Jim Zuber, Water Ways Coordinator. Board of Fish and Wildlife. Mike Gay, District 2. Matt Jones, Jacksonville Water Ways. Scott Thomas, Jacksonville Water Ways. Andrew Frayden, Water Ways Commission. Lieutenant Kevin Kilcoyne, JSO Marine Unit. MST2, Jason Burns, Secretary of Jacksonville. Captain Z. Chrisman, Chief in the Water Ways Department, Secretary of Jacksonville. Thank you for all attending. We'll go ahead and stand up and say the Pledge of Allegiance. I want to start out with a brief introduction of why we're here today. The proposed no-wake zone at the Fort George River sandbar is an urgent and essential public safety measure. By requiring boats to slow down in this congested area, it would reduce dangerous wakes, protect swimmers and children, help prevent collisions, capsizing, and other potentially life-threatening boat accidents. As recreational use and boat traffic continue to increase, establishing the zone now is critical for protecting both current and future residents of Duval County. On June 10th, the Jacksonville Water Ways Commission voted to form a joint task force with the sole purpose of collecting data. August 21st, the charge memo was issued with three commissioners named on the charge memo. Myself, Matthew Jones, Jay Hobson, which is out with an excused absence. He's on it. Had a prior booked vacation, I believe, trip. Commissioner Scott Thomas. We were all formed together. Basically, our job for this is to collect data and available documentation with competent substantial evidence to support a finding by the FWCC commissioners that an ordinance regulating vessel speeds in the Fort George River sandbar area is necessary to protect public safety, as described in Rule 68D-21.004 of the Florida Administrative Code. It's all about public safety. That's why we're all here. It's not about tickets. It's not about anything else. It's about keeping people safe. Every year, that bar changes. I'm sure the guys on the water see it. The public that goes out there on the weekends during the summertime. If you go, you know. It's getting crowded every year. I'm reading from the Florida Statute. Section 327.46 limits municipalities but does not deny them from regulating vessel speed within tidal affected waterways. Further, any vessel speed regulation passed by a municipality cannot take effect until the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission makes a determination by substantial competent evidence that the ordinance is necessary to protect public safety. Florida Administrative Code articulates the level of and examples of documentation required for a municipal ordinance regulating vessel speed to be accepted by the FWCC, and that's what we're here to do today, or at least start the process. If you all look, I've got at least the evidence that we as the Joint Task Force can come up with. It's aerial footage, documentation of vessels increase in Duval County, population expanses. All that's in the legislative proposal that the Joint Task Force has put together, which each of you have a copy of. We're getting a lot of people out there now. That's basically what it is. We just, we as a commission need to put together a packet to formally introduce it to the Jacksonville Waterways Commission. General Counsel can make sure we've got all our T's crossed and I's dotted, and then from there, hopefully it can go right to the state. So if you all want to take a minute and just look at the pictures, like I said, I know everybody up here on the board has seen it, what it's like. The only thing that I personally, not being law enforcement, could come up with as far as competence, substantial evidence would be on the last page of the photos, the color photos. Section 3, subsection 3, part B of 68D21.004 states that containing a documented navigational hazard of a nature that vessel operation in its vicinity at speeds in excess of slow speed, minimum wake, endangers the vessels, or excuse me, the vessel or its occupants. Navigational hazards are presumed to exist within the marked boundaries of mooring fields as permitted by Section 327.40 Florida statute. If that last page right there doesn't show a navigational hazard, I don't know what will. And I'll hold it up for the audience here. Okay. Got it. Perfect. Join in, Brian. You're way smarter than us. So, that is what we as the Joint Task Force, along with the population increase, the vessel increase, it's about as far as we can come with information. So, that's where we're kind of leaning on the FWC and the JSO Marine Unit. Don't know if y'all would be or were able to come up with any calls for service, any kind of documentation from a law enforcement standpoint to put forth with the packet to send to the FWC commissioners. And that's the point of the meeting here. If you have it, that'd be great. If not, this is what we need. With that, who would like to go first? So, I made the request for our crime analysis unit to kind of pull the calls for service in that area. Now, our CAD system is kind of set up more for specific residential or business addresses. So, I gave them a few different addresses to pull. So, if a Marine Unit officer logs out on a call for service out there, it might be one Fort George River. Right. Or it might be one intercoastal waterway. Or it might be one little Talbot Island or Huguenot Park. So, I included all those in there to kind of see what they can come up with as far as like the last two years, just general calls for service in that area that might be helpful. So, I spoke with our boating waterways folks. They said, you know, City of Jacks can do a public records request for, you know, statistical data and stuff. Right. And see, you know, what the number. I know just kind of our experience, there's not a substantial number of accidents, serious injuries, and stuff like that that have happened in the area. That would, you know, that would kind of support it on that side of things. What about congestion? There's not a way to quantify that. Right. Statistically, you know, we don't have like traffic counters, you know, on the water like they use for highway projects and stuff. So, we can go kind of like, you know, Kevin said, we go off stats of calls for service, boating accidents, you know, injuries, stuff like that. And like I said, that's the point of this, is just to basically get the information rolling of what we need as far as what the OGC needs on our side to present it formally to the Jacksonville Waterways Commission before it can go any further. Does anybody get it? While I'm thinking about it, off the topic, either of you, was there a jet ski accident out there this year that you can remember a couple years ago? I know, I know every year the jet skis get more and more out there. Yeah, and we, you know, we have a lot of complaints of jet skis primarily in the no-wake zone over near Alamakani that's already existing. Right. But I don't recall any, we had, we've had a couple swimmer-related medical, you know, issues and stuff, diving into shallow water and that type of thing. But I don't recall a significant chest accident. I did want to add just, I'm not a lawyer by any means or anything or an expert in it, but I wanted to clarify that my understanding of the process is that this would not go to the FWC commissioners. The commissioners review and vote on FWC-established wake zones, whereas this would be a city ordinance that if Jacksonville passed it, they would submit to FWC Boating and Waterways for review, but it doesn't actually go to the FWC commissioners. Okay, we may need to get some clarification there, because I think, if I remember correctly, we were advised that it went to the commission, but we'll certainly find out. And that's what this meeting's about, just getting our ducks in a row. Like I said, we feel that it's needed for public safety. It gets more crowded every year out there. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that part out. Commissioner McGee, do you have anything to add? Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Jones. Over the past few years, we've had a couple different scenarios out there where we're trying to get the, I think, with the getting the FWC, everybody to dial in to what the request is out there, because we've got the, I want to say it, the state is requesting some of the, I think the, where the state is out there that they're wanting to slow down the boat traffic because they are having issues with, I forget which one of them is asking for it, but there's several scenarios out there that we can probably start basically exploring what can be done. But with the Shad Creek, that's one that we're looking to do something with. And I believe the, there's that new legislation that's coming forth that I want to say in, I think, January, where it's basically allowing a circumstances where that, as before, we wasn't able to utilize, but we will once that gets, I guess, the state finally passes all that to where we can take and apply it to where you've got different scenarios where the no wake zones, the speed, no speed zones is, to where we're able to extend those parameters and to where that possibly could be able to look at what they're, what we're trying to do here with the amount of boating and population out there. So I'm not sure if you're too familiar with what the state is already looking to bring forward on that. So that would be something that, some possibilities. When you say state, you mean like the Kingsley Plantation area over there? Okay, yeah, I'm not familiar with anything. Because they are having issues with the boaters that are coming through there. Basically, it's impacting their dock and facility through there as well, where it's the number of boats and jet skis that come through there is unbelievable during the, especially during the summer, the amount of people that go through there. You know, we've got issues where they're coming through the Shad Creek as a shortcut to get back through there. And they have just a short area where they're going through and not being able to withhold all the people in their docks and the way that they can go through those areas. So hopefully with December or in January that we'll finally have that to start moving forward for Shad Creek. But then hopefully we can take that same scenario and use that out at Forge Island there. Go ahead, Jim. Sorry. Just a little bit of history, if you will. Several years ago, some of the lieutenants, two lieutenants at FWC, four of you came on board, came to my office and asking what the city could do to make something happen out there because it was getting so congested and dangerous. And the danger is the congestion and then attached with, it's not just jet skis. We can blame jet skis all day long, but they're just a part of the problem. It's not always jet skis. Sometimes it's just boats that are plowing that go in there and they just don't care. But that's the way it is. And because of the congestion and because of the sandbar and the shallowness that is out there and the lack of the ability to maneuver a boat out there, when you come in and you're going out, if you're not careful, things happen. We've had, I know there's been a couple of fatalities out there that may not, they're not boating crashes. There are incidents of where people just were found drowned out there. How that happened, what happened is a question on some of them. But, you know, law enforcement has expressed the concern, not only FWC, but JSO as well. The officers expressed concerns out there that something needs to be done. And specifically, they wanted us to ask for no-wake zones. At Alamacani, there was a cut-through that happened closer to the state's park side that was a cut-through that opened up. And I think it did its own damage and closed itself back up a little bit, so it kind of eliminated the issue for the time being. But as everybody knows, that sand is always moving. You know, we can have a hurricane, and it takes the whole thing underwater, and when the water drains out, it's going to still be there, but it's going to look a little different. It's just the way it is. Every high tide, every low tide, it, you know, You know, there has to be always something that identifies what's happening out there. So it definitely is an area that you can't, as far as the state, you know, I know that, I know the state, you know, as far as FWCs, Boaters and Waterways, they have a hard time considering shorelines and docks as being an excuse for a no-wake zone or a slow-speed zone. But out there, it's not going to be a damage of sand because sand is going to move around no matter what you do. That's not the issue. The issue is public safety, and it is the dynamics of blind areas, congestion, and just people not having the abilities to behave themselves at times that, as much as I hate to say, you know, you shouldn't have a sign for everything, but some things you just got to have a sign for, for it to be enforceable, and that's the issue that we have out there. So my question, I guess, to the JSO and the FWC is that do y'all feel like it's important enough for y'all to support a zone out there in that area, no matter how it happens, whether the state puts it in or the city finds the funding for the signage and puts it in, that's another topic of the conversation. So the biggest thing that we need in Tallahassee is we need, A, they're going to look and want to know if there's local support other than, you know, well, we don't have any statistics. Well, there's statistics out there. There's known fatalities. There's known injuries. There's known, you know, I know you guys go out there and write citations out there on a regular basis. My question is, do we need to do a public records request for y'all to come on board as a task force to help make this issue, it's not just a city issue. As a matter of fact, it's really not a city issue. It's a state issue and it's a law enforcement issue and it's, you know, it's out there in our Duval County, per se, but it is an issue. Does that make sense? Perfect. Any response from the guys with badges? I would say that, you know, JSO Marine Unit's going to support anything that promotes public safety, especially on the waterways. Like Abdon Haney said, it's going to be maybe a little bit of a challenge to quantify the statistics part and, you know, compare how many more people are going out there. I think we all go out there and we all see more people out there, but proving it is going to be a challenge as well. I don't even know if that's required to make it a slow speed zone or not. Yeah, I tell people all the time, my personal opinion doesn't really matter about things. You know, I mean, I'm bound by, you know, the law and stuff like that. And so, you know, obviously boating safety is, you know, one of our top priorities. And, you know, we all know how busy it gets out there and, you know, some of the issues that come along. But, you know, it's basically just a, you know, for us, it's looking at the criteria and, you know, do we meet the criteria or not? And so, yes, sir. Yeah, I've been out there several times and it's a lot of fun. But also, as Jim, as well as Councilman Gay pointed out, too, I mean, there's docs out there. There's erosion on the banks. What about, and I know we're focused on public safety, is what about wildlife, manatees? I mean, manatees and other wildlife. I mean, this would be a good benefit to them as well by slowing down the speed zone, I would think. Because a lot of people go through their, especially when they leave, on plane so that they don't, because it's so shallow that they think they can get out there on plane. So having speed limits out there would be great. Anyways, thank you, Chairman. Yeah, we just, I think we can all agree it doesn't take a child to get hurt or even worse out there. And it's not a matter of if now, it's going to be when. So that's why I've always had the public safety part up top. I mean, it's everybody's duty to keep people safe. You don't even have to be a police officer to do that. So that's what we're all here for. Obviously, we want all of the information that we can. We want to do it the right way. And this is the start. Brian, you got anything you think you can add? I think we're on the correct first step trying to figure out, compile that evidence that is approved by FWC as justifiable evidence, right? There's other things that, you know, we could throw in there. But there are certain criteria, right, that you check to see. So we see, make sure we stay in bounds for what they will review. And I believe the captain was correct. I think their staff makes the approval. But if we, if they deny and we appeal, then I think it goes to their board, I think is how that goes, if I remember correctly. So there is a process for appeals if it came to that. And just to also point out, it's not just the state parks, it's the national parks. They're the ones that actually manage Kingsley. And they're the ones that came to the city initially to say, hey, what can we do where we got their issues are more resource based. You know, they got a eroding shoreline on a very historic and vulnerable shoreline, as well as a public boat dock there with high traffic going by. So that's a concern of theirs with their visitors coming by water. But they are, they are definitely, they voice their support for this effort. The state parks, I know they've, they've, they deal with the, the congestion as well. I don't know if they've taken a formal stance on, you know, whether they would outwardly, you know, throw their advocacy towards this or not. But we can certainly reach out to the local manager and see. Okay. Sounds good. See if I got it. Go ahead, Andy. Thank you. Tess. I got a lot of questions. I'm sort of devil's advocate or in the middle. First of all, aren't boaters already responsible for their own wake? Ticketing, if they're, if they swap another boat or anything of that nature, they are responsible for their wake. As of right now. And then, is this a seasonal thing for the summer? I hate seeing a blanketed, no wake zone 24-7, 365 days a year if it's only a certain time that's needed. Those are a few of those are a few of my questions because I could see this ballooning to other spots too around that. I know motor boaters like to park South Jacksonville, sometimes in Pottsburg Creek. I don't want to see everything become a no wake zone. Yeah. I mean, that's certainly not the meaning of this. This task force is focused solely on the Fort George area. Go ahead, Jim. Commissioner, you're good points. This particular area is only, the only boating traffic that goes out there is the boating traffic that are going out there. It's not a pass through. It's not a way to get to the ocean. It's not a, it's not even a, you know, boats that fish don't even go in that area to fish by boat. As you go around getting through there all the way, one thing you got to have local knowledge to get through that part. But the second thing is to get out into the ocean and out the inlet there. It's, it's another dynamic situation where it's always moving also. So unless you're a regular, know how to, you know, I know with, I was with the sheriff's office. We used to have to go out there about twice a year and buy a helicopter and take pictures of it. Just so our, in case we had an emergency, we'd know which inlet or which little channel to get through if we had to. So it's, it's a destination is what it is. And there's no residential effect out there whatsoever. It's all state lands or, or county property or National Park Service is the three land owners in that particular area. It's all, it's all a matter of, it's the same thing. Kind of like what they have out down in Salt Springs to where they have to regulate, you know, no wake zone going in, no wake zone coming out, all because of congestion. Simple as that is the majority of it. And I think it's, it's, it's, it's easy to, your pictures are dynamic, Chairman. The picture tells the picture, period. So to answer your question is, it, will it affect other people that don't, that, that want to go to, that slows people down and get to other destinations? It's not the situation out at Fort George, per se, when it comes to that. Yeah, and I think Jim really hit it on the head. Fort George is a destination. And I didn't think about that. It's not a cut through. It's not Pottsburg Creek. It's not St. John's River. People go to Fort George to be at Fort George. So it's, it's not, like you said, cutting through from Sisters Creek to head on out to the Atlantic. The vessels that go to Fort George, that is their destination. And that's where I, well, it's not a think, I know. That's where the congestion comes from. And I do know the little bar you're talking about on the Pottsburg. You would think with that knowledge, there'd be that much more respect then for the boaters that are moored. There's not. Unfortunately, there's not. And then also, I mean, again, boater knowledge is a plus. I mean, knowing your own wake. If you're in a big boat, you got a big wake. In your jet ski, you don't. And for the boaters that are on shore, if I'm worried, I put my bow out in park, you know, more of the bow out, so I know it can take the wakes. But with it being a destination, I was, I thought it was a cut through. That does make a difference, yes. Mr. Chairman, if I'm. Yeah, sure, go ahead. If I may also, the wake perspective of it is not the, it's just a small part of this issue. It's the speed. It's, you know, reacting to something if something is happening, like somebody's swimming and you're coming through there. Or if a boat is pulling out after they had just cut themselves loose off the anchors and pulled in, pulled out to leave, you know, they have, there's currents and everything, so they have to react right away or else they're going to go into another boat. And so it's a dynamical area that a lot of things, like I've said a million times, it's a lot going on at one time out there. So if you're coming through on a jet ski, and jet skis do leave a good wake, by the way, but coming through there on a jet ski and you're up on plane even, you don't have time to react if a boat has just broke loose on the shoreline and pulled their anchor and trying to pull out, all of a sudden there's a jet ski. That's the type of thing is it just needs to be slowed down out there, period, because of the congestion. I completely agree. And like I said, that's the goal is just to slow things down out there, because I've been going out there for three decades, 30 years, and the main thing that I've noticed is how many boats we have out there now versus when I was 17. I mean, when I was a teenager, the bars weren't there. We water skied from one end to the other. We don't have that anymore. It is one giant sandbar with little, I wouldn't even call them navigable, but small channels and fingerlings for the boats to go through. The majority of the boats are anchored up on the sandbar, and the people that aren't familiar with that area come in there hot. I mean, they come in there hot because they don't see any speed zones, and it's not necessarily putting blame on them. I mean, new area, nope, it's not a no-wake zone. I can come in. They don't know what they're coming into until they see all the boats, and I just, I feel that something needs to be done before it's too late, and that's why we're all in this same room today. It's opinion. I think it's 20 years past due. I know the conversation's been picked up in the past. I've heard it's, the can's been kicked down the road. I've heard it all. I've got four years here. I'm going to see it through to the end. Somebody's going to have to tell me, no, it's not going to happen. And if that's what it is, that's what it is. So, with that being said, I think if anybody got anything else they want to add? No, there's no vote today. This is an informational-only meeting. That's it. Oh, yeah, we're going to do public comment as we close. Absolutely. Go ahead, Chairman. Thank you, Chair. Mr. Burkett, the state or the national, do they have a boat ramp that they utilize there, or is it just a dock? The national park just has a dock, but the city has the boat ramp at Al Makani. So, I think, technically, we could expand the zone 500 feet north of that. Well, it's what I, I believe it's the 1,000 foot that they, that's what they're looking to propose, I believe, in November. That that's what's supposed to go into full, the new law is saying that if there's, you've got the original no-way zone for the boat ramp, but then if there is, I guess, blind curves, that we can extend that. Yeah, they're saying if there's two public facilities that qualified and there was a gap in between, I guess they're going to, it used to be some minimum, or there's a critical distance they had to exceed or be within in order to keep it continuous, but they're going to expand that overlap area to make that gap more achievable. Yes, I think that's the same thing we're looking at, Shad Creek, is that this could possibly be the same scenario where we can expand it to get the maximum that we can get. It may not get full area, but if we can get a majority more, that, that, that's a possibility that, you know, FWC would accept. Right, so I think in that situation, Shad Creek, and then for this too, if we could document evidence of blind corners, those could be married together with the boat ramp. And then if, if we, if the distance between is under a certain amount, those could be cobbled together to kind of patchwork and larger zone. I guess where I'm going with it is if the boats wasn't there, then the possibility of not having a blind corner. But on the big weekend that all these boats are out there, there, there is blind, blind corners that all these boats that are lined up along the, the shoreline is creating that blind corner. So I think there's a possibility of how our presentation is to FWC is what we've got to, I guess, get dialed in with them. So, yeah, I would, I would, uh, public safety, boating safety is also a qualifying factor. So I think that would be our number one priority, but then we can also layer these other criteria in there to, you know, strengthen the case is what I would advise. All right. Thank you. Go ahead, Jim. I guess this would be a question that would end up being approved by either, you know, the commission and city council when it comes right down to it. But the question that we need to request, are we requesting the state to do this or are we requesting the, uh, permitting authorization for the city to put it in? That'll be a direction that we need to go. Uh, so basically, uh, we would be doing as the waterways commission doing a, a, uh, uh, recommendation request to the state, uh, from what I understand and, and, uh, correct me if I'm wrong, is that basically they'll approve it, but they're going to want us to come up with the funding to put in all the signage out there. Yeah, absolutely. And I was always under the impression that the signage would fall on us, but not a zoning guy either. Those guys speak a different language than I do. I would just, um, I think y'all's general counsel needs to clarify that. Right. My understanding is different. My understanding is that under this criteria, there's certain criteria where the state establishes it, mainly zones and stuff like that. But for, uh, for a situation like this, the city establishes it as a city or county ordinance, and then applies for a permit from FWC to basically make it legal and enforceable. And that would be a, as far as your understanding, that wouldn't be with the state commissioners, the seven commissioners, it would be under boating and waterways. So I've got a flow chart I can email through, um, if it helps. And it, it basically outlines that the city passes the ordinance. They submit a proposal to FWC boating and waterways for review. FWC boating and waterways can request additional information if needed before they make a decision. Right. And it's, it's kind of a process of that and they review it to meet the criteria. And then ultimately they're just deciding whether or not they're going to issue a permit. Got it. If you could forward that, we'd certainly appreciate it. And OGC may already have that, but once again, that's what we're all here for to cover bases. It would be good to get, get that flow chart, but, but you, you are correct. It's basically, uh, and what we've been meeting with them prior about is, uh, making sure that once we do submit that, that it, it's within the parameters that, that would be a lot. The permits will be allow allowable. So it's our responsibility to do the due diligence, to see where the circumstances would apply. Then we would submit it to FWC. And then from that, from what I understand is then, then the permit would be issued, but then we would have to fund the signage out there. So that, that's pretty well where, um, then, then we have to go back to city council and say, Hey, you know, we, we need to fund this. So, so that's kind of the, the procedure there, but the main thing is getting the, uh, uh, get it laid out and, and understood what the parameters are that's allowable for the, the, uh, the signage out there. Right. Um, one question I do have, and I've had this drilled in my head for a month, is this substantial competent evidence. I know those are three words that can be very, very gray. So I would like to go on to record if, if you, Captain Haney can find out whether or not the sandbar itself is considered a navigational hazard. And if the answer to that is yes, would that satisfy subsection three B of 68 Delta 21 dot double O four? Ask the question. Yeah. I know you're not an attorney. I'm not putting that on your plate for a yes or no, but somebody can answer it. We just need to, we just need to find out. Cause I know that that is probably the hurdle that's always been battled because what's the definition of competent, substantial evidence? How do you, how do you, how do you even define that? It's not like, you know, highway, highway patrol. We wrote 19 tickets between mile marker, this and mile marker, that, or homicide. We've had, you know, this amount of shootings and this and this, is it, we don't, what is competent, competent, substantial evidence when it comes to water, safety, congestion, and vessels? Go ahead, Jim. Mr. Chair, can we address the, the issue of whether it should be seasonal or not? I think that I'm going to say here in this particular situation, seasonal doesn't matter, mean a thing, just whether the day is nice or not year round here in Jacksonville. So I would like to suggest to recommend that y'all come to the conclusion that it'd be a year round zone period and that keeps confusion down for boaters to know it's that way. I agree to that. But my initial thought was seasonal, spring to fall, that's when, that's when it gets packed. But guess what? I jump in my swimming pool every Christmas day. People go on their boats year round. That's one of the perks we have of living in Florida. So I, I think if we're going to do it, we need to go for it year round. The last thing we want is a crowd to get accumulated out there for a winter party 10 years from now. And us look back and go, well, we should have done the year round. My thought it was, if, if that gets approved, it would probably, if somewhere down the road, we needed to back it up to seasonal. I think with the permit being year round, once again, I'm not an attorney. I think it would be easier to back it up towards a seasonal, if need be, in the future, versus going from seasonal to year round. That's what I think. Like I said, we're not voting today. We're just, we're, we're, we're, we're spitballing. We're tossing ideas out and getting information. That's what we're here for today. My opinion would be, would be year round. So I would agree to you. I agree with you. Excuse me. Anything else anybody would like to have before we go to public comment? We may have a few out there. Okay. So we will close discussion on this and we will invite our public commenters up one at a time. Cards are on the way. All right. Per the course, we'll limit public comment to three minutes each, as much as I'd like to give everybody all the time they want. We all got other things we have to go do. Um, first up, Mr. Nooney. Uh, my name is John Nooney, uh, 8356 Baskin Road, Jacksonville, Florida, 3, 2, 2, 1, 6, City Council Resolution, 20, 23, 0, 8, 1, 9. I'm in City Council, District 4, CPAC, Planning District 3, School Board District 3. And, you know, uh, one thing, you know, I've been coming to waterway meetings for a number of years. And one thing I've come to realize, there is a pecking order. You know, you have federal, state, and we have our preservation parks, you know, and then, uh, broken down into, you know, we have our CPACs, 14 City Council Districts. And, you know, I participated in this resilient Jacksonville, you know, and it was, uh, October 23. The biggest takeaway I got from this was that 90% of all the waterways in Duval County is private. Only 10% of the waterways, you know, and it is public. So, you know, with, you know, this, and so what we're realizing and seeing, and, you know, and I applaud, and this has just been a great meeting. And, you know, uh, and I wrote down here on Reed Island, you know, and that was just a recent joint effort with the Jacksonville Port Authority. Let's keep it on topic, okay? Well, I am. And the point with that is, Reed Island, you know, it used to be that you'd have access, you know, via land. Now it's, you know, only just will be via the waterway. So, uh, so, you know, to the point of the Fort George and what you're talking about right there, yeah, it is a destination. You know, I think you really nailed it with that. So, um, anyway, uh, you know, as far as that is the primary focus is that area of the waterway. And then with the safety parameters, you know, that'll ultimately be established, you know, so I really just get where that is the focus. But down the road, you know, uh, in the entire state of Florida, we have to realize that we have to, I would hope, provide additional public access on our waterways, you know, for the benefit of everyone. Well, thank you. Thank you. Thank you for coming, Mr. Nooney. Next up is going to be Lisa Almeida. I'm Lisa Almeida, and, uh, I am first a boater and second the owner of Freedom Boat Club. And thank you for letting me speak about a place that is so near and dear to my heart. Um, Malcolm Gladwell wrote a book that said, it's called Outliers. It says if you have 10,000 hours in a subject, you're an expert. I call myself an expert in Fort George. And I'm going to try not to get emotional because I love it so much. Um, from doing Float-a-Palooza, Aquapalooza, I had a houseboat out there, and we did a church service and baptized people. I did boat abrasion. I've done all kinds of things. And I've been going there for 35 years, and I think I have more expertise than all of you because I used to spend every single Friday to Sunday out there. Every single weekend, we would stay out all together. What I have witnessed over the years, and I want to add a couple of things. I am a stand for boat safety. Our members go through rigorous training. We write them up if they do something wrong. When I'm out at Fort George, I call on my members all the time. I call the boat and say, hey, can you go talk to this boat? They did blah, blah, blah. I go up and tell them I am also a stand for no alcohol in boating. I don't drink. I don't want to. It's not a popular stand that I have, but I am a stand for that. What I have seen over the years is the incredible change of the sandbar. If you go look at aerials, we used to be, I don't know, I'm not good with feet, but we used to be so many feet on the inside away from the road. If you go look at an aerial there, and we all talk about, we think we're going to be at the road at some time. All that sand has silted in, and what's happened is people are not responsible, Andy. I watched last weekend a guy, triple motors, three boats rafted up and up on plane right by us. The boats are doing this, and so I want to talk about the safety issue. There was a jet ski accident out there this summer. It may not have gotten reported, but it was. I have seen a guy almost drown. I actually was the one that was aware and saw that he was sinking, and he had to get light flighted out of there because I always have my wits about me. And I have watched jet skiers, and I actually called JSO this summer watching them race, not speed. They were actually stopping and racing. And so what's happened with the exacerbation of, I mean, I am responsible for some of this. We have 42 boats. I could have 80 people at Fort George on a day if they do them morning and the afternoon. Jacksonville Boat Club, with the growth of all of that, with social media, everybody knows about it now, and everyone wants to go, and it's silted in. And people aren't respectful, and they don't watch what they're doing, and it's a problem. And I'm not a person that's a stand for no wake, but in this area, for the safety of kids, for the safety of, I mean, these people that are driving the jet skis, they're drinking and driving. And if they lose control, it's a problem. And I watched a jet skier come across the sandbar, hit the thing, and fall over, and actually... Lisa, as much as I could leave you up there all afternoon. Sorry. It does have to be limited to three minutes, and you're... Okay, I apologize. But I support this incredibly, and I think it's the right thing to do for the safety of everybody that's out there. I appreciate you. And I will help in any way I can. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, with public comment being done, we kind of went a little backwards on the agenda, and I didn't catch that until just now. We kind of went into our open discussion by and by these. So I do want to thank everybody that showed up out there also. We certainly appreciate your time, and whatever help you can give us, we would like to make this happen. Thank you, Councilman Gay, for attending. Jim, Captain Haney, everybody. And with that, we'll adjourn the meeting. Thank you.