Board of County Commissioners on 2026-06-09 9:00 AM - Jun 09, 2026

Joining us, let's begin with a moment of silence, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance, which is going to be led by Michael Drost, who's our U.S. Marine and Veterans Services Manager. 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. Okay, we have several presets today. The first is at 9.05, public comment, followed by 9.30 a.m., Lake Grove Water Main Municipal Service Benefit Unit. At 9.45, we'll hear a presentation about a dredging project. At 5.05, or at the conclusion of our meeting, we'll hear public comment again. There are two additional items today. Consent 19 is adopting a proclamation recognizing June 19, 26, as Juneteenth Freedom Day in Martin County. R&P 1 is the Intracoastal Waterway and Okeechobee Waterway Maintenance Dredging Project update by the United States Army Corps of Engineers, and the non-federal sponsor, the Florida Inland Navigation District. Is there a motion to approve the agenda? Move approval. Second. There's a motion and a second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? That motion passes unanimously. It's now time for proclamations. Are there any proclamations today? It looks like there's just one. One. First, we have up, only today, we have a proclamation declaring May 2026 as Mental Health Awareness Month in Martin County, Florida. The mental health of every Martin County resident and business owner is a critical factor in our area's emotional and economic stability. 44 million American adults, roughly 18%, are living with a mental health illness. And 13% of American youth aged 12 to 17 are living with major depression. Raising awareness and fostering open conversations about mental health can promote early intervention, reduce barriers to care, and build stronger, more supportive communities. May was Mental Health Awareness Month, and it is the duty of each and every one of us to provide continued, consistent access to mental health care resources. And here to accept, we have Gregory Jackson, CEO of New Horizons of the Treasure Coast in Okeechobee. Good morning. First and foremost, I want to say thank you to the board for your continued support. With your support, we've been able to serve over 1,500 underinsured and uninsured individuals providing essential mental health services. At New Horizons, we have a legacy of providing essential services to those most in need, serving as a part of the safety net as far as mental health services for our community. So we want to thank you again for that and reiterate that we're committed to continual service, also advocating for our community to make sure that we can have the resources we need to respond to the emerging challenges. So thank you again. Next, we will take up public comment. Mr. Donaldson, do you have a... I do. I have a prepared statement, and this is, since we are in the election season, politicking is prohibited, which is defined as advocating the election or defeat of a candidate for public office, either partisan or nonpartisan. This includes the use of words, dates, signs, props, and or wearing apparel that convey a message of support for a person or group of persons. Thank you. The first request to speak form I have is from Doug Farley, followed by Missy Harris. If Farley comes up, you'll have three minutes. Thank you. So before that starts, I was told I could show these pictures on the monitors. Can I get some direction on how we do that? Just lay them on top of that white square on the desk. Okay. I'm so meant to help you. Like that? There we go. There you go. Great. Stand there and hold it up. Good morning. I've been working with a lot of folks in Martin County, your constituents, to try to convince this commission to work towards quiet zones at railroad intersections. We've been trying to convince you to move this way for the quiet feature, of course, but it's also safer. That's the part you're kind of missing a bit. We've used explanations and discussions, and it hasn't worked, so we brought in some pictures, or I brought in some pictures, to help illustrate and show you that you can have a quiet zone and it's actually safer when you follow the Federal Railroad Administration's guidelines for quiet zones. This picture shows an intersection in Rio that does not qualify for a quiet zone. You can see there's only one gate on each side of the road here. That's the liability. That's where the problems happen. It's a suggestion. The horn is a suggestion at this point. People who use poor judgment will drive around the gate, and that's where the problem happens. We all agree that. This next picture shows a new section in Martin County that does qualify for a quiet zone. Take a look at that. Ask yourself objectively why a horn would be necessary in any way to keep you safe here. You're physically barricaded from the danger zone. It's a no-brainer. You cannot pass through it, even if you wanted to. That qualifies as a quiet zone, and that's what makes it safer. The Federal Railroad Administration has a number of requirements. The biggie are these gates. Another example of an intersection that does not qualify for quiet zones. This is down at Monterey and Dixie. This is where last month a 68-year-old man was killed on his bicycle crossing this intersection that does not qualify as a quiet zone. If it did qualify as a quiet zone, it would have four gates. The sheriff's report says that that man tried to cross that crossing where there was no gate here. All the bystanders report that the horn was blowing, but it tells you a few things. The horn doesn't even work. If there was a gate there, would that man be alive today? Because that would have been a physical barricade keeping him from going forward. So, if you move forward for quiet zones, your residents, your constituents get some peace and quiet and a good quality of life, and they get this real safety to prevent them from danger. So, do the right thing. To not go to quiet zones is irresponsible at best, and at worst, a liability, negligence. So, thanks very much. Thank you. Missy Harris is next, followed by Derek Powell. Good morning. My name is Missy Harris, and I live on Alamanda Way, and I've been a long-time resident. I even had a business for 24 years here. What I am requesting is that the board put back on the agenda, so help me God, in the oath. The oath, do you affirm, to tell the whole truth, has left out, so help me God. I am requesting it to be put on the agenda for next week's approval, next meeting's approval, please. It needs to be reinstated. Our nation, back to God. The president even declared it. He knows that by honoring God, we can save this nation. On May 17th, he declared one nation back to God. Every president has taken the oath, so help me God, included. Every president. And you know who else doesn't say it? It's the courthouse. They have deleted it also. And so there is no accountability. I'm asking for it to be put back on the docket and included in the oath. By deleting, so help me God, we are not honoring God and his authority over Martin County. I'm asking it to be reinstated and to be put on the next meeting's agenda. Thank you so much. And may God bless Martin County and America. Thank you. Derek Powell is next, followed by Yamila Roland Escalona. Good morning, commissioners. My name's Derek Powell, resident of Cove Road. I'm sure you guys are getting tired of me being up here, because I know I am. I sent an email last week, just by a show of hands. Did anyone receive that? Okay. So I'm going to reinstate that email. Three of the commissioners here have been out to my home, and I do appreciate that. And I welcome the other two if you guys would like to come out and see what we're working with. Here's the email. My name's Derek Powell, and I'm here because I believe Martin County deserves better. I submitted a complaint regarding the newly constructed sidewalk adjacent to the Pepperwood development. Several days after the last rain event, there are still sections of the sidewalk holding standing water. Sidewalks are supposed to improve safety and accessibility, not become unusable days after it rains. As someone who works in construction and deals with drainage grading and quality control every day, it doesn't make sense to me. Proper drainage should have been considered before forms were set and concrete was poured, not after residents start pouring out the problems. What frustrates me most is the lack of accountability. If I perform work that doesn't meet expectations, my customers expect me to make it right. If a local contractor or homeowner builds something that doesn't comply with county requirements, they're expected to fix it. But when a large developer builds infrastructure that clearly isn't functioning as intended, it feels like everyone suddenly starts looking the other way. Taxpayers deserve better. I've also been told by workers on site that the drainage basin, overflow, and the pond are essentially at the same elevation. Not the pond, I'm sorry, the berm. Maybe that's accurate, maybe it's not. But if it is, it doesn't make much logical sense. Water needs to go somewhere. If the overflow elevation and the berm are the same, we're creating a situation where drainage problems become predictable instead of preventable. I'm not standing here just to complain. I'm standing here to look for solutions. I believe we should bring all parties on site. Let's have a meet and greet. Let's walk the property, look at the elevations, discuss creating a swale behind the sidewalk and restoring a drainage path to the wetland the system can handle because we all know we're going to get plenty of rainfall. I'm willing to be a part of the solution if a swale or ditch on my property helps solve the problem. I'm open to that discussion. I'm just going to keep going. What I'm not open to is spending another $10,000 out of my own pocket to correct issues that should have been considered before development ever began. At the end of the day, it's not about the sidewalk, it's about accountability. Someone had an inspection there and passed that inspection. Sir, your time is up. Thank you. I appreciate it. Mr. Powell, I will meet at the site with you again and with an engineer and we will fix this. I think that would be a great idea. Thanks. Yamila Roland Escalona followed by Maureen Keelian. Hello. Buenos dias again, commissioners. If you guys forgot who I am, I'm Yamila Roland Escalona, executive director of Yaya Por Vida Harm Reduction here in Martin County. Before I speak, I want you guys to look at my shirt for a moment. This is my sister, okay? I want you to see her face. Not sure if you remember me mentioning to her, to you, to her at all in May and various chats in private as well. She lived with substance use disorder. She cycled through care and stayed in what we call a flop house. She was unhoused for a period. She died because the system failed her. I am here so you do not fail the people that are still breathing. Your presence was missed, by the way, last week at the Treasure Coast Opioid Task Force Fireside Chat that we invited you guys to. I do think the one law enforcement officer who attended, the only one from Martin County, which we're very appreciative to, that single officer showed more engagement than any of the elected officials that we've come across that we've tried to engage with before. After the May 19th POCC meeting, an official from Muir County claimed on the news that unhoused individuals have an abundance of options. If they just asked the individuals that were here last time, I would say that they would beg to differ. It ignores the 21,000 patient ADAP cap cutting off that we mentioned to you guys last time, which, by the way, is ready to be signed for reinstating. But it's still going to take 21,000 residents away from potential housing and HIV medication. When are we going to stop the lies? This board has proven that housing is a priority. You took action on Florida's RV and mobile park. You've made quality of life a priority, allowing residents discussing and demanding action to stop train horn noise. But we are not misaligned. We're asking for the same thing, except the quality of life that we're fighting for survival itself. Last month was Mental Health Awareness Month. We just spoke about it again now. A resident asked today and last time, put God back into government. I believe that means recognizing that God dwells in every single human being. God is in the person sleeping under that bridge. God is in my sister's face that you just saw. Putting God into government means putting humanity into policy. Therefore, I call on the board to add three specific discussions for the next session. As at utilization strategy, correcting misinformation, and again, the voluntary community advisory committee. My sister shouldn't be on a memorial shirt for me to show y'all. She should be living her life here with me. Quality of life means nothing without life. Put these on the agenda. Schedule the discussion. Hold y'all selves accountable. Happy Pride, by the way, and God bless. Thank you. Maureen Killian is next, followed by Victoria Blake. Good morning again. My name is Maureen Killian. I'm the founder of Southeast Florida Recovery Advocates. I'm a board member of Right Light Services, whose job is to bridge the gaps. And I'm a Martin County resident of District 1. More importantly, I'm here as a mother to share experiences of the mothers in every district. My son struggles every day to attain a long-term recovery from substance use disorder. He survived what we call the Florida Shuffle. I'm here because not everyone does. 30-day stints in rehab is not a solution. It's long-term care and long-term, lifelong support services. This is a follow-up to our last meeting. I'm back because the urgency has not diminished. In fact, it's growing and will continue to grow. We are living in an unstable economic environment. An ongoing war has driven up the cost of gas, food, and everyday staples. Rent is out of reach for working families with two people working, let alone for someone stepping out of treatment with nothing but the clothes on their back. The financial pressures bearing down on vulnerable people right now is immense, and it's pushing more men, women, parents with children, our seniors, and our veterans towards crisis, towards the streets, and toward the very predators we're here to stop. We're facing two crises at once. The first is the body brokering, the illegal trafficking of vulnerable people struggling with addiction, and cycle through. It's a felony now, but we need enforcement. Second is visible. It's the homelessness. When insurance runs out, the people cycle through and are abused by predators. They re-sign up, and they are re-abused. They're induced to use again and bill at a higher level service for detox. This is a business model, sadly. Since our last meeting, I've had productive conversations with Ms. Michelle Miller and Ms. Joanne Green regarding safety inside recovery residences, and I'm grateful for their engagement. However, connecting with the appropriate Martin County Sheriff's Office liaison is becoming a little bit problematic. On June 3rd, we had the Trevor Coast Recovery Residence. It was well turned out. We had people from Port St. Lucie, elected officials there, and some officers. A spark was ignited, and our community is ready to act. I need to speak plainly about House Bill 1365. The law prohibits camping, public camping, and sleeping, but it mandates, unfunded mandate, counties provide a shelter. Martin County does not have one. You cannot enforce a law that requires shelter when there is no shelter to offer. What we're left with is criminalization of people who have nowhere to go. A citation does not treat a disease. An arrest does not provide a bed. Your HHS department is updating the Martin County website, and I'm thankful for that, with the laws that are going on and the dangers. And we're going to put up there, like what I submit in our community, red flags, for when you're seeking treatment for your loved one. Ma'am, your time is up. Thank you. To help you. I appreciate it. Thank you. Victoria Blake is next, followed by Scott Butler. Good morning. I want to start with a scripture that I think just really hits home here. I'm Victoria Blake, and I volunteer with Tent City Helpers. Jeremiah 2911, for I know the plans I have for you. You know it, right? For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future. I've worked for Corporate America for 33 years, and I have worked with and sold to some of the top Fortune 100 companies. And my job was to identify their issues and problems and come back with very valuable and solid solutions. So I think about what's going on here in Martin County, and it just baffles me. So there's a law that says that people can't sleep in public property. We have no solutions for them. We have no shelters. We have no land. And so, you know, I'll look at Vero. Little Vero has a shelter. And Martin County, which I think we would agree is a very affluent county, does not have any solutions for our unhoused. And, sadly, we're hunting down the unhoused with police and dogs. Doug Schmidt was recently, a short time ago, was bitten by a dog on his finger. It got infected, and he eventually just passed away. It's very inhumane. So I think we are looking at three options here. We can rent land, buy land, or build a shelter, right? I think about the land right beside Lehigh, love and hope and action. Big piece of property there. They said the owner will not let them sleep there. Let's make them a deal. Like, can we rent it for $1,000 a month? Let's, you know, make it so he gets something back for it. But it's right there next to where they feed them and shower, and they can do their laundry. Can we buy a few acres? I've chaired various fundraisers in my life, and I would love to chair, you know, advisory committee or fundraiser to raise money for a shelter. And, lastly, Governor DeSantis passed the bill, 1365. Can we ask the state for money, since this is a bill, you know, that the county needs to adhere to? I'm just asking, again, Jeremiah 2011, not to harm them, plans to give them a hope and a future. Can we be the hands and feet of Jesus? And I'm asking, officially, if we can be put on the agenda for the next meeting. Thank you. Thank you. Scott Butler is next, followed by Angela Harrison. My name's Scott Butler. I was wondering if I could use the screen to show some videos I've posted over time. Is that available? We have a policy that those have to be approved in advance. We have to be able to look at them in advance. Okay. All right. Well, then, I won't show up. I'll just explain what I do. All right. So, first of all, I'd like to say thank you for hearing me out. You know, I want to say our community is one of those communities that are like no others. We have an environmental system where we have what we call the small-toothed sawfish, which are frequently in our area. They're highly endangered. And they travel our oceans up and down the reef, and they go into our rivers where they have their babies and stuff. So, over the years, I've been documenting with my drone. And I've become accustomed and fond of these animals. But during this time, I'm seeing all these beautiful animals, including the endangered small-toothed sawfish, the eagle rays, the giant manta rays. I've seen a sperm whale out there last year. It's amazing the ecosystem we have out there. But as I'm flying, back in the day when we were doing the bathtub beach renourishment, I started seeing how all this toxic-looking sand was being pumped from the river over into the beach. And I also had video at one point where some of the toxic sand coming out of the sailfish marina was pumped directly out onto the reef. Well, at that time, I wasn't a licensed drone pilot. So, my pilots, my license, the videos weren't able to be used, which I gave to certain people and the boat water people. And they said, this is definitely criminal. So, that time went by. So, just recently, probably about a month ago, I started filming and seeing all this dredge work that was going from the intercoastal waterway that was put in sand out on an area, which is right next to Bathtub Beach and Sailfish Point on the south end by the inlet. And during that process of filming that, I was watching, you know, fish being pulled out of the pumps and dead fish kills, whelk shells. People coming up to me and sending me pictures and showing me all these animals have died because of this pump system coming through. And just being a resident in Martin County for most of my life, I also understand that with, you know, we had the Okeechobee waterways, always had dumpage. And we know, if we live here, that water is toxic and that toxic water has nothing but to do but settle. When it settles into the sand, you know, it's fine until it gets disturbed. So, during this process, I was seeing all this pumping that was going on, seeing all this stuff being pumped up from the intercoastal waterway, being dumped onto this island that shouldn't even be there in the first place, which that's going to become a problem, I guarantee it, because our inlet's getting to the point where it's going to fill up like Jupiter Island. And this is just my opinion, again, if I see it from a drone, and you can really see that if you look at the videos at some point. But the point I'm trying to make here, I'm not against dredging. I'm not against bathtubs or the beach renourishments. I just wish that it could be done in a way where it's safer. You know, by watching these things, I learned a lot on turbidity testing. I don't think there's much oversight on this project. And who knows how much toxicity was put out into our rivers. I know now that our three reef systems are completely smothered with sand. They are dying, and they have happened for years. Mr. Butler, at 945, we're going to have a presentation that's going to address just those. That's why I'm here. Thank you. Angela Harrison is next, followed by Angela Rantanella. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I hope everyone's doing well today. Angela Harrison, Tent City Helpers. I wanted to go over a few, I guess you would say, facts in what the cost of arresting unhoused versus building a shelter. It's actually two to three times more expensive than providing them with permanent housing and social services. While building and maintaining shelter will involve capital and operational costs, the revolving door of legal and emergency medical systems places a huge financial burden on taxpayers. Florida did a study and found that arresting 33 frequently unhoused individuals costs $171,000 per person annually. The annual cost to house is from $10,000 to $13,000 per person. I've done a little bit of research, and I've actually found an organization called The Source that provides something called the Dignity Bus, which I will be meeting with Tony, the gentleman that builds those, this week to see what the price and the cost is so that I can present that to you guys. And I also noticed that there's an article that we're building a $3 million dock in Stewart, but we can't, we don't have any funds to build a shelter. I mean, that's kind of heartbreaking to know that we can spend $3 million on that, but we can't spend a few dollars on building a shelter. Thank you. Thank you. Angela Rantanella is next, followed by Dottie Lancey. Good morning. Good morning. I'm Angela Rantanella, and I represent Hutchinson Island Preservation Initiative. And we're here today to express our concerns about the damage that's being done to the reefs and habitats in the Bathtub Beach area as a result of the dredging nearby. We understand there's a need to dredge to maintain the inlet, and the permit issued contained rules, and it also had restrictions designed to protect the environment. But apparently those precautions were not effective enough because the reefs are covered with sand and muck, smothering all living things, which should never have happened. Hippie asks that all dredging please be halted over there until the proper protection can be put in place and any current damage to the reefs be addressed. We know how much our Martin County officials care about our island that we all share and love. Hippie is confident that you will take action on this matter and save our reefs and habitats that are so vulnerable and beyond priceless. Thank you. Thank you. Dottie Lancey is next, followed by Kathy Ahern. And Ms. Ahern is the last request to speak for my head. Good morning, everybody. Am I speaking into the mic now? You are. Good morning, everybody. It's nice to see you again. Thank you for having me. My name is Dottie Lancey. I live on Hutchinson Island. I'm also a member of HIPPE, the Hutchinson Island Preservation Initiative. And I would, before I go on with why I'm here, I want to thank you for the excellent job that you're all doing. I really think that you're keeping Martin County the most wonderful place in the world to live and your constituents appreciate it. You listen to what we have to say and you act on it. You listen to a lot of people here today and you seem to be concerned about their problems and you're looking for solutions and I think that's wonderful. So I just want to say thank you. I'm here because I wanted to add my voice of concern to what's going on on the reef out there. Other speakers will come and speak about the permitted dredging that's going offshore there and the dangerous effects that it's having on the reef. The reef is very fragile. I'm looking forward to hearing the presentation today on the subject to see what the problems are being addressed. I trust that the permits were approved with safeguards put in place to prevent any danger to the marine environment. But from what I hear from concerned people, this is not happening. Some oversight on the part of you all needs to occur to see that the permit rules are being kept by the subcontractors doing the work. Harm is being done to our reefs and we need to act now to prevent any more harm from happening. If the rules are being followed, then the terms of the permitting are not working and they should be reassessed. But please recognize the seriousness of this situation and do what's necessary to correct it. Thank you. Thank you. Kathy Ahern is next. That is the last request to speak for my hand. Good morning, Commissioners. Thank you for being here. Speak right into the mic. Oh, hi. Good morning. My name is Kathy Ahern and I've been a Mountain County resident since 2011. I moved here and worked for hospice in Martin County for eight years. I've worked in every section through Treasure Coast Hospice. I've done the hospitals, facilities, community. I've been in the richest homes to the RVs out in the woods. And I volunteer now at La Jolla. I'm retired. And I found La Jolla through Treasure Coast Hospice. We had a young gentleman, a war vet, his name was maybe Sam, was at our hospice house when I worked nights there. And through La Jolla and Treasure Coast Homeless Commission, they found him an apartment. And that man got to live the last month of his life. He was in his early 30s. Lungs were shot from Afghanistan. And it meant the world. So when I retired, I wanted to find out about La Jolla, which stands for Love and Hope in Action. And through La Jolla, I've also met my friend Justin Ducasse, who I've worked with on Saturdays. We clean up after anywhere from 50 to 70 people every Saturday. He's there. He doesn't have to be. He also volunteers. Although he's not being paid, but he wants to give back to his community. And we have a tremendous amount of community support. We are almost entirely supported by the community. But what we need now is government connection. We need you guys. I would invite any of you to come any Saturday at noon. Come at 11. We have a church service first. And we'll be happy to show you what we do and the wonderful people our clients are. We have many seniors living in their cars. It's horrible. They have nowhere to go at night. You know, they are with walkers and big medical problems and in and out of the hospital. It's not just substance abuse. There's many, many reasons I saw working hospice that people can become homeless. As many as there are stars in the sky, there are reasons people find themselves without housing. And we have to do something. This is the sixth wealthiest county in Florida. You know, it's what does it say about us if we can't even take care of our seniors? Thank you. And the next and last request to speak form I have is from John Dial. Morning. It should be resolved by the developer. Second, I want to go to the dredging projects that are on the agenda. And recognize the dredging programs are essential for the navigation of waterways. I just hope that this time it's better planned. The same resulted public outcry. By the way, I've been in both of them several times firsthand. Lastly, I'd like to urge you to reconsider. Oh, there we go. I would like for you to reconsider the $74 million no-bid contract for the Emergency Response Center. This is stated as a private-public partnership. Well, in private business, a private-public partnership discloses all aspects of what your costs are, what your profit margins are, what your markups are, and every other aspect of that business because it's a partnership. Partnership means we put all the cards on the table. Plans are usually done to the nth degree in detail prior to getting bids. And you should also know the path of the project. I've done this in the past many times with NGOs in the case, and we all knew the cost of the materials, the markups, and applied what the labor rates were. Then you plug in the variables of the things like weather delays and material availability. You do this all prior to making a decision on what the project would cost. Then for full public disclosure, it should be put out to bid with the RFA process with at least three bids if available, and it should be examined. As well as a project of this size, I would advise even hiring your own consultant to give an unbiased opinion of what the costs and the guidelines would be. You can say this adds to the cost, but believe me, after supervising many, many multiple projects that are multimillion-dollar projects, this is a safer process than a no-bid contract. For the sake of public transparency, I would hope you would reconsider this project. And the last thing I'm going to try to squeeze in here is why don't we have a method for getting public input on issues rather than all of us only getting our three minutes up here on a Tuesday? Something like a change.org-type situation that has secure electronic means for people to give their input. Thank you for your time, and I hope to see you again soon. Would anyone else like to address us? Seeing none, we will turn to Commissioner Comments. Commissioner Vargas. Okay. Yes, I'll be addressing some of those issues that were just spoken about later on in this meeting. I was summoned two Sundays ago about this dredging project, and I did see the dramatic drone footage. I'm a scuba diver. I appreciate reefs. I've dove all over the world, but this is my backyard. I want to be able to do it here. And I did speak with our county manager that Monday, as I said I would, and I asked about best management practices with the water quality, and that should be paramount and complied with no exceptions. There was a huge public outcry that was deafening to me, and this created a viral community awareness. My understanding is that this sand was taken from the shoal area. It was put in an impoundment basin, and there it remains. However, there was a lot of turbulence, so it created, I think, adverse situation. And I thought that the best thing would be to put it out on a barge away, but they said that was more expensive. So I'm waiting to hear from what our presentation is in a few moments, actually, away from nearshore reefs and avoiding further damage. So I'm aware of this. I took action right away. My understanding is this project is finished. Am I correct about that? Okay, so the project is finished. It's after the fact. I'm sorry about that. I wish I had known sooner. I'm going to just bring a little levity right here. On another point, we have a four-mile beach project that was completed May 2nd, and that was funded $15 million by the United States Army Corps of Engineers. Thank you very much. And we needed to have this done, obviously, before season. We're in turtle season now, too. And we also received an award from the American Shore and Beach Preservation Association. And this is open to anyone interested in protection and preservation of America's coast. It has a multidisciplinary mix of coastal managers, professionals, researchers, academics, that type of thing. So thank you very much. That is something that we can be proud of. And please do visit our beaches. We have beautiful beaches on Hutchinson Island and elsewhere. Another thing, I want to be able to talk to you, everyone, that can hear me or see me also, not just those here, your own backyards. You might want to take a look at them and say, gee, I really could use some help. Well, I have the answer for you. We have our very wonderful extension offices with master gardeners here. That is right at the Martin County Fairgrounds. I put in pollinators. So what I did is, with their assistance, I was able to select plants that bring bees, hummingbirds, and butterflies. And they have a lot of educational programs. They cover a wide range of topics, including agriculture, commercial horticulture, natural resources, environmental horticulture, family consumer sciences, 4-H youth development. And, again, the master gardeners are there to make a positive impact of the community and school enrichment programs, school gardens, community gardens. You know that we're in a drought season where we're restricted and also with our fertilizer. So we want to take care of our beautiful Martin County. So in the meanwhile, since I followed everything to a T, they awarded me the gold level. Gold level. All right. So I'm really proud of this. It will be in display in my office. It is a free service to everyone, even if you have a restricted lot. No problem. Anybody can do this. Thank you. Mr. Katz. I'm good today. I would like to add an unofficial item to the agenda today. I want to talk about, have a report from staff about the property tax legislation. Yes, ma'am. Should we, Commissioner, should we add that to the end of the meeting? Yes. Yes. I thought that's what we were going to do. Didn't we decide that? I don't think we've decided anything. Well, I think Don spoke about that with me. Yes. That'd be great. So we're going to do that. I was planning to, but thank you, Madam Chair. Yes. Thank you. Commissioner Campy. Madam Chair, good morning and thank you. Two serious issues I'm going to bring up. The first one is a recommendation to our staff that I had an opportunity to speak to Mr. Donaldson about is that we do create in our continuing effort to educate and inform the public about one of the topics that was brought up this morning, which is the centralized maintenance facility building. This is something that has been in the discussion phases, Mr. Donaldson can attest, for probably 20 years, the need for some type of a consolidation and a redo of our maintenance system, facility system. We then went through a process that was very public. There were several meetings. There was opportunities to speak. There were presentations in this chamber. I think most people grew up understanding that if you were bidding on something, you would get multiple bids. However, I was one of them, but that doesn't mean that there are no other techniques and strategies that can be used for a bidding process. It had been successfully used by Indian River State College and the folks that built the Indian Town High School. It was the first time I had seen it, and that's here and obviously in Martin County. I was also skeptical of not doing it the more traditional way. It is one of the largest projects that the county has ever undertaken in terms of coordinating and consolidating. Many people that are familiar with this process remember that we've even had conversations in years past of creating a really centralized universal maintenance facility with the school district, the city of Stewart, our other municipalities, the sheriff's office. In Stewart, we even looked at the property that used to be the driving range and now has a crematorium on the front of it. It's a brownfield. We thought that that could be something in an effort to save taxpayer dollars by consolidating all of these satellite technical services that are needed by an organization of this size. We then looked at property. We had many conversations on where the potential property. Some of us disagreed. It was a healthy debate. Many different properties were considered. And then eventually we found our way to a piece of property off of Canter Highway. That process of purchasing the property went through a whole vetting process. Then we got into how we would design the building. And then, look, I get it. There's a lot of confusion and concern because a lot of our residents have not been given the opportunity that we are afforded to ask questions of experts to find out exactly how the process went, to participate in the process before making that decision. It passed four to one. That's why there's five of us because there's five unique opinions up here. That's the best representation for our citizens. And we approved it. I had then started to hear pushback and feedback from people that said, wait a second, I don't understand it. The Taxpayers Association, others, constituents had reached out to me directly. And I asked staff to consolidate and boil down this complicated process into sort of more bite-sized info bites, if you will. And they did. Then I had heard more people. Then the Taxpayers Association came out with like a white paper discussing their thoughts and how they had heard about it and how they were informed of the process. And they shared that, which was very helpful. Because it was separate from the county, it was, you know, the Taxpayers Association is, you know, 60, 70-year-old organization. It's independent of the county government. They have no problem calling balls and strikes, which they've done very successfully. They put out a paper. I still heard about it. So I asked our staff to create an info document, like an infogram, that explained very sort of easily, very succinctly the process. And I submitted that out to people that were interested in seeing it. Then I had a call from a very well-known Martin County resident who is very active on social media. Good for him. Most of the time, I would agree with most of his positions and opinions on things that are happening in the county. He called. First, he put out a video. I'm friends with him. I reached out to him. I said, why don't you come in and meet with our staff? One, I was very appreciative of our staff at the highest senior levels to meet from legal, from budget, from general services, and tour and come in. And he did. I don't think that meeting went the way that we were hoping. He still had many questions and concerns. He has continued to post. So what I'm asking our staff to do is create a video, not a half an hour long video, but a shorter video that can be social media friendly. Many of our people use social media platforms in all of their varieties as their way to obtain information. So I would like us to participate at that same platform to create with our staff the visuals necessary. The first question is, why are we moving from where we are in the first place? The second question, what's the situation with the FAA about having non-aviation-related business on the airport property? The next was the process of where did the land acquisition come from? Then the design aspect. We didn't just say, hey, build us a building. There was hundreds of hours of discussion and input. Then the financial portion, and how did we come up with this 3P? I think we owe it to our residents. They're expecting it of us. Sometimes certain controversial issues or topics peak, and then they sort of naturally fade back to a normal process. This one seems to be gaining more traction. I think it's our responsibility to continue to inform the public. Will we convince everyone that it was the right decision? Probably not. But we need to continue to work on that. So that's first. The second one is probably going to shock most people, and that is I am one of the few people that has been involved in the Brightline train station discussion, negotiations, settlement since the beginning. Commissioner Hurd and I are the only two that are sitting up here that were involved from the very beginning. Not the conversation of should the train come through Martin County. That was primarily out of our hands. But once it did, my philosophy was if we're going to, as residents, take all of the inconvenience of a train system coming through top to bottom Martin County, shouldn't we at least get the benefit of a train station? Now, if you remember those folks that were tuned in in the beginning, Brightline said they were only going to have a couple. Miami, Fort Lauderdale, West Palm, Orlando. There was none for the Treasure Coast. There was very few smaller community stations that were even being discussed. Then they added Adventura. Then they added Boca. Then they talked about the Treasure Coast, and they said, well, we're not going to stop on the Treasure Coast. And then we negotiated and asked them to do that. And then it became sort of a contest. We did settle a lawsuit with Brightline. At the time, it was called All Aboard Florida. And we did get a certain amount of accommodations in that negotiation. Some are still valid. Some are completed. Some are not. And they seem a little more nebulous. I won't go into the history of Fort Pierce v. Stewart and the back and forth. But as you know, the station was selected. The community of Stewart was selected. From the very beginning, my suggestion was that the station be at the fairgrounds. But the downtown business community, Stewart Main Street, a lot of our local businesses said, if you put it down there, it's really not anywhere in particular. It would be much better for us as businesses to draw all of the reasons I won't get into about the benefits of having stations. Some people hate it, but many people like the concept. But as it started to materialize, it started to get complicated. We had a different set of partners at the city at the time. Most of their administrative staff that was involved in the decision are gone. Several of their commissioners that were involved in the decision-making and the approval at the time to partner between Brightline and the county and the city are gone. Some of our colleagues that were part of the decision-making process have changed. There's new faces here since that time. And now it's become obviously it's campaign season, so it's a big campaign issue. It's also gone from $30 million to $40 million to $50 million to $60 million, depending on who you're asking. Now they're talking about a number that's in the $80 million range. I don't remember agreeing and signing on to an $87 million train station. I don't remember that we were going to take on all the responsibility. But I've stayed quiet because we've been going through a process of receiving grants, trying to receive federal grants. So I left it alone. I also capitulated to allowing, from my perspective, it being put much closer to downtown Stewart on a piece of property that is county-owned within the city limits next to the courthouse. And we left it alone, and we got the award of the location. The finances have changed. The logistics have changed. The personnel, even at Brightline, their senior management is basically different people now. So I am requesting that the county staff, because the city of Stewart had voted with their new board, as is absolutely their prerogative, once they had new commissioners come on the board, they changed their opinion and stepped out of the process completely, and we took it on. I speak to residents, and most of them, although they could disagree on where the location of the station should be, most don't disagree that it would be good to have a station. Now, I'm not saying everyone, but I think a majority of our residents would like the concept and the convenience of a station. Now, the other big elephant in the room is Brightline is up against the financial ropes, and maybe there will be no Brightline. Maybe they will go bankrupt. I don't like this expression, but I've been hearing it used. It was used during the recession. Certain industries or certain businesses are too big to fail. Think about this. It's not just my opinion. Think about it. They built a massive train system and station in Miami, in Fort Lauderdale, in West Palm, in Adventura, in Boca, and at the airport in Orlando. They've laid a double track from Miami to Orlando. All of the heavy lifting, the expensive, very technical, and hugely expensive work is done. If you've done research into how Brightline is working, their ridership, their cost per rider is okay. What is sinking the organization is the tremendous weight of the debt of the work they've already done. I think reasonable minds will agree, Brightline, whether it's Brightline or a company that purchases Brightline or a governmental entity that has to take over Brightline, there'll be some train system on the east coast of Florida. Will we participate in it or not? With that in mind, I would ask our staff to begin a conversation and discussions with Brightline leadership for the possibility of changing the location from where it is currently, which creates parking issues and other issues that are reasonable points that we disagree on. Back to what I think is, in my opinion, a good option, which is at the fairground that the county owns. If you're not familiar with where the fairground is, it is east of U.S. 1, and it's basically on Dixie Highway. It's north of Indian Street. It's owned by the county. It's approximately 11 acres. I don't think it would need more than a portion of that. The fair has been negotiating to exit the fairground property after 65 years to move out into western Martin County. So the timing of the fair exiting that location and if all of the puzzle pieces fell into place would be appropriate timing for Brightline Station. It doesn't adversely impact neighborhoods. There's plenty of parking. You're in between the busiest road in Martin County, which is U.S. 1. It's adjacent to the airport. It's close to where other industries are, where people could walk to the station. There's possibility of other economic development along the fairground property that was going to happen anyway when the fair exited. There is other industrial and commercial lots and properties along that same corridor. One of the most important reasons I believe in moving is you've all heard recently that the FEC sent a response letter to former Mayor Collins about their concerns. And FEC and Brightline, I think of them as cousins. They're from the same organization, but they don't necessarily agree. And FEC's big concern was that a station would interfere with the St. Lucie River Bridge, which is a big, big issue. And we've had our marine industry and our boaters worried about and negotiating for quite a long time. And we've had Brian, Congressman Mass, to thank for bringing in huge, multimillion-dollar grant opportunities to replace a 100-year-old bridge that, when it's in its down position, knocks out most of boaters from the western side of the county. We cannot jeopardize the future improvements of that bridge. If a station, which some people like and some people don't, is deemed too close by the Army Corps of Engineers or the U.S. Coast Guard or whoever's involved, then it comes off the table for me because the more important issue for Martin County residents is replacing the St. Lucie River Bridge. If you move it further south to the fairgrounds, that issue comes totally off the table. If you think about, well, there's the possibility that if a train is in the station to stop, it could block intersections. Not at the fairgrounds. I've been out there many times to look. If you think you drive over the train at Indian Street, make the left onto Dixie, and then travel the length of the fairgrounds all the way up Monterey, excuse me, Dixie, to Monterey, where the Monterey crossing is, you could fit three trains full length on that property. Nothing would block the roadways. The last point is this, the look and feel of the station. Prior to this ever being discussed, I had an opportunity with some of our staff to meet with the senior, senior leadership at Brightline, and I gave them several options. I said, why do you have to build a brand new, big, permanent station right off the bat? Why not do a temporary station like they do if you're building a new neighborhood, if you've ever gone to a sales center in a neighborhood? They're beautiful. If you've ever been to a major sporting event and they set up those tents and those retail, you know, the gift stores and the hospitality tents, they're pretty legitimate. And Brightline said, we can't do that. We have certain security issues and all these other things. I said, okay, if you can't do that, why not just build a much smaller train station? It doesn't have to look like Bocas. It could be a Stewart-sized train station. And they said, well, you know, we have waiting rooms and administration and ticketing and restrooms. We need to have a certain look. I said, well, the most obvious choice would be no station at all. Why not just a platform where the train stops and the doors open and you get out and you walk to your car? And if it really works, make it a proof of concept. Let's do that first and see if it works. And then you can tell Martin County residents and taxpayers it's time to build a station. They weren't interested in that at the time. But I think intelligent people have the ability and should change their opinions when the circumstances change. And that's what's happened to us now. The circumstances are different. Our colleagues, I can't speak for them. They're hearing me say this for the absolute first time. I can't support the station in its current location at its current budget and price tag because it is disrupting and destroying our community. It's dividing us. Friends are divided by this issue. I've kept quiet because I wanted to see what was going to happen in Tallahassee with the property tax. I've kept quiet because it's campaign season. I'm not running. But it's campaign season. And I don't want voters to have to worry about where do incumbents or candidates fall on are you for the Brightline station where it is or not. It shouldn't be a campaign issue because it really shouldn't be an issue. The version that exists today in Stewart at $87 million or thereabouts, I don't think most people are interested in that. I'm not. So I would ask staff, well, first off, my colleagues will have to hopefully agree at least to enter into that conversation. There will be a Brightline system. We don't know who will run it, but we don't want to be left behind in a station. Opportunity. Thank you. Is it time to comment or? Sure. Okay. Brightline is in junk bond status. In case you don't know. I know. They were sued by FEC a number of years ago. This has been divisive in our community. We are dealing with a lot of issues that have not settled yet. Last week changed a lot. We were anticipating, I was anticipating at least, that we be nipped on our income that we're going to be receiving in this county. We should not be discussing Brightline at the moment. We have other issues that definitely take precedence. And I know that you really, really have been pushing for this, but I urge you to consider the alternative of being reasonable. There is only so much money to go around. Our taxpayers are squeezed beyond belief. And there should be no smiles from this commission whatsoever. This is a serious, serious concern. I deal with people all the time. And if you're a serious commissioner, you will listen to your constituents. Those are our bosses. There is nobody here. I don't think any time by staff should be spent on a losing proposition. I believe, and I can get you the name, and his position was just found dead in London after he moved over there from Fortress, from Texas. So you have to look at everything. It's changed from 20 years ago when you started looking at it. And you've been on this board for quite a few years. Yeah, I'm certainly amenable to continuing conversations. We have until, as I recall, June 30, 2027, to back out of the deal. Sure. Until then, we continue evaluating all the options. Thank you. Commissioner Heathering. Yes. So my turn to public comment. So thank you for that. And I agree with continuing those conversations, however they may shake out. And I saw Ms. Ahern, looks like she just left, but I had a note here to thank her for the invitation to visit La Jolla. I have had the opportunity on a number of occasions and have been there, and I've had a really good partnership over the years with the District 2 office, which is our office, and La Jolla. Appreciate what they do. We'll gladly come back again and look forward to continued partnerships. And then I would say to Missy, who I wrote down, who spoke this morning, I don't know what particular oaths you're speaking of, but I certainly agree with you. And please get in touch with the office. I would support having God in our oaths. And with that, thank you to Army Corps for being here and the fine representatives. A number of years, I've had an opportunity to see your presentations at Florida Beaches and Shores, and thank you to Jessica and our ecosystems. You do a fine job presenting information, sharing that with the public, and thank you again for being here this morning, and I look forward to your presentation in just a few moments. Mr. Donaldson, Ms. Elder, and we will take up our 930 preset, which is public hearing number one, which is the Lake Grove Waterman Municipal Service Benefit Unit. Good morning, Commissioners. Good morning. Good morning. For the record, David Duncan, Senior Project Manager. David Duncan, Senior Project Manager with the Utilities and Solid Waste Department. Martin County Utilities received a petition from the residents of the Lake Grove community requesting that the Utilities Department conduct a ballot process for the provision of potable water services for 64 properties that currently do not have access to public water service. Following the completion of construction plans and the receipt of bids, a staff workshop was held on June 2nd at the Board of County Commissioners' Chambers. The purpose of the workshop was to review the project scope, associated costs, and the assessment process with the affected property owners. In addition, the department has received a Florida Department of Environmental Protection permit to construct the project, and the lowest responsive proposal was selected. Go to slide two. Slide two shows the site plan for the Lake Grove community for the proposed water distribution system improvements. The proposed project offers significant benefits to the community. First, residents will experience improved water quality throughout the connection to Martin County's public water system. The project also will provide a reliable and consistent water supply, including during power outages. Additionally, the installation of fire hydrants throughout the neighborhood will enhance fire protection for a potential reduction of homeowners' insurance rates. The proposed assessment includes 64 properties, representing 64 equivalent residential connections, or ERCs. As shown in the slide, the project cost total is $740,900. Martin County Utilities contributed $110,000 towards the project, reducing the accessible amount to $630,900. The accessible cost is divided equally amongst the 64 benefited properties, resulting in an estimated prepayment amount of $9,857.81 per connection. For property owners choosing to finance the assessment, the estimated annual payment would be $964.86 per unit, amortized over 15 years, with an interest rate of 3.9% plus applicable fees. Martin County Utilities currently serves just under 40,000 water customers. The average residential customer uses approximately 6,000 gallons per month at the current rate of $2.56 per thousand and includes a monthly base charge of $19.99. The average residential water bill is approximately $35.35 per month. Pending approval of the final assessment resolution today, the department anticipates beginning construction in August of 2026. Construction is expected to take approximately five months, with substantial completion anticipated in December of 2026. Property owners who elect to pay their assessment will have until August 1st of 2027 to submit payment. Any unpaid assessments after that date will be placed on the annual property tax roll beginning in November of 2027. That concludes my presentation. Questions for Mr. Duncan? Mr. Canfield. Barring any public comment, I appreciate the efforts of our staff. This is a community in my district that I'm very familiar with. Lots of friends live in there. And I know it's been an issue that they've wanted to have this for quite a long time. I think by the virtue of the fact that there's not a big contingent of people here saying they didn't like it, I think, universally or close to it, people appreciate it as an excellent value and an option from the county. So I would make a motion to accept staff's presentation and request. I'll second. This is a public hearing. Would anyone from the public like to address us? Seeing none, we will return. And also, Commissioner, the balloting was very lopsided in favor of the assessment. It's the strongest balloting I've ever seen, I think. So there is a motion and a second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? That motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. We'll now take up requests and presentations. Number one, which is the Army Corps of Engineers and the non-federal sponsor, the Florida Inland Navigation District, for the Intracoastal Waterway and the Okeechobee Waterway Maintenance Dredging Project. Good morning, Lieutenant Colonel. Well, it'll be some time before I'm officially promoted, but I am eligible now. Congratulations. Thank you so much. I don't think this mic is on. It's on. Yeah. It's green. You've got to use your Army voice. That's right. So Major Corey Bell, Deputy Commander for South Florida, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District, out of the Palm Beach Gardens Office. It is my honor today to introduce Ashley Fontaine. She's our acting chief right now for navigation, and then Ms. Jessica Garland as well for Martin County's coastal program. So with that, we'll start with the presentation. You're on. Okay. Good morning, Commissioners. Thank you for having me. I really appreciate this. Can you try to get closer to your mic so we can all hear you? Thank you. Yes, I can try to do that. All right. Good morning, Commissioners. Thank you for having me. I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you all today about the Intercoastal Waterway and Okeechobee Waterway, what we refer to as the Crossroads Maintenance Dredging Event that just recently completed. As Major Bell just introduced us, I am a project manager, and I'm also a chief with the Jacksonville District. I have the opportunity today to cover for one of my colleagues, Mr. Eduardo Morin, who is the project manager for this project. And we do have representation from our non-federal sponsor, the Florida Inland Navigation District, and I'm happy to present here with Ms. Jessica Garland. So thank you. A quick timeline on this work, particularly for Crossroads, which was a contract that was in connection with work that we also did in Palm Beach County in the vicinity of Jupiter Inlet. I'll give a quick timeline there. In 2024 and 2025, we received some reports of shoaling. These were not new to us. We do take annual surveys every year. But we did receive reports of shoaling, and we have a couple of those letters in our presentation today, letters from Marine Industries Association and Indiantown Marine Center. After that time, the surveys that we took and the letters that we received, we initiated what we call the plans and specs for plans and specifications for an upcoming Operation and Maintenance event, or O&M event. That O&M event was planning to place material in the St. Lucie Impoundment Basin, just north of the inlet, and that was a location where we have placed previously. So whenever we do dredging, and I'll talk about some overview of how we do our dredging and how we plan our O&M events, we take surveys. So the St. Lucie Impoundment Basin had plenty of capacity, more than sufficient capacity, to be able to place the anticipated volume that we were going to dredge. So as far as reporting that information out for the public, we did issue a news release in October of 2025, where we had indicated where we planned on dredging and where we intended on placing that material, as well as who had the award, which was Southwind Construction, how much that cost, et cetera. In February, Southwind mobilized to the IWW for the dredging in the vicinity of Jupiter Inlet, and they demobilized in April. But in that time frame, in March, due to coordination that we've had with all of our partners previously acknowledged, we elected to make a modification to our contract and reduce our scope of the amount of material being placed at the impoundment basin. So that scope, we de-scoped, the volume went from 220,000 cubic yards of material to approximately 70,000 cubic yards of material. We will receive effort. We did our after-dredge surveys, so we'll know exactly how much was placed in the impoundment basin here shortly. I don't have that yet, but that's the approximate volume. And so in March, we issued the d-scope. Southwind mobilized to this area in April, and they started dredging on May 5th, Cinco de Mayo. And they just concluded on June 2nd. So their demobilization efforts are underway, and I think we just saw some pipe leaving this morning on our way in. Okay. So I talked about surveys that we conducted, and we dredge this area approximately every three years. We survey it on an approximate annual basis. We identify these shoals. So shoals are just the high spots above our authorized project depths. Shoals can occur to many reasons. Just a few are the currents that we have here in this area. Tides actually do come into play with shoals. Storm events are a big contributing factor to shoals, and I'll talk about that because that did impact the capacity of the St. Lucie Impoundment Basin. And then here in this area specifically, we have a convergence of multiple waterways. We have the Okeechobee Waterway, we have the Intracoastal Waterway, and we have the St. Lucie Inlet. So a confluence and then storms can all impact shoals within our channels. Shoals affect draft restrictions or can cause draft restrictions, and all of our surveys may be found on heat hydro. So about economic impacts of dredging, Florida Inland Navigation District Find did an economic analysis specifically for Martin County. That's the infographic that you see on the left. I think we can all say with certainty that there's a clear connection between the waterways and Martin County's economic vitality. We work with our partners, our non-federal partners, to plan these projects. Jacksonville District has something like 900 miles of waterway that are authorized. Obviously, we can't maintain 900 miles of waterways every year, but we do our very best in coordination with our sponsors and stakeholders. These two letters on the right are the letters that we received with reports of shoaling. Again, the news release that was issued in October 2025, which identified the dredge areas and the placement location of this material in the impoundment basin. The link for that is on the bottom of this slide. As mentioned previously, our original scope of work was for about 220,000 cubic yards of material based on the reports of shoaling and based upon our surveys. On this slide, in the yellow boxes, you can see some darker gray hatched areas. That was the original scope of work that we had. And then we modified and de-scoped to the areas that are seen here. So just like you're at the eye doctor, that one was the one of our original scope. And this is the one that we have recently completed, approximately 70,000 cubic yards. When we conduct these surveys, our hydrographic surveys, on the screen you should see, maybe you can't read the numbers, they're kind of small, but the red numbers indicate where we have elevations that are above our authorized limit. So when you see red, that indicates a shoal, and blue indicates it is at project depth or below. So when you have these red areas on our surveys, that's how we identify our dredge boxes that you saw at our last slide. And that was in plan view, and then this is in cross-section. So we have a 10-foot, for instance here, we have a cross-section looking at a 10-foot project with two feet of allowable over-depth. So that is how we structure our contracts. The contractor may, they are required to get to 10 feet, but if they get to 12, that is a pay volume that we will pay for. And just a simple schematic here of what a cutter-suction pipeline dredge looks like, which is what we just had here from Southwind Construction. We have the cutter, which is the actual, the dredge, where that is sucking up material, cutter-suction. And then you have the floating pipelines, as you can see here. There's also a booster pump, which we did have in this contract. And you also have ancillary vessels that need to move the floating pipeline around. And so I just wanted to share this schematic. This is what dredging does look like, and this is the equipment that is needed to perform a dredging contract. And this is here, and this is an aerial of dredging, this dredging underway. So you can actually see, if you squint your eyes, you can see the submerged pipeline. So the last slide had, the schematic had floating, but we do try to submerge our pipeline just to kind of avoid any impacts to navigation. And you can actually see that there are vessels that are transiting over the submerged pipeline. That pipeline is marked in accordance with U.S. Coast Guard safety requirements. So what you can see here is you see the pipeline from the dredge, pipeline from the dredge. Then you have a booster pump. Booster pumps are needed when the material has to be transported longer distances. And then you can see that the submerged pipeline is going to the impoundment basin. As mentioned previously, this is not the first time that we have placed at the St. Lucie impoundment basin. There's several dates here listed where we have placed previously in accordance with all environmental documentation and permits. In 2019, we did a maintenance dredging event using one of the core dredges from our fleet, the Merton. That was approximately 40,000 cubic yards placed in the impoundment basin. Again, in 2021, but that was a contracted action from Atlantic and Gulf Coast Atlantic and Gulf dredging and marine AGDM. That was a cutter suction, which is what Southwind used today. They placed approximately 60,000 in the St. Lucie impoundment basin. In 2024, an emergency event. Again, we sometimes mobilize the Merton following emergency events after storms. And so the Merton conducted an emergency dredging event in 2024, placing in the impoundment basin. And then here, we just recently completed our event. Happy to report that we cleared the shoals that the mariners were concerned about. And we placed that material in the St. Lucie impoundment basin using a cutter suction. The work that we're doing for the IWW and OWW is not the only work that's occurring in the area. And so I just wanted to acknowledge that we do have the Inlet here, another federal navigation project. This work was conducted in 2024. And it hit a couple of delays due to the very new listing of a threatened species, the queen conch, in which there were required surveys. So the queen conch was listed in the beginning of March, and we awarded in the beginning of March. And then we were told that we needed to conduct queen conch surveys. So we're always adaptable here, and we wanted to make sure that we were doing everything in accordance with all environmental requirements. We coordinated with the National Marine Fisheries Service on that. And we hit a couple of delays, but ultimately dredged approximately 380,000 cubic yards of material. That does not fit in the impoundment basin. That went to our offshore borrow area, B. And that material will be used for future beach nourishment projects. These next few slides are just a couple of surveys that were provided by Martin County. What these slides really are just representing here are that Inlets are very dynamic systems. They can change from month to month and day to day. I think any time you've ever walked on a beach, it looks different probably every single time. Inlets are the same way. This white box identified here is the outline of the St. Lucie Impoundment Basin. The warmer colors, like the reds and pinks, those are the higher elevation. And as you get to yellow and greens and blues, those are the deeper elevations. So you can kind of see changes as I'll go through these slides, just how the sands are shifting in this system, in this inlet. But really just want to acknowledge that we had some high spots in the impoundment basin. And then you can also see the St. Lucie Inlet. There's movement. And I heard discussion earlier today that the inlet is going to close. You can kind of see that it kind of flushes itself out as I move through these slides. Okay, so this is in February. And you can, I'll go to the next one here. You can see that there's still a low spot in the impoundment basin. And this is before we started dredging in the high spot on the west. You can see kind of there's a little bit of a shoal moving into the channel in that yellow. So let's see if you can see my cursor here. There's a shoal in the channel in the St. Lucie Inlet. We were keeping track of that. And then you can also see here we are in May. We've started placing in the impoundment basin. You can see the elevation of where we're placing is increasing as designed. And then here in June, after we're done dredging, you can kind of see we still have that high spot there. We still have the lower elevation to the east. And then you can actually see if you kind of look at the inlet that the inlet has kind of, the shoal in the inlet has kind of shifted also. So sudden smooth in inlets is basically the bottom line here. I wanted to touch on the endangered species monitoring that we do with all of our dredging contracts. This is in accordance with our National Environmental Policy Act document and also all of the consultation that we had to do with all of the resource agencies, National Marine Fishery Service, et cetera. So we had to have endangered species observers looking for species such as manatees and sea turtles during the duration of construction. We had to stop so that we that was our requirements during our dredging. And I just want to acknowledge that all work was completed in compliance with all of our requirements for our permit and our consultations. When we're talking about turbidity, which I've heard about turbidity concerns, dredging innately does cause turbidity. That is the nature of dredging. You can't clear shoals and have navigational channels without doing dredging. When you dredge, there is turbidity. And so with our permit from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, there are very clear standards. We have mixing zones, and I'll talk about those on the next slide. And you also have requirements on how far you can go your turbidity above background levels, which are recorded. But when we're talking about turbidity, the reason why we're talking about it is because there's impacts. You want to prevent impacts to submerged aquatic vegetation, reef habitats. That's why we talk about turbidity and why there's turbidity compliance monitoring. One of the things that we do with this project is we collected pre-construction seagrass surveys. So we want to say, okay, we know that there's seagrasses in the area. We want to make sure that when we're going through our project, that we are documenting the seagrasses that are there in the beginning and documenting the seagrasses that are there afterwards. So we'll have post-construction as well. Turbidity can impact some of these habitats. We want to make sure that our project is not doing that. And we will do that with data from seagrass surveys. So we did not have seagrass surveys around the impoundment basin, but we do have them around and adjacent to our channels. When we're talking about turbidity, you can see here the diagram on the right. You have a turbidity plume and you have a mixing zone. And you have specified areas where you take turbidity measurements within the mixing zone and outside of the mixing zone. And the number of turbidity exceedances that we had during this project outside of the mixing zone were zero. The sand that was being dredged out of our channels goes through extensive testing. We have Taylor Engineering here. They have a lab. They do geotechnical testing. This material is compatible with beach placement. That has been determined by Florida Department of Environmental Protection. They have a sand rule. They tell us whether this material, we submit all of our data to them. They determine, yes, this is compatible for beach placement or no, this is not compatible for beach placement. It needs to go in the near shore. This material that we dredged is compatible for beach placement. I will acknowledge, though, that when you are dredging material from channels, that, yes, wet sand does appear darker. And also wet sand, the material that we're dredging, does have organic content in it. And that will oxidize over time. It will, when you place material on a beach, the sun does bleach the sand. And that is a natural process. So I just want to acknowledge that. Taylor Engineering, one of Fine's agent, provided some of these slides here about all of the FDEP guidelines that we follow for the material, looking at grain size distribution, finer versus more coarse, also the color determination using a Munsell color chart. That is how we kind of determine the coloration. Each of our beaches have unique colors for the sand. It's important for the turtles. We take that into account. And this is the table that's our sediment test results. So comparing our compliance values with our samples of our material from Crossroads, for example, from the OWW, and from Cut 5 and the IWW, all within compliance. And in summary, I just want to say that I enjoy working for the Corps of Engineers. I enjoy my collaboration that we have with all of our partners, with our stakeholders. This was well-coordinated with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. We work closely with Fine and with Martin County coordinating this to try to make it to do this work within the most efficient manner. The material that's being used here in the St. Lucie, or that is being placed in the impoundment basin, is actually going to be used for Martin County later on. This is a cost savings to Martin County, so they don't have to go get material from offshore. It's right here. This is beach-compatible material, and we're keeping it in the system, like I said, which is cost savings. We're not having to offload a DMMA, a dredge material management area. We're not taking the material out of the system. That should naturally be in the system. And all permit conditions were met, and our turbidity monitoring was in compliance. So with that, I'm going to hand it over to Jessica. So good morning, everyone. I'm going to talk about what are the next steps with the material that has now been placed in the inlet. And it's our three-year process. We dredge the inlet every three years for both inlet maintenance and for our beach nourishment project at Bathtub Beach in Sailfish Point. So the first project I'm going to talk about is the St. Lucie Inlet Maintenance, which is going out to bid the end of the summer. And it will be bid in conjunction with Bathtub Beach. So we can get more of a larger project with one contractor doing both projects. So we will be placing the material in the St. Lucie Inlet State Park, similar to what we did in 2022. Roughly about 450,000 cubic yards of the material that's sitting in the impelment basin and the inlet will be going south to the St. Lucie Inlet State Park. This will be a county project all on our own. And then we will be monitoring the project for three years following construction. We're looking at construction being in January of 2027. I do have some of the same photos that Ashley showed. But it's just to show you that we do our due diligence on monitoring the inlet. We perform two required large monitoring efforts in the inlet every year, August and February. This year we have done quite a bit more just because the inlet has been filling a lot quicker over this last year. It's Mother Nature's moving sand around a lot more. As Ashley showed in the slides, there was a lot more sand that showed up even before the Army Corps and Fine Project even began. So at this moment, as of the June survey that was completed last week, there is roughly 500,000 cubic yards sitting in the impelment basin. That's a lot just in the impelment basin. The impelment basin alone can hold anywhere between 500,000 to 575,000 cubic yards before it completely starts spilling over and closing off the transition area and into the navigation channel. So we're just in time to do our next project in January, so before we have large shoaling efforts in the inlet. With that, the other project is Bathtub Beach, which will be bid, like I said, with the St. Lucie Inlet. Construction will begin in January of 2027 with a planned project completion of April 27. But as you can see in some of these pictures, Mother Nature put a large slug of sand through, across the reef and rebuilt the beach. So we weren't stressing the last two years on what Bathtub Beach was going to do. We did not have to do any large truck calls or emergency truck calls during storm seasons because Mother Nature did that for us. So Bathtub Beach has been very well protected. I do have Cheryl Miller here in the audience to answer any questions regarding the health and status of the reef. She has been studying the reef for at least 20 years, if not longer. She knows this reef like the back of her hand. And she is one of our consultants doing all of the biological monitoring on Bathtub Beach reef to meet all of our DEP permit requirements. Just here are some more pictures of Bathtub Beach reef. And the dredge areas will not only just be the impoundment basin. We will also dredge the Sailfish Point channel per our agreement with Sailfish Point. And if need be, the flood shoal borough areas. And the placement for this project will be roughly 250,000 cubic yards going from just a little south of the Sailfish Point clubhouse up through Bathtub Beach. And all sea oats will be replaced and planted within the project area. And that is it. So we are open for your questions. And like we said, we do have Janet Zimmerman from FIND and Taylor Engineering or Cheryl Miller for questions, for technical questions. I'd like some more information before we turn it to the commissioners and to the public. And that is, you said that we have an expert on the reef. Yes. Let's hear about the reef first. Cheryl Miller. Yes. Sure. Good afternoon. As Jessica, I'm Cheryl Miller with Coastal Eco Group. We're the county's biological consultant that's been doing Bathtub Beach monitoring since, officially since 2009 in terms of your permit requirements. And during that time, I mean, Bathtub, you've all seen what it's gone through cyclically over the years with the erosion and then the repeated storm responses and truck haul projects, large-scale truck haul projects. It is a very dynamic system for us to monitor. Beach projects usually have one annual survey in the summer. And we work with Martin County because that just doesn't work in this environment. The county actually has a plan where it's three surveys a year, the big summer one. But we do edge map the reef additionally, two times a year, as well do sediment monitoring. So we have a very large data set. And along with what we've recently implemented, we do monthly drone surveys now for the past year and are continuing. And we sometimes actually will go out two days later because the level of change within two days at Bathtub Beach is enormous. So we're capturing very short intervals of these change and being able to map it. And then we delineate all of the exposure of the reef as well as the worm rock reef, the accretion, the buildup, where it recruits and then dies off naturally, recruits again. So we're following that elevation. And the reason we do this is we need this type of data set for this variable system to be able to understand, okay, do we have project-related effects that are in excess of natural, you know, impacts from storm systems? We would not be able to kind of get to that answer without doing this many surveys. And it is a very difficult area to survey. I mean, in terms of wave action, you know, the tides, the visibility, the Lake Okeechobee releases when we were trying to do water quality sampling and doing the reef sampling during those. It's a very difficult place. Basically, we're out there every month doing monitoring. So we have a very large data set to help us answer these questions as to will mitigation be required for significant environmental impacts. So the level of change that we've seen just this year alone where we were looking at a lot of worm rock during the first recruitment and accretion period, we're hoping this summer we'll see that naturally come back again. When you add sand to the system, if it is good sand, if it is appropriate sand, coarse grain size, the worm reef, it likes that. That's what it uses to cement together and build up. If you put too much silt, it smothers it, and it will die back. And so we're paying very close attention and collecting that type of data to, you know, make those assessments. Commissioner Vargas. Yes, as I told you, I'm a diver, and I'm going to go dive, and I'm going to go take a look. You can come with us. We're out there all the time. Let's go with me. Yeah. Okay, so she can see that. Yeah, unfortunately, a lot of reefs in Florida have been destroyed. Absolutely. And they're never coming back. And, you know, I think of Panicamp Park, where I learned my open water diving, and it's not what it used to be. So we're very protective, reasonably, as we should be. I appreciate your expertise. I appreciate your oversight. And I've had extensive conversations with Jessica at conferences also when we were up in Panama City Beach, learned a whole lot up there about marine life that I didn't know and how to preserve our shores. So I do thank you, and thank you for keeping an eye out. I mean, the county really is a good steward and recognizes how valuable that system is to our reefs, particularly with all of the, you know, natural and man-made influences on our nearshore habitats. So they're paying close attention to it. Commissioner Capps. Yeah, I wanted to help us try to dispel some notions about this project that have appeared on social media. There have been some, it's this political season, and there have been some people running for office who I think have used and misused this issue and have stated a lot of things to try to discredit the project and the people involved. And the first question I had was, it has to do with governmental authority and who has authority over this kind of a project. You know, there was almost this suggestion that county commissioners have the ability to stop something like this from happening. And maybe you could address that question first. Yes, thank you, Commissioner. I believe your question is, this work is underway. We have appropriations to do this work. We have all necessary permitting. We have all necessary documentation to do this work. And I think the only thing that would stop this would be, one, if there were contractor delays, their equipment. This is, I guess I'll just kind of outline reasons why we might stop dredging. There might be contractor issues with their equipment. We could be shut down for turbidity, which we were not. We could have, if there was a take in a sea turtle, then that would shut operations until there was an investigation that was completed. Those are reasons why we stop our dredging. Once we award a contract, we take that contract award very seriously. We have a lot of regulations about our awards. And we did a modification. It was in the, it was due to conditions. But as far as stopping the work, there's only a few reasons why we would do that. And we didn't run into any of those. And one of those reasons would not be because county commissioners have said that it needs to stop. You don't take orders from county commissioners. This is the federal government. And you don't tell the federal government what to do. Yes, sir. I just want to, Commissioner Klepp, just want to clarify some things here. So we have the, you know, federal appropriations. That's the funding to do these projects. And the authorization, which gives us the authority, right? So that, again, comes from Congress. So it's two different things. So Congress approved this project. And then they appropriated the funds for us to execute that project. So it's called an O&M, operational maintenance. So that continues to happen on a cyclic basis based on the environment that changes, right? So we do it two to five. It all depends on the system that you're looking at. But we put a lot of emphasis behind that. So to turn this project off, you would have to get congressional approval from those representatives to terminate that. And if that is what's called deauthorized, then that project will never become reauthorized. And then that would be a full cost to the county or state, depending on how they want to handle that. Does that answer your question? Yes. Very good. That's good. Putting the bill. The next question I had to do with, has to do with prior impoundment basins. Has this been done before? My suspicion is that it's been done several times. Yes. We have placed at the impoundment basin several times. That is correct. Right. And then there was this charge that the sand is poisonous. And you've sort of already addressed that by saying that it's compatible with beach placement. Yes, that is correct. You know, I don't think we're going to be putting poisonous sand on our beaches for our kids to be playing on. And then you mentioned that wet sand appears darker in color and that it does have some organic material in it, but the sun bleaches this out over time. So the sand is thoroughly tested, right? Yes, that is correct. And then on the issue of whether the sand is covering up our reefs, that charge was made. And, you know, we just heard from this agency that monitors the worm reef at Bathtub Beach, and I think the evidence that was presented there was quite compelling that the sand is not covering up our beaches. Another thing about the impoundment basin is that it's a cost-saving measure by having the sand in close proximity to where we're going to need it. Can you touch on the relative costs, like if we were to take all that sand and dump it out in the ocean and have to go retrieve it and bring it back to the beaches? Correct. That would be enormously expensive, would it not? Yes, that would be. Mobilization costs can exceed upward of $1 million to $1 million to mobilize a dredge. Okay. And then one last thing, there was a Facebook post that seemed to suggest that the public outcry on the issue shortened the project's timeline and that these folks supposedly shut down the pumping of sand into the impoundment basin. I don't think that's true. I think that the project stopped when it was scheduled to be stopped, and whatever pressure these folks exerted had no bearing whatsoever on when the project ended. Is that true? Southwind completed their remaining cuts on June 2nd and then initiated demobilization efforts. So they completed their work within the contract. Great. Thank you. Good presentations from all involved. Commissioner Keefe. Thank you. I think Commissioner Capps did an excellent job of summarizing some of the misinformation that's out there. I'm not going to render a guess on why that information is put out there, but it's disappointing because it scares and makes good people, legitimate, thoughtful, Martin County residents upset and anxious and nervous and mad. So, again, it's an opportunity where those of us that are inside the organization get to hear from our staff, which is award-winning and normally very highly regarded, but all of a sudden they're all quacks. And the beatdown on the Army Corps, which most of the time, most of the people that were beating the drum the loudest, were highly complimentary of specifically the major and the team. But all of a sudden, since it fell into a weird narrative at this particular issue, similar to our maintenance facility, has really revved up the community. And it's disappointing because we're trying, the commission, the staff, and our partners are trying as hard as they can to do things above board the right way, fiscally responsible. And in this particular case, Martin County is very, very specific about our environmental protections. And every day, Commissioner Capps is right, every day there was just this constant just, and it was escalating. It wasn't plateauing. It wasn't de-escalating. It was escalating. And I knew that you were coming. We all had an opportunity to speak to our county administrator. It's not like there's only one of us that can speak to him or one of us that's watching the videos. There was no need to go down and stand on the beach because we already knew how the process works. It happens every couple of years. That being said, there was some concerns, and there was some videos of fish kill, dead fish laying around. Can any of you explain the natural process? Obviously, if you're in an environment, you're dredging, which is basically vacuuming up sand and water and sea creatures. Was there any more this time? Was there any – was it consistent? Was there some kind of an anomaly that would have caused this? Or is this just a focus showing what naturally occurs? And, yes, any loss of even sea creature life is disappointing. However, I think you made it clear that if we don't do these projects, what would happen? Because there were comments that said, stop doing it. There's no reason to keep dredging. I think, if anything, we're fortunate to have the partnership and the relationship that we have with the Army Corps. Because I remember the days when we would go to Washington when Congressman Rooney was able to earmark money for dredging our inlets. And then the earmarks went away, and we would have to go to Washington or Jacksonville. And I've made that trip several times to beg, hat in hand, for the Corps to please consider Martin County in their budget. And I remember being at the Pentagon speaking to someone, one of the higher-ups in the Army Corps, who was explaining that his responsibilities was not that big. It was the Mississippi River, the Chesapeake Bay, the Gulf of Mexico, and the St. Lucie Inlet. And he – the first question he asked us is how many tons of shipping cargo exits the inlet. Guess how much? Nearly zero. But we've still, with our staff and our relationships in Florida and in Washington and in Atlanta, have been able to constantly do this. And I think our residents have become used to it. But for whatever reason – and remember the climate and the season that we're in, that you all were used as an opportunity to just beat the drum. And it's disappointing because, you know, you never mentioned your resume, and our reef expert didn't mention their resume. But I'm sure it's stellar. And so I appreciate it. I mean, I'm sad that our meeting was on the 9th, and you were all ready to make this conversation 10 days ago. But we waited because this is our format. And, again, to this issue, similar to the other, I think we need to create a sort of a crisis management information team. We have an excellent media group, information group. But I think what we can learn from this on our side is that we need to respond with facts from experts very quickly. Even this morning with our friends from Hippie that came, and they had concerns. Hopefully they were addressed today. But that's a good group. They live right there. And it's sad that they got panicked that somehow you all or we were doing something wrong. So I appreciate you very much. Commissioner Hetherington. Thank you. All my questions have pretty much been answered and asked. But I would point out it was a great presentation, and I think it illustrates the enormous regulatory oversight that happens on these projects, both with all the agencies. And I think, Jessica, it's also worth pointing out again, how many surveys does Martin County do in addition a year? In the inlet, we perform two at minimum. This year we've done seven since December. And I think Martin County and their partnerships, if you look around the state, and when we've attended these Florida beaches and shores, we have a very model partnership, Martin County, with some of our neighboring agencies and our federal partners. So I think that we exemplify this kind of work, and we're noted for that around the state. And then I would say, too, unrelated to this, but on the topic of reefs, there was a really good presentation at AWRA maybe a year or so ago on bleaching the reefs and their health and the water temperatures and how that related to the health of the reefs. And we have some newer commissioners, and I think that would be good as an unrelated topic to bring that back as an educational presentation on the health of our reefs and how the water temperature and the conditions have been affecting it statewide. Thank you for your presentation. Yeah, and I also thank you for your presentation. Lots of important facts. There's just one question I have, and that is that Martin County is solely responsible for St. Lucie Inlet Maintenance? No, we are not solely responsible. We do work in coordination with the Army Corps depending on their funding availability. But as the budgets came out for this year, they did not get funding for the St. Lucie Inlet. So we have, as the board coordinated several years ago after the St. Lucie Inlet TAC Committee and Advisory Committee, we put together a funding source to put money aside just in case the Corps did not have funding. So we will be funding this project with help from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection grant program. But so the next time, hopefully, the Corps has funding. They did fund the 24 project, but they will not be funding this one. So it's almost every other project that the Corps has funding. We did have it in the work plan request and the president's budget, but it did not get funded. So currently there's about 500,000 cubic yards of sand in the inlet that Martin County is going to be responsible for removing next year? And it will be going on Bathtub Beach and the St. Lucie Inlet State Park. So how do we justify putting additional cubic yards, 70,000 cubic yards, in that impoundment basin that we're going to have to pay to remove next year? We will be asking our fine partners for a cost share on that since it is their sand. Jessica, also, you could point out that the state of Florida requires the county, as the local sponsor, to be responsible for the sediment volume that this inlet interrupts. Yes. So we have a target every year that we're required to, on an average annual basis, move sediment that the inlet has, it acts like a check valve. It blocks sand from going to the north because of the jetty. So that's why there's a small volume allocated to go to the north. And it also blocks sand going to the south, which is a significant issue. And we also have a secondary agreement with Jupiter Island that puts additional requirements on the county to ensure that we move approximately 200,000 cubic yards a year on an average annual basis. So without, so we have an obligation that the state unfunded mandate put on us to meet their carrot is a funding partnership of up to 75-25, but we usually only get 50-50 in terms of their funding. And so that's, I think that's the important piece, is that we have a state-mandated obligation to move that sand onto the beaches to compensate for the impacts that it is doing, for the erosion it causes to the north and the south. Correct. Our inlet management plan, state-mandated inlet management plan requires that. So that is part of the every three years project. Commissioner Vargas. Yeah, I was in Washington, D.C., gee, a number of months ago, and the Army Corps of Engineers was very enthusiastic to work with us. So we were very, very fortunate. I know that it's a little bit iffy right now, and we will get past this. And with FIND over there, I see him sitting in the back of Mr. Kennedy, we appreciate that, and we will get this done. This is our crowning jewel, our beaches here in Martin County. So thank you. Mark Perry, would you like to address us? I appreciate that. I think you've been shown an adequate presentation by the Corps and FIND and what that project is. But it just came to our attention at the beginning of May when we started seeing photos and actual demonstration of what was actually going into the impoundment base and what was being dredged up out of the intercoastal waterway and put on the site. And it did not meet beach-quality sand. In fact, it was very fine silt and sediments that were probably at the bottom of the intercoastal waterway whenever the dredge was in that area at that time, and the disposal was happening right onto those things. There was photo documentation by a lot of captains. You heard from Scott Butler, and he's actually taken drone footage of a lot of this silt and sediment material that not stayed on that beach. It also went out over the reefs. It went offshore. It came inside the system, so we were pretty concerned at that time. And then later on, we also got pictures and documentation about 128 fish dead on the beaches north of the inlet along the Sailfish Point area. So it became a big concern of us as to how this could occur and how this could be. We know that dredging operations have happened a lot of times and over the years, and basically, you know, they usually have to get an MPDS permit or a 404 permit, and it's regulated under DEP to monitor those turbidity and monitor those systems, not just at the disposal site where they come into the impound basin or an upland disposal management area. It's also they have to monitor it at the wellhead. And there were several times in the intercoastal north of the crossroads where we saw a lot of turbidity created by the wellhead, the suction wellhead right around that area, which could cause impacts to our seagrass beds and other areas. When you talk about putting this material in a place, and I know they've used the impoundment basin, the impoundment basin was constructed inside the North Jetty, and the North Jetty was kept low because there's about 230,000 cubic yards of sand that is littoral transport south into the inlet, and they allowed that impoundment basin to be dug to about 7 to 16 feet in depth in order to maintain a catchment basin for that literal transport. And then periodically, once a year or so, we're obliged to dredge that out and dispose of it now in a hopper dredge offshore in that borough area B, as you've heard about, which is off Jupiter Island. Then they can use that to re-nourish that beach and continue on. You know, it's just ludicrous how they can say, we didn't have a turbidity issue. We didn't have a problem with this dredge material being here. They should have been using M5, which is the FIND site on the southeast corner of the crossroads, and we just needed to make sure that that site could have been used. So it's 15 acres, it's the site where they've used it before. It's got a big high berm around it, and it contains the silt and sediment, and anything you're dredging out of the intercoastal waterway contains in there. These upland disposal areas are used by FIND all the time, and they're going to be used as they dredge up the Okeechobee waterway. But we don't need to use the impoundment basin for this. It shouldn't be used. It was a terrible incident. We hopefully can learn from this that they should be on top of that monitoring every day, and if something starts to occur like that, they should shut it down and then go check out the suction head, see where that is, and adjust the situation. Mr. Campy. Mark Perry is our astute and esteemed, renowned local expert. We're very fortunate to have him. Would any of you like to respond to some of his comments and concerns, please? I know we have FIND here as well, but I'll just speak to M5. M5 is at capacity, and we were not able to use it for this event, so I'll speak to that. And then, Janet, did you have anything to add? Good morning, Commissioners. Janet Zimmerman. I'm the executive director with Florida Inland Navigation District. The district does provide dredge material management areas where the Army Corps is able to put material for disposal. What we have in this current situation, M5, is currently at capacity and no longer able to take any of that material. Once that material goes into a DMMA site, it's essentially taken out of the sand-sharing system. This means that you have lost, I believe, our capacity there is about a half million cubic yards of sand, if not a little bit more than that, for M5. So by placing material in M5, we've removed that. Your beaches no longer have that material available to them. We will be doing an offload for M5. That happens once every 20 years, that that material is able to either be put back into the system, or that material may be used for some other activity. Previously, that material was used and barged up to the city of Fort Pierce, and they used that to create islands around their marina to protect and add additional storm protection for the reconstruction of the city's marina. What we are hoping to use some of the M5 material for is an upcoming project at Boy Scout Island. If additional fill material is needed, we can place material behind your engineered expansion or reestablishment of Boy Scout Island. I believe some of the M5 material was also used at M2 when they did that Bird Island restoration. The cost savings by having the material placed into the impoundment system is not only keeping that sand in the sand-sharing system, but not having to go offshore to barge that material back in. Our permit limitations with the core tells us exactly what has been studied extensively, where that material has the ability to go. And our current permit during sea turtle nesting season, we're allowed to put the material in M5 or in the impoundment basin. And I believe the core made the best environmental as well as best economic decision. As was mentioned earlier, our turbidity monitoring was done three times a day. It's done both at the cutter suction dredge head as well as at the placement location. And all of those testings were sent to DEP and were found to be in compliance with our permit. And I'd be happy to answer any additional questions. Manny, I appreciate that. Did you get an opportunity to see any of the photographs or the videos, drone footage, and what is your opinion of what you saw? I have viewed the videos. I am also a Martin County resident, so I was out at the site weekly to double-check on what turbidity plumes were being shown in the video. I do have some of my own photos from those days. I do believe we were in compliance. I asked a question earlier about sea life and sea creatures. We heard from Mr. Perry that there was hundreds, and we heard from our drone expert you got a new certification about that. Can you share anything? Was it in the parameters? Was it more? Was it more for a reason? I can speak to that. Thank you for that question. Yes, during dredging, the innate action of dredging does, unfortunately, cause the life of some marine species. And so that has been accounted for in our National Environmental Policy Act. When we do our alternatives analysis, that is accounted for in there. We do have our environmental team member, Aaron Lasseter, here, who can kind of speak to more specifics. But we have, as has previously been mentioned, there is a cutter section. It is, like you mentioned, sir, a vacuum. And sometimes fish can go through the cutter, they can go through the pipeline, and they can come out of the discharge pipe and be perfectly fine. But sometimes they are not. And that is just the fact of the matter of the process of dredging. And we did account for, we do account for that in our environmental documentation. Either you or one member of your team, do you feel that this particular dredge operation was less equal to or more than normal? I do not think it was more than any other dredging operation, no. I mean, I'm asking questions on behalf of our constituents so that we can try to answer and present. You know, Mark Perry puts out some, you know, local concerns. And I know a lot of you are locals, as well as our team. And so I think it's become an issue, which is understandable. The project is done. I know that when we talk about the environmental impacts of not doing things and then the price tags, I just wanted to be careful when some people might say, well, you know, you could have done this, you could have done that, but you were doing it in an effort to save money. I don't think, you know, and I'll ask Ms. Garland to explain, especially here in Martin County, we're not just looking for the least expensive, correct me if I'm wrong, the least expensive option in an effort to save money, which is one of our priorities, but not at the expense of our environment, our sea life, permanent issues. I'm not an expert, but the turbidity, I know that when you stir the things up like that. But if you were saying that it was monitored, well, actually, you said it was monitored several times per day and submitted to the DEP and came back, the DEP is not looking to shortcut or do anybody any favors to keep the project going, right? They have no issue with saying stop. No, they will tell the Army Corps to stop a project just as quickly as they will tell us to stop a project. We all have to meet the same turbidity requirements. When the Army Corps is dredging in the ICW, their turbidity requirements on their DEP permit are the same turbidity requirements we have when we're dredging the inlet. Everybody has to meet the same requirements. We all have different permits, but there's turbidity requirements because you're in an aquatic preserve, you're in outstanding Florida waters, there are requirements because of the type of river and inlet we are in. We have requirements that we have to follow, we have to stand by, and we cannot veer outside those boundaries because they will stop us. If we're over a turbidity limit, we have to shut down. We have to stay shut down for a certain amount of hours, wait for the turbidity to settle. We start, we continue sampling, and then once it stops, then we can continue back. So there are requirements. A turtle comes within so many feet, we stop working. A manatee, we stop working. There are strict requirements. You cannot keep moving. Thank you. Was there any point during this project that the turbidity levels got to the point where you had to shut the project down? No. So when I hear from our local, I count him as one of my personal experts, and then I hear from you all who are also experts, is this just a situation where you will agree to disagree? Commissioner, I think it's important to note that you do have occasions where your sediment mapping isn't perfect, you know, and you may come up with an area where there's more organics than anticipated. And so the duration I think Mr. Perry was talking about was there may have been something in that northern reach at a time, and it may have not lasted long, but nonetheless, you can have a more organic load and then goes back to normal. I think it's fair to say that our after action of this would take a look at those reaches to the north the next time to see if more detailed analysis is needed before it is allowed to go on the impoundment basin. We certainly know that the crossroads, which has been routinely dredged numerous times, its infill rate is so rapid over the time that it's always full of clean sediment. Anytime you touch a portion of the channel that hasn't been dredged for 10 or 20 years perhaps, it may have pockets that you didn't anticipate even though your sampling showed that there was good look. So I think it's fair that with Mr. Perry and others may have seen conditions where there was a pocket hit. So I think my suggestion is that in our after action of this is that we carefully review the next time we do an ICW cut or the next time you want to use the impoundment basin that we, especially in areas that have not dredged before, that we do much more extensive analysis, and Martin County would take that on to ensure that that impoundment basin is only used for truly beach-compatible material because that's what it's for, and that would be my suggestion. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Any further comments? Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. We will now take a 10-minute break. Let's see. One consent agenda item that has been pulled, and that's consent 16. Shall we take that up? Sure. That is adopt a resolution approving the acquisition of a parcel of environmentally sensitive land located in Poinciana Gardens as recommended by the Environmental Lands Oversight Committee and approved by the board. Good morning. Good morning. Thank you, Mr. Gurra, Real Property Manager. This request is for the adoption of a resolution approving the acquisition of that parcel that's 0.20 acres in Poinciana Gardens as approved by the board in October 2025 with the Environmental Lands Oversight Committee using the funds for the 10-year tax referendum. We're going to be using the funds for the 10-year tax referendum. Appraisals were completed on these properties, and staff negotiated a price of $24,000 for this parcel. Real property staff has reviewed the title work and confirmed the ownership. And with the legal department's review and the board's approval will close before July 14th, staff request that the board approve the vacant land contract in the amount of $24,000, and adopt a resolution approving the purchase, authorize the chair to execute the contract and resolution, and authorize the county administrator to execute all documents necessary for the closing. Questions? Commissioner Vargas. Yes. I just want to say every little bit helps, right, on vacant land. What are we going to use this property for? I know it's near the Atlantic Ridge. Is that correct? Michael Houston, Senior Project Manager for the Environmental Resource Division. The goal is to continue to acquire lots out there because one of the challenges of the area is it's small lots, similar to what we have in Palmar. But the goal is, yes, to eventually it will provide a buffer for Atlantic Ridge State Park. It could provide public access to get us into the park. And then in addition to that, to protect its ecological values because it has some nice habitat out there. So just to, you know, in this case a little bit at a time, just continue to acquire properties until we have a nice big manageable chunk that we can then incorporate into our program. And manage and provide access to. I remember looking at the map, I think, with Director John Mayle. We pinpointed all the areas that you were targeting. And this is right on the heels of one of our constituents that was most gracious and has invested $10 million. So I'm speaking to everybody out there who has a few extra pocket change. Please, please help us preserve Martin County. And that's why I asked to comment on this particular acquisition. This is only a quarter of an acre. A lot of homes are built on a quarter of an acre or less today. Zero lot line. Okay. Any further comments? Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda? I move approval of the consent agenda. Second. There's a motion and a second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? That motion passes unanimously. We will now take up public hearing number two, which is a legislative public hearing to consider adoption of the comprehensive plan amendment 2503, P3, public facility with clinic, future land use map, a future land use map amendment. Good morning, Mr. Doolin and Ms. Nobby. Good morning, commissioners. Good morning. For the record, my name is Jenna Nobby, senior planner with the growth management department, and before you today is a request for a small-scale future land use map amendment for a 2.66-acre property that is located east of the intersection of southeast Runke Street and southeast Willoughby Boulevard. This site is adjacent to the Sailfish Splash Water Park and is located directly south of the Martin County Public Safety Complex. On October 21st, 2025, the Board of County Commissioners approved Resolution 25-10.30, which initiated this amendment to the future land use map for a change on the land use designation from institutional general to commercial office residential. This is a small-scale future land use map amendment, and so there are two required public hearings. This is the second of those two required public hearings. The first public hearing was held before the local planning agency on May 21st, 2026, and the LPA voted 5-0 to recommend approval of this proposed change to the board. The appropriate public notices were turned in at the LPA meeting, and those notices have also been published in this agenda item as well. This is an aerial photo of the subject property. It is 2.66 acres in size, and this site is a portion of a larger, roughly 9.08-acre parcel that Martin County has owned since 1990. This is the existing future land use map that shows the institutional general future land use designation, and this is the proposed future land use designation showing the commercial office residential designation. Section 1-11 in Chapter 1 of the Comprehensive Plan outlines four criteria that staff and the board must analyze when evaluating each future land use map amendment request. During staff's evaluation of these four criteria, we concluded that three of the four criteria had been met to make a positive finding and recommend approval, and that one of the criteria had not been met, which I'll go over briefly. It's this criteria C right here that says the proposed change would correct what would otherwise appear to be an inappropriately assigned land use designation, and since this property has been owned by Martin County since 1990, the general institutional future land use would be an appropriate district, and so this request isn't necessarily correcting an inappropriately assigned designation. Section 163.3177 of Florida statutes outlines two different sets of more criteria that are used as indicators to judge whether a land use amendment discourages the proliferation of urban sprawl. Staff analyzed both sets of these criteria, and under the first set, we concluded that the proposed amendment complies with 13 out of 13 sprawl criteria that discourages the proliferation of urban sprawl, and under the second set of criteria, we concluded that the proposed amendment meets eight out of eight criteria that determine the application discourages urban sprawl. And in conclusion, staff recommends approval of the future land use map amendment from institutional general to commercial office residential for the 2.66-acre property, and that concludes our presentation. Questions for Ms. Nobby. Commissioner Capps. Move approval. I second. This is a public hearing. Would anyone from the public like to address us on this matter? Seeing none, we'll move back to the board. There's a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? That motion passes unanimously. Thank you. We will now take up public hearing quasi-judicial number one, which is a public hearing to consider adoption of an amendment to the Martin County Zoning Atlas to change the zoning district classification for the P-3 public facility with clinic rezoning. This is an ex parte, a quasi-judicial public hearing. Any ex parte disclosures? Commissioner Vargas? If I have any, they've been filed. Commissioner Capps? If I have any, they have been filed. If I have any, they've been filed. Commissioner Campy? I don't have any, and it's been filed. And Commissioner Hetherington? If any, they've been filed. Excellent. Have you turned in all of your relevant materials to the clerk? Yes. Copy of the item and my work history has been turned in to the clerk. Anyone who's going to be providing sworn testimony, please stand up, raise your right hand, and be sworn in. Do you swear or affirm the evidence you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, or nothing but the truth? I do. Please proceed. All right. Thank you again for the record. Jenna Nobby, Senior Planner with the Growth Management Department. And this is a request for an amendment to the Martin County Zoning Atlas for a property that is 2.66 acres in size and is located east of the intersection of Southeast Runke Street and Southeast Willoughby Boulevard. Again, it is adjacent to the Sailfish Splashwater Park and is just south of the Public Safety Complex. This concurrent rezoning is concurrent with the Future Land Use Map Amendment that you all just approved. And this request is to change the zoning district from the PS2 Public Service District to the Commercial Office Zoning District on the subject property. The proposed CO zoning district implements the core future land use designation. And this is also the second public hearing on this request. The first was before the local planning agency on May 21st. And they also voted 5 to 0 to recommend approval to the board. This is an aerial photo of the subject site. And this is part of a larger 9.08 acre property that the county has owned since 1990. There are three different zoning districts that implement the core future land use designation. Those are the CO, the Core 1, and Core 2 districts. This table here is an excerpt of the purpose of each district. And specifically in the proposed CO zoning district commercial office, the CO district permits fewer, less intense uses than the Core 1 and the Core 2 district. And it also specifically excludes residential uses. This table here shows a comparison between the existing PS2 Public Service Zoning District and the three zoning districts that implement the core future land use. So if we look between the existing and proposed zoning district for this application, the minimum lot area and minimum lot width are both the same. They both exclude the residential and hotel density. The maximum building coverage is lower under the CO proposed district than the existing. And the maximum height in feet and stories for the proposed district is lower than what's currently permitted under the public service PS2 zoning district. So just for comparison's sake. This is the existing zoning map that has the PS2 district. And this is the proposed zoning map that has the CO zoning district assigned to it. Martin County shall rezone individual parcels to the most appropriate zoning district. That's consistent with the LDRs. And that's pursuant to policy 4.4 A1 in the comprehensive plan. And section 3.2 E2 in the land development regulations provides seven different criteria for review when analyzing a zoning district change. And during staff's analysis of these seven criteria, we found that it complies with all seven standards. And with that, staff recommends approval of the proposed rezoning from the PS2 district to the CO zoning district. And that concludes our presentation. Questions for staff? Commissioner Capps. Move approval. Second. This is a public hearing. Would anyone like to address us from the public? Seeing none, there's a motion and a second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? That motion passes unanimously. Thank you. We will now move on to Department 1, which is Office of Management and Budget Items, which require board approval. Ms. Murley. Good morning. Stephanie Murley, Director of OMB, here to present two items on our OMB item today. Our first item is permission to accept the Federal Transit Administration, FTA, FY22, Section 5307, Urbanized Formula Grant. Our Public Works is requesting the acceptance of $1,520,776 to provide operating and capital assistance funds to the Martin County Public Transit Service, or MARTI. The grant also includes $617,424 for the replacement bus purchase and safety security enhancements. This requires a grant match of $405,119, which will be used from the FY22 State Public Transportation Block Grant, as well as $498,000 from the Transit Division operating budget, which is currently budgeted. Our second item is permission to accept the Florida Statewide Response for Opioid Abatement Funds. Our Human Services Division is requesting the acceptance of $785,066 for the renewed state opioid settlement funds, and funds will be used to support direct client services and diversion courts to implement opioid abatement efforts. There is no cash match required for this grant. Questions for Ms. Murley? Is there a motion to approve? I'll move approval. Second. There's a motion and a second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? That motion passes unanimously. On to Department 2, contracts that meet the threshold for board approval of $1 million or greater. Good morning. Good morning, Commissioners. Tasha Sapp, procurement supervisor. I do have three items for your consideration today. The first one is disaster recovery engineering services with a maximum not to exceed value of $5 million, a maximum not to exceed term of five years. Recommend in action, move that the board award the contract to the two highest scoring firms, La Conte Engineering and CapTech Engineering, and move that the board authorize the county administrator or designee to execute all documents related to this request. Second is disaster debris monitoring with a maximum not to exceed value of $3 million, and a maximum not to exceed term of five years. Recommend in action, move that the board award the contract to the two highest ranking firms, Thompson Consulting Services and Debritech LLC, with a maximum not to exceed value of $3 million, and a maximum not to exceed term of five years. Recommend in action, move that the board award the contract to the two highest scoring firms, Hoyle Tanner and Associates and Avcon Inc., and move that the board authorize the county administrator or designee to execute all documents related to this request. Questions? Is there a motion to approve? So moved. Second. There's a motion and a second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? That motion passes unanimously. Three is Parks and Recreation Special Facility Revenue Update. Mr. Abate. Good morning. Kevin Abate, Parks and Recreation Director. Today, I just want to provide a short presentation on the successes of the special facilities within the department. So we have a really short presentation, but some pretty good figures to show you of our accomplishments over the past few years. The first facility that I would like to start off with is Seaside Cafe. This is an operational summary of our facility. Since we've opened the cafe, this facility has grossed over $6.8 million. Currently, in this fiscal year, a year to date, we are currently sitting at, like it says, 443647. And the revenue, actually, as of today, it's $474,454 in our current budget year today. And our current total reinvestment reserves, so that's for future repairs, is at $1.44 million. And this facility has one full-time employee. And then we contract out approximately 24 employees through resources, government services. And some snapshots of some things that we've done the past couple years, as we sell a lot of breakfast meals, over $62,000. Lots of lunch meals, over $84,000 in the last couple years. And our beach chair memberships. No sandwiches for the board. That will be the next meeting. Sailfish Sands Golf Course Restaurant and Hitting Base has a complete unit of their operational summary. If you recall, before we constructed this project in fiscal year 2020, during the pandemic, our subsidy had reached a $1.1 million subsidy. Our gross revenue over the past few years is over $7.1 million. Our current reserves as of, actually, the numbers as of today are $1,112,721. And our reinvestment reserves that we have, that's, are over just $1 million. That facility has three full-time employees and approximately 87 contracted staff. Some snapshots of our past two fiscal years are staggering. We hit over 5.7 million golf balls that we traced to our technology. Played over 79,000 rounds of golf. Over 1,500 memberships. 1,300 lessons. 387 junior programs. And then our junior players card program. Fifth Park Campground was another investment we had with the Florida Inland Navigation District. And county funds for a campground that used to be a FEMA site during the 04 and 05 hurricanes that we turned around. So that, currently, the operational summary, the gross reserves for the past two fiscal years is over $2 million. Our current reserves are, actually, at 582, 505 as of this morning, not the 560. And our reinvestment reserves for future improvements are over $1.1 million. We have two contracted staff, no full-time employees that work there through resources, government services. We do have an administrator that oversees the campground and the two mooring fields. That's paid by their revenue 100%. The snapshot for that facility over the past two years is over 16,000 guests and almost 3,400 pets. Well, I don't think we charge the pets. And over 35, almost 36,000 total site rentals. Manatee Pocket Mooring Field is our star mooring field right now because of its location. Currently, our reserves are at 36,543. Our current fiscal year reserves, actually, as of today, is 61,487. And then we have reinvestment reserves of $23,852. One of the most challenging things about this project is the constant maintenance of the mooring balls and the anchors to be secure. Those are constantly under repair and through outside services for both Jensen Beach and Manatee Pocket. So we use the revenue that we collect from these projects, and we put it into that mooring ball maintenance to make sure that we have good coverage. As a matter of fact, of note, of all the products mentioned thus far, they don't use ad valorem. They're basically revenue offsets, just for information. So we have a Harbor Master. We split their FTE salary between both mooring fields, Manatee Pocket and Jensen Beach. So you'll see a .5 FTE. And we have no contract at staff. So in the past two years, over at Manatee Pocket, about 1,250 guests or so and 107 pets. And at Jensen Beach Mooring Field, the FY25 reserves is $65,000. FY26 current reserves is $10,800. And full-time staff, again, we split that more, that Harbor Master, and they've done 1,600 guests in the past two years and 166 pets. I did take an opportunity to kind of add them all up of this slide today for our current reserves fiscal year to date. We're about $1.662 million. Our total reinvestment reserves is at $3.889,618, so almost $3.9 million. And if we run the same trajectory of this current fiscal year trend around the same numbers of where we are today, we could end this fiscal year with approximately $5.55 million in our total reserves, a reserve fund for future improvements. And some examples I can give you, for example, at the cafe, we've replaced the thatch on the roof through a storm recovery. We've replaced the air condition systems and replaced them with coastal units. And there are, so we're constantly looking at improving the asset, but the money stays home for now. Of course, it's at board discretion. But those are some of the success stories of our departments for these facilities. And the first facility that I, when I was, I arrived here over 15 years ago, Sailfish Splash Water Park and Pool. If you recall, when I got here, well, maybe you don't recall, I think Commissioner Campy does, we had a subsidy that we used to pay to the pool, Martin County High School pool, of about $100,000 plus capital repairs. So since the inception, this facility has generated about $16.4 million in total water park and pool revenue. Our swim meet economic impact is $40 million. We used to host the state swimming and diving finals for over a decade. The budgeted pool subsidy, which we've used five times since inception, we do, we've always had a budgeted subsidy for the pool, just in case, it's called a weather subsidy, but it is a pool subsidy. The water park has successfully paid for the entire facility, but the pool is quite expensive. We've dipped into that subsidy at an average cost of $108,000 annually. Our current reserves for the water park and pool are $159,000. That facility does have 135 seasonal employees, and since we've opened, we've employed over 1,000 students since we opened it since inception. I'm giving over 2,500 swim lessons. And one of the things that's unique about this facility as it relates to relations and our insurance is that we spend, with our revenue to cost recovery, $119,000 on our premium for the water park and pool insurance coverage. So the overall picture for the Parks Department as it relates to those special facilities has been great. There's a whole team involved, lots of success stories, lots of hard work to make these little semi-enterprise funds happen for the betterment and enjoyment of the community. And I will have any questions that you may have. I just wanted to give you a nice short presentation. Thank you. Commissioner Vargas. Thank you very much. I do like buildings that produce very well. So I appreciate you putting all of that together succinctly. But I do want to talk to you about the Sea Turtle Cafe. Now, the schematic that was done, I think it was by our building director, Sean Donahue, who's here. I find it, excuse me, but I find it incorrect. We have more than 4,600 square feet. There is no way, if anybody knows me, that I would ever, ever say $912 a square foot is appropriate. That is not the case. As a matter of fact, we were just talking about vertical square footage. But we do have, because of the specialty building, we do have restroom, storage building, breezeway, ramp, stairs. We have the tiki and the bar. We also have kitchen equipment that's specialized. We have a kegerator. I believe that's what it's called also down in the basement. If we're talking about a total amount of square footage, it's over 10,768 square feet, not 4,614 square feet. So that's a vast difference, and, you know, it's a division, and, again, it is not correct. So that needs to be noted that, in fact, we have more than double that amount square footage based on the cost for this. The other thing is I'd like to mention that it's $422.49 a square foot. Now, the thing is that we have to look at to where it's located. This is not an inland building. It's not an industrial building. We're talking about something that is on the ocean. And so it has to be curated properly and set so that it conforms with the DEP, with any statutes. Also, it has to be ADA compliant also. So I wanted to bring that to your attention, put this on the record, let my fellow commissioners know also that we're talking about a substantially, drastically lower amount. And we haven't even gone to bid yet, so that could be more attractive by the end of this year. We're hoping to do that at that point. Do you want to add anything else to that? Did I miss a point or misdate? I do not have any questions. Okay. That's fine. So anyway, if you would please make a note of that. I have a graph here. Happy to turn it in if we need that also. So I did a study when I saw this. I said, this is totally incorrect. I mean, this just jumped out at me. Commissioner Campy. Thank you. Mr. Donahue, may I ask you a couple questions, please? Just heard from my colleague. Project up in her district. I know she's very familiar with it. The original square footage of the floor space and how you did the original calculation is did you, when you did the Stewart Beach, was the calculation similar? Did you agree with what we just heard? Did you have the opportunity to review that? How would there be such a discrepancy in terms of the original square footage or square feet versus our new calculation that we were just presented with? Yes. Generally, when I do these calculations, I try to keep the vertical component intact and not include the horizontal in the square footage. Now, cost of construction, depending on location, as stated, can be extremely high. And the size of the project and the infrastructure that's involved can vary dramatically. So it can skew the numbers, absolutely. But to be apples-to-apples comparison with all the other projects and looking back at current contracts over the last five, seven years and seeing price per foot of vertical construction versus the contract, that's the analysis that I tried to portray. So, yes, horizontal construction can be expensive, and it can change the way the calculation is derived. But to keep it apples-to-apples with the other past contracts that don't have that breakout, that's the calculations that I used. Do you need then to reevaluate some of our other square foot calculations based on this new formula? To be able to – I can't break out the other projects and have a horizontal component to it and separate that. So it would be – I would skew it the other way. So I'm either going to – you know, we have to hold that calculation and just acknowledge that price of construction and development for that particular project is high. It's actually also evident when we did the classroom building at the public safety training complex. That was not just a vertical component. That was a whole entire site because that site was raw. And we came in from the fence line and developed that entire site. So the cost of that construction was actually also pretty high at the time. And I think that was 2022 or so, you know, inflated high in a sense because we had to do a lot of site work to make that work, and it was expensive construction. The pursuing construction after that with the berm building and the training tower were within reason, you know, much lower than the original because we didn't have all the site development included. So, again, to keep it apples-to-apples and have that comparison intact, that's the calculation. Last question. When we're looking at the calculations of price per square foot at the future maintenance facility, are we going to use that new calculation matrix in terms of site work, parking, electrical, landscaping, outside lighting? Is that all going to be then divided out, or are you just doing it the old-fashioned way with vertical? I still think we need to keep it on the vertical just to keep it consistent. Those numbers are, you know, as we design the site. For example, there's a chiller plant included in the cost now. The cost didn't go up, but the chiller plant is included. There's other buildings, the hazardous waste building that we talked about previously, other ancillary buildings, a standalone restroom and things like that for Marty Bus and other areas of the site are starting to develop into additional square footage that are changing the numbers, but it's not dramatic, and certainly it's not changing the price of the project. It's all included in the design. We paid for what the design is turning out to be. So, Commissioners, if you included the parking area, the STAs, and if you include their square footages as an overall component of the site area, it could drastically reduce that number even further in terms of what its unit price cost is. So I think what Sean attempted to do was to isolate the main component of the building and look at them. Keep in mind that the beach has to have a pile-supported foundation, so any time you even a small structure there, you're going to have that pile so far at the foundation, so it's going to be increasing costs. You know, compare it because you're not doing a slab on grade like you would do next door if we did something right here in our own parking lot. What was there currently? There was a restaurant there, and it was torn down, and now it's an expo. What was the foundation of the former restaurant? It was wood piles that were damaged by a car and other things, so they were nonexistent. So it all has to be redone and, of course, redone to the current state standards for a coastal construction zone. Perfect sense. Yeah, so it is, you know, the merits of the project, I think, are excellent, you know, in terms of, and we saw the presentation on the revenue generation, and they were able to pay for it, but it is a unique structure in terms of where it's located. And, again, the pile foundation is such a critical component of that that you don't have in other structures, which immediately increases the cost. Commissioner Vargas. Okay, so as a real estate broker, I do have done many, many comparative market analysis. You have to eliminate this one. This is different. This is unique. But, again, I have the numbers here, and it's not $912 per square foot. So I'm asking that this, if you want to redo this schematic, that's fine. But this particular cafe does not belong there. It is unique onto its own, and here's the number, just over 400 square feet for the pilings, for the building, for the walkways, for everything else that I mentioned also. So that's up to you, but I want it on the record that I am not spending $912 a square foot for this particular property. It's $422.48. Yes, it's taxpayer funds, Commissioner Hetherington. We always have to remember that, and I will never spend that amount of money on a structure. And we are going to go to bid, and we are going to find the best, best company to be able to execute this. That's it. Commissioner Camps. I'd just like to mention about how new construction projects vary dramatically in price, depending on where you're building. You know, ocean construction right along the beach is a totally different animal than anything else. The foundation issues, Pyle Foundation, that was mentioned by Mr. Donaldson. Also, I think there's a lot of expense associated with building a building where you cook in the building, like the grease trap thing and all of that. That's enormously expensive. And just the size of the project, it's always going to be more per square foot when you're building a small building compared to some large thing somewhere else. They're apples and oranges. You can't compare the two of them. I had one other question about Selfish Splash that I wanted to mention. You know, when you ride by there, you think, oh, this is a place for kids to play. There are sliding boards. How cool is that? But most people don't really know what all goes on there. And the whole swim meet thing, when I took a tour with you of Selfish Splash, I was really impressed with all that goes on with that. And the thing that I thought about is my nephew was real involved with travel baseball. And there's like this whole society of people who spend their whole weekends with their kids, like for like a year or something, just traveling all over the state, getting hotel rooms, playing ball on some field in Tampa, and then one in Jacksonville. And it's a really big thing. And the same thing goes on in the swimming world. And our facility is used for that purpose. Can you expand a little bit more on what all happens with that? Well, yeah, the competitive side of our facility where we do our swim lesson program is intense. You know, you have, you know, diving programs. We host every high school swim meet we can for all three county high schools and also the Pine School. We have competitive swimming programs there every evening. There is no lanes left that are not unused. Every single lane of that facility is used almost every single night during school hours. So it's a very busy facility. You know, for example, this summer we'll host the Junior Olympics program. We'll have 1,000 swimmers from all over the state. Similarly, like as I put in the presentation, the $40 million in economic impact since we've opened is a result of having 20 to 30 swim meets a year. The state swim and diving finals that we had for a decade was great. But we also bring colleges every year, 10 different colleges a year that stay here for 10 nights, and they've got 20, 30 a team. So there's a lot that goes on in that facility other than the recreational fun side that pays for the whole place, hopefully most cases, most years. But it's the vibrant community of aquatics from swim lessons to private to public to grant swim lessons to the Children's Services Council. All of that program occurs there every day. And, yes, there are parents that use competitive swim meets, similar to travel sports, to watch their kids grow up and excel in a great sport like swimming. So it's a great asset for the community. Thank you. Commissioner Vargas. No, I think that was an old light. Okay, any further questions? Thank you. Thank you. Now we will take up our last agenda item, which is a presentation on Martin County impacts from the proposed property tax legislation. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, Commissioner. Stephanie Murley, Director of the Office of Management and Budget. And I have our county administrator with me, Don Donaldson. Yes, to join in on this important conversation. So I'll go through a little presentation, and then we'll open it up for any kind of discussion or questions at the end. But we're here today. As you all know, a week ago, the Florida legislature had completed a special session on property tax reform convened by Governor DeSantis in a two-day period from June 1st to June 2nd. And during the session, lawmakers passed a joint resolution proposing constitutional changes, along with implementing legislation to support administration of those changes. The proposed amendment would expand homestead-related exemptions, adjust assessment limitations, and restrict how ad valorem revenues may be used by local governments. The implementing legislation establishes the administrative framework for how these changes would be applied. If approved by voters, the constitutional amendment will appear on the November 3rd, 2026 general election ballot and will require at least 60% approval to take effect with an effective date of January 1st, 2027. So passage of this amendment would be realized within our fiscal year 2028 budget development. So I say that to you as I present these numbers. This is strictly on a revenue loss perspective. This does not contemplate any replacement revenues. This is just strictly the loss of revenue that Martin County will realize in the event this passes. So first, it would behoove all of us to know where exactly our property tax dollars go. So for every dollar that you give to Martin County Board of County Commissioner, a typical unincorporated taxpayer will see this split. This is as of our current budget development that we're working on right now. So 65% of each dollar that you pay Martin County BOCC goes towards public safety, which includes the Martin County Sheriff's Office, Fire Rescue, E-9-1-1, Emergency Management, and all of Ocean Rescue, Hazmat, Air Medical. The jail. The jail. 23% goes towards general government expenditures, which include all other constitutional officers like our Supervisor of Elections Office, our Clerk of the Circuit Court, our Property Appraiser, and our Tax Collector. The county's judicial system, which includes our medical examiner, our public defender, guardian ad litem, state attorney's office, victim services, and court administration. Also, county administration, the county attorney's office, our general services department, public buildings, information technology, and technology improvements. 6% goes toward road, stormwater, environmental expenditures, which include all of the coastal items you spoke of earlier today. And then 6% goes towards our culture and recreation type programs. It includes the Martin County Public Library System and our general park operations. So this slide shows the estimated reduction in Martin County property tax revenues under the proposed homestead exemption scenarios. So based on current taxable values, the county could see revenue reductions ranging from approximately $42.5 million under the $150,000 exemption to more than $170 million under full homestead property tax elimination. So a key consideration is that the proposed property tax changes will not affect all municipalities and counties equally. Martin County's tax base is approximately 75% residential, and a significant portion of those properties are homesteaded. Martin County will likely experience a greater impact than communities with larger commercial and industrial tax bases. So it's important to note that these estimates reflect only the direct loss of property tax revenue based on current values. They do not account for additional revenue reductions from lowering the non-homestead cap from 10% to 5%, nor do they include the impact of additional property owners who may qualify and apply for homestead exemptions in the future. As a result, the actual fiscal impact could be greater than is shown here on this graph. And Ms. Murley, what's the timeline for the first $42.5 million, the second $75.7 million, and the full homestead of $170,000? The $150,000 exemption, realization of $42.5 million, we would, this time next year, we will be doing those cuts for our fiscal year 2028 budget. Okay, and how about the next one? That would be the following year for the fiscal year 29 budget. And the following year for full homestead? That's our big unknown question. They have been given the ability to phase that in, but it's at an unknown period, which I will discuss in the next slide. So, of course, uncertainty is the big question here when it comes to property tax legislation. So this slide highlights several areas of uncertainty in the recently enacted property tax legislation. So the bill creates ambiguity around eligible expenditures, including unclear definitions across seven specified funding categories, which may lead to inconsistent interpretation and implementation. Those seven categories are listed as public safety, judicial services, corrections, infrastructure, public health, human services, and general government operations. It also lowers the non-homestead assessment cap from 10% to 5%. This may further constrain revenue growth and reduce flexibility for governments, particularly during periods of inflation, making long-term forecasting more difficult. This is a harder number for us to calculate right now based on current information, but I did see that the Florida Association of Counties had done preliminary analysis. And for year one, based on this assessment cap, I think it was around $14 million for year one, in addition to our property tax loss. That was specific for Martin County? For Martin County. The provision also changes the formulas to calculate the rollback rate and allowable millage, which may effectively lower the ceiling for revenue growth. Local governments may have less flexibility to adjust the millage rates in response to that inflation, population growth, and increasing service demands. And finally, the legislation grants the legislature broad authority to phase out the property taxes over time without a defined timeline or clear parameters, adding additional uncertainty to long-range fiscal planning. And so overall, these provisions just increase the uncertainty in revenue stability for budgeting purpose and for future fiscal outlooks. And with that, that was a very short presentation, but I tried to give the highlights from a fiscal. And I think it's important to point out that the eligibility expenditures, also the legislature has flexibility to further define what is eligible. They have specifically stated what can be, but there's a sort of an item there that other as approved by the county, which gives you sort of some flexibility in year one. But as I understand it, there is a move that should it pass, the legislature would like to come in and define those immediately after passage as a special session, potentially. So those are some of the things that would likely be defined as we should this pass for next year. And that's just before we get into questions, I just wanted to point out sort of some ongoing strategies. As Stephanie pointed out, what we presented today was the impact without any changes to your millage or tax shift. Certainly, there are a number of tools that the county has available in how we collect funds for services. You certainly heard an example, one previous to this, and the successes of some of Parks' issues. But there's also revenue sources like charging parking at Parks. And I think Parks is probably one of the areas that, unfortunately, is most out there in terms of not specifically as an eligible item for using ADVORM funding for things that we do in Parks Department today, like making the ball fields free to all-use sports, things like that would have to be examined. A lot of fee for services. And as Stephanie pointed out, that in some cases, even though it may be eligible, if there isn't any ability to move your ADVORM at all in a tax shift, you won't have the revenue to fund the eligible item anyway. And so you'll be having to look at different alternatives. So at this point in time, we're preparing, I think our recommendation is to prepare two analysises. One is, as has already been stated here, which is what happens if you just simply left your millage as it is today? What does that look like in a revenue sum? As we're going through this, working with our county attorney and how the language is spent, is to also develop a scenario on what kind of tax shift would it look like if you modified your millage rate. So, which I think is an important question that I understand a lot of the public are concerned about, is what is a tax shift? And that tax shift comes, in our mind, in two different areas. One is actual property tax collected, and then it's the fee for services potential that you would be applying to the various services we already provide at no additional cost to the public, like parking at beaches or a fire fee or other MSBU type of actions, or point-of-sale type of, do you charge people to enter the library, those kinds of things. How do you fund the services that you want to serve? And then also, and so that's, I think, for this point of our exercise in educating the public, is to develop those two different scenarios on how it might impact. At this point in time, that is our recommendation. Of course, we'll be bringing for you a budget for next year that we're looking to keep flat. But should it pass, that's when the real work of terms of how you transition between November and July of the following year, of a combination of, you know, shifting how you collect fee for services and reduction of services. And that's a very painful process that we're prepared to do. But at this time, we're looking at it from a much broader perspective. And just simply, our main goal is to educate the public so that when they make a vote, they're well informed. And so finally, I'll just end it with our request from you is to authorize us to prepare a Hot Topics page on our website that contemplates both of those analyses. One is without a tax shift, and then another analysis with the types of tax shifts that might occur should the ad valorem be changed or fee for example services. And before we put some of those out there, we would meet with you all to at least give you a heads up of what we're looking at. And that will open it up to questions. Commissioner Campy. Thank you, ma'am. I appreciate that summary. Obviously, a lot of this is fast-moving and just happening. But I'd also want to caution us as an organization not to just say if we don't get the money through these ad valorem taxes that we would shift it into different ways of collecting the fee. I think the message needs to be clear that there will be belt tightening, new fiscal. We're a relatively strong fiscally conservative community to start with, so it makes it harder. We've done this exercise in the past in regards to trying to look for the low-hanging fruit of excess. But I think it's important that our residents here, that we're also talking about not just saying, well, if we're not going to collect it this way, we're going to collect it in a different way. I think the message from Tallahassee to us and from us to the residents is that we'll do belt tightening. We're not just going to look to make up the money that's lost in some other ways. I think that would scare our residents. I don't think that's the message that you were hoping to convey today because I certainly don't want to be part of that. It sounds like, well, you know, we still need the money. So if this goes to the referendum and the residents speak, it's also about bringing budgets down through Ms. Murley, you're the perfect person to lead your team of experts with our overall staff to find ways to do it. We've done it in the past, but I don't want it to sound like, well, we won't collect it over here. We'll collect it some other way or we'll start cutting all your services. That's not the message I'm looking to send. We'll do the belt tightening. We'll do the efficiencies. We'll do the right sizing of the organization, and that's what the residents can expect from us. Thank you. Commissioner Vargas. Okay. So you'll never make up this money on parking fees. You just won't. That's part of the charm of Martin County. Slide right into a parking spot. You don't have to fumble around. I know in Miami-Dade County, my stomping grounds, you can do it on an app and all of that. It's costly. And to eliminate services, no. You've got to reduce expenses. I do this in my business. Reduce expenses. Nothing is off the table. Nothing. And this is the moment of reckoning. So I feel that I want our constituents, our taxpayers, to hear us this morning. We're going to do what is in their best interest, not in our best interest. We are there to serve. We are here to serve them, not the other way around. Commissioner Capps. Ms. Murley, you had one more page in your presentation. Yes. I was wondering if you could put that up. Sure. Before I start on that, I thought I would mention one general thought, and that is that when you're approaching this subject, there's a dilemma. If you talk about it, you're an alarmist and a fear-mongerer. And on the other side, if you don't talk about it, you didn't warn the residents of the consequences of things. So in the coming days, this board is going to need to be involved in educating the public. We're not advocating. We're not saying, telling the voters what to do. But it is our job to let them know what would happen. We don't want people to get blindsided and shocked at the consequences of a vote. And this is a constitutional amendment. This is not a piece of legislation that can be reversed or changed or tweaked. You know, this is permanent. This is forever. And the consequences here, like if this were a business venture, this is grave. You know, the consequences here are really big. And I'd like us to look just at year one at the $150,000 exemption and to look at the red numbers here that we don't have a single dollar for. Just getting started at the $150,000, the next year it's $250,000, the next year it's probably $350,000, and the next year $450,000, $550,000. And then eventually people who are living in $40 million homes are not paying any taxes either. So it'll, and at that point, we lose $170 million. But just look at the very first year of the things that we do not have any money for. Libraries, administration, that's everything in this brick building, the salaries, the things that we, the money we use to run the government. There's nothing, not a dollar. Parks and recreation, there's no money for parks, nothing. Public works, which includes mosquito, environmental, real property, zero, not a dollar. The county attorney's office, we have no money to run the county attorney's office. I hope you guys are ready to work for our grants. And then grants and aids, no money for that. This is in year one. I would really encourage our residents to study these red numbers. And in year two, what are you adding to that? You're adding capital maintenance of $28 million. You're adding $8 million for the general services department. And you're adding $7 million for technology infrastructure. And you're adding ITS department operating another $5 million. Just in year two, that kind of eliminates five or six more giant departments of the government. This is not, this is really revolutionary in the way government services are provided for our residents. And, you know, I would just urge our residents to study it hard. And we'll honor whatever conclusions the voters come to, and we will adjust as needed, and we'll do what we have to do. But this is not a 10 or 20 percent tweak in a budget. This is a complete upending of the way county government has done all across the state. Please address reduced flexibility in millage rate settings. That's kind of. Sure. It's a pretty complex calculation currently. When millage rates are being set, there is a formula essentially that contemplates what you raised your millage rate last year and in juxtaposition to the maximum millage cap of 10 with a little bit of CPI adjustments and allowances for new construction. So we're still kind of dissecting what that language means, but effectively in periods of downturn, your rollback rate essentially is higher than your current millage rate. So if we saw a sudden reduction of 25 percent of our tax base, our rollback rate will then become higher, but then it will effectively become our ceiling. So in periods of higher valuation increases, essentially what happens is that rollback rate becomes our maximum millage rate rather than the 10. So we're still kind of working that through and seeing what that truly means and exactly what kind of adjustments can be made on a year-to-year basis. There's provisions. There's already stringent voting requirements. This seems to further make those requirements more stringent. So we're really just trying to understand what that might mean at this point. So the voting requirements start at the rollback rate, and at a rollback rate, you're able to pass a budget with a 3-2 vote. And between the rollback rate and up to 10 percent, you need a supermajority vote, and anything over a 10 percent increase over the rollback, you require a unanimous vote. And the expenditures that Commissioner Capps was just talking about, those are the ones that become nondiscretionary because they're nonessential. The legislature has said, okay, by year three, there are $123 million in your budget that are no longer fundable because they're nonessential. Even if we had the money, we couldn't spend it because those services are not essential. And, Commissioners, if I could just wait one point on that chart, because it is a very high-level gross approximation and not to be followed by our staff or the public as an exact targeting of how you would reduce the budget because simply there are items above the red line that you could shift to the other. So I just want to make sure that we're also – but it is a clear example of the types of services that weren't initially contemplated by the legislature and how they would be reduced. You know, things like state revenue sharing is not an avalorm tax, and you could, you know, potentially shift some items along. But still that $31 million has to come out, and it doesn't contemplate any inflationary increases and fuel increases, things like that, that are going on for the next year that you also have to account for. So the issue is, is that while I agree that there is a significant amount of belt tidying, we have not foreseen in any scenario that if you take $31 million that you could do it simply by belt tidying. There would be elimination of a service or implementation of some other fee for service that could contemplate keeping some portion of that service alive. And also the $31 million shortfall in year one also doesn't include the non-homestead assessment cap of dropping from 10 to 5. That's another 11? That was estimated at $14 million for Martin County. Okay. Commissioner Hetherington. I've had a lot of questions from businesses on that non-homestead cap, too, because there are a lot of businesses that were nervous that you were going to shift that over, and they were going to be paying the lion's share. And I think it was interesting that you noted that 75% of our tax revenue comes from residential homes. So while it's going to impact the counties very differently, I think that would be good to have a comparison of other counties, too, of how that impact, because, for instance, I've seen numbers from Miami-Dade, which has far more commercial revenue, where their impacts, and maybe some others throughout the state, they're not going to feel the impacts because they're not 75% residential. They have far more commercial collecting revenue. I think that's important to illustrate that as well. Yes, the other thing that Miami-Dade would have, too, is a significant number of properties over $250,000. So that also limits the impact you have. I think part of the conversation that confuses folks, too, is the assessed value increase limited to 10% does not take into contemplation of what any board, I'm not saying this one, does with their actual millage rate. You still have the ability to change your millage rate, and that is a tax shift. And so where you have a large – so even if you reduced it, let's say, some amount, maybe not all $31 million, but whatever amount less than $31 million you do and you increase your millage rate, the tax – the shift would be on the commercial and non-homesteaded properties. And the same is true even if you don't change the millage rate. So who's paying property taxes? It's those that are – have values more than $250,000 or significantly more, and the commercial and industrial properties. So if your neighbor may not be paying any taxes and those who just moved here or it's a second home will be paying all the taxes. So that tax shift is a current – even if you don't change your millage rate, you may collect the same as you did last year from a particular homeowner. But the tax shift is happening no matter what. Now, the magnitude of the tax shift also depends on how this board and others' boards decide to vote on the millage rate. Independent of that 10% tax, that just simply means their valuation is changed. Even if their valuation changed by zero over the next 10 years, we said we were flat. There was no – we were into a kind of a stagnant time. Certain commissions could continue to increase their millage over that – until they hit their 10-mil cap, right? So that shift could still continue to happen. So the conversation is complicated by how valuations are calculated, what the homestead exemption is, and the ability or limitations by voting that are implied on the tax rate. And then your tax rate is influenced by the 10-mil cap, depending upon whether it's a general fund or an MSTU. And I know I just probably really complicated the conversation for a lot of people, but that's the nuance of how this will actually affect. And then there's the nuance of what you do for fees or other services or elimination of them. That's the challenge. Commissioner Hetherington. I just had a thought. I didn't see it in the legislation, but did it reference portability of homestead? It did not. So that would stay into effect whatever is there. Commissioner Campy. I travel for work all over the country, and I know that this topic is big elsewhere. Not that other states are looking to do it. There are only seven states that don't have a personal income tax, Florida being one of them. And I know that the governor's plan was to make Florida the first one to have the ability to eliminate this level of property tax. So potentially a consequence of this will be that it will make Florida even more appealing to folks that live in other high-tax states, regulatory states, you know, up from the north. There's been a huge influx since the pandemic for freedom issues, but then financially a lot of folks that look to come. It will continue to put a lot of pressure on the real estate market, the rental market, and the folks that own property that have yet to develop it when there's a continued push. Because if you live in just, for example, New Jersey, Connecticut, New York, Massachusetts, California, Illinois, and you're feeling really the burden of taxation from your state and local government, where would it be great to go? And we are already feeling, not just in Martin County but everywhere, the pressure of development and real estate to push. So that's something that we'd have to take into consideration when, you know, I know it's interesting when the city of Stewart or the county we win awards, on the best place to live and the best oceanfront and the best coastal community. Well, people, you know, in the Midwest in winter are reading those magazines and like, honey, I know where we should move. We should move to Florida, and maybe more particularly, we should move here, which is terrific. A lot of us are transplants. However, this will also be another big potential selling point for folks that live elsewhere to want to come here. If I could add, since you've spurred on my memory of other things in the bill, if you move here, it takes five years for you before you can qualify for the full exemption. Unless you move here before January 1st. So you could see a real flood of folks looking to come here in the next six months. And the other thing is, is that the state of Florida right now is a very pro-growth state. And at any time, it's the state. And you're rewarded for high growth. So if you approve a lot of new development, you will get a lot of new taxes coming in. And you can pay for some of these services under the false sense of security that it will last, because it doesn't, because it all kicks in. So anyway, at least I personally, you know, this is your county administrator's opinion. It does reward high-growth communities by helping them to continue to pay for new services without dealing with the rollback condition. Adding more tax base to your community is rewarded. And for us, that's not a great option either. None of us are interested in starting to blow up development. I don't think it is either. I'm just thinking that is a consequence. Like Commissioner Capps said, we have to be able to put it out there in a neutral way for people to just make their own determinations. Some people will see this as a fantastic opportunity to lower their expenses, and other people will look further down the road and say, what does this all mean? I mean, Commissioner Capps hit the nail on the head. We will do what the people request of us to do. That's right. Commissioner Capps. A few other observations about it. You know, in some of the earlier bills that were in the legislature, there was a carve-out for public safety. And we saw on the first slide here that public safety is 65% of our ad valorem. And public safety would be defined as sheriff and fire rescue, right? Emergency. Right, which is part of fire rescue. And it's been the tradition and the history here to really try to award the request of those departments and do our best to make that a top priority. But when you're looking at the numbers on the last page here, that's impossible. You know, we will have to look real hard at those numbers as well. And the public safety carve-out did not make it into this bill. There is no carve-out for that. And they're subject to cuts as well, and they'll have to be probably rather dramatic cuts. You know, we need to let people know that. Another thought that was in some of the earlier bills was that we were going to have this trust fund established by the state where maybe we could go and get some grants or some help if we have these shortfalls and stuff. The trust fund thing did not make it into this bill either. There is no trust fund. But that's for fiscally constrained counties. But it doesn't even exist for fiscally constrained counties either. It does not now, but that's what it was for. Right, right, right. Because I'm aware of that. So there's nothing for the counties to try to appeal to get help either. That's not in the bill. And then another thing I would like to remind people of is that so much of what we get to do in the county government requires a small local match in the, you know, when we hear about the grants every meeting that Ms. Murley tells us about. And, you know, it's always based upon a local investment, you know, 10 or 20 or 30 percent or something. When you're running on fumes, you can't scratch up those few dollars, and the whole project just doesn't get done. And, you know, whatever you're looking to get a grant for, it's out the window because you can't scratch up a few dollars to pay that initial investment into the thing. So, you know, there's a lot to look at here, a lot to consider. This is really big and a humongous change in the way counties would operate. We'll, like we said before, we'll do whatever the voters decide, but we don't want to be accused of not letting people know repeatedly what the consequences would be. May I say that my larger annual bill at my house is my homeowner's insurance. I wish they would have stayed. I get the tax one, but to take their eye off the homeowner's insurance issue is much greater. Mine's over $10,000 for my old house that's wood, and that's a harder nut to crack than the property taxes. I'd like to, you know, lower them both, but I hope this doesn't, they don't feel, and remember, this is a county budget issue. It's not a state budget issue. The state's budget is completely intact. I wish they would have, in conjunction to, addressed insurance, homeowners insurance issues, because that's the runaway one. Ms. Williams, would you like to address us on this matter? Please join us. We've got to start at the mic first. Oh, okay. Let me get back to my timer. Oh, I have to wait until you get back? Oh, okay. Should I start now? Sure. Thank you, everyone, for all that you do. This budget period question, I'm sorry I came here late. Thank you for answering my questions if you can. This is directly from the state. This amendment is state regulated, so that means that the county has no say-so, or will the residents be able to change and say, no, we don't want this at all? It's a statewide referendum. Okay. So how are you all going to do this and still stay fluent and keep the library as it is and the fire department as it is and the police department as it is and the parks as it is and the government services for, you know, like the swimming as it is and the golf courses, the beautification, the road? How are we going to maintain a 2.3.5 million just for public safety? This is a really safe county. So how you can't even answer that right now, I understand. But it's devastating to think that it's more important for some homeowners to get this break that's going to decimate the whole county. Is it really worth it? And so is that going to be a question on the referendum? Can we say nay, no, get rid of it? And then the last statement is, can I get a copy of this so I can look at it and understand what you're talking about? I only had 15 minutes of listening to you. You all have a, you're going to make me cry. How are you going to do this? I understand you may have a business, but this is beyond owning a business. This is saying the people like me, and I'm going to use me as an example, who can't get a business, but love the luxury that's available to us, i.e. the library, i.e. the training of the aviation, i.e. the parks, the beautification of fishing. All of that is going to be taxed, and that's going to leave me out of a lot of stuff. So anyway, amen. Thank you. Thank you. Any further comments? Thanks, Ms. Murley. Thanks, Mr. Donaldson. Are you all right with us starting a web page, a hot topic? Absolutely. Thank you. Just objective, though. No fear-mongering. Show the options. Let's not do that. Okay. Just the facts. Just the facts. That's it. But it's not all about just we'll either raise additional money or cut services that people love. There'll be a more comprehensive look at it. Look at both sides. Thank you. Otherwise, we're doing ourselves a disservice. Yep, we agree. Would anyone else from the public like to address us? Right. I would like to make comments now. Commissioner Vargas. Commissioner Vargas. Okay. I've taken a lot of time to look at the paperwork that was presented for the P3 project, the operations center, and I want to make some comments on this. I want to talk about the key taxpayer risks for Martin County Operations Facility Project. So the documents that I looked at were the CMS Conceptual Estimate, the Comprehensive Development Agreement, CDA, the Half-Cent Sales Tax Revenue Bond Series 2026, final numbers, and the county's white paper, well, the one we spoke about this morning, P3 detail page. And it shows a project that's promoted as efficient and cost-saving via a P3. However, it is riddled with unknown risks. And here they are. I'm going to make four points. The total taxpayer cost significantly exceeds the $74 million headline figure. So the bond reality of that, because we had to send out IOUs on this, the county issued 59.685 million par bonds with premium, generating 64.47 million proceeds. However, that total debt service is 94 million, 984,160. So that's the principal amount floated, plus 35.3 million interest over 20 years through 2046. And I think taxpayers should be made aware of the true cost of this project. It is not the headline figure. It's more. Number two, cost overruns and change order exposure. The CDA, that's one of the documents I referred to initially, sets the $74 million guaranteed maximum price, except for approved change orders. That's on page 26. And the CDA, on pages approximately 13 through 14 in 49, states that the county administrator can approve amendments without BOCC approval that increase those expenditures, provided the increase does not exceed 10% of the original contract value. So it's not to exceed $499,999.99 each. There are no limits on the number of change orders under half a million dollars that Mr. Donaldson can approve. The CMS estimate shows 76.66 million probable costs, including a 20% contingency plus a 6% escalation. So the qualifications note material costs could change substantially. We just had a discussion about that earlier. And it excludes items like geotechnical studies, security guards, and certain unknowns. How much more are these items going to cost us? There is no longer a fixed-price contract. A 20% contingency is excessive in any standard, any standard. A normal contractor contingency is 3 to 5%. This is much higher, 20%. And lenders would reject a 20% contingency clause in any hot minute. So taxpayers are ultimately the backstop via bonds and change orders. The 18-month timeline promotion assumes no major add-ons, but the contract and the estimate allow them. So on page 26 of the CDA, which I referenced before, exhibit C1 context, the total value is described as an amount not to exceed $74 million except for any approved change orders. Just talked about that. Guaranteed maximum price. This is a guaranteed maximum price structure. However, it also has built-in flexibility for change orders. I remember our staff saying to the contrary, but didn't the staff say that there were not going to be any change orders? I do remember that as they sat here. Timeline mismatch and delay risk, number three. The county promoted an 18-month build-out to commissioners, to us. However, the contract provides multiple avenues for extensions, which could extend beyond that. So the CMS, which I referred to originally, that's a conceptual estimate, escalation allowance of $4.34 million is based on a 28-month completion. And delays beyond 18 months erode the faster, cheaper value proposition by increasing interest cost. That means more time carrying the bonds, so we have to rent the money for longer, and may trigger additional change orders or escalation. The CDA, which is the Comprehensive Development Agreement, explicitly allows the developer extensions of time for delays arising from causes beyond the developer's reasonable control. That's on page 26, and there are related sections to that on excusable delays. This includes standard force majeure, like acts of God, owner-directed changes, et cetera. Liquidated damages are waived for approved excusable delays. One other thing I wanted to ask, where are the building plans? Are they available for the public to view? Number four, lack of the owner's representative. For a project this size and complexity of Martin County's operations facility, best practice and strong risk management strongly favor using an independent owner's representative. Many public entities voluntarily hire them precisely for transparency and oversight. And these are reasons taxpayers are raising locally. Yet, our county canceled its RFQ, that's request for that service, for an independent owner's representative, and decided to handle the role in-house to save approximately $500,000 on this major $74 million taxpayer-funded project. This is particularly concerning because the contract allows multiple change orders and amendments up to half a million dollars without our oversight, the BOCC. Who exactly at the county will serve as the owner's rep, and what are their specific qualifications and experiences managing large-scale construction projects of this magnitude? We don't have answers to that. We don't have answers to that. That's critical. Canceling the RFQ after it was issued raises legitimate questions about transparency and accountability, especially on this unsolicited P3 proposal that bypassed traditional competitive building. Public trust is eroding. Public trust is eroding. I hear from people all the time about this. And an independent third-party owner's representative remains the standard safeguard our taxpayers deserve to protect against cost overruns, delays, and change orders. So this is to my fellow commissioners. Given the documentation we now have, the comprehensive development agreement, the CMS conceptual estimate, and the final bond numbers, I have serious concerns about the true long-term cost and oversight of the operations facility project. The CDA clearly states on page 26 that it is a $74 million guaranteed maximum price, except for any approved change orders. So on page 13 and 14 and 49, that further authorizes the county administrator, Mr. Donaldson, to approve multiple amendments, each up to $499,999.99, with no apparent limit on the number of such approvals. The CMS estimate already projects $76.66 million probable costs with a 20% contingency plus escalation based on a 28-month timeline, not the 18-month build-out that was promised and presented to us. So here's a final question. If staff previously told us there would be no change order and this was a tightly controlled fixed-price project, why does the contract explicitly build in so much flexibility for cost increases and timeline extensions that taxpayers will ultimately have to pay $94.98 million in total bond debt service? Why is this? Where is the answer to this? And why did we cancel the RFQ for an independent owner's representative? This is standard safeguard for a project of this size and complexity, especially when our administrator can now unilaterally approve nearly half a million dollars at a time, so it could be multiple, without our oversight. That's a question that needs to be answered. And who exactly is the owner's representative? What are their qualifications for managing this $74 million-plus construction project? And how will we, as a BOCC, ensure that our taxpayers are protected from excessive change orders and delays? So, my fellow commissioners, how comfortable are each of you going forward with this project after knowing this information, which I have studied and you are welcome to do also on your own? Any answers from anybody here? Commissioner Campy. Thank you for that presentation. That information, that information was also, because you had requested it, of Mr. Donaldson, was available to each of us. I have a printed version, I guess we all do, and I got the electronic version, and I did also go through all of the pages of it, and I did read your questions to Mr. Donaldson, and I read the staff's responses. So, I thought that was a very productive exercise, so thank you. There's a lot to unpack there. In regards to giving our administrator the ability to approve up to half a million dollar issues. Change order. Change orders or, you know, whatever. In this particular case, we also allow him to do that on a day-to-day basis. It's from our purchasing manual. We copied it from the purchasing manual. That's what I was going to say. We allow that all the time on anything. This is a very large organization, hundreds of millions of dollars, thousands of what? How many employees do we have now, Mr. Donaldson? 1,200? Yeah, roughly 1,200. 1,200 employees, and the budget is north of $700 million? Yes. So, we're a $700 million organization with nearly 1,200 employees. We have many people that fall into all of the professional specialty categories. When you mention a owner's representative, if this was a private organization that had owners that were in manufacturing or anyone else that's built these kind of projects, this is a large one. But that being said, most people on a day-to-day basis are running their companies. We have an advantage. Now, we can agree to disagree, but we have an advantage of having professional staff within engineering, within legal, within public works, within environmental, within mechanical. You know, that is in-house experts across all of the different categories. So, I don't believe that we were necessarily, and if I'll make my comments and Mr. Donaldson can agree or disagree with what I'm saying or clarify what I'm saying, we weren't going to say it's going to be George Stokas, even though that would be a good choice. It's going to be our internal team that has the responsibility of overseeing hundreds of millions of dollars worth of projects across all of the different categories countywide every single year. This is a large, single-scale, single-item project. As I mentioned this morning, and I was all in favor of continuing the process of informing our residents, helping them understand and clarify the different concerns that people have. I didn't – I hear your concerns. I don't disagree with your concerns. It's a philosophical way of doing it. I had mentioned that in all of my previous experiences, a multi-bid proposal is what we do on most of the situations. But that doesn't mean that we should dismiss an option that 47 states take advantage of in the U.S. as well as multiple countries do. It might be a new way to do it. I like transparency. I like our residents to be able to ask questions of us when one did, both through social media platforms and reached out to me directly. To be honest, when he called me, we were supposed to get together with the staff, and I hadn't heard from him. And then he called me and said, I'm available today at 2 o'clock to meet with your senior staff to discuss this. It was 1 p.m. I said, well, you're not really giving me a lot of time to put the proper people in place. I called Mr. Donaldson, and he came over at 2 o'clock, and our staff, Ms. Murley, Ms. Elder, Mr. Donaldson, Sean, anybody else? That was it, and went through all of his concerns for more than an hour, a couple hours? I was not in attendance. Okay. I spoke to you afterwards. All right. So the key proponents that could give him the advice did. So that was helpful. In terms of do I feel comfortable, I'm very interested in hearing all of the information that we can present to the residents. The other thing to take into consideration was the two points that I had made when we originally passed it 4 to 1. One was that, remember, this is a consolidation. I hear some of the information out there that says, well, fire rescue and the sheriff's office are already combined. Why would you need to do more? Or I don't think the information that's been presented through social media has really defined exactly what the scope of the project is. We're talking about consolidating nearly all, except in unique circumstances, of our far-flung maintenance services facilities, and we can ask staff to present exactly what they are. I think we're going to need to maybe have this conversation again. There are locations on Indian Street, at Halpatioke, and Indiantown, and Hobes Sound, and Jensen, and Palm City. There will be a full consolidation. So what we need to take into consideration is what will eliminating and consolidating and making it much more efficient, the duplication of services that we've had no choice but to have, what will that save us, the taxpayers? And that savings is from the day that the facility opens forever. So you have to look at that and factor that in. Then my point was that those locations, where possible, should be put up through our system, put up for sale, and sold back to the private sector, back onto the tax rolls. So start to whatever that is, and we can ask staff to at least give us some preliminary numbers on what that would look like. That, you know, when we sell property like that, that is really very centrally located around the different areas of the county, what's that worth? That comes off the top. And then the efficiency of, instead of having, you know, supervisors and foremen and managers at the multiple locations in the different departments, there can be an economy of scale in employment, in leadership, in services. So instead of having to effectively do the business of the county over multiple locations, when they're all brought together, what is the employment and the HR savings? That can also come off of it. The efficiencies and the environmental benefits of the building, how will that work? And one of my deciding factors is I had the opportunity to tour the Indiantown High School during its construction. I was involved with the original donation from the Johnston family to build it. I remember his concern that he was old and wanted to make sure that the project was done efficiently and quickly so that he could be there. And that, to me, helped tip the scale in terms of could this work? There was concern that the original company that we've selected is not a Martin County-based company. Well, if you're looking for a very specific technical type of companies that do this type of work, if one doesn't exist in your home county, what are you supposed to do? But my final point was is that I asked them and our staff to not just give us lip service that they would hire local subs to work on these projects. That would genuinely happen, and I've already heard that that has started to be a process that a lot of our very well-known contractors that are based in Martin County have already started the process of engaging this as a possibility. So that's where I stand. My colleagues might have differences to add into that. I hear your point. I appreciate your perspective. We might not always agree, but I'm glad you're sitting up here so that we can always hear what we should be doing on behalf of our residents. Mr. Vargas. I appreciate you all pining on this again. You've been here how long on this commission, and you knew about this project? You told us 20 years ago. You've been here 16. Why did you not put money aside every year for this project? Instead, we have to – you can shake your head no. Instead, we, as taxpayers, have to go out and pay for money. It is not free. The numbers do not lie, and I'm holding up a piece of paper. I've done my studying. We need an independent overseer, not somebody who's employed in answers to our county administrator. We do not have the expertise in this building. And if you say you're doing this to save half a million dollars, but at what expense? We were told, I was here, you were here, the others were here, no change orders. However, that is not stated in the document. This is wrong to go forward with this without complete independent oversight. We do not even have building plans. How can somebody put a price tag on something? And furthermore, industrial space per square foot is 200 to 250. It's not $533, which was written down on the schematic here. So, again, I'm asking my fellow commissioners to look your constituents in the eye and say, yeah, I'm fine about this, to overspend by more than double your hard-earned tax money. This is not sound. This is not sound whatsoever. This doesn't make sense. We just had a whole presentation, Ms. Murley, Mr. Donaldson, about belt tightening. And we're very happy to spend $533 a square foot. We don't even have the basics. This doesn't even make sense. So, you know, if you're going to stay mute, you have answered your constituents. I have done my studies. I have hard numbers. You cannot dispute the facts. You can be emotional and talk about selling other properties and move over here and how everybody has to come together and leadership and team. I understand that. I've lived overseas in three countries. And I've owned many residential properties and other commercial properties. So I know what I'm talking about. I have the numbers. Happy to supply it to anybody. I even refer to the pages. So I've done your homework for you. I'm speaking to every commissioner here. Let your conscience be your guide on this one. So, Commissioner Vargas, if you want to kill this project, what's your alternative? What are your options to proceed? The alternative is to sit down and look reasonably at another property that doesn't consume $533 a square foot. We need to have three bids. I do this in my personal life. I said that initially. Not just one bid and say, this is a swell deal. This is a terrible deal. So this is what I would urge us to do. We are not playing with our money. If you want to. If you have a family foundation, Mr. Campy, that's fine. But this is other people's money. And we are the guardians of this money. Especially in these times, too. So I'd say three bids. And then we'll see where we are. We know what the numbers are, and we need to hire somebody independent outside of these four walls to be able to oversee this project. There are many other ideas I have also to get this on the straight and narrow. Mr. Donaldson. So it was my decision to pull the independent oversight, if you will, based upon we do have a few unique staff that have had the experience of dealing with large, complex projects like this that we can put full time on this project. We have a gentleman who's done this for a year. We have a whole team, as Mr. Campy described. And so a lot of the construction management companies charge a percentage on the total contract cost. And we felt that we had, you know, hiring qualified staff in today's market is tough. The private sector has the same difficulty. And we have a few staff that are really capable of doing that. And we can bring the resumes and their things to you and provide those to you. So I felt that it was in our best interest to have our staff oversee the project. It is a project not to exceed. There won't be change orders. There would be only a change order that we bring to you if there was something additional that you wanted or we wanted, and it would come to you. We're not going to do. It is a not to exceed contract, and that's what we're looking for. That's the whole point. And while our purchasing manual does allow up to 10%, and that's the total cost, you could have, you know, lots of little change orders once you hit 10%. They always have to come to the board. But in this particular case, certainly, you know, there is no change order that's going to come to you without your approval. Oftentimes, we have change orders that are negative. In this particular case, the key point is to getting all the components in that development agreement that we asked for. It includes not just buildings but fueling depots. Fuel contained, the whole, not just the deep, not just the pads, but the entire system, the electronics, the computer system, the pumps, the same thing with mosquito control. All of the facilities, our vehicle maintenance has lift devices. It's not just a shell of a building. It's a stormwater treatment area. All the different things that go along with our traffic system, our whole traffic management system, which we have, DOT says, one of the best in the whole district. All that fiber and computer system is being put there. So it's got a whole new, all those computer systems and all those things that go along with those attendance facilities are all going into that facility out there. I would not have recommended this project to you if I didn't feel it was a good project and good value. We'll continue to provide the education. I believe that the public wants to hear more about how this works, the total financing dollars. Yes, any time you're financing something, the total cost goes up. If you buy a $100,000 home and you get some, you know, 7% interest rate, you're not paying $100,000. If it's a 30-year mortgage, you're paying $300,000 or $400,000. That is absolutely true. Pay-as-you-go is always cheaper. But the challenge with pay-as-you-go is the inflationary costs in between as you deal with the cost of materials and all the other things that we've seen come up. Yes, it would have been great to build this right after the Great Recession or during it. But also, that's the time when you didn't have money. So it is a challenge. It's been a challenge for 26 years, you know, during the hurricanes. We built the traffic center there. And I've said this story before that there was reluctance to allow us to build that traffic facility because we were going to be moving off the airport soon. Well, that was in 2005. And here it is, 20, 21 years later. And now the seriousness of the Part 13 and other issues at the airport require that we got to get off the airport. We went through extensive times going through the property acquisition. We can produce all of the analysis to look for that. And also, it's not just an industrial building. It's all the materials where we store our mast arms for our traffic division, all the ground-up asphalt that you take off a road or the fill material and the other things that stormwater uses and all the host of things that are going on there. And as Commissioner Campy mentioned, it does allow us to, the board's decision, to sell properties that we're no longer using. So we'll provide all of that. I understand the public's concern about how, you know, it is a unique process. I still feel confident it is an excellent means. It is the fastest way to get this project done. And I believe it's also the least-cost method to do it. And hopefully I can convince Ms. Vargas and those others that it is a good methodology. I understand the mistrust. But what is important to note is that, you know, the questions you bring up, I think, are reasonable questions in what social media is bringing up, and we'll address those. Are there things that during the process that we can do to help better? If you guys ultimately, it doesn't matter the cost and you think that it is a means that we can still reissue that RFP and have a firm do construction management oversight. Essentially what we're doing now is we have a project management team, and then you'll have private contractors that are going to take, you know, geotechnical samples and all the other things that go into being able to certify that what we purchased is exactly what we get. So it is, I think, a good project, and I'll do what I can to educate everybody as we go through. And the last thing is that if you want any change order that happens, you know, even for a dollar, I don't mind bringing them to the board. Mr. Vargas. No, Mr. Campi was first. That's fine. No, go ahead. Mr. Donaldson, I think that I appreciate you just giving us your narration on the pros and cons or the benefits of the project. It's helpful, but probably not complete enough. Yeah. I would make a recommendation that beyond the video that I had mentioned this morning, after hearing the pounding of the dais, we need to have an agenda item where we do a recap of what we've done. We need to hear from our financial folks, the bond folks, and how that worked. We need to hear from Ms. Murley. We'll need to hear from you. We'll need to hear from the department heads that are involved. We need to have PowerPoints, so as a visual, to show each of the departments that will be moving to this facility where they're located. You just ran off right off the top of your head about masked arms and mosquito control. I think it's important when one of us up here is as passionate as we're hearing for the rest of us and our public to hear what we have had the opportunity to hear, to get a little bit of the history of where we've been. If you don't know the different site selections, I remember Commissioner Hurd was very concerned. There was property along Willoughby that we looked at. We need to have, since there's new folks here and in the community, and there is enough serious questioning and concern, I don't think this is going to be like an ebb and tide issue that will just go away. It's big money. It's got a lot of confusion in the community, so I would make a recommendation that we have an agenda item that brings us through the process, what happened historically, how this process came about, why you selected it, who else has used it beyond the Indiantown High School. We need to reassure and inform our public so that we don't have this lopsided kind of board. I wouldn't say that we need to do this in every specific case, but the dollar amount that's being discussed and the novelty of this new approach, even though it's legal, I know some people said just because it's legal is not the only bar that we need to climb over. So I think we need to have a more thorough review of how this went. Not that I might come out on the other side at a different point of view, but let's hear it again so that we, four of us, five of us, have had the opportunity to hear it. Four had agreed that it was the right approach, but if the public is not aware enough, then, and Commissioner Vargas is going to continue to beat the drum, which is absolutely her prerogative, then let's have it. I'm not embarrassed of the process. I think once people get a chance to see it, are you going to convince everybody that it's the right strategy? No, but we need to convince more people than we have. Commissioner Vargas. On this schematic, it shows $63 million. Here it's 74, but that's not the true number. So I'm not beating the drum. I have, excuse me, sir. In my opinion, you're beating the drum. That's your opinion. That's why it's my opinion. But that's fine. But everybody doesn't think the way you do. Thank goodness. These are facts and figures. You cannot dispute them. You cannot argue with them. And don't argue with me because I've done my homework. I would encourage you to do the same also. But I brought back, you know, the point that since you've been here, as you proudly say, 16, 17 years, why didn't you plan for this sooner? Put money aside. I see it happens. And I've only been here a year and a half. I'm a fast learner, though. A little bit of a difference. And we are not lopsided on this board whatsoever. There are five of us. You are not the boss. We all bring some particular expertise, some less, some more. I bring a wealth of it. Having said that, you need to have an independent individual or company. It's well worth the money. If it's 1%, 3 quarter percent of the total project, who's going to be writing the checks? Just somebody here writing checks? Maybe the vice chair writing checks? Who's writing checks? What expertise do they have? I haven't seen this yet. Just to say, well, you're going to do it in-house and they're going to be dedicated. That's no. You have people that do this actually for a living. And they know what is reasonable. They know what viable costs are. They know what expenditures should be made or not made whatsoever. So I'm not talking emotional. I'm talking facts and figures. Some of my colleagues like to go on the emotional rant, but I don't. And so you cannot dispute that. And this is not going away. The community is very divided on this. Very divided. I don't get my news from social media like some of my colleagues do. I speak with individuals. And these are business people and they know what they're talking about. I see the medical examiner's office. I don't know if that's correct now because this is not correct. $63 million, $21,652 and change, $839 a square foot. Well, I don't know if that's correct, but let's say it were. That's very specialized. Can we at least agree on that? And I understand you have to have bays, but it doesn't have to be embellished as the high school was out in Indian town. It has to be something that's functional. You talked about bays. You talked about offices. I have Joanne Fabrics up in Jensen Beach that's totally vacant. You could put people there if they needed office space to consolidate them for oversight to keep functioning well as an organization. I had a constituent say they were out at one of our facilities. There was nobody there. Three o'clock in the afternoon. There's nobody there. So what are we talking about? This is management that needs to look at this very severely. And that's why they're compensated well here. So I am not going to let this go and say, well, my opinion doesn't matter. It's not opinion. This is factual. And I keep bringing it back here again. If you haven't done the homework, then you can't really respond well to this. So I'm saying this where everybody can hear me as videotaped. They can replay it back and forth. They can call my office. I'm not going to duck them on this. I'm going to say this is what I spoke about. This is something that's going to be at least $90 to $95 million, not $74 million or this figure of $63 million. I don't know where that figure came from. So we need to revisit this. We need to have two other bids. One bid is not sufficient. There are other companies that would be delighted, delighted to throw their hat in the ring for this. But the board chose not to do that. They chose to have one bid. This doesn't even make sense. I don't do this personally. I would hope you don't, but maybe they do. But this isn't their money. Remember, it's our constituents' money. Mr. Campy. Thank you. I will hold my colleague's position in the highest regard. I could care less what she thinks about me personally or what she wants to say. That's fine. I will conduct myself professionally and her position being duly elected. I won't get into a back and forth with her. When I say lopsided, when something passes four to one, that could potentially be defined as lopsided. I did request of staff. I'll make a motion to request of staff to have an additional new agenda item so that this can be discussed. You can say that you're holding up numbers. You've done your homework. I appreciate that. I've said it many times. I think I hold you and treat you in a much higher regard, and I don't care officially what you think about me. That's perfectly fine. That being said, I represent all of our employees and our constituents to give a different perspective. Yours, which I have said I value, is your perspective. I'm not emotional. I'm not ranting. I'm just giving a different point of view. Your numbers, I read. They came from staff. Staff did the homework and presented it to you. I give you credit for asking the questions. That's all it is. I don't want to get into a back and forth with you. I want to treat you with respect that you've earned as an elected official in your position. We do not have to like each other personally. That's well beyond the scope. I will always treat you fairly and respectfully. I will always be interested in hearing your opinion because it's a valuable opinion. I wish that there was a case. I'm not being emotional. I'm not making weird decisions. I've been here, and it doesn't make a difference how long, but I was sharing with you the history of how this happened. Now, when you say, why didn't we do this in the past? Why didn't we save money? We've done all that, and I don't want to get into a back and forth debate with you on that. The record and the history and the folks that know it already know it. That's why I said we should have an agenda item where you won't have to hear from me. You'll hear from the people that have been here for decades that have been doing this, and there are specific reasons why we didn't do it when we did it. As Mr. Donaldson said, not for a lack of trying or a lack of foresight. It just, it was on the back burner as other things were more important. As it continued to work, I compliment our staff for putting up with all of the inconveniences and the issues that they dealt with for year after year. And now is the proper time. Is there ever a good time to spend a ton of money on a project? Not necessarily, but by waiting longer, I'm not opposed to any of the suggestions that you had made. I just want to be clear. And no matter what you say, I will always treat you with the respect that your position deserves. Commissioner Vargas. Okay. This is the final statement I'm going to make to you, Mr. Campy. This is not from staff. I sought professional individuals who understand building and understand what money costs. So it wasn't from staff that I took this. And I know you proudly say you read that report, the question, the answer, the question, the answer. I have that also, sir. However, I went above and beyond. I would suggest you do also since you know so many people in this community. Take your time. Do it. It's important. Commissioner Capps. I'd just like to say one thing. We are not professional construction estimators, and we are not construction contract lawyers, and we shouldn't pretend to be either. We don't need a motion. Just in case we did. Any commissioner can request any agenda item. You just requested an agenda item. Are you clear with my request? Thank you so much. Any further? One other comment. Mr. Donaldson, I do not think it's needful at all for you to be coming to the board with every little change order on the project. The parameter on that that's in place already, I'm very comfortable with that. Any further commissioner comments? Not just on this subject, but any subject. Yes, just one. Before we meet again on June 23rd, on June 20th, which is a Saturday evening that we'll be having in Palm City, our last Music in the Park patio playlist on Saturday, June 20th. It starts at 630 in the evening on Map Road right next door to the fire station. We have food trucks, beverages, ice cream trucks. We have a great ban to end the season. We won't be doing it in July or August because of the probability of rain, so come out and see us for Music in the Park. Also, on that same day, it's starting at 7 a.m. at the Jensen Beach Beach Operation 300, which is the Aaron Vaughn's family charity. They're having their annual Frogman Swim. It also has a 5K and a 10K run. It's a really, even if you're not going to swim in the ocean or run, it's a really, they have lots of vendors, and it's a very patriotic day. It's a fantastic cause. If you have not been out to the beach to see it, it really is a very moving and patriotic event. To support one of our most beloved local charities, 7 a.m., you can register. It's Operation 300, which goes by, like, OP300. They have websites and all sorts of opportunities to register if you would like to swim in the ocean. They have a couple of days. They even have a children's swim, so if you have young children that would like to participate, it's a beautiful event for a great cause. Thank you very much. Commissioner Hetherington. I'm all set. Thank you. Mr. Donaldson. All set. Thank you. Ms. Elder. Our next meeting, commissioners, is a joint meeting with the City of Stewart and the Village of Indiantown and the school board next Tuesday, right? See you then. We are adjourned. Thank you.