really great. And I understand in 2017 they didn't talk to us, but they might talk to us now. You know, I think that, and that's something we could address at a joint meeting in the future as well. If I may add, every couple years I do a road show and go to all the municipalities, and water conservation is always something we talk about. And we try to get water use data so that we can offer our rebate programs and things like that. And I'm about to schedule those for this summer as we're dealing with some of our stormwater programs. And I will definitely put, you know, water conservation and remind them of the tools that they have because being utilities, some of our municipalities have some great tools that they can use. And, you know, we'll definitely remind them. And if it's useful for it to become part of our joint meetings to have those discussions, I think it's worthwhile because this falls in with, you know, the goals that we have on our, you know, water and climate board and other places. So, you know, having, you know, having these things, it totally makes sense to me. So I just thought I'd throw that out there because things have changed since 2017. Thank you. Okay, Commissioner Cornell. I was just going to ask Stacey, you know, Stacey, around the state, how does GRU compare to other utilities with regards to conservation efforts? Yeah, I mean, I think GRU does some great water conservation, but they also lean on us, which is great because, you know, we have our irrigation design code, so that really does implement it. But they do have some of their own programs, like reaching out to the high water users. We recently met with one of their representatives that deals with their large accounts and trying to find ways that we can get those large accounts to participate in some of our rebate programs. And then they've had rebate programs in the past. So, I mean, it's definitely very easy to work with GRU. And I think that, you know, water conservation, you know, we are doing well in Alachua County and in GRU. Definitely look across the state. Yeah, that was the only point I was going to make. I mean, I think a lot of times GRU doesn't probably hear that around Alachua County, but I know around the state, GRU is, you know, kind of a leader with regards to utilities. And I just want to tell them I appreciate that. Okay. Commissioner Prizio? Yeah, I guess I just, to your point, I guess, Mary, too, like that, you are right. GRU is a leader. I mean, they've used H2O Save. They've thought about ways in which they can target their high water users and really have real conversations. And I sincerely appreciate that. You know, my bigger concern is sort of this regional approach. I know the Regional Planning Council, I don't make it to the meetings because of scheduling. I heard it moved. It's still in an evening. Anyway. But I do think this is an important conversation to be had. I mean, it's talking about the whole region, like literally fresh groundwater alone cannot meet projected 2045 water demands without causing unacceptable impacts to water resources. I mean, it's the stuff in this regional report is really dire. And it's our region. I'm not talking about somewhere else. I'm talking about right here. And to your point, those rural areas are small towns. You know, they're all figuring on bigger and then they want to grow and they want that tax base. But every house they plant is another hundreds of gallons of water a day on a good day. And that's if they're not. They don't have ingrown irrigation systems. So, you know, we do need to have those conversations. And so I just, you know, I don't know if the Regional Planning Council's, if it's on their plan, if this is on their agendas. I think I could make it be part, you know, to have the Regional Planning folks come and present the water plan, I think would be a good, you know, Regional Planning Council agenda. That would be great. You know, I happen to know they're looking for something for next Monday. I wonder if I could make it happen that quick. Well, I just wanted to thank you for bringing that to the agenda and having that conversation. And if I can be there, I will. Thank you. Okay. Yes. Rick Cotton, Gainesville Regional Utilities. I just wanted to say we really appreciate our partnership with Alachua County and all the work that you all do and all the things that we do together. Really appreciate it. Okay. You're great, Rick. Thank you. Approval of a transcendental to the state land planning agency and other agencies for review and comment. Second. Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion by the board? Are there any citizen comments to the motion? Seeing none, back to the board. Those in favor of the motion, vote by the sign of aye. Aye. Those opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Next, we'll have public hearing Z25000015 to consider amendments to Unified Land Development Code related to plating. Plating. Plating. Mr. Chair, Jeff Hayes, Growth Management Director, did not have a presentation for this item. This is a very narrow item that's reacting to a recently signed legislation that's relating to plating. This is for our Senate Bill 784, which was just signed by the governor a few days ago. That legislation would take our plating process, which is how we divide land in a subdivision. It would make it an administrative process. That, in and of itself, isn't a huge issue, but it does present some other process issues that would come up for the county. Our plating process is the way by which you accept. The county accepts any public infrastructure or any public right-of-way that's part of a plating. So we would just have to institute a new process to do that. The legislation did provide an out for charter counties, of which we are one. And so that's what this one sentence that we're adding to the code is putting in place, that we would keep our current plating process. Those platings would come to you as the Board of County Commissioners on a consent agenda for approval. Move staff recommendation. Second. Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion to the motion that's on the floor? Are there any citizen comments to the motion? Mr. Chair, and I would have to check, this is a change to our Unified Land Development Code, so we probably do need to find it consistent with the comprehensive plan. I would move that we meet as a Unified Land Development Code, find this consistent with our comprehensive plan. Okay. Second. Got a motion and a second. Any public comments? No public comments. Go back to the board. I don't see any. Back to the board. Those in favor of the motion, vote by the sign of aye. Aye. Those opposed? Same sign. Motion carries. I would move as a county commissioner, the staff's recommendation. Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion to the motion? Are there any citizen comments to the motion? Back to the board. Those in favor of the motion, vote by the sign of aye. Aye. Those opposed? Same sign. Motion carries. Next, we'll have the quasi-judicial public hearings. Item Z25-00008, a request for a special exception to permit a commercial animal boarding facility. Mr. Chair, I have our script for the quasi-judicial items. Okay. I believe this is our only one. Mr. Chair, 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 to the chair to ask questions of staff or other speakers, to seek clarification of comments made, to respond to comments or presentations. All persons who present written materials to 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 experts and non-expert witnesses. Persons presenting testimony may rely on factual information in the record to support their testimony. And my understanding is there have been no party requests. Of course, a person can come in at the hearing and ask for party status, but they will need to tell you why they are delayed in putting in their application. Okay, then we'll go to the clerk. Is there anyone wishing to seek party status at this time? All right, can I inquire commissioners if you have received any ex parte communications, and if so, please disclose of them. No. I have not. No. No. No. At this time, anyone wishing to address these items, if you will please stand and raise your right hand and be sworn in. Do you sworn 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. Mr. Chair, good afternoon. Jerry Brewington, Senior Planner, Alachua County Department of Growth Management. I have been sworn a copy of my resume is on file, and for the record, this item was properly advertised. This is, as we have heard, a special exception, Z25-00008, a special exception request for a commercial animal boarding facility. Some slides first. This is the location of the site, is on the southwest quadrant of northwest 39th Avenue and I-75, located south of northwest 39th Avenue. The aerial view of the site shows the property. Now, this is from a couple of years ago, the actual horizontal construction for the hammock subdivision is going in right now. Maffert, I think it's probably complete. Also, that parcel that you see adjacent to the project site, 6233, is a stormwater retention area for DOT and for the site as well. So, you will see that in the master site plan, but it is a pie-shaped site that is part of a larger development. We'll show you in a second. The zoning for the site is ML, which is an industrial, light industrial zoning district that does permit this use by special exception. The overall site plan for this subdivision, or the whole area, non-residential, includes conservation area, as well as some residential housing and warehousing as well. The land use on this property is light industrial. You can also see the various land use designations, including a conservation area, immediately to the south of this project site. Again, it is part of a larger development that has already received development plan approval that will come in for the individual properties as each one is approved. A special exception for a commercial animal boarding facility, sometimes known as doggy daycare, but also does permit overnight boarding as well for a limit of 30 days. And we do have specific criteria in the code, section 404.44, which do govern these types of facilities. The master site plan for the entire property shows the hammocks reserve subdivision that you can see down the street from the proposed animal facility. But more to the point, Mr. Chair, you can see that this particular facility, the site for it, almost five acres, is surrounded both by stormwater facilities to the south, to the northwest, as well as the large conservation area across the street. So there is no immediate development next to this property except to the northeast, and that will come into play in a second, which I will explain. The project site plan has a building area for the actual facility as well as a dog park area and a vehicular use or parking area located adjacent. But you can see those rough areas shown in the project site plan. There will be a medium density buffer, but only to the northeast of the site, as well as some screening around the dog park area itself. Staff analysis of the proposal is that it is consistent with our comprehensive plan and that it will not cause level of service standards in our future land use element to fall below adopted levels. In other words, there is infrastructure to support the intended use. It's also consistent with policy 7.1.2 of our future land use element, which does state the proposed changes in the zoning map shall consider consistency with the plan, as well as impacts the public facilities and the relationship to surrounding development. Staff analysis has found that the proposed special exception will not negatively impact public facilities, that it is consistent with the development patterns in the immediate area, and is consistent with the policies, goals, and objectives found elsewhere in the plan. As far as our Unified Lane Development Code goes, there are criteria for approval of a special exception. These include factors for consistency with the plan, compatibility, again, with surrounding uses, as well as the health, safety, and welfare of the public in general. It also considers factors such as ingress, egress, off-street parking, noise and odors, availability of utilities, screening and buffering, signs, impacts to public roads, as well as environmental justice issues. And some of these criteria are new ones that the board has just recently passed as part of the update to the special exception criteria. In no case is the proposed use found to cause any sort of impact to public welfare. It does not have any impacts on environmental justice. And also, the code does provide, again, specific requirements for commercial animal boarding facilities, which this property will be consistent with. The proposed conditions are shown in your staff report. They are outlined here. There are five conditions. I would like to point out specifically number four. The board is empowered to reduce the buffers if they so choose. And staff would note, if you remember, again, the majority of this site is surrounded by stormwater development, stormwater retention areas, as well as the conservation area immediately to the south. Staff found that also providing a buffer for these areas was not really necessary. And so, we have asked, and the applicant, of course, is in full agreement, that the medium density buffer only go to the northeast, where the additional development will occur. Otherwise, there's a road there, surrounding areas, stormwater areas that you can see, and the existing conservation area. We felt that a buffer was redundant. And so, not really necessary, except to the northeast, where additional development will occur. So, the board is empowered to do that, and that will be reflected in the conditions for your special exception. Just some quick photos of the site. You can see that when I actually took these site photos, there was some of the horizontal improvements were going in. The paving hadn't even been finished yet. The site presently is undeveloped. Again, this is all new development that's going in. They're putting in the horizontal now, including the retention areas on the south of the site that you can see. The conservation area is the treed area off in the distance. That will stay. Of course, it's all conservation. Will not be improved. Additional stormwater facilities, and again, more of the conservation area to the south of the site. So, this is the project as you see it. Staff recommendation is that the board find the proposed special exception request consistent with the plan. As well as our unified land development code, and that you adopt resolution Z2502, approving this requested special exception. And that concludes that presentation, Mr. Chair. The applicant, I guess? Sure. Just a quick question. That's okay. I guess I just don't understand. Like, there is an R2 zoning rights just to the, I guess it's the southwest of the property. It doesn't look like it's constructed yet, but that's the zoning or the land use. See that R2? Right now. That's the, that's the hammock, I want to say hammock reserve, that's going underway. If you remember. My only concern is, like, is there enough buffer there from a sound perspective? If they've got, like, overnight dogs running around and barking and things like that. So, you mentioned no buffer on that end, and I just. Well, Mr. Chair, if you notice, there's stormwater actually between. If you see, this is the overall master site plan. You can see very clearly the hammock reserve subdivision. So, there is actually some distance between the proposed use. There is going to be stormwater and the road before you get to it, the actual hammock reserve. I will also note, and this was actually pointed out in the LPA, the local planning agency meeting, if you go to the site, I-75 is kind of a white noise thing there. I was there for quite a bit, and it's always that background noise. There's always kind of a low-level rumble from trucks and vehicular traffic from I-75 that is actually the most prevalent thing that you will hear on around the area, more so than anything else. At least that was staff opinion. Commission Halford, you had any questions? My question was very similar to Anna's. I was concerned that the sound would carry across the roads in the stormwater ponds differently than it would carry through trees, so I wanted to make sure that that new development wasn't going to be impacted by that. But you are right, I-75 would probably be the prevailing sound that you would hear. Thank you. Mr. Chair, Clay Swagger with EDA. I don't have a formal presentation, but I appreciate the consideration today. This is right in the center of a PDP, a preliminary development plan that was approved several years ago. It's got a mix of uses, some single-family attached hammock reserve, some light industrial to the east over towards I-75, and then a really large conservation area to the south. So we're almost 800 feet from the Hoffler Brothers, Hoffler State's subdivision with a lot of buffering there. Hammock reserve under construction, that's a good 400 feet away, which is about double what the code requires for the separation of 200 feet. I also just wanted to mention that all the boarding in the building is completely enclosed, so the animals will be kept inside. And also your code has a limitation of outdoor areas for use of the animals, has to conclude by 9 p.m. And we have a design where it will actually be sort of like a courtyard. It will be sort of surrounded by the building and they'll have the indoor, I'm sorry, the outdoor areas. So that will also attenuate sound impacts. So we agree with the conditions. And if you have any questions for us, we'd be glad to answer them today. Okay. Commissioner Prezio? I was just going to move staff recommendation and recommend that the board approve, adopt Z25-2, approving the proposed special exception request. Sarko? Got a motion to second. Commissioner Cornell? I was just going to say I'm normally not a huge fan of special exceptions, but this seems like a really good one and an easy one in the back of an industrial area. So I appreciate everybody's work on it. Okay. Commissioner Wheeler? Yeah, just very quickly, the buffer that you're saying is not required. What is in that buffer now? What is on the edge of the property? And the only reason I'm asking is because it seems to me shade seems to be, you know, a commodity these days. You know, that they would allow to keep that buffer in just to have at least some shaded area on the spot. Sure. So to answer your question, there are existing stormwater basins that are to the west and to the east. And they're very large because they're master plan to accommodate the industrial and the residential areas. So it's a really large scale. And those do have landscaping as well. There's also elements in the county plan that require landscaping for shading. We have to have 30% of the site has to be under canopy cover in 20 years. So there still will be a very good amount of canopy and shading. I just was thinking it was already existing, you know, that you wouldn't have to deal with that. You would just know that there are shaded areas along the edge of that property that animals could get to during the day or people, too. That's all. Yes, ma'am. So we will have quite a bit of landscaping that will be put in. We just won't. We were asking for accommodation and not have to do the specific buffer plantings on that west side. We'd rather cluster the landscaping closer to the dog areas and where they'll be using it as opposed to sort of on the edge of the parking lot. Sure. No, got it. And I was hoping to hear if the people were here because of the facility, because we've been working so closely with the animal shelter, you know, that if they're in times when during storms or when we have to, you know, when we're for their emergency situations, if they would be able to take dogs, you know, or cats, you know, that sort of thing that in to help out. So Anna and Stefan Mann are here. They're the owners and operators of Jazz's Wonderland. That'll be hopefully a new business. Oh, not a new business, a new location of an existing business. And they're great folks and they're excited to. Well, come see us and, you know, see if there isn't something that you can work with our shelter somewhere on helping getting animals out to people who might need them, et cetera, et cetera. Mr. Chair and Commission, good to see you. Byron Flagg, Land Use Environmental Attorney from Gainesville. These are my clients. And I've been working with them for about two years now to get to this stage. So we're just very excited to see this move forward. Good, good. Are you guys new to the area? The residency here is about eight years, nine years total. Yeah, I'm originally from Brazil. My father has a rescue in Brazil. He has, like, a big farm. So I was raised around 70 to 100 dogs at a time, you know, all from the streets because we don't have a good system there to rescue dogs. My father just has a very sweet heart to, like, just get every single dog he sees and gives them a nice life. We currently foster dogs for plenty of pit bulls. So I reserve a part of our facility to have dogs that need fostering. And it is part of my plan to eventually have a – to help with shelters, but more towards maybe the senior care because I know those dogs usually don't find a home. So I was hoping to eventually maybe be able to be that place where if they don't get adopted, they can kind of, like, live with us until they, you know, they pass away. So, yeah, sorry, I'm very nervous. I'm glad I asked. And I also love trees and plants, so I'm obsessed with shading and all this stuff. So that was one of the things I told the EDA and also our architect that I want to preserve as many trees as possible because I do love the shades. That's something that on our current site, every owner that pulls up, they love to see the pecan tree and all the dogs running around, you know, around the shade. So I told my husband, I will not remove trees unless if I really have to because replacing the trees for just canopies doesn't really do its, you know, thing with the heat, especially against you being so hot all the time. So I'm all about preserving. So I was like, they're just talking about the, you know, the buffer requirements and stuff. But, like, personally, I want to keep as many trees as possible because I think it's the best way. Thank you. That's exciting. Any other questions? I'm so glad we asked. I'm a big animal lover, so I'm all about, you know, providing nice space for a peace of mind for the owners when they're away, but I'm also big about rescuing and all these things as well. My architect told me to just take it slow. I can't hug the whole world and all the animals on earth at once. He's like, let's start with the boarding facility, and then you can plan to have something, you know, moving forward shelter-wise and all these things. But as long as we have room, we can always help. I always do that, too, when there are the big storms and some of the shelters don't have a place for the dogs. They have to relocate the dogs. Exactly. That's how I adopted all my dogs, too, just so you know. I'm a foster failure. A lot of foster failures. A big one. All my dogs are adopted. How many do you have now? How many do you have now? Right now we have three dogs. Okay. But I also have three babies, like babies, four years old, two years old, and nine-month-old. So we're very busy with the ones we have. Yeah, it's a little bit of a chaos. Well, you're working with an excellent attorney, too. Yes, exactly. And you have a hospital, too. Yes. A lot of dogs coming from there for folks that have a need. You know, they're stuck in the hospital, families aren't around. For a long period. We've done that a few times. I'm so glad to know you. Yes. Hi. And Jazz is Wonderland because my dog's called Jazz. So I figured I would make her a Wonderland with all her friends. So that's why it's Jazz is Wonderland. Seems like an awesome business and a great, two great owners. So thank you for doing it. Thank you so much. Thanks for having us. Commissioner Prisian. That's all right. I'll make my comment after we go. Okay. All right. Those in favor of the motion, vote by the sign of aye. Aye. Those opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Well, I forgot. Okay. We did have, I guess, national citizens, but I want to put it on record. Any citizen comments? Okay. Those in favor of the motion, vote by the sign of aye. Aye. Those opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. I just wanted to make a comment that it's not related to your application at all, but I just saw a lot of non-erosion control on those pictures about that site development. So EPD and site developers, erosion control is a thing, and it's important. And I just saw a lot of sand on those roads. So I don't know if somebody could pop in on that site and check on their erosion control. Mr. Chair, that sand that you see in the road is actually for the tacking of the asphalt. You sand it up, and you put the seal, so it doesn't wash out with the next rain. All of that. Today, you go there, it's already paved. Everything is already paved. That picture is probably three, four months old, so it's already paved. Almost complete. They should start buildings probably within a couple of weeks. You should be seeing buildings and then come and reserve. Thank you for your attention to that detail. Madam Clerk, I guess we go to closing comments. Yep, closing comments, public comment at all. Okay, any public comments? Don't see any. I don't see anyone. Okay. County attorney comments? Mr. Chair, I do not have anything for you today. Okay. County manager comments? Mr. Chair, I do not either. I think I've had enough today of comment for you. Okay. Commission comment? Commissioner Mueller, anyone have any comments? I just thought it was very interesting that Mr. Connish came in and was talking about working with the university, you know, and trying to be a conduit, and I just thought that was kind of interesting, you know, with Mr. Clemens coming in now to work with the university and that Mr. Connish wants to work with him and hoping to be some kind of a conduit, you know, between. I just thought it was a very interesting thought. They worked a lot together on the GRU stuff. Sir? They worked a lot together on the GRU. I got you. Legislation. All right. Thank you. Commissioner Prizzi? I just had one thing, and that was I was hoping that we could ask staff to look at our boards that we have that are created by ordinance and consider, like, just looking for any amendments that we might want to make to make them more consistent with our advisory board rules. I've just noticed there's some inconsistencies around things like the way we handle, like, appointments and removals and things like that. And I just think it would be good to have them be all aligned appropriately so folks are okay with us referring that to staff. And then they could bring us back. Any recommendations? I move that. Second. We got a motion and a second. Are there any further discussion to the motion? Are there any public comments? Back to the board. Those in favor of the motion, vote by the sound of aye. Aye. Those opposed. Same time. Motion carries. That's all. Thank you. I saw an email from the state attorney's office, Brian Kramer, about the medical examiner search committee to Michelle. Have you put some of it? Yes, Mr. Chair. I had already taken care of that. He had originally emailed that to me. Okay. And I had not yet responded. So he forwarded it to you all. But I did take care of that. Who's going to, is, did you put Tommy on there? Yes. So there's two committees. One is a subcommittee and a primary committee. The subcommittee I've asked Claudia to do because she is the staff liaison to the ME's office. So I thought it'd be important for her to have some input there. But then Tommy to the primary. Perfect. As he's, he will be the one coming back to you as well with recommendations on the structure. Yep. Which in part will be based on who we get on and their preferences of how they want the ME's office to be structured. Okay. Thank you. Joint meeting with Hawthorne. We sent a letter to Dr. Brody on June 3rd about the Santa Fe Outpost. Have we heard back on that letter? I have not heard back from them. No? Okay. It was a good letter. I liked the letter. And then I just wanted to compliment our staff, Missy and her team on the Forward Focus community outreach. It's, you guys are doing a jam-up job. You know, when we initiated that, I guess it was Mary and Mary Helen kind of initiated that, I don't know, a year and a half ago. So they knew what that was as far as such a big undertaking. I didn't really understand how big it was, but I just want to compliment staff. I got the latest newsletter. And I appreciate the constant communication. So thank you for that. And then I don't know who wrote the Mill Creek chair letter on June 11th, but it's really good. It was really good. It really did a nice job. It gave some good recommendations to the city of Alachua. I hope they take it to heart and are working with our staff. So thank you, Mr. Chair. And I'll see you all at FAC. I'll be down on Thursday. I won't be down until Thursday. My only comment is we've gotten a lot of letters about a proposed development on Payne's Prairie. Have you guys gotten those letters? 441, Miranda Holmes. Yeah. Yeah. I just don't know anything about it. So I haven't been able to, I don't know how to respond to folks other, yeah. And not to, yeah. Yeah, I just, I was curious if staff had anything they could share. And I see. Well, Mr. Chair, I just wanted to say we have had a pre-application conference with the landowner developer. There has not been an application submitted as of yet, but there may be soon. Okay. So other than that, it would be a quasi-reasonable application. It would be a rezone. But we haven't had the application yet. The application is not in our hands. So that helps me answer the question. No, I will just add that their neighborhood meeting is supposed to be tomorrow. Okay. So it's out of town firm, Mr. Chair, Jerry Brewington. But they, again, June 25th meeting for neighborhood meeting. So that's going to be held tomorrow night. So we anticipate, based on that, that it's probably going to be submitted by the end of the month. Okay. All right. Thank you. That's very helpful. I have none, and if there aren't any other business, we adjourn.