Well, good morning. It is now 9.30, and I'll go ahead and call to order the Monday, May 4th, Neighborhoods Meeting, and we'll start with introductions to my left with Mr. Delaney. Good morning, y'all. Bill Delaney with the Mayor's Office. Brandon Russell, Council Research. Mary Stifopoulos, Office of General Counsel. Philip Peterson, Councilor's Office. Good morning, Michael Boylan, District 6. Good morning, Ken Amaro, City Council, District 1. Randy White, District 12. Mike Gay, District 2. Ron Salem, Group 2 at large. Good morning, Tyrone Clark-Murray, District 9. Terrence Freeman at large, Group 1. Good morning, Rockmont Johnson, District 14. I'm visiting. All right, welcome, visiting council members. We'll go ahead and go to public comment. We have our first speaker, Mr. John J. Nooney. Come on forward, sir. Give your name and address or say it's on the record, and you'll be given three minutes to speak to an item on the agenda, sir. All right. Hello. I am John, philanthropic, jelly roll. Good boy, resiliency, Nooney. Ocho Trace, Cinco Saves, Baskin Road, Jacksonville, Florida, 3216. I'm in City Council, District 4, CPAC 3, School Board, District 3. Yeah, as far as the agenda, yeah, I'll be touching on agenda items. Let's see. We've got 5, 6, 7, 8, 15, 16, 18, 21, 24, 26. R.D., Real Doge, Ron Davis, 600 WBOB. Let's see. Yeah, the agenda. Let's see. I jotted down agenda item 5, 2026-0259. You know, boy, they're calling in on that one already. Okay, that's Jacksonville Waterways Commission. That's the hotline. 2026-0260, another direct contract. Remember, 2024-0107-JU, 2024-0325, Urban Corps CPAC. In fact, they're meeting tonight, 530. So are you going to defer on this and wait to see what happens with the CPAC? Let me just say this, too. I went to an Ethics Commission meeting, and I asked, you know, and Dylan Rheingold was there, Kirby Oberdorfer. You know, we have six CPACs representing the entire city of Jacksonville. We have the Mayor's Disability Council. You know, they're meeting tomorrow. The wheelchair gang. The Council on Elder Affairs. The senior citizen gang. I'm in it. You know, fishing with centurions. Down a minute 22. But why is OGC not represented at these meetings? It's the Wild West. Okay, agenda item. We got number 8, 2026-0265. That's JSEB stuff. 200 grand. You know, that should be just the biggest, you know, lottery thing in the world. 25,000, eight of them. You know, let's see. We got down to 50 seconds. You know, this, you know, will be a handout for the permanent record. But 2026-0315. Another should be in waterways. 2026-0316 should be in waterways. 2026-0318. A $10 filing fee. Council Member Johnson. Wow. 2026-0521. Park stuff. 2026-0327. Emerald Trail stuff. We're paying the tax. The wonderful, wonderful tax. La-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da. All right. And then we have 2026-0332. It's J-U stuff. Remember, Cherry Pollack, Michael Fackler. You know, is there going to be a board? All right. Thank you, Mr. Nooney. All right. Thank you for listening. And this is for all of you. So I have no other speaker cards. So we'll go ahead and move into our agenda. I want to skip. We're going to skip around a couple items to go ahead first. We're visiting council members. The first item we'll go to will be item number 8, 2026-0265. Can I get a motion? I've got a motion and a second on the bill. Council Member Friedman, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you so much for taking this up early. This is a pretty straightforward bill. I want to thank the co-sponsors on it. This was birthed out of the workforce initiative that Council Member Iris had put forward, and the local unions were not a part of that. So that's this funding. And speaking with the auditors, Friday over the weekend, we addressed their one concern. And if it's the pleasure of the chair, through the chair to Mr. Peterson, can you share with this body the amendment that I would like to add to this bill? Thank you. Through the chair to the committee and to Council Member Freeman, as noted on your agenda, the audit recommended amendment that I worked with Mr. Freeman on is to extend the term of this contract an additional year. So instead of ending on 9-30-27, it would go to 9-30-28. It would also require reporting by the Jacksonville General Apprenticeship Association each year, and that if there are apprentices that drop out of the program within that first year of being paid for their enrollee, that JGAA would reimburse the city for that $2,500 per enrollee that fell out of the program. So it's acting as a clawback to ensure that these participants stay in the program for at least a minimum of a year. I've got a motion and a second on the auditor's recommended amendment, so any discussion on that? All in favor, say yay. Yes. Yay. Any opposed? Likewise, none. The motion carried. So I can get a motion and a second on the bill as amended. On the amendment, okay, go ahead, Ms. Murray. Good morning again to everybody. Thank you, Chair. So just one question in regards to the frequency of the number of enrollees. Is it annually? Do they, through the Chair to Council Member Freeman, why is it only annually? Because that means they have like the whole year before we know who actually is enrolled. Could they do the enrollee portion more frequently, or is there like only a yearly? Do they only take in or allow the program enrollees to enter the program on an annual basis? Go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through the Chair to Ms. Clark-Murray. I can speak for the electrical side. We have two intakes a year, one in the fall, one in the spring. The window stays open for applicants to apply, and I believe then in November or so they are selected to start that spring cohort, and then the one in the spring ends in May, and then they're selected to start in the fall. That's just on the electrical side. This is a consortium of several different ones, so they may vary from one to the other, and I think Mr. Peterson has more to add to that. Through the Chair to Council Member Clark-Murray, in working with JGAA, they expressed that this program is a single annual program enrollment, so it starts on September 1st of each year, and so the city, the enrollees will get into the program. It starts on September 1st. They'll submit documentation to the city after the program begins. The city will write them a check of $2,500 per qualified enrollee upon them submitting the required documentation, and then the program wouldn't have another class. It will pass, if you will, until the following September 1st. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. That answers my question. All right. So we're on the bill as amended. So let me go to the speakers in the queue. I'll go to Dr. Salem first. Thank you, Chair. I was just in there to move the motion of Council Member Freeman. As he's not a member, I should have taken myself off. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Let me go to Chief White. Yes, sir. Please add me as a co-sponsor. Very good. Council Member Amaro. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Two actions. Add me as a co-sponsor and a quick commentary on the amendment we just approved. I see tremendous merits in it. It not only protects the taxpayers' money, but it also is motivational for those who are applying that. If they know up front that you're going to have the payback if you don't complete the course, I think it would give them a pause to give serious consideration upon enrollment. So I think it's a very good amendment. All right. Thank you. Let's go to Council Member Bolin. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through the Chair, Council Member Freeman, perhaps Mr. Peterson, qualified individuals. You mentioned application. Could you help me understand something in the grant agreement that defines what a qualified applicant is, please? Through the Chair to Council Member Bolin, qualified enrollee is defined as a program-eligible Duval County resident who is enrolled to participate in one of the JGAA apprenticeship programs referenced here. So that's electrical, sheet metal, plumbers and pipe fitters, operating engineers, and carpenters. All right. Thank you. Let me go to Council Member Freeman. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you all for the great questions. And just one last thing. This needs two-thirds votes, obviously, to pass. But now I'm no longer going to take anything for granted. So I want to ask through the Chair to Mr. Delaney, is this something that falls within the priorities of the administration due to apprenticeship programs? I know she was on Mondays with the mayor this morning, and they talked about JSEBs and bragging about JSEBs and how great they are and how proud we are of it. But yet, last cycle, JSEBs were not moved forward. So I just want to make sure that there are no surprises as I move forward with this. Where does the administration stand on apprenticeships in this program? Through the Chair, I'll let you know and get back with you. And thank you. So through the Chair to Mr. Delaney, this bill has been out for several weeks now. Is there any reason why we're not prepared to discuss it during committee as an administration? And I mean, we have representatives from the JGAA here in the room. They took time out of their day to be here. Is there any reason why they now have to wait to know if you all are going to object to this later? I mean, it's going to be back up again in rules so they can take time out of their day to come to rules. It'll be back up in finance. But we have citizens here that are representing numerous individuals. Through the Chair, I don't see any objections here. We haven't raised any thus far. And thank you. That's all I wanted to make sure that they understood. Because they'll end up calling you. They'll call me. So with the confidence of moving forward, thank you all for that. All right. Thank you. Yeah, Mr. Delaney, if you could, in rules, just kind of give us a confirmation that y'all are on board with this. We'd appreciate it. To the Chair, absolutely we will. All right. Thank you. And I fully support this. And I think it's definitely needed for our construction industry. We can't do enough to get our young people trained in a skilled trade in their possession. So with that, let me go to Mr. Delaney. Thank you. And I apologize. I wasn't in the loop on this one. But we do support this. I just got a word. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Council Member Clark-Murray. Thank you, Chair. It's just to be added as a co-sponsor. All right. So with that, let's open the ballot and record your vote. Six yays, zero nays. All right. Thank you. By your action, you approve 2026-0265. And I'd like to recognize Council Member Peluso has joined us. All right. The next item that will be taken up will be item number 6. That's 2026-0260. I've got a motion. Can I get a second? I've got a motion and a second. Dr. Salem, you're recognized. Thank you, Chair. Through the Chair to Mr. Peterson, I just want to verify, because I see we're using general fund operating reserves. But it's my understanding that these dollars were allocated a year or two ago, fell into the reserves, and now we're simply reappropriating them. So in the big picture, there's really not a change to the reserves. Is that correct? Through the Chair to Council Member Salem, that is correct. These exact dollars were appropriated in September of 2024, and the contract allowed for it to carry over through September 30th of 2025. At that point, they were unspent, so they fell to reserves. But the $392 million number that we have referenced being the reserve limit at 9-30-24 would not have taken these dollars into account. Okay. And a second question through the Chair to Dr. Johnson. I guess you are now hopeful that this process will move forward, and what has changed to believe that the Stanton Group is ready to go? One word, leadership, through the Chair to Dr. Salem, and thank you for that. Judge James Ruth is now the Chair of the Board. Judge Ruth and I have sat down. He's explained the plan. One of the reasons why they could not realize and use those funds at the time was the fact that it's such an old, historic building, and they had to have the right contractors doing the right work so the building didn't fall down. But Judge Ruth has come and sat with me, and that's why I was willing to sponsor this, to get those funds back, even though they lapsed. Unfortunately, the group before him, I would have done a carryover bill at that time. I just didn't know. And so when he came, and now he's the new Chair, I believe that they're working toward not just getting the building shored up, but to getting it open so it not only generates revenue, but gives people a chance to walk through history in Jacksonville. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Dr. Johnson. All right. Thank you. All right. Let me go to Council Member Bolin. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the history of this. I have no problem in supporting this whatsoever. Just one quick question, perhaps for Mr. Peterson, based upon the grant agreement. Is this on the reimbursement basis? Do they have to demonstrate expense and then get paid thereafter? Through the Chair to Council Member Bolin. So yes and no. This agreement authorizes a 25% advance, which is $36,000. They have to provide support that they spent that $36,000 in order to qualify for future reimbursements. So the first $36,000 is in advance. Thereafter, it's all reimbursement. That's fair. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. All right. Thank you. Chief White. Yes, sir. Add me as a co-sponsor, please. Very good. Council Member Clark Murray. Thank you, Chair. Please add me as a co-sponsor as well. All right. Thank you. Council Member Amaro. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Add me as a co-sponsor as well. Question through the Chair to Mr. Johnson. So do they already have folks lined up to get the work done? And as far as turning that property over into a revenue-generating stream, what are the plans? And is this going to be sufficient to get to that opportunity? Thank you for the question. And through the Chair to Council Member Amaro, this is not the full extent of what they're doing. And talking to Judge Ruth, what they're planning to do, this was just to shore up the roof so it doesn't go through, what is it, demolition by neglect, I think is what they call it, because the building needs this done. But it is a painstaking process. They're going to be working, or they are working with DIA to hopefully find ways to move it forward. But right now, this is a dire need situation, but they had to find the right contractor, because this was supposed to be spent a couple years ago. I know when I came on the council in 23, the initial legislation was carried by that time Councilman Gaffney, Sr. and when I got on, the board at that time asked if I would sponsor the carryover legislation, which I did. They weren't able to get, and there was some change in leadership with them, movement with the board. So they do have a plan. He, and again, Judge Ruth is a new leader. I trust him. I know him. He's done a lot of stuff in the community, and that's something else that made me say we can move from just keeping the building up to actually getting the building up and running. Through the chair, just a quick follow-up. I trust Judge Ruth as well, so that's not an issue with me. And I was a little bit surprised that since you and I have been here that the money was never used, that it's been sitting there. Through the chair to Councilmember Johnson, this church is, oh, this church, this school has a relationship with the AME Church. Is that still a part of this, or is it just being operated? By this nonprofit. They did have a relationship with the AME Church. They have nothing to do with the church as a functioning body, so no, it's its own separate historic Stanton 501c3 nonprofit. All right, thank you. Let me go to visiting Councilmember Peluso. Thank you, Chair. Seeing as how this is in my district, I'd also like to be a co-sponsor. All right, no other speakers in the queue. I've got a motion and a second. Let's open the ballot and record your vote. Six yays, zero nays. All right. By your action, you've approved 2026-0260. Let's turn the page to item number 7, 2026-0264. Can I get a motion on the bill? I've got a motion and a second. I don't see any speakers in the queue. Let's open the ballot and record your vote. Six yays, zero nays. By your action, you've approved 2026-0264. So that takes us back to the beginning of our agenda. Item number 1, 2024-0966 has been deferred at the request of Council President Carrico. Item 2, 2025-0361 is deferred at the request of Council Member White. Item number 3, 2026-0227 is deferred at the request of Council Member Diamond. That takes us to item number 4, 2026-0258. I've got a motion and a second on the bill. Council Member Morrow, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to offer a floor amendment and have Ms. Luper, if I can get a motion on the amendment and have her explain what the amendment is. All right, I've got a motion and a second on the amendment. Carla Schell, Office of General Counsel, through the chair. So Council Member Morrow intends to offer an amendment to change Category 2 and Category 5 of the Renew Arlington Advisory Board member qualifications. Instead of having a geographic boundary of one mile and three miles, respectively, it would be within Council District 1. And I'm here for any questions. All right, Ms. Murray on the amendment. Thank you, Chair. So why are the boundary changes being requested? Through the chair to Council Member. I apologize. I thought Ms. Nazarela was speaking, but it may have been like an unfamiliar voice. You can answer it. Is that you? Okay. I knew it sounds somewhat of a voice that was unfamiliar. I apologize. I was multitasking. Good morning. Karen Nazarela, OED staff. It's green. Let's see. Is this one better? That one better, yeah. Let's go with this one. Let's try again. Karen Nazarela, OED staff. For the past couple of years, we have struggled with obtaining new advisory board members for both King Sutel and Renew Arlington. As it's written, it's just too constricting. Because of these vacancies, many times we don't get quorum, and we can't take action on items that need to be voted on. Again, the proposed ordinance will expand the boundaries into the community, adding a broader consideration of candidates, and we think a better representation of the community. Thank you for that. Thank you, Chair. All right. Thank you. Council Member Boyle on the amendment. Ms. Nazarela, and I appreciate, actually it applies to the bill as well, but the amendment speaks to it. My concern is their familiarity with the work of the CRA, their interests. Have you identified individuals that would fill the categories that you need in order to do that, and is there some kind of transitioning to get them up to speed as to it's not just about having a warm body in the chair, it's a meek quorum, and it's really people who are engaged and see a value in being a part of the CRA. Can you speak to that? Yes, sir, through the chair. The members in both areas, both King Sutel and Renew Arlington, are very active in the community. They come to meetings. They attend the town hall meetings that the council members conduct. They're very well informed. We do an initiation when they do come in. I go through the redevelopment plan. I explain the rules of Florida Statute 163, Part 3, what their roles are. We do have a PowerPoint that we conduct during our advisory board meetings. Most of them are very familiar and want to be a part of the advisory board. Sometimes the rules, as they're written, are so constricting that they just don't expand to where they live. All right. Thank you. Let's go to Dr. Salem. Thank you, Chair. Having been on the original board, I think that started in 2017, and there was a desire, obviously, to keep people close to where the CRA is that would have more buy-in to the process. Clearly, that was, I guess, nine years ago. It's amazing that it's been that long. But I can understand expanding it to three miles and still having people fairly close. But I'll go along with Ms. Nasrullah through the chair. You believe we need to go completely into District 1 to find people? Through the chair. I do. One reason is because you have a river. So if you do a mileage, it crosses the river and goes into Talleyrand. I understand. As you understand. Secondly, the commercial corridors of University Boulevard, Merrill Road, Arlington Road, and Fort Caroline, they're commercial corridors that, once they're redeveloped and they're moving in that direction, I think we're making good progress, it will have a ripple effect into that community that will expand all the way down through District 1. That's the goal of a CRA if it's redeveloped correctly. Okay. I will support it then. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Let's go to Councilman Amaro. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to expand on what Karen just said a second ago, and that was one of the issues we discovered. For example, because of the prescriptive description of the boundaries, we found that it extended into District 7 and Talleyrand, and those guys really don't have as much of a vested interest as much as the rest of the folks in District 1. And so it just seemed like a common-sense approach to make the boundaries be the district, where you have a wider pool that you can search for folks who have a vested interest in Arlington. And so I just wanted to expound just a little bit more on what you were saying. All right. Thank you. Let's go to Councilmember Bolin. Thank you, Chair. I mean, to follow up on that point, with respect to Kings Hotel area, why not apply the same rule there as well? Does it make a difference? I mean, good for the gander in terms of that. So I don't know if we would want to take a look at making that consistent for both CRAs. Your thoughts on that? Through the Chair, I would have no objection to that. I think that would be an outstanding idea. So with that, I think we should move on to Councilmember Amaro's amendment, but I think it might make sense to offer a second amendment to apply the same rules for the Kings Hotel as well. All right. Councilmember Clark Murray. Thank you. Through the Chair, in consideration. I don't know if through the Chair to Councilmember Bolin, are you making an amendment to the amendment or because I was going to speak to what you're going to say. Actually, I've made it separate. I think we should go ahead and move on to Mr. Amaro's amendment. And then I will make a second amendment that we also apply the same criterion for Kings Hotel. Okay. Okay. So I'll go ahead and say that I do want to be a co-sponsor for this bill and then we'll vote and then I'll make my other comments. All right. Dr. Salem. Okay. All right. So let's, on the amendment on the floor right now, all in favor, say yay. Yay. Any opposed? Likewise. None. The amendment carries. Now let's go to Councilmember Bolin. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to go ahead and make a second floor amendment that we apply the same criterion making it district-wide for the, to serve on the Kings Hotel CRA. All right. I've got a motion and a second on that amendment. So let me go to Mr. Peterson first. Through the Chair. I don't know if Ms. Nasralla knows. I'm not sure what council district that falls in. And is it, it's 10? Okay. All right. Dr. Salem. Thank you, Chair. I'm not comfortable moving on this. The district councilman's not here and had no idea this was going to come up. I would value the input of Councilmember Pittman on this and see if there's the same type of need and that kind of thing. Are there other committees this is in? And is Ms. Pittman, is it in finance? It is. No. Just in rules? And Ms. Pittman's not a member in rules. Hmm. I don't know how we handle that other than coming back at a future committee meeting and briefing her. Ms. Nasralla, through the Chair, have you had this discussion with her? Through the Chair, this just came up today. I'm happy to have that conversation with her and be prepared at rules. I would prefer that personally. I won't support it today without her knowing where she stands. Thank you. All right. Let me go to Councilmember Clark Murray. Thank you. So, in a sense, Councilmember Salem stole my thunder. That was my concern as well, the fact that the council representative is not here. And then to see what that distance, what it would actually look like on the CRA map for Kings Road and that Soutel area. I think it's the Kings Road, Soutel area, CRA. So, to see what that additional distance would look like actually in comparison to the current boundaries of the CRA. So, I, too, would feel more comfortable, as Ms. Nasralla said, that she would be able to speak with Ms. Councilmember Pittman by the time rules meets later on today. Then I would feel much more comfortable with that. But I think through the Chair to Councilmember Boylan, I think it's an excellent suggestion, depending upon whether or not they have the same issues, such as the quorum and the participation. Thank you, Chair. All right. Thank you. Let me go to Councilmember Muramaro. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just a quick commentary, and Ms. Nasralla can refresh our memory on this. In the Kings Hotel CRA, we, this body, had to amend, waive the distance and resident requirement because they were having issues as well finding individuals who live within the prescribed area. So, I think the district councilman, I concur, if the district councilperson is not here, we probably should not move forward. But I would not be surprised if the district councilperson finds this amendment somewhat amenable. So, I'm just adding commentary. That's all. All right. Thank you. Let me go to Mr. Peterson. Through the Chair, I think y'all are going to defer or not move on the amendment, but just wanted to add, did find a map. It also touches Council District 12 and Council District 8. It's kind of right where the three of those come together, so I don't know that you would want to choose a singular council district. All right. Let me go to Councilmember Bolin. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will go ahead and withdraw my amendment at this point. I mean, it would make sense to give her the latitude to reach further out, but the fact that it intersects with two other districts makes it pretty complicated. So, I'll just withdraw the motion, and if she wants to address it in a different fashion, I'll leave it to the council member. All right. So, I've got a, I need, yeah, move, I need a motion second on the bill as amended. So, I've got a motion and a second as amended, and I have no speakers in the queue. Let's open the ballot and record your vote. Six yays, zero nays. By your action, you approve 2026-0258. That takes us to item number five, 2026-0259. Okay, get a motion. I've got, I've got a motion and a second on the bill. Councilmember Bolin, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate this coming through, and I want to make a comment with respect to the model here. It looks like it's going to be remarkably similar to, actually, Hogpen Creek and the situation there, making a determination of that. Some of you may know that we have, in my district, Deep Bottom Creek, where we have an arrangement with the administration, well, actually, through now the CBA, I'll be using funds to do that. But what we did there was to create a special taxing district that requires the neighbors to maintain the basin once it gets dredged. So I'm just tossing it out there for conversation as a model for Councilmember Diamond or others to pick up and run with after they do. And I think which is appropriate we're hearing about is the study to make sure that what is warranted. Thank you. All right. Thank you. No other speakers in the queue. Let's open the ballot and record your vote. Six yays, zero nays. By your action, you approve 2026-0259. Item number six, we've already taken action. Seven, we've taken action. Eight, we've taken action. Takes us to item number nine, 2026-0267. Can I get a motion on the amendment? I've got a motion, a second, on the amendment. Mr. Peterson. To the chair of the committee, the amendment removes a waiver of section 745-105-J10 related to noticing requirements. There are no affected property owners on this stretch of land, so there's no reason to waive that code section. And then there's also scriveners that need to be corrected. All right. No speakers on the amendment. All in favor, say yay. Yay. Any opposed likewise? None. The amendment carries. And motion second on the bill as amended. Okay. I've got a motion in a second. No speakers on the queue. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Six yays, zero nays. By your action, you approve 2026-0267. That takes the item number 10, 2026-0286. Can I get a motion on the bill? I've got a motion and a second on the bill. No speakers in the queue. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Six yays, zero nays. By your action, you approve 2026-0286. It takes us to item number 11, 2026-0287. I've got a motion and a second on the bill. Council Member Bolin, you're recognized. Just about to talk in my coffee cup. Ms. Long, you are here. Don't come down. I just want to meet with you after this if we can. This is our last item. Thank you. That's it. All right. Thank you. So I've got a motion and a second on the bill. Let's open the ballot and record your vote. Six yays, zero nays. By your action, you've approved 2026-0287. That takes us to item number 12. And these items are on second reading. 2026-0312, 0313, 0314, 0315, 0316, 0317, 0318, 0319, 0320, 0321, 0323, 0324, 0327, 0331, 0332, 0333, 0334, 0335, 0336, 0337, 0353, 0354, 0356. 0358, 0358, 0362, and 0364. So as you can see, we will have a full agenda at the next meeting. So with that, no other comments or questions. We are adjourned. So with that, no other comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments or comments