get started with this regular commission meeting for tuesday january 20 2026 if i can please have the city clerk call the roll commissioner colwell commissioner harriet present commissioner howington commissioner novick here commissioner santiago here vice mayor vila vasquez present mayor vila here all right at this time we're going to go ahead and i'm going to give the mic over to commissioner howington for the invocation and pledge to the flag all right at this time we're going to go into additions and deletions seeing none we're going to go ahead to presentations awards and reports uh first presentation we have up is from the volusia county hispanic association uh they're going to present the city with a check the commissioners want to meet me in the bottom and then we're going to stay there also for the parade winners and that's it good evening everyone good evening mayor commissioners and members of the community my name is elaine daniels i serve as the secretary of the volusia county hispanic association and it is my honor to be here to present this uh check to the city of deltona today on behalf of our president cassie landron who couldn't make it today um tonight volusia county hispanic association is proud to present this 11 000 check sorry i don't have more than two hands i'm gonna thank you to the city of deltona uh this money was raised from the 2025 mayor's winter ball with one clear and unwavering purpose to support the expansion of the harris saxon building at harris saxon park a space that primarily serves the boys and girls club and the many children and families who rely upon it there has been a lot said about this event but one thing that we want to make sure that we speak we let the truth transparency and results speak for themselves scriptures tell us that in matthew 7 verse 16 you will know them by their fruits so tonight the fruit of this effort is right here real dollars for a real building for real children in our city this event was never about politics it was never about campaigns this was not a city event it was and always and has been about service we do this as a voluntary organization by doing this this is our way of giving back to our community and doing good and investing in our youth and the future of deltona our organization is guided by faith integrity and accountability so every dollar raised has was handled responsibly ethically and in alignment with our mission we stand confidently in that truth so to those that have supported us in this effort we thank you we look forward to next year and how we can better serve our community and thank you for allowing us to be here and serve and present this we got one more we have now we're going to do the recognition of the holiday parade winners and they're going to trophies here we go so best band if you can hold it please uh we have the deltona the deltona high school band the deltona brigade the blue brigade if you can please come up let's give them a big round of applause if the rest of the blue brigade can please come up we saw your face you were best float trinity christian academy best vehicle the volusia jeep club tell us our secret and holly light them all up so uh the best dance studio is studio b they couldn't make it and mark will personally hand deliver that so thank you and congrats to all the winners we did have a presentation on the agenda unfortunately uh because of unforeseen circumstances the presenter won't be able to make it so we are skipping presentation c and we're going straight to the consent agenda item and there's not they told me that the word she just told me not all right uh is there any public comment on consent agenda items tim logic please give me one minute uh sarah go ahead vice mayor yes i'd like to pull um e and h please was was that e or b e as in edward h as in harry thank you got it okay you have to excuse my book came to being uh agenda uh the agenda items that includes the purchase for replacement ambulance yes or no yes yes okay uh as far as that was concerned i just wanted to say um in keeping with uh the replacement um schedule that was uh put together a while back it's long overdue it's uh in the best interest of everyone in deltona that we do this and uh it's well worth the investment um and that's about all i want to say about that go ahead and buy it long overdue okay uh commissioner novick go ahead yeah i wanted to go ahead and pull c season charlie all right i need i'll make the motion mayor go ahead and fyi for pio none of my controls are working on this machine on the machine none of them i can't see requests nothing is working so just fyi go ahead uh commissioner harriet thank you mayor i'd like to make a motion approve consent agenda items a through i excluding c e and h there's a motion by commissioner harriet to approve consent agenda items a through i excluding c as in charlie e as in echo h as in house is there a second second second by commissioner santiago is there any discussion if not let's go ahead and uh can you please go for a vote motion passes six to zero at this time we'll go in alphabetic order commissioner novick you chose to pull c as in charlie i'll hand it over to you thank you mayor for clarification are we using the ipads for request to speak or nothing's working it's supposed to be the machine but they're not working okay so we're not using anything just raising our hand okay um i 100 support the uh the purchase of this unit it is chief correct me if i'm wrong it's going to be about a two-year build my only question is with the amount of runs and the the increase that we've seen from 2024 to the 2025 numbers i highly recommend that we find the money to order two units with this purchase and not just the one because by the time we take delivery of this and we take delivery of the other unit that we've already ordered we're going to be needing two more units so with the extended amount of build time on these units that we currently are seeing which will probably increase by the time we place the next order to either two and a half to three years we should seriously consider this being two units that we purchase and we move the money uh accordingly and i see the money man's coming up right now um it's it's just because of the build time that takes so long we're already behind the eight ball he constantly has units that are in maintenance and we're in backup units now our backup units are several years old so it's a step down process as we get a new unit the chief takes an older unit and pushes it towards a reserve unit a backup that they can go into when they have a mechanical issue or they're due for maintenance or whatever so if there's a way that we can find the money mr manager and mr finance director i would highly recommend that we place an order for two units as soon as possible not just the one thank you mayor okay we have commissioner howington that was on here first and please to the dais forgive me they just fixed it so it's i got it written down in the order i saw you guys putting in so we got commissioner howington who's already on then we're going to go to commissioner harriet and then vice mayor let's try that so i would support this there we go i do believe it's something that we need to do and as we know later on this evening we're going to be discussing the moratorium and these are the types of things that the pause on development was intended to help us move forward with we have situations that have to be dealt with and we have a growing population we have between four and five thousand new housing units coming into this community in a very short period of time and so with that i completely agree that we do need more but i would like to ask that we go to the county and ask them to give us more transport ability with that purchase i know that i've spoken to the county manager and he was amenable to having the conversations i think that we just need to go and start those conversations with them thank you can you test your microphone please just to make sure it works is it working yes okay perfect thank you uh commissioner harriet and then vice mayor vila vasquez and um pio i still can't approve them to speak so it's made it a little bit worse here we go harriet oh here we go i got it i got it go ahead we got it i think the microphones are mixed around that's why all right hold on wait stop harriet that is your microphone that's why it's not working they haven't mixed up up here that's fine no this is mine i think that's his all right harriet this works says harriet what does this say on yours vice mayor go ahead yep okay all right uh so my question is for um the fire chief what is the next oldest unit i understand that this this unit that we're replacing is um fairly old and rather frequently visits our fleet maintenance um as is all i'll say it's unreliable i know that's not the official position but i'll say that um so what would the our next oldest unit what's the age of that unit uh right now we're right now we're replacing the 2009 and then we'll be replacing the the 16 and i believe after that is a so this agenda item is for the 15 is that right adam 16 so 15 16 so this this agenda item is for what year uh the 2016 2016 okay and then the next presumably next budget cycle it would be the 2015 correct from an operational standpoint and a level funding strategy for fleet replacement so just just to add a little bit so our our fleet adjustment got got adjusted last year yes last year so we're kind of adjusting to that as as we go um and then we also have to plan for if we do put a fourth transport in service so that's also part of the the plans also yes that is the plan i would like to see this come come back as soon as we have an opportunity to see what a fourth transport looks like if we get approval for that then 100 support that plan my concern is and it should be no shock to anybody that i vehemently support the fire department but um my concern is if we start replacing multiple units each year or in a given year and then we go a couple years without replacing units then they're all going to come back for replacement and at the end of their life together we we have them on the five-year plan okay marched out on the five-year plan okay so so we're we're good rather than just replacing two units right now we can replace this one unit the the real problem was that they were bunched up because we we went into the transport business yep so we kind of had older units that were bunched up and we're just working our way through them and this this should get us it sounds like almost there this unit should solve a lot of that yes bundling problem correct so we we're good then we don't need to necessarily replace multiple units right now we're we've got a good level funding strategy and then if we do have approval for additional transport units from the county then we can address the need for additional units at that point correct awesome thank you chief yep commissioner santiago and i'll go to the city manager right after if i could just throw in we have a meeting i believe in the next week with the county to discuss transport so thank you just bring that to the commission's attention i didn't press the button but i'm in full support got it uh the only thing i would add to that really quick is you know we we saw the chart that the fire department has brought us in certain areas that are very critical and uh in your meeting with the county just remind them that this this game of not giving us another transport because it affects who gets paid and who doesn't i am willing to not listen to the county on that aspect because the lives of my residents are more important than what they get paid in an insurance payment so if they want to play this this game i mean i'm pretty sure i speak for myself but i'm sure the others on this dais will put the life of their residents before the back and forth so just fyi commissioner harriet and then we'll go to a vote just a real quick real quick comment on that um transports don't pay for themselves this is an enhanced service that we all expect from living within a city so the argument that this is uh this is cost effective for the for the county is is and i'll put it on a limb it's not a it's not a viable argument this is not uh we don't we don't want transports because it covers the cost transports revenue doesn't cover the cost of the actual operation this is an enhanced service that deltona residents want because they pay city taxes so commissioner nobik the um it it's a the transport not only benefits the people of deltona but it benefits the surrounding community we routinely transport uh as the closest unit we routinely transport for other communities enterprise oestein new smyrta beach in in some cases and the wear and tear on these these units they're non-stop during the day so my motion is to go ahead and direct the city manager to find the funds to order two units with this purchase there's a motion by commissioner novick for two units to be ordered and commissioner howington you're up next i'll second that with a second by commissioner howington all right can we please go for a vote is it coming on the ipad okay motion passes six to zero at this time we're going to go to letter e for echo uh commissioner or vice mayor avila vasquez you have the microphone thank you mayor so i would like um someone to give a little explanation about this item somebody call me and question what does that mean um they weren't sure they were a little bit nervous um you know about their tax bill and how this affects it so if somebody can come up and give an explanation on this and how does this affect if anything the residents commission vice mayor um so several years ago back in 2021 the commission passed this a similar agreement for the volusia county property appraiser subsequently we now have a several additional constitutional officers the sheriff tax collector etc so when we put the new potential fire assessment fee out there and we had to provide the appropriate notice to both the property appraiser and the tax collector the tax collector said whoa we haven't done an agree interlocal agreement with us since since he became a constitutional officer this is only to put in that interlocal agreement with the tax collector as they're the agency that collects the ad valorem proceeds and non-advalorem proceeds nothing more it doesn't change our level of service nothing it just puts in that appropriate interlocal agreement and it does not increase anybody's taxes not at all we're already paying the fee thank you that was the question that was asked thank you so much you're welcome uh i make a motion to approve uh item e on the consent agenda there's a motion by vice mayor avila vasquez commissioner howington you're on the floor i'll second second by commissioner howington commissioner okay can we please go for a vote motion passes six to zero this time we go back to vice mayor avila vasquez for h's and house um yes thank you mayor so i would like to find out um who who is exactly is purchasing this property all we have is a initials bng a llc and do we know if any their plans for the property good evening mayor commissioners vice mayor um so bng a bng a llc is the howpins and um mr switzer and they're building an industrial project within the activity center um no pro no plans have been submitted to date so this property is within the activity center meaning by howland boulevard correct it's right by synergy the synergy project it's um 5 488 square feet it's landlocked has um no use for the city purposes okay um and the appraised value is 9 900 they're going to pay the appraisal fee and closing costs and as far as we know right now they we don't know what the plans are of what they're building down it's going to be an industrial project but um nothing has been submitted to the city we're going to have a they said they're going to have a pre-app probably within the next month or so okay thank you you're welcome at this time i'll entertain a motion commissioner novick motion to approve item h commissioner harriet second i have a motion by commissioner novick to approve and a second by commissioner harriet if we can please do a vote motion passes five to one okay at this time we're going to go into ordinances and public hearings if i can please have the city attorney read the eight a's in alpha thank you so much mayor this is ordinance number zero two two zero two six an ordinance of the city of deltona florida amending the general ordinances chapter 66 traffic and vehicles to update regulations related to micromobility devices in accordance with florida statutes providing for conflicts codification severability and an effective date this is first reading all right at this time i'll entertain a motion and a second and then we'll go into uh public comment uh vice mayor you were up did you want to do the motion okay uh commissioner harriet did you want to do a motion go ahead commissioner harriet i'd uh i'll make a motion to approve uh ordinance number zero two zero dash two zero two six amending chapter 66 traffic and vehicles establishing regulation regarding micromobility devices at first reading with updates to come at second reading further restricting the use of e-bike devices to those under 18 all right we have a motion do i need we have a motion do i need to go into more detail on what changes no i i understand that you want the age of restriction to be raised from 16 to 18 for e-bikes is that correct for vehicles over 750 watts for vehicles over 750 watts yes sir okay and then that they stay off of the roadway have to they have to be on the sidewalk yes sir okay that's sufficient there's a motion by commissioner harriet is there a second hold on hold on because vice mayor is first um uh harriet can you please commissioner can you clarify what your microphone's on it's on can you clarify for this so someone can make it second what you're trying to accomplish what clarification would you like the age so so right now um i believe the way that it's written uh anybody over the age of 16 but under the age of under the age of 18 has to ride on the street in the bicycle lane and i think in light of everything that's gone on specifically in district one and the accidents that we've seen across the city we need to be more restrictive with this ordinance uh specifically to um those and i'm going to refer to them as vehicles but those bicycles that have enough power to go rather fast um and and cause problems create traffic accidents and take people's lives i'd like to see the the the vehicles with enough power to go 30 40 50 miles an hour outlawed and that those true e-bike that are just power assist bicycle type devices um restricted to the sidewalk and get them away from cars okay is there a second you want commissioner howington i'll second but i'd like to ask can we include to be an appropriate bike lane sidewalk or bike lane your microphone's off yeah not changing anything else to what you put forward just adding it to include if they're old enough yes i'm okay with that yeah i'll amend the motion to include a she has it yeah a clarification old enough as in they're over 18 if they are over 18 they can ride on the sidewalk or in the bike lane because i think that's what you're getting at right in the roadway however if they're if they're over 18 then they can follow motorcycle laws over 18 bicycle lane and sidewalk not motorcycle laws bicycle bicycle lane thank you and sidewalk under 18 so sidewalk limited to the size and we just move forward with what we have in writing tonight between first and second reading get your amendments taken care of because this is getting very confusing on what we're actually voting on i'd like to see it in writing i agree with you 100 where you're trying to go we we could write it between first and second reading to address all of your concerns and then come back and pass it on second reading would you be agreeable to that so we have it in black and white commissioner happy to do that that sounds great thank you both okay so the city clerk doesn't kill me can you hold on stop stop everybody turn off your mics really quick go ahead turn on your mic really because nobody can hear you and the public needs to hear you go ahead so i'll make a motion to approve ordinance number 02-2026 amending chapter 66 traffic and vehicles establishing regulation regarding mobility micro mobility devices at first reading okay between now and then we'll update the changes commission there's a motion on the floor to approve by commissioner harriet is there a second commissioner howington seconds the motion now we're going to open it up for public comment and then we'll go to discussion tim blodgett please mr blodgett you'll have to click on the button please okay uh i don't want to stomp on anybody's parade here but i think you all need to go back and review sb 462 which was recently renewed in 2025-149 anyway aside from that i did read it all over and they've already made adjustments that include this i think what you're doing is trying to pass an ordinance that is based on last year's uh state regulations they've already figured out a lot of language that isn't what i really came here to talk about what i came here to talk about is what i'm sitting on is considered a micro conveyance and according to this i'm illegal i'm not supposed to be on the sidewalks i'm supposed to be out in the street yeah that'd work out really well um under the ada you're not allowed to uh to uh what's the term i'm looking for not allowed to qualify if somebody is disabled or not and you're not allowed to regulate what they decide to use for an alternative uh conveyance so if i wanted to take a hemi engine and put a skate on the bottom of it and i want to call that my mobility conveyance there's really nothing anybody can say about it it's protected by federal law now i've got i guess you can add this to jemma's pile of things to look at but in the point where it gets down to it says and 50 pounds in weight or less i want to remind you the travel scooters that they have the smallest pieces are the ones that they take apart and the three pieces so you can travel is 60 to 80 pounds so the state law or what you plan on adding here copy and pasting is already wrong anyway what i would suggest you do is at that point where it talks about and 50 pounds uh in weight or less rewrite it or add the phrase and exclude those with disabilities under the ada period and that'll take care of part of your problems you guys got quite a mess with the rest of it have a good night kathy bryan please good evening kathy bryan as i got questions um you're talking about cutting the age from eight 16 up to 18 but yet folks with drivers like you know kids at 16 have driver's license so i'm not sure why the difference in age the other thing is and i'm glad mr blodgett brought up the ada point but when you start having kids ride these things down sidewalks they don't pay attention and i'm concerned that you're going to have people getting run over by them i'm also curious like so this is just we're talking about electric bikes essentially what about four-wheelers and other motorized vehicles that i see kids riding on all the time through neighborhoods they don't pay any attention to the traffic laws they don't have on helmets i've had them pull out straight in front of me before so is there a reason that that cannot be included in this as well because i i guess i have a lot of concerns with the way i and i get it i said sometimes something happens and there's a knee-jerk reaction but really think about the wide scope of this and what you're what the consequences of what you decide are going to be we all want everybody to be safe but i also think maybe we need to get some more education out there about the use of helmets the traffic laws etc and you know of course parents these days they're my kid i don't care my kid's fine until they're not so i really think about this and i just don't like the idea i don't like the idea of kids riding on the street with the bikes but i don't like the idea of them going down the sidewalk either and the ada stuff is one of those reasons so thank you that is public comment thank you i'll go to vice mayor avila vasquez thank you so what i was trying to say in between every other interruption um i mean a lot of the stuff that i was thinking was set up by the residents this is from what i'm listening to to me it seems like to be breaking a lot of ada rules um how do you restrict riding your electric bike or whatever just on sidewalks versus street by age um is it just strictly e-bikes or does that also uh give permission for golf carts right they're considered to me micro mobility um as well as you haven't been recognized vice mayor still speaking thank you um so i mean we need to really look at all this stuff before we make all these decisions by age on the sidewalk not on the sidewalk who do we kick out of the sidewalk you know i don't know i just i just feel like we're going to be breaking rules if we jump into this and and agree to all these terms on this um without really really looking comparing it to ada because you know like mr blodger said there's a lot of ada rules that might not fit into what we're looking at right now and we might be breaking and i think the city has been um charged and suited up for breaking ada rules so i think we need to look at this real real good before we make decisions thank you mayor i would only add and because nobody else is on the board but i would only add have we looked at what i think it was winter springs or winter garden what they just passed so we we did not look at winter springs um or winter garden um this was this was prepared in accordance with the request of the commission back in august of last year um we did look at manatee county um certainly it is not the city's position that this violates ada um we are happy to ensure that that's not the case this is a section that's going to be added to our existing code so um between now and second reading i'm happy to just give you an analysis that talks about all the definitions and the carve-outs um certainly this this is not going to impact those who have an ada accommodation but happy to to just provide a little analysis between now and then we can include it with the second reading in addition to the changes um and just to sort of step back more broadly and again this was a discussion you all had and we prepared this in response to that and at your direction um you know this is really more drilling down on and this happens more and more uh where there's a lot of tourism but it is spilling out where companies like uber have these companies called like bird and lift where they have these like scooters orlando has them all over like it's like a scooter that has a motor and they go very quickly um and so when you talk about like this weight limit this under 50 pounds it's really trying to target these types of micro mobility devices which you tend to be able to like rent with your credit card they just like park them on the side of the road anyone can go up with their little credit card hop on this scooter and scoot around and just just to sort of step back broadly um the proliferation of accidents from these scooters has has been astronomical um the medical community has a lot of feelings about this uh emergency medicine in particular has a lot of feelings about electric bikes and electric scooters and i will tell you that they when the legislature created the or um the statute that allowed us to create our ordinance they looked at this traffic safety data um from 2020 from 2020 through 2022 and the high level of pedestrian facility um pedestrian fatalities and so as a result of that um they wanted to create give local government the option to regulate um and create more safety on their streets um for both the drivers and the pedestrians and the users of the scooters who are candidly the ones that are most at risk um and so when you think about the age you know you want i think that's partly why you know the the age is something to consider which i think you reasonably have so we're happy to provide an analysis between first and second reading to address the ada concerns and happy to talk about this section integrated into the larger um code um which which which it will be a part of um and talk about that but certainly there's not it is not the intent to have any violation of ada and or address those types of issues it's really more drilling down on um those types of electric scooters and then the bikes which also go quite quickly and you know can often are operated by children so mr servia to finish my point can we be very explicitly clear on the definitions because i i don't want this affecting my residents that have any type of ada issues and also can we can we get a copy to the rest of the commission essentially what winter garden did um i think that could be a good stepping stone for us but unless it's absolutely necessary and we we're foreseeing all these scooters coming i know which ones you're talking about i just don't want to start creating bad law because you know we in my opinion we already have one still lingering over us so mayor point taken and i mean again there is language within the larger section 66 of the code but we can i mean there's language that we can add that just says that clear definitions that's all those with mobility issues ada so we're happy to drill it down to this section and clarify the larger section which which does protect those with ada understood thank you so there's a motion on the floor in a second if i can please have the city attorney read it again and we'll go ahead into a vote thank you mayor um this is ordinance number 02-2026 an ordinance of the city of deltona florida amending the general ordinances chapter 66 traffic and vehicles to update regulations related to micromobility devices in accordance with florida statutes providing for conflicts codification severability and an effective date this is first reading between first and second reading we will make the revisions as requested by the commission um and we will also provide more clarifying language to ensure the the residents rights are protected motion passes six to zero this time we're going to go to section eight b as a boy if i can please have the city attorney read the ordinance thank you so much mayor um this is ordinance number 36-2025 an ordinance of the city of deltona florida amending section 110-814 additional regulations for certain permitted principal uses and structures of chapter 110 zoning and chapter 44 administration of the land development code updating procedures and regulations related to certified recovery residences in compliance with florida statutes providing for conflicts codification severability and an effective date all right at this time we'll go ahead and entertain a motion and then a second so we can go into the presentation commissioner novick i make a motion to approve ordinance number 36-2025 at first reading there's a motion by commissioner novick commissioner harriet second second by commissioner harriet if we can please have uh mr smith go ahead with your presentation good evening mayor vice mayor commission so before you as item is ordinance number 26-2025 regarding certified recovery residences um this ordinance updates the land of eminco to comply with new state law the purpose of this ordinance is threefold first it establishes a clear approval process for certified recovery residences second it ensures compliance with senate bill 954 and house and federal housing laws and third it creates a reasonable accommodation procedure as required by law the recovery residence provides alcohol and free drug housing with peer support they serve individuals in recovery who are protected under state and federal disability laws and the legislator now requires all cities to adopt procedures by january 1st 2026 per senate bill 954 the ordinance sets clear objective standards in residential neighborhoods the occupancy is limited to six residents plus a house managers or no more than seven no more than two residents are allowed per bedroom and a 1 000 foot space requirement applies between recovery residences and community residential homes and all facilities must be properly licensed or certified residents must participate in recognized recovery programs alcohol and illegal drugs are prohibited sexual offenders are not permitted to reside at these facilities a house manager must live on site and enforce house rules and written visitation policies are required in terms of parking all street parking is required at a rate of one space per three three residents plus one for the manager on street parking by residents or visitors is not permitted and garages and driveways must remain available for parking limited parking relief may be requested through the reasonable accommodation process if justified in terms of enforcement the city retains full authority to enforce these standards inspections are permitted to ensure compliance violations may result in revocation of approval and code enforcement action and loss of state certification as grounds for revocation and what are the takeaways of this ordinance this ordinance provides a legally compliant and transparent transparent process it balances neighborhood compatibility compatibility with fair housing requirements and it protects public health and safety while supporting recovery housing the planning and zoning board reviewed the ordinance and voted 7-0 to recommend approval staff recommends approval of the ordinance at first reading and the second reading is scheduled for february 2nd 2026 thank you public comment no public comment commissioner howington you're up first just a quick question is there any way that this would possibly have any potential risk of being sued via sb 180 because it appears that there's some more restrictive items within this is there going to be any risk with that at all i'm going to ask jim if the legal for help with that question that seems unlikely uh certainly we cannot predict uh what people will do and and again the the most challenging part of sb 180 is that there's no requirement for standing anyone can bring any action for any reason on any ordinance whether they have a legal basis or not um we're standing and so i can't tell you that no one will ever do that um um this is the i mean the the reason we move this forward obviously is compliance with state law um and certainly there's a general uh the the general position in is that general laws do not conflict with one another so uh it would be our position that this should be fine but we cannot predict the future so basically at this point we have to approve this by state law and if we don't then we have an issue but we are potentially opening ourselves up to sb 180 claims if somebody without standing deems it to be more restrictive or burdensome i just want to make sure that we understand what we're doing right when we have conflicting laws that don't play well together and so we know this going in that we are putting ourselves at risk but we are required to do it correct thank you commissioner santiago you were up next thank you mayor um jordan you and i spoke and you know how i felt about this ordinance i was like no way because i think the residents deserve a little bit more information on how this might affect of where they live but i also understand this is a state law adoption is mandatory but i think what i want to come across is i want to make sure the next at the second reading we have some kind of process procedure on how somebody who wants to come in and put up a recovery house how does that work what is the process um as well as um i know they have to be a certified recovery residence and and we do i and i understand if we do approve it if we don't approve it the city loses the ability to apply and enforce reasonable local standards so by approving it we're able to have more additional standards added to it correct that is correct commissioner okay all right thank you commissioner so one of my concerns with this and and this opens the gateway to to additional standards is when you deal with a um a group home or an assisted living type of facility on the life safety side of it you're constantly evaluating the clients that are in there and what their ability is in terms of mobility and and being able to self-evacuate in the event of an emergency in this case here we only see the requirement that they have one attendant for up to six people now if four of those six people happen to be somehow incapacitated uh either by methadone or some physical inability then what means of protection do we have in place to be able to ensure the life safety component of of that occupancy so i i would definitely advocate that i would want to see these fall under a fire sprinkler residential fire sprinkler requirement that if they're they're not uh if they take a client that's not able to self-evacuate promptly and there's a process in in the code to do that that the fire marshal i know is familiar with then the requirement would be that it would have to have a residential fire sprinkler system in place so as we move forward with this i want to be able to drill down into um the the life safety component uh portion of of these residences as well as i have a concern i think as you do commissioner santiago about how is this going to affect the surrounding property values having one of these sober homes move move into a neighborhood what does that do to the residents uh that are already in in that in that neighborhood and what might we be able to put in place to help ensure the maintenance of their property values um you know is it going to be something a frequency of sheriff's responses to that to that location for disturbance or or just what might trigger uh some some type of issue to protect the existing residences are there this is something the state has mandated i know that there is legislation that's being worked on currently in tallahassee to help improve this and hopefully something more comes out of this session uh that that will tweak this and and make it a better situation for our community i believe these people do need some place to be able to go and transition but we also have to try and protect them against a bad element that may introduce itself in that situation and also protect the existing neighborhood where it's going to be be housed at thank you mayor okay okay um just to answer commissioner novick um on line 123 we do have a regulation that says must comply with applicable laws of building codes and fire codes and inspections will be allowed so um planning will work with the part of fire services to make sure that everything is good thank you commissioner novick to address if i may through the mayor um you know you you make a very good point about tallahassee uh and their attempt to improve this bill i would urge all of you to reach out um to the delegation because this is a bill that uh will be challenging and this will create challenge i i i don't want to say will very likely will create challenges it ties our hands uh it continues to strip um our home rule authority as a local government as a city so this is the type of this is the type of law that severely ties our hands maybe we'll conflict with another general law but certainly creates um a real restriction on the way that you all as elected officials regulate your community and you know as you're voted in to do so i would certainly urge you all to there's a lot of bills that are uh hot right now but this is one that i i would urge you to to speak to your elected uh delegation about as well as the public commissioner novick no i didn't know if she was gonna ask me all right if i can please have the city attorney read the ordinance again we do have a motion by commissioner novick and a second by commissioner harriet thank you mr mayor we're doing that between now and second reading with this legislative session too thank you this is ordinance number 36-2025 an ordinance of the city of deltona florida amending section 110-814 additional regulations for certain permitted principal uses and structures of chapter 110 zoning and chapter 44 administration of the land development code updating procedures and regulations related to certified recovery residences in compliance with florida statutes providing for conflicts codification severability and an effective date and the city attorney's office understands that we will make those revisions between first and second reading as discussed by the commission tonight thank you motion passes five to one this time we're going to go to action items if i can please have the city attorney read action item 9a as an alpha thank you so much mr mayor this is resolution number 2025-169 resolution of the city commission of the city of deltona florida adopting revised master fee schedule of fines fees costs and or penalties and various administrative fees relating to the city of deltona code of ordinances providing for conflicts severability scrivener's errors and an effective date this time we'll entertain a motion in a second so we can see the presentation and go to public comment commissioner harriet i'm not ready to make a motion but i'd like to get consensus to see the presentation before we need to make a motion on this item okay all those in favor aye all right mayor commission i'd like to introduce brian mance with gov rates he is the one who completed the utility rate study for water wastewater irrigation and reclaim utility rates well good morning all right i'm sorry good evening uh commissioners members of the public uh staff my name is brian mance from uh from gov rates and i'm here to present of course the the results of the water and wastewater rate study this is the first formal rate study that has been completed since uh the last one was in 2021 basically the utility provides a an essential service on a continuous basis for public health and safety it's a top priority it's highly regulated by the fdp and department of health and permits require full compliance if i can just ask you to speak directly to the microphone please it makes it easier for the residents to hear you yeah that that might that might be better so i so because i i can't see the uh the powerpoint on the on the on this uh on this uh on this uh it's on already okay the lightest green okay uh so it's the uh the water and wastewater fund is is an enterprise fund where the operations are primarily funded through user rates and you currently provide service to about 36 500 water accounts and 7 500 wastewater accounts and 1 750 reclaimed water accounts a lot of more water than than uh wastewater accounts and you got a lot of utility infrastructure under city management which is often out of sight out of mind they're about 200 million dollars installed cost of assets which would be much higher if adjusted to today's dollars so you got substantial utility renewal and replacement needs and i've heard a lot of comments tonight about uh about your utility infrastructure and certainly the longer the city defers necessary renewals and replacements the higher the cost to rate payers we've recognized about 172.8 million dollars of critical capital reinvestment needs through 2030. the good news is that the largest project the fisher advanced water treatment upgrade you received 50 percent grant uh funding on that which is which will really help uh but uh of course the city is has to has to uh finance the the rest of it and and that requires uh some some uh that that you're there to race be sufficient to be able to support that debt uh you also got 100 grant funding for the citywide septic to sewer program another issue is uh substantial operating expense increases utilities have limited control over a lot of the operating expense increases which are driven by global market forces there's nationwide issues with filling positions and keeping employees and certainly it's a critical to have a well-trained staff usually because of the regulatory environment the utility costs increase at a higher rate than the consumer price index and it's a a key takeaway is that permanent increases in costs must ultimately be passed through to customers by rate increase as far as uh the funding of the capital program uh where most of it would be through uh it's a kind of a balance of rate revenues and operating reserves and additional uh grant uh proceeds but also we have a list of um also uh water and wastewater impact fees as far as the uh adjustments we're looking about uh six percent adjustments uh the city has historically done cpi adjustments we would ask for a little bit more than that uh to to be able to to to fund this this capital program as i mentioned uh utility costs tend to increase at a higher rate than than the the cpi for water service and again it's important to recognize that water um 80 percent of the customers only have water service and only 20 of the customers have water and wastewater service so for 80 percent of the customers that's an increase in the customer bill of less than two dollars in fiscal year 2026 for wastewater uh for for both water and wastewater service that's about a nine dollar increase and again that's 20 of the customers under both scenarios uh it would uh the epa considers 4.5 percent of median household income to be the affordable affordability threshold for water and wastewater rates and we're well below that threshold for both water service and water and wastewater service and also if you can if you look at the cost per gallon of service three cents three to four cents compare three to four cents per gallon of water and wastewater service to the cost per gallon of other commodities like bottled water and that really helps to communicate the value of water and wastewater service uh you here i show some recent rain increase activity of other florida utilities you can see that actually deltona's increases are a lot lower than what some other uh utilities have uh have been dealing with groveland recently increased had to had a one-year increase of 40 percent one of the reasons why deltona's increases are are moderate is that the the the is that the city has gradually over time increased the rates of uh instead of having a one-time uh adjustment it's just these these gradual increases over time because you don't want to be every time i've dealt with a utility that has dealing with a 95 percent adjustment for a utility that hasn't increased the rates in 10 years i always get the same response from the governing body gosh i wish that we had just gradually increased these rates over time but as far as the the water bill comparison you can see that deltona is kind of in the mix of where everyone is another a key takeaway is that just about all the the utilities on this on this uh on this uh on this chart are are currently evaluating their their rates or they're involved in a rate study so the the takeaway is that as as uh these other rate uh other uh communities uh in increase their rates deltona's rates will continue to be uh uh uh competitive uh the water and wastewater rates again 20 percent of the customer base uh deltona is on the on the high high end but as i mentioned it does these rates do afford do meet all affordability um criteria and of course it's not a report card on how well a utility is performing because there are a lot of different reasons why rates differ among utility it's a discussion point but it's not a report card and the most important thing is to make sure that you're able to through your rates i did uh address your infrastructure issues uh our impact fees where we're uh we're recommending uh about a 2585 dollar per uh equivalent residential connection um increase um which is and as you can see that with the existing and the pros were competitive with those of other other uh local governments so our recommendations is to adopt the proposed user rate adjustments which are necessary to address capital critical capital needs and again to we also need them to be able to uh for the city to to do it's part port of the part of the uh the financing that's 50 50 percent grant funded uh also to adopt the proposed capital charges or impact fees which which are competitive and help to uh adjust reduce the need for future rate adjustments and uh and help to reduce the need to finance capital improvements and to monitor capital costs and financial results and adjust the rate plan as needed because certainly you know the the the the capital costs are certainly subject to change thank you uh can we go to public comment please gail bar please bar if you can just click on the mic please thank you so much okay so i understand that i everything goes up in price and if we're going to be paying more will we get better quality water to drink i'm from new york we were able to drink right out of the tap there's no way sometimes i'm even afraid to wash my hands from the tap it just happens to be that friday i had in my house a an odor coming out of my water out of the the sink in the in the kitchen it was chlorine i don't know how it gets pumped in and it was so strong and i'm very sensitive to chlorine um someone came out checked it out and he said everything looked fine he came back yesterday and he said well the numbers really aren't right he was going to show it to someone else and today i can smell chlorine so i don't know what we know that there is so much junk in our water is that going to be coming out is it going to be filtered better um are we going to be able to use the water or is just the price going to go up um do we get fluoride in our water i don't i don't know besides whatever the chemicals that we have you know besides chemicals what else is in there that we know is bad for us and are we getting the true reading when they're when they're monitoring this i don't believe we are because i know i have chlorine in my water so something definitely needs to be done not just raise our rates and give us water yeah we have water but it's really you know it's good for to water the grass is it good for our plants good for making coffee good to bathe in i don't think so and i just wanted to bring that to your attention that i think deltona's water is awful tim blodgett please okay i don't really i'm not sure exactly where i should start with all this i like to see analytics i like to see graphs i'd say 95 percent of the time i look at a graph i see 10 things that other people haven't even looked at and i see them really quick and the only thing i saw with this really fast was the town the municipalities that had the um the lowest cost were those who can sink a well and get fresh water out of it everybody else is further away and i think i figured that out in about five seconds just imagine if i could have sat down and examined this now aside from that uh you guys have done a really great job of speeding things up i mean uh talking specifically about the budget our ability to get the budget and the information out to people to stick to deadlines has been in comparison to your predecessors outstanding now i understand that we're seeing this now because and it didn't make the last budget because it's been so tardy and the main takeaway i'm getting from this is next time we need to take a look at this let's do it on time so we're not so rushed that's it david markle please good evening mayor and commissioners uh that presentation is a little biased uh if you look at the um the comparison i mean fort lauderdale was up there residents in deltona aren't making what residents in fort lauderdale are making the cost of living there is a lot more than what it is here in deltona but since 2019 deltona residents have seen water and sewer rates climb by 24.65 percent with this six percent we're moving up to 32 with the projected six percent annual increase through 2030 we're going to be at 57.4 percent over a 10-year period these are significant increases and they weren't a careful look at how our utility is financed and managed a critical first step is conducting a comprehensive cost service analysis this allows residents to see exactly what is the cost to provide service of water and sewer including treatment operations staffing regulatory compliance maintenance and capital investments transparency cost of service modeling ensures that rates increase are justified by actual system needs rather than applied automatically each year at the same time deltona should be pursuing efficient improvements reducing system water loss optimizing plant operations for energy savings upgrading outdated equipment and identifying operational redundancies can all meaningfully reduce long-term expenses and slow the rate increase cycle but perhaps the biggest opportunity lies in alternative funding for capital projects so the utility doesn't rely most entirely on the taxpayers programs like clean water state revolving fund and other epa and state low and interest loans initiatives allow cities to finance infrastructure upgrades at far below commercial interest rates deltona can also include or issue municipal bonds which offer lower borrowing costs over long repayment periods and are specifically designed for large-scale public infrastructure needs again rather than putting that cost back on the taxpayer up front additionally the city should aggressively pursue grants from state water managers which we've seen a few but i'm sure there are others out there florida's legislative budget allocates and federal programs such as the water infrastructure finance and innovation act program which can cover a substantial portion of expenses for treatment and pipeline projects without burdening taxpayers before committing to a multi-billion dollar aquifer project is essential that we ensure deltona's existing water treatment system are fully updated reliable and compliant strengthening the foundation of the current system should be the priority before expanding into new high-cost ventures finally community-wide conservation efforts including high efficiency fixtures leak detection leak detection assistance and tiered rate structures that reward lower usage can reduce demand and help residents better control their bills in short deltona has options but using transparent cost of service analysis improving operational efficiencies pursuing external funding and grants and prioritizing upgrades to the current facilities we can stabilize rates while still meeting the city's long-term infrastructure needs thank you that ends public comment thank you at this time um is there a motion on the floor so we can begin discussion motion to table a motion to vote no a motion to move forward commissioner santiago this utility rate study is the fifth year uh we we've done it fit this is a third year of a five-year plan um which must we bring it every year correct minus last year please push the button so i can we got staff there you go hello yeah yes it would be recommended to to be done as needed you're one of the and you know the last speaker mentioned a cost of service that's what this is um in your in your agenda materials you have a a pretty large report that uh that that that uh it basically is a cost of service analysis uh and and uh certainly the the city has the utility has qualified for grant funding and uh the the the speaker last speaker also mentioned low cost state revolving fund loans that's what we've assumed for for for the financing and one of the advantages of the state revolving fund loan is that you don't need to start making repayments on the debt until six months after after uh uh construction is completed so you actually have several years to to to gradually build the rates up to where they need to be to support the debt and so that's what we've assumed here because we we want to try and avoid rate shock we want to have uh more gradual increases and i think that's what we've put here we're not groveland which is was dealing with a 40 percent rate adjustment we're dealing with more gradual adjustments and i think that's extremely important to note commissioner santiago to to quickly answer your question the previous rate study that we did was in 2018 it was implemented in 2019 it went for five years so we we did not do an increase last year other than the epi index prior to that it was five percent each year so we're one year behind already on doing any sort of increase um the the the capital funds that we're talking about um the previous five-year period from 2018 we were able to complete 22 capital projects with the funds that were given to us by the users and those 22 capital projects were for infrastructure improvement for compliancy for regulatory purposes for water quality improvements all of the things that the uh the residents have spoke about that is what those funds are used for for for us to improve the quality of the the water that we present we're always wanting to improve that as a resident myself i want to make sure that our residents have the best quality drinking water that we can provide to them with the funds that that are given to to us so so we constantly do that we are always in compliance with regulations from the epa as well as the florida department of environmental protection and the saint john's water management district those are things that are non-negotiable we have to provide that and provide water that meets the the the regulatory compliance of what the maximum contaminant levels are we have to be below them um there's no there's no negotiating on that with those regulatory uh agencies and those are things that we exceed in all of our reporting but we do that with the help of yourselves as well as the rate payers by the the the investment that we make back into the infrastructure thank you so much commissioner howington i move to deny resolution number 2025-169 there's a motion by commissioner howington to deny commissioner harriet did you want to second that commissioner novick did you want to second that vice mayor avila bascos did you want to second that i have a question before that it says um on the agenda the city uses a master fee schedule to establish fees for a variety of services with the adoption of the final budget by resolution number 2025-134 the master fee schedule that was adopted by resolution 2025-144 on october 20 2025 did not include the fees incorporated into this resolution as the race study had not been completed so this that we are voting on today did not include what was approved the last time so this is an additional um amount of money that we're adding to what was already approved to be raised that is correct what was approved previously is what was adopted by the fiscal year 2526 budget and as i stated at that time we were almost completing the rate study so this is only adding to it the utility rates for water wastewater irrigation and reclaimed and every resident has a different amount that's going to be increased it depends on their monthly usage okay so this was not approved this is something new um so i said i second dory's uh commissioner harrington's motion all right we have a motion by commissioner howington and a second by commit by vice mayor avila vasquez i do have a couple of commissioners on the board so we'll go through them and then we'll go to a then we'll go to a vote commissioner harriet thank you mayor um so i just want to confirm what i think i heard twice that there was no increase in water or wastewater fees back in october that's correct okay second um i want to reiterate that this rate study which is very lengthy and if it's not part of the public agenda i think we should absolutely publish it to the website so everybody can see it because i think it addresses a lot of the questions that have come up tonight includes capital improvement projects to do exactly what we heard increase the water quality replace the essential components of the infrastructure so that we can actually receive water into our homes and that it's done in a level funding strategy so that we don't see these 40 increases you know nothing for a couple years and then shock right that that's correct we have we've looked at our capital plan over the next five years and we've said these are what we're going to be doing during that time frame and we've actually shifted some of those those projects around so that we can accommodate them with having the least amount of of funding issues uh so that we've we've we've got the the money in the bank basically uh and another thing that i wanted to wanted to address for my previous comments uh to address a concern of regarding fluoride we we don't put fluoride in the water we've never put fluoride in our water it's actually been been banned by the state of florida but the city of deltona never put it in there because we didn't feel that it was beneficial uh to the residents so thank you thank you and um also just gonna put it out there i i uh i do drink the water in deltona although it is not as tasty as some of the mountain spring water that i've had the ability to drink uh from the carolinas it it's just municipal tap water it seems fine um so thank you mayor commissioner novick thank you mayor all right so the figure that i heard is six percent correct six percent of what is that six percent across the board six percent on the base rate six percent on the gallonage usage rate how are we applying that six six percent across the board on all usage rates and base rates okay so i'm not voting for this tonight because i i want to see a breakdown of how we can make it more equitable the several years ago when i was on the commission we saw numbers where it broke down it was more advantageous to raise the same amount of dollars but to look at putting it on the base rate so that everybody pays it not just putting it on the usage rate and at that time we also took more on the water customers to relieve the sewer customers so i want to see where we can make that more equitable as we move forward and start to level that playing field back out instead of us supporting from the water side uh supplementing the the the sewer customers so there there's a lot of numbers that can be moved around and i a hundred percent want to see us maximize the impact fee i want you know we we had an issue up here before i came on board where we put a moratorium in place we've done absolutely nothing as a commission and that moratorium is getting ready to expire in march so whatever the intended purpose of that moratorium was as a commission we've done nothing to move that forward well one of those tools to help manage growth and slow the growth and give infrastructure a chance to catch up is by significantly raising the impact fees so whatever your analysis was it's not high enough the impact fees definitely need to be raised to the maximum amount to help new customers coming in and growth help pay for pay for itself as well as putting a per a good percentage onto the base rate so that everybody pays across the system because we still have many residents here that are our winter residents only and they pay nothing for usage uh for the better part of the year and then when they come down that's when they start to experience those usage tiers so the base rate they would pay all year round so i want to look at increasing the base rate to get you the dollars that you need and minimizing the impact on on the usage side as well as increasing the impact fees and and uh just to to to clarify the the the the the impact fees are part of the of the of the package here and uh and they are calculated uh for example we can't include grant funding uh grant funded infrastructure into the impact fee calculations so the the ones that are proposed uh that the the nine thousand uh sixty dollars uh that is is that's uh that's uh that's what we would consider to be the maximum amount that you could justifiably charge based on the multi-year capital plan and and certainly uh uh to even if you didn't you take action on the user rates tonight i would certainly recommend uh taking action on the growth related uh fees because those help to reduce the need for for user rate uh adjustments to to to take action on the on the capital charges and the and the uh capital financing uh recovery fee as far as the user rates are concerned one thing i would caution is that a condition for having for having these grants that for getting these grants these are 50 percent match grants so you the the city has to pay for the rest and when you're applying for state revolving fund loan the srf or the srf loan program will only count uh when when they evaluate your ability to repay the loan they will only count adjustments in your in because you have to provide a multi-year financial forecast to them they will only count adjustments that have already been adopted by the commission now what i can tell you is that as a commission you're always in charge you can always this is not something that's set in stone that you need to that that that you would need to uh that you can't uh can never change but this provides you a an ability to move forward with getting this grant these grants and doing your portion of financing the capital program so i would i i recognize so again i would strongly encourage that you move forward on the on the impact fees and again i you i i you know you have 22 million dollars of grant funding that that you're that you have to that you know again you that's a that's a 50 50 percent match and you then the city has to do its portion so um the i think it probably would not benefit the residents to have to give up the grant money grant money because because uh you're not willing to raise uh the the race to do to for the city to do its 50 share madam attorney madam attorney yes where where do we stand in being able to have a a defensible impact fee rate how high can we go and you can defend it so impact fees are governed by statute um an increase of impact fees are governed by statute uh it's fairly formulaic the rates the the impact fee study has to support those fees um but the stat there is a statutory cap for increases that basically allows a phase in over time yeah i i want to ma i want to make sure we're getting the maximum we can legally get on the impact fees and that's again what we've tried to to uh to propose you tried to or you did we did we did that's what this is the maximum amount that we feel that you could justifiably charge point of order uh just what commissioner navic is saying uh mr orcivia is he wants to make sure unless uh somebody from staff wants to answer wants to answer this that the nine thousand sixty dollars is the maximum we are legally allowed to charge per statute per your per the study per your plans per the the grant funding that you provide that that's your uh that that you simple gesture no yes gemma would you like to correct the study governs what we can charge and then there's a statutory basis for phase in for certain types of increases but the study governs we cannot that's the whole point of the study thank you commissioner navic please finish okay so mr mckinney what's our our timeline uh in terms of putting any of these grants in jeopardy if we don't move forward with this tonight everything predicated in the 25 26 budget would have to be reviewed because based on this study as presented by staff this evening with the grant of 22 million we predicated the ability to issue the remaining 22 million in debt and this would help pay for that debt service so without increasing the rates we would have to go back and relook at everything where do we stand in being able to adjust the base rate higher up and leveling out the usage rate to to create the balance uh could the three of us um take a minute outside to discuss what would have to be done and i could give you that answer you have five minute recess is that good enough yes sir all right we're going to go into a five minute recess and i would uh just suggest that the commission please all remain in one place and not go to the back to avoid any conflict we're going to give uh commissioner harry just a minute not to call you out okay mr mayor all right we're going to go ahead and get started go ahead mr mayor uh so that this is is not uh not delaying the meeting any further what we would like to do is we would like to ask for a pause on this and allow the commission to move on to the next topics while we go and and actually have more time to to to look at the numbers and it not be just in a back back room so that we can can put the uh the information down in the spreadsheet that it was calculated in and come back with a with a right number tonight commissioner commissioner howington will you be willing to retract your motion hold on i'll get to you just you moved on me go ahead i was gonna say i'd be willing to retract and then table table all right yes that'd be the next meeting would that we would like to be able to present the information to y'all this evening so that you've you've got got a chance to uh to look at it because i have some additional questions that i'd like to add for consideration as well so do you want me just to give them to you or you can absolutely absolutely i'd be more than happy to answer any of the questions that you have we just like i said we don't want to delay the meeting any longer so we'd like to pause it go do some calculations and then come back before you this evening go ahead finish with that and then before we go uh vice mayor avila vascos are you okay with retracting your second the motion or is okay we're retracting her hold on i'll get to you can you uh repeat your motion again uh your changes we're going to retract it so that we can push this item further back into the meeting so that they have more time to go discuss um yes okay uh commissioner howington go ahead and finish the other questions and then if there are other commissioners on here that would like some other questions on top of with commissioner novick and commissioner howington are asking now it's the time to do it so when it does come back they can come back with some answers so go ahead so my first one ties to the impact fees because obviously impact fees have been a very high priority item for us we've seen sb 180 has caused legal challenges for various communities to increase their impact fees so we need to make sure that whatever we enact is not falling under that more restrictive or burdensome and that definitely follows the statutes um outside of that when the analysis was done was there an anticipation that our population is going to grow by about 15 percent over the next five years that so that was factored in because this is looking at it year over year over the next five years that's a total of about 30 percent increase when you take each year and and looking back it's it's an astronomical increase and i believe over the past five years we only had between 15 to 20 percent inflation and so that concerns me significantly that we are increasing exponentially over what most people would consider the future inflation rate to be we're already starting to see gdp movement and things like that that's causing our economy to kind of rebound and that could potentially push us into a de-inflation position position and if that's the case and we're on a target to increase by 30 percent and there might only be 10 percent inflation rate over that time frame is this something that's sustainable this is a huge cost i am one of those few houses that's on reclaimed and sewer so i feel that pain and when you take my what is it 65 base rate or whatever and all of a sudden now it's gonna be almost 90 dollars in five years that's a lot of money for the base rate so these are concerns that i definitely have over this escalating table that we have it is spread out i did notice that it drops down to three percent conveniently the same year as the election but you know that's kind of a side note um but it is a concern 30 percent over five years is a lot of money thank you mr orcivia can you answer the sb 180 question please can you she wants to know if the increase in the impact fees is affected by sb 180 as long as our impact fees are in line with florida statutes on impact fees they it should not be yeah that's what i was looking for the clarification on is because we've seen a couple lawsuits i think come through in various communities related to impact fees all right thank you we're going to go ahead and uh if it's okay with the commission can i get a simple majority if we're okay with uh moving this item to just before the city attorney comments all those in favor all right thank you thank you we're going to go ahead and we're going to move to a request for consideration of all reappointments appointments to the affordable housing advisory committee and i'm going to let uh joyce kind of tell us how that's going to go down before i start calling folks so these appointments are not done by district or anything like that just basically by their qualifications so we've previously given you guys all the applications we've given you the chart of what they qualify for we need a minimum of i believe eight in a maximum of 11 and i believe they've been working on eight for some time okay i'm not mistaken so we're going to call it's one commission okay i got you and then the rest whoever pushes it first so we're going to go ahead and do it that way uh we'll start with uh district one uh commissioner harriet so are we going to go one at a time yes okay um i'd like to make a motion to approve all right there's a different there's a different order to uh rachel amoroso there's a motion by commissioner harriet to approve uh miss amoroso uh vice mayor avila vasquez you're on next um is it allowed how many do we have right now that are i'm sorry to ask you this but how many do we have right now that are on the board that reapplying so rachel was already mentioned one two five five yeah gene armstrong jody penna castaldi is it to make it easier for you is it easier to make a motion to approve all those that are filing for re-election you could can we name them off first we're we're gonna name them on then we'll so the ones that want to be reappointed that's right rachel amoroso gene armstrong jody penna castaldi sorry sylvia hayes and michelle wallace chin those are the five all right we have um we have uh district one has chosen rachel moroso commissioner santiago everyone please press your mic so i can turn everybody on so question mayor go ahead my motion to um nominate the rest of the current board members that are re-elected that's not approved there we currently have everyone nominating one person right but my question is can i we used to do this before can we all lump everyone that is currently on the board you could do that yes so that's what i'm saying so it's besides rachel which was nominated by commissioner um davison i would like to nominate the rest of the other five or four no yours is good because i'm nominating no that that is the point he's the original motion so what is the original motion or what the hell is that when does this new work come up okay somebody explain to me what just happened here so the vice mayor's request is to include four people for her picks five perfect now i'm going to go down the line and hopefully i won't get interrupted again we have a motion but i i want to include everyone so we can do this clear and simple and get everything out of the way the second for his motion okay go ahead good i get it yes so i'm i'm sure i'll make you next i second okay harriet's motion there's a motion by commissioner uh harriet and a second by commissioner novick to reappoint all those that wanted to be appointed before we start voting is there any public comment on this okay let's go ahead and um go for a vote there you go okay okay there's five so we got six more to go how much okay perfect so so everyone should be allowed to get at least one person there you go okay got it we'll start again with commissioner harriet since he's in district one i'm sorry commissioner novick he got his already now you go to all right commissioner santiago you're next hold on let me go ahead and turn you on say that again i'd like to appoint ashley hill there's a motion to appoint ashley hill second by commissioner novick can we please vote all right commissioner howington you are next you are the vice mayor you always go second to last like i do go ahead commissioner howington let me go and turn you on go ahead i'm going to go ahead and pass it to the next person as several of the people that i was going to nominate have already been nominated okay as part of the mess thank you commissioner uh novick you're next timothy griffith we have a motion to approve kathy griffith timothy timothy griffith i'm sorry timothy griffith is there a second second by vice mayor avila vasquez can we please vote motion passes six to zero at this time vice mayor avila vasquez you're next hold on let me turn you on there okay since novick took my i will appoint grace mojica there's a motion to appoint grace mojica second second by commissioner novick can we please vote all right um next i'll go ahead and appoint joseph somerville is there a second second second by commissioner novick please vote joseph somerville how many more do we have uh city clerk just to have the maximum number that way because we know we get some two more is the commission okay with stopping here do we want to fill all you give commissioner howington a chance commissioner howington would you like to at least fill one in hold on let me turn on your microphone go ahead uh i'd like to move to add brandy whedon motion to approve brandy whedon second second by vice mayor avila vasquez can we please vote motion passes six to zero there you go all right there's a motion to approve maria nazaro nazaro is there a second sure second there's a second by commissioner novick oh uh vice mayor they're waiting for you all right motion passes zero we have all 11 correct all right we're going to go ahead and move to action item nine season charlie request for discussion rhode island avenue extension city-led versus county-led i believe this is a city attorney or is this a jordan smith there you go mr smith there you go you're on good good evening mayor commission vice mayor um the item before you is the discussion regarding the proposed rhode island extension staff is seeking direction on how the project should move forward staff is requesting city commission direction on project delivery this direction is whether the city should lead the project or coordinate with volusia county for a county-led approach this direction is needed before any further planning or coordination occurs the project would extend rhode island avenue to improve connectivity in this area extension would connect veterans memorial parkway normandy boulevard pine view estates and will pack run the intent is to improve traffic circulation and support long-term transportation planning under a city-led approach the city would control the project design pro would control the project design schedule and access but would be responsible for construction and maintenance and long-term maintenance under a county-led approach the county would design build and maintain the roadway with potential access to county funding but the city would have less control a county-led approach would also would require an interlocal agreement there is no immediate fiscal impact associated with tonight's discussion based on commission direction staff will either begin city-led planning or coordinate with volusia county on a county-led approach and that's city-led versus county-led or just seeking direction all right commissioner novick you're on first commissioner commissioner harriott has this have you guys had discussion of tpo regarding this could you turn on your microphone okay oh he said do you have a concern one way or the other from a tpo standpoint um from a tpo standpoint from the discussions that we've had so far this has not come up across the any of the agendas or discussions from tpo okay then my my commissioner i'm sorry um matt does participate in the advisory committee so i would ask if they have had discussions from that perspective yeah i'm on the tcc and uh we i had a discussion with colleen nickel and the executive director today after the tcc meeting and this is not eligible to be on the five-year uh list of priority projects because that list only has has to do with traffic operations like turn lanes signals things like that so this isn't in in the five-year capital improvement uh list of projects for the tpo okay so number one is just because it's not does it mean it can't be so that needs to happen yep okay and we need to flex on that that needs to happen so be clear about that this is a huge project that interfaces with the i4 uh lanes beyond the ultimate beyond ultimate okay there's no way that we have the staff to be able to manage this project we would have to contract it out it's a multi-jurisdictional project it's the county it's orange city and deltona and at least the npo so um i strongly would urge the commission to let us do an interlocal agreement with the county as long as we maintain in that agreement that we have a seat at the table and we can have discussion and have have you know fair representation and input uh if if we have concerns or want to give direction but it's imperative that this be moved up on the tpos planning list and because they're going to play this is this is a very regional project um even metro plan i can't believe that is this do you know is it on metro plans right i believe it's in the long range transportation plan but it's not in the five-year commissioner i don't mean to interrupt you i believe it was under a 10-year plan okay but what what's jordan do we know what their what their timetable for this is for design for all the design right we're talking about design at this point well yeah at this point from normandy the howland would be the part we're talking about we have to do design some right-of-way acquisition and then of course construction so so the the importance of it being in the plant getting it in the plan is obviously making access to dollars available for us okay so that's why it's important that we've got the seat at the table but for what you're asking for for a vote tonight please can we if you're ready for a motion make it um go ahead make the motion that we do the interlocal agreement let county take the lead on this we're talking about this portion we're talking about the purple portion right here yeah okay yeah it's it's it's all it's it's all got to tie together it's all got to interface so the county is best equipped to have their their staff work with our staff and they're probably going to contract this anyway and and so if we'll do that interlocal agreement it'll that'll flow better all right we have a we have a motion by commissioner novak is there a second there's a second by commissioner santiago um before we start going into the different conversations because i know that the board is lit up is there any public comment on this elbert bryan please elbert bryan deltona this has been on the books for what 12 years now that i know of maybe a little bit longer yeah i think that what i saw in the agenda item i have a problem with because if you take this directly to wolfpack you're going to cause a racetrack on catalina if uh you take and put a light there you might slow it down a little bit but not to bring it out to howland basically takes and takes everything away from it that we always wanted to be able to relieve traffic from howland that's what this was all about was to relieve traffic on howland boulevard by taking it away from howland boulevard what are you relieving can anybody actually answer that what are you relieving you're relieving nothing except for you're adding traffic now to catalina all the way to wolfpack that's all you're doing and most of the kids that go to that school you're going to be turning from howland to what wolfpack to get to this and you got kids every morning and every afternoon there you're creating a problem by doing that if this goes forward like this the way it was written in the uh agenda this is going to be bad news you're not going to actually help traffic you're going to cause more of a problem right there at the hospital or high school think very good before you actually do this i don't have a problem with this going over to the county but what i have a problem with is all of a sudden they want to come out on wolfpack who does that actually benefit most the marsh nobody else but the marsh it doesn't help traffic flow it helps his traffic flow not ours it was said long time ago that if it comes out on wolfpack there would be accident after accident after accident there because of one problem you got school drop off in the morning you got school pick up in the afternoon that's where your problem is going to come from with this think about this before you actually do this that way bring it out to howland now i also understand that that little road right there next to uh uh the racetrack's probably not wide enough you're gonna have to make it a little wider think about that because as mr novich said you don't have an engineer on staff that's worth a squat for doing this i have no faith in the city being able to build this properly none at all ah you you came close to saying it that way so the problem at the end of the day is you don't have staff to be able to go through the state the county orange city and us that's where the real problem is turn it over to the state or to the county kathy bryan please kathy bryan deltona um i too have an issue with the wolfpack run and one of the reasons is what mr mr bryan mentioned was the kids dropping off and here's what i always saw when i took my kids to school is parents wouldn't go into the gate and go around the drive to drop their kids off no they would drop them off in the middle of street in the middle of traffic so if we've got if we increase the traffic through that area that is going to be a huge issue and i think whatever we can do to get this done sooner because it has been so long and i agree with putting it with the county but don't leave yourselves out of the say you're going to turn it over to the county make sure that deltona and its residents have the proper input on this because that area is already a mess the traffic lights don't flow well you've got that weave pattern coming on from graves and people trying to immediately get over left to turn into that neighborhood there that place is a mess so whatever is going to work best to relieve some of that and reduce that congestion accidents etc is what you guys need to think about so thank you that is public comment all right so uh we have a motion on the floor in just a minute let me finish uh we have a motion on the floor to send to the county under the conditions of keeping this is what commissioner novi said keeping deltona having a seat at the table and it was seconded by commissioner santiago jordan then we'll go to vice mayor avila vasquez just for the record so nothing no alignments have been set um it would still have to be approved by volusia county council and then also um deltona city commission with the interlocal agreement if that's the direction we're taking so in terms of will pack or wherever the alignment comes out that still needs to be approved thank you vice mayor avila vasquez thank commissioner harriet then commissioner santiago uh thank you mayor what was the original plan where was rhode island supposed to come out of before it was um directed to wolf pack there were also discussions to bring it out by the racetrack as well to that's what i remember um you know i do a lot of work with deltona high school and i can tell you that sometimes in the morning when i'm coming in i'm waiting to make that right turn and i'm still by the racetrack on that i'm on that line waiting to make that right turn i think wolf pack and like you said it has to be decision has to be made by both sides but i think wolf pack is the wrong uh road to pick um to add more traffic too because that's where all our students come in and out of school i mean i don't even um you know the bus is going through the middle so it doesn't affect the school buses um but yes and um the other thing is if we partner with the city with the county what happens to the funds that were already allocated from the city of deltona to um for that for that project we could present a big check to the county we have 15 million dollars to give to the county to help with the project but we still have to ask permission to be added to the to the table right no we um we've had conversations with the county and they would be open to an interlocal agreement okay all right um thank you appreciate it just a quick point of order to vice mayor's point can we make sure if that's what we end up doing today there needs to be a strict line in that check that says that that money can only be used for this project so planning flat out full stop so planning staff will work with legal and drafting this into local with the county commissioner harriet thank you mayor there's a there's a lot more at play than excuse me there there's a lot more there's a lot more here at play than uh what's been brought up by the commission or what's been brought up by a couple of the residents a couple of the other things that discussions that tpo has been having are moving forward and and bringing advancing the studies for beyond the ultimate for this area and um some of the things that that could possibly include all possibilities why it hasn't been briefed on anybody yet are um an express lane interchange at rhode island a commercial interchange at rhode island nothing just an overpass at rhode island but these are all things that have that beyond the ultimate has been advanced and bumped up forward to begin those studying components to see what that traffic assessment does and i think that we need to make sure that whatever we do aligns with the beyond beyond the ultimate plan because if we're sitting here looking at wolfpack run versus the road next to the racetrack and we're not going to put in there's not going to be an interchange at rhode island and i4 now we've just diverted traffic to where through a neighborhood because they're going to drive down normandy we're going to hear complaints commissioner vasquez is going to hear complaints all day because we've got we've just quadrupled traffic down normandy to get to saxon which is already overloaded so all that to say there's a lot of moving pieces here so i think it's really really important that we don't try to rush this i understand that this has been on the books discussed for 12 years and and i am sorry that the city has has not moved forward with this in the past at this point i am grateful that we haven't because i don't think anybody envisioned beyond the ultimate back when this began some of the other things that i would like to ensure and this is what our 15 million dollars goes to buy is that we have say in the way that this road is designed we have had workshops and many discussions on possibly a center of commerce a downtown whatever we want to talk about on rhode island and the walkability of that that area so we need to be able to impose our position on oversight sidewalks enhance street lighting enhance landscaping so that we can actually bring that vision to fruition and not just put in a straight road with the street light every 200 yards that we've now created a safety problem with pedestrians and this was a discussion that was had during the synergy discussions um during at least two workshops that i'm aware of so there's a lot this is not a very simple thing i have i don't have any issues with the the county leading this um i have full faith in our staff i i don't think that um i know that we just hired a city engineer i don't have any questions about that this is just a massive project with a lot of jurisdictions and the county being the county and over all of the jurisdictions are having that kind of umbrella authority i think is the right the right place the other thing that i want to make sure that we maintain is that the portions within the city limits the deltona has the maintenance responsibility on and it's not just about adding an expense to us it's about adding the ability for us to fix it and maintain it to the level and the standard that our residents demand because i i hear a lot about problems on howland about problems on saxon about problems in the road about problems with the landscaping and i get frustrated just like everybody i'm sure gets frustrated hearing it saying that that's not a city road we don't have authority to fix it i want to make sure that we have that authority i want to make sure that that we can maintain it to the level and the standard that our residents demand have demanded from us and i think that will only increase so that's my piece thank you guys commissioner santiago thank you mayor yep i agree 110 percent with what you just said we need to um and and with commissioner novick as well we need to make in full support of the county taking over this huge project however we definitely need a seat at that table every time with an interlocal agreement so jordan you got this right you're you i we need to have a seat at that table because we do we have to protect our residents we have to protect our students we got to make sure um everything is done and we are aware of what's going on um with the landscaping with um not having that road go and connect to wolfpack run um but my agreement yes they're better equipped county is very better equipped and um i support it for the county so thank you and staff will provide um updates on the project as well as we move forward commissioner howington um my concern is i just want to make sure that the 15 million that we do put in actually goes to deltona and it remains within that they use it on deltona and that they don't funnel it off to another stretch in another city that's my concern understood and um staff will work with legal and making sure that's in the interlocal agreement thank you i do have one more commissioner harriet please let's wrap it up thank you mayor real quick um the last piece the last thought that i have is that we've discussed wolfpack run there's been comments about the racetrack road i want to make sure that we have an open mind to this and we see what the traffic studies say will be the most beneficial because if lord knows that the bryans are going to be right back here if we put in a road and it's nothing but safety concerns next to the high school and it's nothing but traffic congestion and doesn't actually accomplish the goal and rightfully so that's not picking on anybody that's you know rightfully so so that's all all right thank you can we please go ahead and uh i'll ask the city attorney to uh read this uh request and uh the motion and the second go ahead she's coming this is uh the request for discussion on the rhode island avenue extension um and the request that they're asking is the the motion that you'd like to make uh whoever the the mover is commissioner novick and seconded by commissioner santiar go ahead go ahead mayor um there was a lot going through between the motion and stuff like that and i know there's been rumors going around saying that i don't know what i'm doing because i always ask to repeat the motion but you know what it's it's not a stupid thing to ask for something to be repeated i can repeat it um so can you please repeat the motion again so that we all understand absolutely the motion has been what are we approving here yes the motion by commissioner novick is to let the county lead the project with conditions that the city has a seat at the table and the check is restricted to specifically city of deltona area yeah well are you okay with that vice mayor okay the motion passes six to zero we're going to go ahead to uh action item 9d which is request for approval of resolution if i can please have the city attorney read that thank you so much mayor i i want to be clear before i i read the the normal resolution title i want to read the background on this item so the city of deltona adopted order here's a point of order by commissioner howington uh i believe the meeting has a stop time of nine o'clock can we go ahead and extend it until after we complete we can extend it till 9 30 which is per policy so do you want to make a motion to extend it till 9 30. uh yes but i'd really like that we get the water back before us before we well hopefully we'll get there so do you want to make the motion i'll make a motion to extend the meeting until 9 30. is there a second second by commissioner harriet a simple vote all those in favor aye all those opposed all right we're excited until 9 30. thank you so much um so the city adopted ordinance number 29-2025 which imposed a temporary moratorium on june 30th 2025 on november 4th the attorney for howland holdings group sent correspondence to the city alleging that the moratorium is prohibited pursuant to senate bill 180 um there was additional correspondence received which is included in your packets um this is the third item in there it was sent december 23rd 2025 this this triggered this item being put on this agenda um and we are seeking direction if you want us to take action so i want to just be clear about that we prepared a resolution and i'm going to read the title but you are not required to take action you can hear this discuss it approve the resolution deny the resolution or do nothing so we'll talk through all these things but before i read the title i just want to be clear we just want your direction and we will do whatever it is you direct us to do so this is resolution number 2026-05 a resolution of the city of deltona florida acknowledging that ordinance 29-2025 is void ab initio pursuant to chapter 2025-190 of florida statutes providing for implementation and an effective date with that i would encourage you all to have a discussion all right no motion i think is required for this discussion you can have an open discussion and then if you want to take action you can make a motion now or later all right following the way we've been doing this let's go with a motion then we'll do public comment and then we'll do the discussion so uh commissioner harriet you're lit up i'll make a motion to uh withdraw the moratorium pursuant to the allegations made within this resolution resolution number 2026-05 there's a motion by commissioner harriet commissioner santiago you're on the board i would i would just urge you to amend it to i move to approve resolution number 2026-05 because the resolution does everything you want to do are you good with that uh commission do you want me to repeat it please i move to approve resolution number 2026-05 okay commissioner santiago you're next on the board second all right is there any public comment yes tim blodgett please and then when we come back commissioner novak you're first on the turn on the microphone please you're on the phrase that comes to mind is are we beating a dead horse please let us be 180 die whatever kind of death it needs to die and let it die tonight that's it john b hello i'm john i'm in district six for about 40 years i'm sorry commissioner howington you don't get another award tonight they didn't threaten you in this latest threatening letter latest threatening letter is we'll give you 10 more days you better pull out of this this is a threat and a joke if they follow through they have to wait until march to do any filing this this is all about time and the time of importance is november there'll be five seats opened up up here now these people these developers are applicants as soon as commissioner lully left within days they were over at the school next door the christian school gloating we've got commission votes now we're putting a subdivision in here and let's make it be perfectly clear that's what this is all about so i mean uh yeah five seats are going to change in november they want to hurry up because their fear right now is if they don't get started before march there's two months of uh planning and zoning two months of council meetings something could happen they might miss their boat they've been trying this for seven years this is just another tactic you need to just drop this say forget it it's a joke sue us if you want put it on the pile as my hero over here says because because that's all it's about they're just trying to hurry up push the process tell the city how to run their business so there's one person over here on the end that shouldn't be able to vote at all my opinion because let me count the votes that he got uh zero nobody voted for him in district six this one over here's family works for these applicants she should recuse herself and there's more up here that ought to consider what you're voting on and i'm sorry to be kind of negative about this i'd love to come up here and be flowery but you pushed me in a corner on most of this crap so you know the other thing is you talk about transparency in here all the public speaking's been cut and out of the not recorded and shortened and books are gone but i think you must have put in your new golden book that the definition of transparent is a man who can have a baby see you later that ends public comment vice mayor avila vasquez thank you mayor so i'm asked i'm being asked to make a decision on sb 180 which hasn't even been finalized up at the state level they're still being discussed what they what they want to change what's wrong what's not right so it hasn't even been agreed upon as how sb 180 should be uh read or should be followed or what the law really means to us so um here we are again having to take a vote on sb 180 and um it's sad it's a sad situation uh we are outnumbered we will continue to be outnumbered up here at this dais so i just want to make everybody aware that um i have no other choice but to go along with the rye and like tim said let it just die and give everybody what they want um so um let's go with the vote all right can we please vote motion passes six zero can i please have the city attorney read section or action item 9e as in edward thank you so much um so this this is a resolution i'm going to read the title and then obviously happy to discuss as needed this is resolution number 2026-06 resolution of the city of deltona florida approving the settlement of all claims made by howland station condo developers llc ratifying certain property transactions in accordance with the settlement agreement directing the city manager to schedule a city commission workshop amending the budget for the fiscal year beginning october 1st 2025 and ending september 30th 2026 providing for implementation severability scrivener's errors and an effective date all right this time i'll entertain a motion and then a second so we can go to public comment and then discussion commissioner novick i move to approve resolution number 2026-06 commissioner howington i'll second okay we have a motion and a second motion by commissioner novick second by commissioner howington is there any public comment pat blodgett please tim blodgett please oh well you're up next then so mr blodgett would you like to go ahead of miss blodgett oh okay all right is there anybody else um just the two miss parker if it's okay with you when miss blodgett is done can we take the microphone up to mr blodgett can you click on the button please so i can turn on the microphone okay is this because of sb 180 that we have to pay over three million dollars for the howland station crossing right ask your question then i'll make sure we write it down and we'll get answers because of howland station crossing we have to pay over three million dollars to the builder is that because of sb 180 okay then are we going to get an explanation to why we have to i just said just ask your question and i'll make sure we get an answer that's what i said sorry i have believe mr blodgett was next i can see why you don't want to have a discussion before you get public comment three and 3.125 million for a settlement for mitigation um who do we have on our side mickey mouse uh without knowing more about the details of this there really isn't a whole lot i can say about it other than i mean it's already been litigated we got to pay it if we got to pay it pay it if we don't fight it i think somebody's ash should swing in the wind for this and that's all i got to say that is public comment thank you if i can just have the city attorney go through it the public is deserving obviously of of knowing what's going on yes i don't know if we're allowed to just obviously after everything's over we can disclose sunshine stuff or the shade meeting but at least what is public if you can please explain to the for sure mayor yes um and and this is a complicated issue um we obviously didn't have two executive sessions earlier today you're a smart lady you can make it very uncomplicated i have i'm gonna do my i'm gonna do my best i will tell everybody i tried very hard to make a very clear memo so there is a memorandum of law that we included in the packet that really walks everyone through this but i'm gonna just from the ten thousand foot view i'll drill down and then mayor you let me know if you want more detail so um the howland station condo developers llc versus city of deltona is one case that's in the currently in the seventh judicial circuit it is set for trial in about three weeks it's the second week of february so if this settlement is not approved we go to trial there is another case it is a burt harris act case brought by the same party the same plaintiff against the city it is early in its stage um and so we're still in the uh we have not we have not replied yet but that is a separate matter but related to the same property and the same project and this project is identified as two different tax parcels uh i've got the titles in here but it's it's property that's located on martin luther king jr boulevard and howland boulevard it's the two parcels that are just on the other side of the center so the road leading into the center the two vacant parcels on either side right before you get to the center those are the two pieces of land we're talking about so there's two cases here um we were required to go to court ordered mediation which we did on january 6 2026 and at that mediation it was an all-day mediation um we came up with a global settlement and part of the reason we wanted to explain everything in this memo and again i'm going to try to drill down is um the two cases are separate but related and they're related to the same property and the same project so in the underlying litigation which is the howland station condo developers llc every city of deltona case um there are two counts for relief they share the same fact pattern and they're related to the city's adoption of ordinance uh 02-2025 from december of 2024 which as as you might recall that was the live local ordinance that you all passed in order to better to comply with florida statute with respect to live local and it's related to the howland station's application for development of the subject property um there is a portion of the property that includes a portion of land which is sort of the wooded area portion of the wooded area of the properties we're talking about which is subject to an agreement that the city had between the faith bible uh church of the christian and missionary alliance and the city which required city consent um for any development or transfer of of any part of that land without city consent the church property was conveyed to howland station in october of 2024 this has been the subject of much discussion and debate um with with uh the principals and attorneys uh for howland station developers and with you all and with us over the last year or so um and the position in the litigation that howland station developers has taken is that their application was deemed complete and the old live local ordinance should apply and it's the city's position that the application was incomplete and the new live local or live local ordinance from december 2024 should apply now then uh senate bill 180 passed and senate bill 180 as we all know um has a lot of uh a lot of regulations with respect with respect with respect to more stringent land use regulations and the the part that impacted this litigation is that it was retroactive to august 2024 and so because we passed the live local act in december 2024 um the plaintiff in this case took the position that senate bill 180 invalidated that second live local act um ordinance which was passed in december 2024 and they amended their complaint to add that as a second count so that case is set for trial we have to go to mediation the court requires it we go to mediation um and we discuss all the issues that one discusses that mediation we you know we both uh aggressively put forth our positions um and and frankly uh and they're here so i don't want to speak for them but i think we were both all ready for trial we've been in depositions um leading in the weeks leading up to mediation i think the day before mediation we were doing depo prep the day after mediation i think we had a depo set and then one the day after that so we've been gearing up hard and and we were going to trial um there is then this second case which is the burt harris act case and the burt harris act case is related to the underlying issue and in that case um howland station has taken the position that effectively there's been a um diminishment of value of the property uh certainly the city disagrees um and that diminished value is about is is 1.170 they also have a demand for attorney's fees as part of their burt harris act claim now i'm going to step back again the first case howland station was not covered by our insurance so the city has been funding the litigation itself so paying out of pocket for all litigation costs experts uh depositions court reporters the whole kit and caboodle the burt harris act case was picked up by fmrt fmit our insurance carrier for the burt harris claim um and that's again early on but there is a cap that fmit has on that policy of 300 000 for that claim so it's a it's eroding as work as work is done so we have these two cases we have the the real cost that we're incurring for howland station developer case and then we have the anticipated cost that we will incur for the burt harris act case because burt harris act claims uh are long and laborious um the estimate by the um the firm that that fmit gave us for that case was that it would take between a year and a half and two years and certainly uh there's an opinion that we would erode that 300 000 over that time and then certainly if there was any recovery made by howland station it would be above that and it would be on the city um and so here we are we have these two cases there's real there's real clocks that are running on attorneys and it's not just one attorney it's running on two it's on two cases so at mediation uh again we go back and forth and one of the things that we did on the city side is we really sat down and sharpened our pencils to figure out what is the real cost of litigating these two cases all the way through um as an aside and you all know this but for the benefit of the public theoretically potentially and i'm sure you guys know this we were going to bring a quiet title action as well and so there's other real costs associated with bringing that action which would be a third case to attempt to bolster the city's position so i created this table in this memo it's on page three of the memo and it breaks down the costs and i'm going to go i'll just walk you through them so for the howland station case these were the estimated litigation expenses through trial 195 000 to get us through trial if howland station condo developers prevailed on their senate bill 180 challenge which was the second count of their case they advised that their attorney's fees would be at least 250 000 and as you all know if we lose a senate bill 180 challenge which is what this is is and they prevail we pay their attorney's fees and our ordinance is struck so that december 2024 ordinance for the live local act is struck on the basis of their case if they win that count what is your point of order commissioner harry if you you don't mind i we all were briefed on this and i don't want to take any time away from explaining this water situation but we're getting to the point where we're not going to be able to get to the rest of the agenda items um so if we could could we ask staff to make that memo public and it's public but push that out and make it available widely available to everybody so that we can it is it's in the packet it's in the agenda that everyone has it's on the website right now and everyone can walk through this table but i'll just say this the estimate that we provided at the end of the day for potential exposure on legal fees and potentially if we lost right if we lost all these cases was about 2.245 million dollars this is hard cash money above the insurance coverage we also do have an appraisal that they provided as part of their burt harris act claim um and the appraised value of the property is based they had two different numbers but ballpark it's between 1.5 and 2.1 million depending on how you look at it they had they had a current value and then with entitlements value so the value of the property exists then there is this other 2.25 of potential exposure of hard money that the city will have to spend and if we spend that money and we lose we get nothing we've just spent 2.2 million dollars uh and get nothing thank you so here we would acquire the 5.5 acres we settle two cases we prevent the third case from having to be initiated and move forward thank you so much so we've already had public comment we have a motion and we have a second if we can um go ahead and vote please motion passes six to zero uh at this time we're going to go back to i'll get to it ordinances in public hearing nine action items 9a thank you if you can turn on the podium there you go mayor commission thank you um we were able to go back and take yes sir we were able to go back and look at the five-year projection and the previous staff recommendation was six percent on all fees across the board if we were to go based on what commissioner novick stated it would for base fee only for both water sewer um all all base fees it had to go from six percent to nine point one three if we were to increase the tiers by only three percent so nine point one three percent for five years would be the necessary increase in base fees to bring in the same amount of revenue in a five-year period commissioner harry you're up first and that's only that's only increasing the base fees increasing the base fee where they're currently at by nine point one three percent rather than increasing and the consumption would stay at three percent versus the previous six percent so we looked at it like i said we looked at it across all five years and the average needed increase would be nine point one three percent for base fees yeah i i understand what commissioner novick was was getting at trying to make this equitable across the board um i think the overall goal uh to really long term reduce the um kind of reduce the position that we're in is to we need we need residents to reduce the water consumption and i'll say this part out loud because this is the part that everybody wants to be quiet about um but we need to reduce the excess consumption of water from users um increasing only the base fees and increasing it for everybody doesn't do that um i think that as presented originally with the level funding for six percent and increasing the consumption as well so that those that use more water will then pay more is the most appropriate to help with the long-term plan and long-term operation of the water department which personally wish we never got into the business but side note um that being said i'll make a motion to approve the uh i gotta go back to 90 i'll make a motion to approve resolution number 2025-169 adopting the updated master fee schedule for fiscal year 2025-2026 that incorporates the utility rate study for water and wastewater motion by commissioner harriet commissioner santiago you're on the board second second by commissioner santiago uh vice mayor avila vasquez you're up thank you mayor you know right now at this moment i think we are rushing into making a decision on this uh because we want to go home it's 9 23 i think it's unfair for the residents uh for us to rush into this if i'm not mistaking commissioner navic you have made a suggestion that we uh review this again am i correct um i think that that would be the best decision than for us to just make this decision at the last minute that's my comment thank you mayor you're welcome we have a motion on the floor in a second can we please vote the motion fails three to three does this commission have an issue with raising the impact fees because i that seems to be part of nobody has an issue with so can i entertain a motion to at least hold on hold on commissioner novick go ahead i'll make a motion that we approve the impact fees at a rate of 10 000 was it the what just stated by the study no i want to go i want to go a little higher we we are not allowed to by state statute yes i can hold on let me turn on your mic click on the mic so i can turn on your mic it was forty dollars more right uh yes sir so the impact fees are currently six thousand four hundred and seventy five dollars uh mr mance has recommended increasing them to nine thousand sixty dollars that's the maximum that he can um support based on the study anything above that would be at the commission's finance is correct as long as we are aligned with the study and statute we are fine all right i'll go with the study then and and also uh hold on guys stop i'll go with the study that's my motion so there's a motion by commissioner fees only yes there's a motion by commissioner novick to increase the impact fees to nine thousand sixty dollars per study and there is a second by commissioner howington can we please vote and then we'll continue with the rest the motion passes six to zero uh did you want to say something else uh yes sir mr mckinney go ahead thank you mayor in order to comply with our bond resolutions and our grant application that we currently have outstanding um based on what we have in the um fee resolution on page eight it talks about the automatic user rate adjustments mr mance is very confident that if we at least adopt the increase that's based on the engineering news record enr which is currently at 1.6 percent increase which is very similar to the cpi we would at least be in compliance with the requirements of um all of our granting agencies that require a um increase to be income you know to be in compliance with our requirements commissioner navic you're on the board still did you want i'm sorry okay okay commissioner harriet you're up next does that uh so if we if we do the 1.6 now that just pushes us off next year to a larger increase yes but i'll also be coming back at mid-year with having to relook at all operations and currently budgeted capital and cip point of order before you make any motion can i make a suggestion please can can we and if not i'll hand the gavel over i'm not afraid to make a motion but i've only got one more question i'm not planning on making no no no so if anybody who makes the motion they could put to approve the 1.6 percent increase with stipulations that the rest gets put on a workshop and if it takes three four workshops it doesn't matter but um we can't keep kicking the can down the road because we're in the same predicament we are as the past commissions i think the last time a commissioner had the the backbone to say hey this needs to get done was actually commissioned or not because i remember he got criticized and i was guilty of one of those people that was criticizing you so um i'll say that finish your question and then i'll entertain a motion the if we decide to push this next decision or any other decisions off what will the impact to uh funding bond rating what will be the financial impact to outside i will have to come back to you at a later date next commission meeting with that answer all right no so that i've changed my mind if that's okay um i'd like to make a motion to adopt the 1.6 uh was that the er yes sir it is the um if the engineering news record enr construction cost index in january okay so i'll make a motion to adopt the 1.6 percent enr from january yes sir with the stipulation that this be put back on a i'd like to see this on a priority workshop workshop and presented with the capital five-year plan yes sir with the rate study as well yes sir and i'd like to see a list of projects that were completed from the last five years with the cip for the next five years there's a motion by commissioner harriet commissioner novick you're up next i just would you put a date specific for the workshop 90 days no a date specific very much april um i recognize that this is important to everybody let's with by the end of march i was gonna i know you want i know you want to i think give me a date february 16th thank you done i agree okay is that a second commissioner novick yes sir all right can we please uh go ahead vice mayor uh thank you mayor is this one percent on top of the uh impact fee that we just approved the microphone's off impact fee is to the developers not really to the sorry the impact fees are only charged to um new residential units and commercial units the only thing our existing customer base at this time will be charged would be 1.6 across all base fees and tiers thank you all right please vote motion passes six to one this time it is nine 30 and the meetings adjourned