All right, it's 2 o'clock. I would like to call the group's order, the meeting is July 16th, at 2 o'clock. We have a voting forum that has been established in person. Melissa, are there any members attending by phone? Any members attending by phone? Possibly Mr. Acosta-Arula may be joining the meeting. Okay, but not currently? Not as of yet, yes. Great, thank you. Yes. Also, we'd just like to take a moment and thank our board members for the voluntary service. It's an honor to serve alongside of you. It's a robust group with tons of experience, and I thank you for your time you spend doing this. And I would, understanding the gravity of today's meeting, would just ask that we hold a civil meeting and respect one another and people that are making statements allow them to finish and go to the same from our standpoint. So we'd just thank you for your consideration, Mayor, and understanding the, certainly, the issues that we've done on the pleasure today. So with that, I'd like to call the case of Knox Leaves to the pleasure of the election. Thank you. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you, Melissa. Melissa, I see we have three or four of these up at the time. Is that correct? Yes, correct. Councilman, you're up first. All right. You're also on the agenda at the end. Oh, great. Okay. Thank you. All right. Nick Allen, 117 West Duval Street. Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for coming this afternoon. I wish this meeting today was about bringing a growing aerospace company to Cecil, creating thousands of jobs for Jacksonville. Instead, it's about suing the city. The board will sue and vote on what's a fairly inflammatory resolution and on what lawyers call a, quote-unquote, speaking complaint, one that relies on rhetoric instead of facts. Unfortunately, J.A. doesn't record its meetings, but the city council does, including the 2025 August budget hearing that forms the basis of this lawsuit. If you watch it yourself, you'll see these allegations are wrong. My assistant, Amber, right now will be handing out QR codes linking to that budget hearing. At 2.23, I praise J.A.'s management of the International Airport, note there's more investment at Craig than Cecil, and urge accelerating investment to capture the growing aerospace market. At 3.14, in this budget hearing from August 2025, I explained that I had already withdrawn every proposal I'd previously made regarding airport cash long ago except Cecil. Yet this complaint repeatedly attacks proposals that no longer exist. At 3.40, we debate the FSCJ amendment. The complaint says council pickpocketed J.A.A. and created a budget line item from Whole Claw. Neither is true. We simply transferred $10 million from retained earnings into Cecil Airport's capital account with one big condition. Not $1 could be spent unless J.A.A., FSCJ, the state, and the FAA agreed on a collaborative solution. It gets crazier. The complaint claims council seized J.A.A. funds and compelled violations of federal law. Neither happened. J.A.A. has the funds now. We haven't taken them, and we expressly prohibited spending anything without FAA approval. J.A.A. doesn't even have to spend any of the money that we allocated if it doesn't want to. Anyway, that hearing lasted two hours. All amendments passed unanimously. And at 4.01, we conclude the hearing and call for a new spirit of cooperation between city council and J.A.A. We now know that never happened, and I now know why. This lawsuit isn't really about those allegations. They're easily disproved when you watch the hearing. This is about control. While council is working to bring airspace jobs to the city, while Keystone Heights Airport just announced a billion-dollar airspace hub of their own, J.A.A. is suing to separate itself from the city. Our general council has already concluded that the budget actions were lawful and that J.A.A. is part of the consolidated government, and he's not alone. Republicans and Democrats agree. The mayor and council agree. By a vote of 167 to zero, council and the Florida legislature agree. Only you on this board or a J.A. management disagree. And if this board approves the lawsuit, it will stand alone. I conclude at 3.17 saying this. There's nothing I'd love more than J.A., this board, myself, and the Duval delegation working together in lockstep, moving Cecil forward as a job engine for northeast Florida. The people have spoken. Let's put this behind us, move forward together, and make Cecil the airspace hub it's meant to be. Thank you. Next up, I do not know me. My name is Jason Teal. I am the former general council, and I was with the office of general council for almost 25 years. And I am not here in my current role with the city council, but I'm voluntarily here because I care for both the consolidated government and the office of general council. I'm also appearing before you today because I fear that you have not been provided proper legal guidance concerning the resolution and draft complaint that is on your agenda. You've been asked to approve a lawsuit against the city of Jacksonville and to ratify the previous hiring of outside legal counsel that has not been authorized by the general counsel, Michael Fackler, as required in section 1-4 of J.A.A.'s section of the consolidated city's charter. J.A.A.'s failure to adhere to the requirements to obtain the general counsel's approval could be determined to be a misuse of public funds for any fees that are paid to the illegal outside counsel. This could result in each of you being held personally liable for those funds, potential criminal liability, and a determination of malfeasance or misuse. To demonstrate this risk, J.A.A.'s section of the city's charter states, quote, The authority may use any of the services available to governmental units through the finance and administration department, information technology division of the city of Jacksonville, but is not required to do so by law. However, the authority shall be required to use the legal services of the city of Jacksonville, except in those cases where the chief legal officer, the general counsel, of the city, with the city legalized legal services, the draft complaint alleges that J.A.A. because it doesn't take, but however, it makes it man, the J.A.A.A. instead of verbally and inflammatory language, that in the six of you, support your staff's desire to take this action, ignore, misleading, and in some instances, in addition to the factor it sees that Council President Howland just clarified, whoever drafted this complaint is attempting to mislead you into thinking that the state legislature created a separate J.A.A. charter in 2004, one that is independent of 2004-464 Laws of Florida, specifically states in the title of the bill, quote, an act relating to the Jacksonville airport, comma, J.A.A. is part of the consolidated city of Jacksonville, which is part of Newport County. It states creating and establishing separate charter provisions, not creating a separate charter concern. Three minutes. In addition to providing optional use of the city's finance and administration department and IT services and mandatory uses of the office of general counsel, the J.A.A. charter also provides, J.A.A.'s budget must be approved by the city council, not just when J.A.A. comes to the city hiring. Auditing authority by the council auditor, city council has control of J.A.A.'s use of its own real property. J.A.A. must obtain city council permission to work and dispose of its real property under some circumstances. J.A.A. must pay the city a $50,000 surety bond for each of its members to guarantee, quote, faithful performance of their duties. All of this control and oversight proves that J.A.A.'s charter section is not a freestanding charter, as the complaint alleges. Jason, can we close to wrap it up? Yes, sir. We're past time. We'll wrap it up with this. Finally, I feel that there's a very real possibility that if you approve of its filing today, this complaint will not even be heard on the merits. I believe it will be dismissed out of hand due to J.A.A.'s failure to exhaust its administrative remedies and because many of the claims are impermissibly speculative, namely that the city council and its president will possibly take certain actions in the future. J.A.A. has a legal obligation pursuant to the charter to first seek a binding legal opinion from the general counsel on every one of these legal questions. Even if it's argued to you, it will not be fruitful. This complaint seeks to illegally bypass that reform. My belief is that a reviewing court will require this procedural step before it even looks to the merits of the complaint. The charter provides that the general counsel's legal opinions are binding unless of them themselves are overturned by a court. That is J.A.A.'s path, not this one. We have any other public comments? Chair, you're going to allow me to speak at some point? Yes. Prior to consolidation, the jury indicted 11 publicists of larceny and bribery, seven of whom were elected officeholders. Convictions followed. Political manipulation and influence failing was obvious in city departments and offices. The framers of consolidation certainly recognized the negative impact of political influence on the operations of the local government, especially utilities, transportation, and the like. In short, a degree of insulation from day-to-day politics was against the independence of the authorities consolidation created isolated them from such interference. Furthermore, the architects of consolidation wanted a strong, unified government. We're wary of concentrating every important function in the when elected administration and council. Independent authorities provide a measure of separation, making operational decisions through boards instead of city hall. Lastly, there were other reasons, including ensuring bondholders that revenues would remain dedicated to the enterprise, avoidance of revenues being diverted to unrelated city expenses, and more stable long-range planning not hampered by the potential change of officeholders that reported to take years. Again, for these reasons and others, independent authorities made a lot of sense. I share this because of my belief that independent authorities, in particular the JAA, are under attack, and some people ignore the ideal and definition of independent. Perhaps we need to be reminded more often of the intent of the original framers of consolidation and the subsequent local and state enabling legislation that led independent authorities like the JAA. I dislike the headline, JAA sues the city of Jacksonville. It connotes an adversarial action, and that is not the case. It is an attempt to resolve a disagreement which I think directly calls the question in certain aspects of the relationship between the city council and the JAA, a relationship enjoying 20 years of success prior to the document and unlawful demands of the last three years. The board and staff of the JAA are in complete agreement with substantially increasing JAA's primary emphasis at CECL's field of maintenance repair and overhaul facilities, as well as interest in developing infrastructure in support of future growth of the aerospace industry. In fact, that has been the goal of the authority for some time, evidenced by what's already taken place at CECL, like Boeing. Additionally, AutoAir, the biggest aerospace development news here in some time, as a result of the hard work, tenacity, and persistence of the JAA staff. I witnessed that firsthand at the air show outside of London several years ago. Since 2005, a total of $375 million from all sources has been spent on capital improvements at CECL, with JAA advancing over $264 million, much of it on infrastructure improvements to benefit future development. Also, the sizable and fiscally responsible cash reserves, JAA is always ready to meet the significant financial commands that could be related to a major project at CECL, not to mention most important issues of airport aviation safety. As community citizens, we are committed to assisting in any way possible and legally allowing to help enhance workforce development and how to be broke in this area, even if it's outside of the realm of aerospace development, as long as it is not outside of the realm of lawful revenue conversion, unlawful revenue conversion, or lawful revenue conversion, and fiscal prudence. In the last several years, there have been multiple requests, demands, and even threats that JAA provide funding for certain city projects and initiatives. Time and time again, the authority was prevented by federal law to fund such projects because, as the Federal Integration Administration has opined, it was not directly related to airport and aerospace activity and development. In the last year's city budget hearings, for the first time ever, the council took the unprecedented move to amend the 2026 JAA budget. The general counsel of the city, Mr. Michael Fackler, was asked for a legal opinion as to whether they could do that, and he said they could in very limited fashion. More specifically, Mr. Fackler said, I quote, the council's budgetary control over JAA's budget has limitations. The council cannot reduce JAA's budget below the required debt service obligations for bonds issued by the authority. However, the council could alter the JAA's budget in such a manner as to create a violation, could not alter JAA's budget in such a manner as to create a violation of federal or state law or result in a breach of contract. The council amendment to the JAA's budget would both violate federal law and result in JAA breaching a lease with an existing long-term tenant. Regarding these potentially unlawful amendments, Mr. Fackler and his staff also noted that JAA is not required to honor any council amendments to its budget. Please note that the JAA receives no funding from the city of Jacksonville. Our budgetary and spending decisions are based solely on money that the authority generates. I'm further concerned by the stance of the council in the upcoming 2027 budget deliberations. The finance committee has allocated 90 minutes to consider and possibly act on the JAA budget. Let's do a comparison. Other independent authorities, 45 minutes. Sheriff's Office of Fire and Rescue, 60 minutes. Public Works, 45 minutes. Half the time I'm allocated to JAA. Most of the other departments, 30 to 45 minutes. The JAA, 90 minutes. And the only 90-minute allocation. Why? Is there a message here? Do we as board members have a right to be concerned? After engineering the amendment to the JAA's charter and with the help of the Office of General Counsel, Council President Howland is insisting that the JAA does not abide by the new charter of workforce and economic development language, JAA will violate state law. I'm not sure how he can insist that JAA violate federal law so as not to violate state law. Council President Howland's attempt to codify his workforce and economic development initiatives into Florida law is clear from his April 23, 2026 email to our board chair, in which Council President Howland states, It is abundantly clear that JAA leadership sees neither the City Council nor the State Legislature as an authority, but they work for the board, and it is the board's responsibility to abide by and implement the charter. City Council and the State Legislature put workforce development intentionally into the definition of economic development in the revised charter language for this very project. The project referred to here is the same FSCJ training center project that the FAA has recently and repeatedly said represents unlawful revenue diversion. I wonder if all those that voted for the Council President's amendment to the JAA charter knew their votes would be used this way. This is another of many examples of the JAA's proposed legal action as the only remedy available to us to challenge actions by the City Council and the ruling by the General Council of the City of Jacksonville. The total agreement with the language contained in the proposed resolution of draft complaint. Interestingly, in his inaugural comments, the incoming Council President called into question the procedural practice of the authority. Council President Howland says he wants a change, followed by a chilling threat that if we don't, he will have a Council change. I won't speak about the merits of the change, but I can tell you unequivocally that it is a four-general lateral decision to consider such a change and not the Council. I think Mr. Howland is reaching beyond his authority as Council President. And I say that with some experience having served as a Council President. I hope this will help explain JAA's position, my position, and hopefully my colleagues' collective position on this issue. I hope this will elaborate our concerns and direction. Again, this is a totally objective direction without animosity or ill will for the future of JAA. This needs to be resolved. Lastly, JAA Aviation Authority is either a non-independent authority created by the city charter and controlled by the city council in ways that could supersede federal and state law. The Jackson Aviation Authority is an independent special district, a political subdivision created by the state of Florida, controlled by the board of directors, and regulated by the federal aviation administration. This city of Jacksonville believes the former to be true, and the JAA believes the latter to be true, as to the frames of consolidation. Inasmuch as the city and the JAA's believe are polar opposites, this is a matter for a court to decide. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and board members, for giving me the time to speak my mind. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. We're going to pass out copies of my remarks to the people that I've had. There's been considerable commentary and opinions concerning today's topic, so my contribution will be facts and one opinion related to my three board responsibilities. First, as chair of the committee for Jacksonville Aerospace Development, the committee consists of JAA board members, members of the city council, JAA development partners such as Jax USA, Jax Chamber, the city of Jacksonville, existing Cecil Airport, and then partners. Second, when we began this process in December, there were substantial knowledge gaps among the participants. For example, our records only took into secret non-ceremonial activities led by the JAA, and none did. Third, substantial money is being spent on the spaceport. As we learned, Cecil remastered plan has now been submitted and approved by the FAA. Resiliency modification, this in the future, and Reynolds-Smithton-Hills is finalizing the consulting report. These actions will include our work, Jax USA, for more aggressive marketing, relocate, expansion, and aerospace industry. However, in the future, we must not forget the butter. According to the most recent FDOT report, Cecil has a highest average employee salary. The spacewalk got the Florida Department of Commerce to continually seek out and respond to requests that include Cecil Air Space Corps. This work requires confidentiality and can take from months to more than a decade to one of those negotiations for almost 20 years. As part of that, our discussions are also ongoing. Lastly, for this section, all this from other FSCJ demonstrate the ongoing legislation. House Bill 4045 is delegated for the economic JAA. Now, second is treasurer of the authority. Reminder the JAA is PFC, passenger facility charges, and other users. Second, I have spoken with and public for proposed hourly rates are consistent with administrative law attorneys in Florida with similar experience and knowledge. The costs have intricately served as chair of another state entity outside the proposed legal team determined. One place where it's my opportunity for a positive outcome. The next section, as treasurer, relates to the 49 U.S.C. 47-107. Clearly applied. Here's a condensed version of the two laws. One is a separate and distinct entity. Second, in cases of revenue diversion, carbon transfer to interest, billing grant money. Third, however, if the temporary grant in the present future fund could be confiscated by the city's dollars to the federal government, I believe the responsibility of seven per states that there's no need for litigation. In a statement about federal law, I'll read these. Quote, this constitution, the laws of the United States shall be made in pursuance thereof, for which shall be made shall be the supreme facilities that are the... First, I'm saying that I want to mention 4-1 of the law, and the law, but I even want to hear a response. I can have dismayed dissent. So I know that we've talked to our lawyers about that, and that is certainly one of the things I want to say that their job. And so I want to be clear that I would draft you all to respect me. The relief that I requested, it's not about. I served as board chair for chief fire. These are issues Mr. Dress, Mr. Howland, and I have had conversations about these. They deserve and how we can... Lawsuits should not be used. I want to say something to the JA people in this room. I'm just, I'm one of the luckiest, I think I am the luckiest guy in the room. We're two badges. We're a tenant. I've worn a lot of badges in Jacksonville. 75, in 1975, I went to work for John McKean. I flew for 15 years out of season. I was on the redevelopment in 1990, and I've seen this JA-18 take Cecil Field from a small airplane light attack base to what I saw it as the night before our country went into Venezuela to take the president out. If you're really lucky enough to see Cecil on Saturday before that Sunday, there were eight KC-46 tankers on the west side of the field lined up on that runway. I thought Cecil Field had retired. I thought I had retired. When I see Cecil Field acting in its highest and best uses as a home for our Coast Guard, Customs, an Army Air National Guard unit, the C-46s the night before our country, didn't go to war. When I see everything Cecil does, when I watch Boeing open, when I see Otto, when I worry about are we going to run out of land over there, are we going to run out of land if Otto produces airplanes and the next MRO wants to be there, I look at a team in JA that has put land to the highest and best use at a level Regency Centers, a company I spent 39 years at. It would blow up, it would amaze, it amazes me as a former pilot out of Cecil, what Cecil is today with 4,000 employees going and looking for lunch. It's pretty amazing, when I look at Perlong, it's the best business and recreational airport on the west side. When I look at Craig as Jackson Executive Airport and the train base of it. When I look at Jackson International as a really fine improving everyday airline airport. When I look at the projects this team tackles, I just want to thank this team. This isn't about you doing a better job. This is about you continuing to do the great job you have been doing under the leadership, which I happen to respect, at a level that's amazing. I'm proud to be on this board. I'm thankful. Mark lets me interact at a very interesting level with you guys. He lets me, the thing I love about this organization is you try and make these airports every day. And Nick, you've got two great ideas. We need more mechanics and we need to keep doing what we are doing. But we're keeping doing what we were doing before you put it out there to us. Just let us work. That's really, in my opinion, when you have a team this good, we just want the clarity of doing what we're doing. So, thank you for putting that into words so eloquently. I hate to say this, don't let it insult you, but I think our lawyers can get silly sometimes. This one's silly. We just need to keep, Nick's got a couple of good ideas. Some of them weren't so good. And let's just keep doing what we're doing. You should have had a third gear at the hall. We do have a motion. We have a motion second, but I think Mr. Fackler would ask for three minutes to comment so he could have your time before both. And I appreciate that. I'll try to be brief. A lot of topics came up. I think we did up on it. The comment real quick on that ethics rule says, So, they recognize that we've looked at that issue plenty of time. But it does highlight the fun part of my job. It's representing the entire consolidated government. And it's a mess. It makes my job difficult. But that's the job that I signed up for, whether I knew what the job was or not. And it's also the version that you guys put into by the statement. Like it or not, I'm your chief legal officer. I was a little disheartened to hear. I've heard, we've talked to our lawyers about the conflict of interest. I'm afraid you haven't. We're your lawyers. We have tried very hard to make sure we maintain that relationship. I have not heard a call from you guys since I understood there was a kumbaya on the day that went out. Since then, I haven't heard anything. My attorney, Ms. Ross, comes to the meeting. There's been no communication. Hey, we're concerned about that. Ms. Barnett mentioned there's confusion. Ask me the question. There's this assertion that I refuse to put something in writing. I, to my knowledge, I can never refuse to put something in writing. I will put it in writing. I offer to do that now. I offer to give JAA's representative a seat at the table to discuss it to make sure we understand your viewpoint. My goal is to get it correct. So, it's a little frustrating, but we can get an opinion on it and lay out. My job? Asked an arbitrator. Signed up for it. The legislature signed you up for I as your arbitrator. I'm going to die. Give us. Don't say this like me does. Give me another magnet. Yeah, absolutely. I'm going to get out. Going behind my back was very troublesome. But, here, we spent one Saturday morning an hour emptying in of memories. Discussing the work that initiated his input. I want to make sure you know that that's not true. I did not offer that. I don't think it's important for my role because I kept my convolutely. I did not tell you what the mayor is talking to me about. If you want to get into it, say, do not say you know that before time is up. Part of the job, right? But thank you. I didn't travel as far as the chair. So, Mr. Thiel mentioned our failures we've got. Is that the case? I don't know if it's a, I think the other administrative issues. Okay, I'm not following you. Is that the exact action? In days to get an accurate one. I put in my email to you last night, 30 days, willing to compromise. I also have to put back on why, and I did this to another. There's a connection between now. Happy days with your office. See, I think that's part of the concern, right? If we call a law, then how do we say, hey, do you need an opinion on this? Where do you get it? Right? For us to wait 30 days. I think having my own law firm respectfully, that's an issue with this hijacking. It's going to be a binding. It's going to be a binding. Part of the heart of the consolidated government. We brush that. That's why I think 30 days. Bill, I think I had a question that didn't solve it. Yes. In fact, obviously, I'm not an attorney like you and Ms. Barnett. I did watch Perry Mason years ago, but maybe I qualified. I think it's been bouncing around in my mind ever since this is the idea of remedy and your position, where I recognize that General Counsel can indeed give a binding opinion, and it is binding on all parties within the consolidated government and beyond. But everybody has the right to remedy. So my question is, and I guess a DEC action is the only option that's available to some entity that seeks remedy. How does that happen to the General Counsel's office? What if we wanted to pursue that? We don't agree. Let's say we don't agree with your opinion. We've got to have some ability for remedy to these challenges, and that's the DEC action, what I understand, correct? A DEC action is one way to resolve a dispute where money is not an issue. It's a declaration of rights. That's exactly right. What I would say to you in regards to you have to have some remedy, it's like for those of you who are in business and sign up for arbitration, you pick an arbitrator, he decides, you're stubborn. You picked an arbitrator. In essence, you signed up, not voluntarily, by the nature of the legislation that was passed, you bound by the binding opinions of the 7.02 of the charter, you were bound by my opinion. So the answer to your question is, your remedy is to work with me, and if you don't like it, then you take it. Fred Franklin gave an opinion, I forget the date, but he said, Mayor, you can't veto that. Council can. Council, you win in this time. Mayor, you have no right of opinion. Council have one. Council have no opinion. But that section word master, in your opinion, is totally binding, and there is no option for remedy whatsoever, and I have a horrible problem with that. I honestly do. I explained it well, but I still don't accept it. I mean, it may be hard, as you said, in the charter, et cetera, et cetera. But, you know, everything is legal until somebody challenges it, and it goes to the court, as you all know. Yeah. Two responses. One is, I have a large company. They have a dispute. They don't get legal off to their toes. ...by the court. People did not... I mean, I've been under that area of binding legislation for eight years on the council. I still think that you should... I think it's totally different than if a council had a problem. If a council had a problem, you might say, oh, we have to have a rapid remedy. No, they don't. But in our case, I feel like we should be able to, because of the independent nature of the of the accordion. But that's just, hey, that's a guy that's going to have a law degree. He's got a law degree. Let me give it to Dr. Brock. He's got a question. I'd love to answer that question. Yeah. Follow back. Dr. Brock can get going first. Thank you. I'm like, and thank you for being here, also. Of course. And, again, I just went to a trade school. I didn't go to the law school. So, but I seem to remember, in January of 2020, that this circuit ruled that the school board could get outside council, and that eventually ended up being appealed to the appeal last from OGC, because OGC basically gave the school board everything in one. And so, I look at that, the ruling did say. Going back to your Disney analogy, if Disney theme parks was regulated by a federal entity, and Disney motion pictures did not, and the dispute from motion pictures, theme parks is one that goes outside the federal regulations, how does that chief legal officer give a good opinion? This is what one client is bound by, and clear. But who, but how can he give an opinion on a federal mandate? He is giving advice on what they can, what they should and should do, and they should get involved in revenue. Not to the revenue diverting advice. But, yeah. So let me, let me, so you're making the light. So, as my council, what is your opinion on an FA regulation versus a local statute? I'm not on the board, so I don't think I'm calling the question. Yeah. Okay. We'll vote on the call of the question. All in favor, are we calling the question? Please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Carries. So we now have a mandate. Am I allowed to speak, even though they've called the question? And since I'm not on the board. They've called the question. We've called the question. We've moved the board. You will have your opportunity at the bottom of the agenda. We have a motion. We have a second. We have a call of the question. Give me just a second. Let's get a vote here, and I will have some comments after the vote as well. All in favor of resolution 2026-02S, please say aye. Any opposed? Before we move on, make a motion. Entertain a motion from any of the members for 30 days before filing this suit. That we commit to work with the city on mediation. Appoint one board member to appoint Michelle, based on her legal background, to approve before any suit was filed against the city if mediation runs accessible. I'll entertain that motion. Can I speak before the motion? We have a motion. Can I speak before the motion? We have a motion. Do we have a second or a second? A second. Bill Gabbard. From government. Everybody in this room says we understand revenue diversity, but everything this airport authority does with regard to complying with FAA regulations, everything in our budget, every time we go out for a grant for matching funds, that's not a revenue diversion issue. When I hear the OCG claim they understand the airport, I think this is the question you're asking. I understand, I think we all understand revenue diversion, but if they want to review our budgets for 90 minutes, you have to work a year here to understand how we construct our budget. You have to be on the financing. So I honestly don't understand how the OGC, the city, can understand the FAA requirements that go into the makeup of our budget, that's going to affect how a vote on arbitration uses outside. I thank you for the conference, and I agree. The motion is for a 30-day period of JA would file suit to work with the city on mutually agreed upon mediators, and we appoint, we appoint Michelle Barnett as a member of this board, make the final call before we were to file suit against the city about mediation where the breakdown comes from. To put it in the final crisp posture, in terms of Robert's rules, I will make your motion for you, according to the court, if I offered it, and I think you did not, you did not offer it that you assaulted. It's all, that's all you have to do. Okay, I did not make the motion, I got the stuff down to do that. When is our next regular schedule? September. I'm assuming we did schedule on the whole, then. Yeah, just find the schedule session. I do think that we should engage in mediation efforts, but this board deserves to hear the nuances of what that report may be or what the outcome may be before we move forward. Certainly, while I appreciate the confidence in appointing me, and I'm happy to do it, I think that it merits the representation that is here to review again, I think in the 30 days. And so perhaps if we have not reached resolution in the 30 days, I would suggest that this board would be to evaluate and . I would say you'd like to do a motion on what you require. Mr. Howland? Yeah, thank you. I'd like to speak on this motion before you call for vote. And I'd like to note that you didn't let me speak on the last one. You could have easily called to reverse the call, calling the question. And let me speak. I've named 33 times on this complaint on the President of City Council, and City Council's named several times on the complaint and the resolution. And Mr. Goldberg, before you voted, named City Council and the President of City Council at least seven times during his comments. I think everyone should have watched a hearing before they voted on this resolution. I think it's irresponsible that you didn't. If you were there, you should have watched it again if you weren't there and you voted on this resolution. It's irresponsible of you. You'll note that we've created Cecil efficiently and everything that's been accomplished there. But we also noted in that hearing that there was more investment in Craig and Cecil and zero for the Space Board. So Council was clear in its intent that those amendments were passed to help accelerate investment at Cecil. What was also clear all throughout was that nothing had to be spent. No new line items were created. And we were seeking FAA approval for anything. The Council was never compelling JA to spend that money. Revenue diversion never happened. You couldn't easily ask the General Counsel his opinion of revenue diversion happened. I'm glad. I'm pretty certain he would have said the same thing. No one ever forced you to spend that money. And to your point about Mr. Goldberg, you're wondering why 90 minutes was allowed. That's because HB 4045 passed by 149 of your State House and Senate leaders. Demands that you produce an economic development plan for Cecil concurrent with your budget and that went into effect when the Governor signed it. We're putting that 90 minutes so you can present your plan. With regard to Mr. Hoffmeyer saying you wish I would leave you alone. If you recall, we passed those budget amendments. Then we passed the J Bill. It became House Bill 4045. That went through the State House and State Senate. We never did anything. However, JA came after us with a letter from Millionaire. Two resolutions that this board passed. A letter from the FAA. State complaints. And now this resolution and this complaint. That's really interesting that you say we need to stop now. It's been JAA. And the last thing I was going to say before the last vote is you don't just have to vote up or down. 6-0-0-6. You could have deferred, Mr. Chair. The board could have recommended a deferral if you truly wanted to take more time to do this. You supported, since you did vote that, to do the 30-day break. You also could have amended it. Because I pointed out clearly, there are at least four whereas clauses in the resolution that are false. If you just watch the hearing. One that says we moved, created new lines wholesale. False. And the auditor's here if you need to verify that. One that says we unlawfully diverted revenue, caused you to divert revenue, breaking the FAA rules. False. One that says, and this is a very important one. I think it's why whenever I was asking different people to reach out to different board members over the last week to consider a deferral here. And I was told no, this is going 7-0 by almost everybody. It's because of the 27th whereas clause at the bottom of page 4. Which says that what City Council has done to JAA is to cause the immediate danger to the health safety and welfare of the public. And you needed a three quarters vote of your board on that element of the resolution in order to bypass the conflict resolution parts of the state statute. That's really what happened here. That's why the JAA asked its board to vote on this 7-0 or 6-0. Three quarters is 5.25. You needed six votes in order to enact that whereas clause. And that's crazy to think that $13 million moving from one part of your budget to another with $401 million, which makes it just over 3%, results in the immediate health and safety and danger to the public. And then finally there's a big whereas clause number 29 in the middle of five where you're wrong on at least four set of counts. You could have done that. You could have amended those false ones out. Instead you just passed a resolution that has untrue facts. I hope we mediate this. That's the best option as it stands now given that this is passed. So I hope you pass this amendment. But I'm extremely disappointed. Thanks. So I'm compelled to say this as a point of order. There is no obligation, nor is it in Robert's rule, that you allow anyone from outside the actual board to have an opportunity to speak in the deliberation and consideration of a motion before the volume. And I take exception to his potential insistence on being involved in that. And he's not a board member. He's council president. He's due respect. He's council president. But as I said, he's not a board member and doesn't have a vote. And frankly, we're here today and involved in this because it is aggressive intrusion in the JAA activity and action over the last three years. And it has to be said if that's the case. So. Thank you, Bill. And I do feel like it's warrants allowing outside. That is your expression and as the board chair absolutely. It's a foreign issue and we're remiss if we didn't hear from an issue like this. We do have a motion and a second for the 30-day mediation on the future. We agreed upon teams. Michelle serving as the board member for a suit would be filed. And we're all in favor of that motion. Please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Great. Okay. We have the 30 days. Anybody's intention here is to sue the city. It holds clarity. And we're hoping that 30 days will produce that clarity for us. And we can all move forward because I think Jacksonville is an amazing city. I think this airport is an amazing airport. They win the awards. And I think everybody in this potential conflict loves the city of Jacksonville. And I think that's the theme that we take through these mediation and throw it together. So. He and Mark are out of London. Mark is on the way. We expect him to come back with something equal to or better than auto air. I heard that. Yeah. We did it. We did it. I know we did it. We did it. We did it. We're going to go over. Mark is on the way to the air show. And he's got a catch of light. So he is not objecting. Mr. Chair, point of clarification, the 30 days starts from today. That's correct. That's correct. Okay. We do have councilman, front council president Howland on the city council update. Anything further you'd like to add? Yeah. I don't know why we're hustling to get out of here. This is a really important topic for the consolidated city of Jacksonville. But I'll just say this. Government is a contract with the people, which is why the people through the state legislature chose to originally put JA within the consolidated government of Jacksonville. The mayor and city council, we're elected. And when we have an issue, the people often come to us. So you approved a resolution today, but the lawsuit has not yet been filed. So there's still time to choose a different path and work together. Like we did when the sheriff reached out to me and asked me to reverse the lease that you were putting on him in September 2024. And like veterans did in December 2024 when you moved disabled veteran parking out to remote lots and they asked me to come help. Like when a former airport and JSO police officer asked me to see if I could help get the airport accreditation again since they lost it between 2020 and 2026. Those are all examples of how the public comes to city council. So city council can help get a resolution that the public's looking for. I've said before that the people have spoken. They don't want lawsuits. They want a safer city, efficient and affordable services, and they want jobs. Let's move forward together and make Cecil Field the aerospace hub. It was meant to be. Thanks. Thank you, council president. I understand. I appreciate your comments. And thank you for coming by. We are- And for the record, we're happy to work in whatever way necessary to facilitate the mediation. Play no role. Play any role we want to. So happy to be involved in that. I've had some type of statesmen reach out offering this process. So I think we have plenty of fun. I do want to remind the board members. Any conversations outside of this meeting would violate sunshine balls. I want to warn others to do discussions on anything whatsoever to do with everyone. Appreciate the bad things that could hear. we're here. Thank you.