>>CHAIR BROWER:  Chris will get you all set up to do that this 
morning.  We have Rabbi Paul Falk from the Ariel congregation in 
Orange city if you would like to come forward and please stand if 
you care to for the invocation and pledge.  

>> [Speaking Yiddish] King, redeemer, and shield I come before 
you first and foremost to bless you for the opportunity to live 
in this place.  There are so many things we get to enjoy that so 
few in the world in a time pastor even in the time they're living 
in get to enjoy.  We thank you that we live in this jewel of an 
incredible county and place where you've given us such incredible 
resources.  We come before you in regard to this meeting and 
agenda going forward, we thank you for those who stood up to 
serve the community, we stand before us up and awfully huge 
challenge given the support, wisdom and strength going forward 
for the decisions that need to be made as they serve us as a 
community, as they seek out what's best.  As they seek to care.  
And to bless your name.  

>>  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.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Krista would you call the roll please?  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  Here.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  Here.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER KENT:  Here.

>>VICE CHAIR REINHART:  Here.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER ROBINS:  Here.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Here.  A full dais and a quorum and we will go 
to public participation and when I call your name please come to 
the podium.  There is a button on the left side of the podium 
that will allow it to go up and down.  We like the microphone 
right at your mouth so it can be recorded and everybody can hear 
you.  You will have three minutes to talk about anything that 
pertains to Volusia County that the Council may be able to act on 
the in the future.  We have a large audience listening in so if 
you would please keep your language acceptable to people of all 
ages.  Regardless of what is permitted to be said by our 
Constitution, I asked for your cooperation in respecting other 
people.  And when you come up, please tell us your name and where 
you are from.  You don't have to give your complete address for 
public safety reasons but we would like to know where you are 
from so your representative here at the dais knows who you are 
and where you are.  First today is Martha underwriter and you 
will be followed by Lloyd Bowers.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  Good evening councilmembers, thank you for the 
opportunity to speak, I am Martha, a resident and Executive 
Director of the Museum of art to land, here to ask you to restore 
the arts funding previously approved in this year's budget and 
unexpectedly removed.  Funding was not a new request, it was 
planned for, promised and relied upon and when it was cut it did 
not simply affect numbers on a spreadsheet.  It disrupted real 
programs, real jobs and real people in our community.  
Organizations make commitments based on this allocation and 
contracts were signed, programs for planned and staff were hired. 
 The damage from lost funding is not theoretical, it is immediate 
and tangible.  It erodes trust and creates instability in a 
sector that only operates with razor thin margins.  The arts 
employ educators, designers, technicians and support staff and 
when funding disappears local jobs disappear that loss ripples 
out word, fewer visitors downtown, meals purchased at local 
restaurants, fewer hotel stays and less money circulating through 
our economy.  Arts organizations reduce pressure on County 
systems, they provide free youth programming, senior services, 
free or low-cost cultural access for families who cannot afford 
private enrichment.  When arts funding is cut those costs do not 
vanish, they shift elsewhere and these cuts all hardest on those 
with fewest options.  Students, working families, small 
nonprofits and underserved communities.  Access to culture is not 
a luxury, it is an equity issue and I want to speak plainly about 
priorities.  The Council is considering a major investment in a 
motocross facility and I'm not here to criticize recreation 
spending that I am here to ask and to say art deserves every bit 
as much respect, seriousness and commitment is any large-scale 
entertainment or sports project.  Arts organizations already 
exist, they serve this community daily, shape economic 
development, workforce retention tourism and civic identity.  
They are part of what makes our county livable and competitive in 
restoring this funding is good for our County and is a matter of 
integrity.  A commitment was made and organizations acted in good 
faith.  I urge you to reinstate the arts funding as originally 
approved and stand by the value of arts and culture in our 
community, thank you.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you for your comments, Lloyd Bowers 
followed by Mary Dickinson.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  Thank you Mr. Chairman, Lloyd Bowers Daytona 
Beach.  I feel like I should say what she said and sit down but I 
have a couple things I'd like to say.  I am here today with a 
similar clear and urgent request, first for Councilman MC to once 
again bring forward his motion to fund this year's cultural 
grants and the second for Chairman Brower to implement the 
decision made by this counsel February 18 despite being the sole 
dissenting vote.  February 10 this County made a decision to 
reformat the cultural grants and proceed to accept and award 
those grants.  That decision was promised.  First to the artists 
educators and volunteers who give their time and talent, second 
to your cultural counsel, your appointees who did the work you 
asked of us and reviewed the grants but finally a promise to our 
resident to who benefit from the work of these cultural 
organizations every day.  These grants have never been an 
abstract number.  They have been the lifeblood of our counties 
civic spirit and keep our theaters vibrant, museums open, music 
playing, festivals live and the decision to eliminate the funding 
this current year has seriously impacted these organizations, 
organizations that inspire our children, unite our neighborhoods 
and attract visitors.  Without this year's funding we risk losing 
not only programs but are smaller cultural organizations and 
their ability to thrive.  Councilman Dempsey your leadership in 
raising this motion was a vital step towards that promise.  I 
urge you to raise it again not as a repeat of the past but a 
renewed commitment to the survival of these organizations 
suffering after having the rug literally pulled out from under 
them.  Chairman Brower I respectfully ask you to adopt and 
implement the February 18 decision for this current year.  Doing 
so will send a clear message the Council stands by its word and 
honor the commitment made.  As many have already stated every 
dollar invested in cultural grants returns far more community 
benefit but please, please, please let's not allow this year to 
be remembered for what was lost but rather how we came together 
to protect and preserve these organizations that make Volusia 
County extraordinary.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you for your comments, Mary Dickinson.  
And Mary you will be followed by Craig.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  Thank you, I'm here to speak about the Marsh 
Road catastrophe that Volusia County has created in our 
neighborhood in destroying our roads, homes, our property and the 
fact for Marsh Road, Deland, Volusia County, the winding and 
hilly nature and Volusia counties planning and zoning documents 
Marsh Road is classified as a local collector road because it 
runs through the rolling terrain east of the land near the Lake 
George Tiger Bay area transition.  It is officially recognized 
for its substandard geometry.  The road features horizontal curbs 
and vertical hills that do not meet modern federal or state 
standards or heavy truck site distance.  This means a heavy truck 
cannot safely see far enough over a crest or a roundabout to stop 
for a stationary car, a school bus or a pedestrian.  Pavement 
condition, it is historically constructed as a low-volume road.  
That means internal structure lacks the deep reinforced lime rock 
base and thick asphalt layers required to support repetitive high 
impact weight of industrial vehicles like logging trucks or dump 
trucks.  The commercial ban Volusia County code 72 – 287, the 
most important legal tool for local residents is Volusia County 
code section 72 – 287.  While this ordinance is often called a 
parking rule, it is the primary law used to stop industrial 
through traffic in residential zones.  The full ordinance quote, 
no truck tractor set my trailer, commercial bus, cutaway van, 
chassis cab truck or any other truck with a gross vehicle weight 
greater than 10,500 pounds as determined by the greater of the 
vehicle registration or the manufacturer's specifications shall 
be parked or stored except while being actively loaded or 
unloaded through a legitimate commercial purpose in the 
residential and agricultural classifications.  How this stops 
driving and through traffic, the active loading requirement under 
this law a vehicle over 5.25 tons is only permitted in this zone. 
 If it has a specific commercial destination.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you Mary.  Your time is up, I'm sorry.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  Well, Volusia County has decided to sell dirt 
to other counties and they are running they are dump trucks down 
our route.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you very much, Craig and you will be 
followed by Daniel Creel.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  Good afternoon Chairman Brower and 
councilmembers of Volusia County.  My name is Craig, I have the 
pleasure of serving as president for the Volusia County cultural 
alliance, I am a proud member of District 1.  I'd like to take a 
moment to thank each of you for your individual commitment to 
arts and culture here in Volusia County.  I can personally attest 
to the many interactions I've had with several of you at our 
local theaters, our festivals, gallery receptions, community 
events and our school events.  And especially one of which was 
back in December of one of our school events where I saw just a 
wonderful spark of joy in one of you and it was just a wonderful 
time to spend time with you.  Your presence at these spaces 
really does matter and it does not go unnoticed by our artists or 
patrons are families in attendance.  I understand there has been 
some discussion:  Going recently regarding the previously 
allocated dollars for arts and culture for the current fiscal 
year and I want to share respectfully and transparently what the 
real-time impact of the previous decision to withhold rent and 
allocated dollars already looks like.  As expected many of our 
nonprofit arts and cultural organizations have begun to reduce 
services so that means fewer programs, fewer free and reduced 
cost opportunities, fewer free opportunities and fewer 
experiences for our youth and families here in Volusia County and 
these are not hypothetical outcomes I previously spoke about, 
they are happening now.  Children are losing access arts 
learning.  Seniors are losing access and points of connection.  
Organizations are being forced to make very difficult choices, 
specifically just to remain in operation and remain open these 
reductions have directly affected your constituents.  For more 
than three decades as you know Volusia County has recognized 
investing in arts and culture strengthens education, economic 
activity and the quality of life.  I ask you to consider the 
impact of the continued uncertainty and work forward to restoring 
state ability and opportunity for the people we all serve, 
especially for the current fiscal year.  As always thank you for 
the opportunity to be heard this afternoon and also what's 
appreciated is your service, unwavering service to our community 
and beyond.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you, Daniel.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  Thank you, my name is Danny, I live in Daytona 
Beach and I've been a longtime resident of this area and I'm here 
to speak with my friends on the support of the arts.  I am going 
to take just a slightly different approach.  I'm reminded of when 
I began my teaching career in Volusia County and Pearson in the 
late 1970s.  I was not from Pearson but that's where I started 
working and I was having a particular difficulty making a 
decision about a project we were working on and one of my 
colleagues looked at me and said Danny, it is time to fish or cut 
bait and I looked at him quizzically because I have no idea what 
he was trying to tell me because I was not from that part of the 
country where I heard expressions like that.  He sensed that and 
looked at me again and tried again with a more colorful 
suggestion that I do something or get off the pot.  Finally he 
said Danny, it's time to make a decision.  You've been studying 
this, you've asked all the right questions, you've talked to all 
the right people, you have all the information, it's time to make 
a decision and in all honesty that's the way I feel about where 
we are with these arts grant funding.  We've been coming in large 
numbers for not just weeks but for months.  We've presented the 
information, we've presented the viewpoints people have shared.  
Our patrons, our friends and we've made a case.  And yet we are 
still having to make the case.  I know this is a difficult 
decision for you gentlemen but as I said this was a decision that 
was partly made already and it seems as though it is time to 
finish this process.  Please approve the grant funding that was 
submitted through the process that you agreed to and let's move 
on from there.  As my friends have said we do thank you for your 
service.  We know this is not easy.  Thank you for hearing us and 
we will thank you even more when you have decided that yes, we 
will fund these arts grants, thank you.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you for your comments, Cameron, Cameron 
Vincent.  Not a new speaker here.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  Good morning, I don't have to lower it.  My 
name is Cameron Vincent, Port Orange Florida, Executive Director 
of arts house foundation and Vice President of the orange County 
cultural alliance and I would like to thank you JR counsel and 
staff for giving me the opportunity to speak today, it's lovely 
to see you, it's been too long.  Before I begin I would like to 
note several members of our cultural alliance executive board are 
missing.  They are currently in Tallahassee for art stay at the 
capital and they are not only thanking our legislators for their 
continued support in arts and culture funding but also working 
with them to come up with new and wonderful programming that at 
the state level can help provide Volusia County residents and 
tourists a wonderful experience when they come to our borders.  
As you probably figured I am here today to respectfully urge the 
county to release the approved 2026 cultural grant funding.  
These grants support programs that serve Volusia County 
residents, children, families, seniors and underserved 
communities we had a fund Republic arts experiences, youth 
enrichment programs, downtown activations and cultural events 
that enhance the quality of life and cultural connection.  For 
many residents these grant funded programs represent the only 
possible entry point to the arts, providing safe possible spaces 
for youth support emotional well-being and bring people together 
across the neighborhood and generations.  The economic benefits 
are equally meaningful.  They bring people into town, stay for 
the festivals, spend that money and that money goes in taxes to 
support and better Volusia County.  These funds have already gone 
through the competitive review process.  We can't even get the 
fund disbursements if you approve unless we can show you what we 
spent it on and it agrees and matches with what we asked for.  We 
can't spend it on something we have not formally requested and 
been approved of.  For cultural organizations timing matters.  
Releasing these funds as approved allows us to plan efficiently 
operate responsibly deliver the services our residents expect and 
they deserve.  Volusia County has long recognized by arts and 
culture are essential to a thriving community, releasing the 
approved 2026 cultural grant funding reaffirms that commitment 
for Volusia County residents.  On behalf of the organizations, 
artists, families and Volusia communities we serve I respectfully 
ask you to move forward in releasing these funds.  Thank you for 
your time I appreciate it and have a good evening.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you for your comments, Dan Pollard.

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  Good afternoon JR counsel and staff, here to 
talk a little bit about fire spring mandate, my wife and I are 
building a house in Volusia County currently in construction of a 
three-story residence.  I'm here to raise concerns about a newly 
imposed requirement by Volusia County services mandating 
sprinkler system in a residential home solely because it's three 
stories.  Despite the structure being classified as a one or two 
family dwelling and I want to be clear on an important note fire 
prevention code Florida building code Florida statute governing 
this issue have not changed.  What has changed is the 
interpretation they've applied by the newly appointed fire 
Marshal in 2024.  I am a recently retired firefighter and 
currently a state licensed fire inspector.  I've spent my career 
enforcing fire codes protecting life safety and I support lawful 
evidence-based fire safety measures but I cannot support the 
unlawful mandate that exceeds statutory authority.  Under Florida 
statute 55395 section 2 the state of Florida prohibits local 
governments from requiring fire sprinklers in one or two family 
dwelling including three-story standalone residents unless the 
local government has adopted a more stringent requirement by 
ordinance following a specific process required under section 633 
208 section 8 and nine Florida statute Volusia County has not 
adopted such ordinance.  Despite this we have been told fire 
sprinklers are now required based on an informal interpretation 
by fire Marshall and inspector Association, that organization is 
not a regulatory authority and its interpretations are not 
binding.  Explicitly nonbinding yet that informal opinion is 
being used as a sole justification to impose a mandate that 
contradicts state law.  The selective enforcement is also evident 
as a three-story home behind us on South Atlantic Avenue also 
under construction was not required to install a sprinkler system 
because a permit was issued before the fire marshals appointment. 
 Identical structure, different rules.  We are advised by Volusia 
County fire services and County legal department our only remedy 
was to file an appeal which we did in 2025 only to have it 
rejected on formatting grounds.  We corrected the issue we filed 
on July 3 and on July 18 were told the appeal was recognized and 
would be scheduled.  After a follow-up call on our attorney 
August 1 the County legal department reaffirmed Volusia County 
does not currently have a seated appeals board capable of hearing 
the appeals process and we were told the next possible meeting be 
November 2025.  We then even then there was no certainty a quorum 
would exist and as a result we lost a month of appeals process 
and that reality did not exist.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Your time is up, your point is heard.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  We are asking no special treatment, just 
follow state law as it is written.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you, Michelle.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  Good afternoon everyone, hope you're having a 
good afternoon.  I am Michelle, I and in New Smyrna Beach trying 
to get back into Port Orange.  I am one of the unlucky ones that 
have worked at a hospital, have been terminated from the hospital 
because I've been injured by the Pfizer vaccine, the COVID 19 
vaccine and if anyone wants to look up my name you can look it up 
on Governor DeSantis roundtable and I have extensive bloodwork 
and documentation I am injured and also blessed because I have to 
see another specialist because I have another issue, the 
blessings just keep coming.  Jeff, I want to thank you for 
listening to me and caring about me because not too many people 
that serve in government whether you are city, whatever, they 
don't care about the constituents.  More people care about 
infrastructure, roads, what have you and I understand that's 
important but we have to care about the people that are left out 
on the streets after paying $20,000 for medications to stay 
alive.  I've given up my savings, my 401(k) and now it sucks, 
sorry, that you have to give up all your savings living a good 
lifestyle, now having to live into housing through section 8 or 
HUD.  Although these opportunities are rare to get into they are 
limited where you can go.  Most of them don't accept certain 
vouchers.  They are in unsafe neighborhoods.  The crime rate is 
high, the drugs are high and it's unsafe.  Someone like me living 
alone with my disabilities and everything I'm going through, I 
don't feel safe in some of these neighborhoods.  There is not 
enough of these facilities to house people and I know we have to 
work on crime and things like that but we deserve better than 
that, there's people that get hard places or I can go to a senior 
living facility and live there because I am disabled, I am 
allowed to live there before I am 62.  I will do what I have to 
do for people I have more of a heart for people that go through 
what I do now.  When you go to places they are not clean yet it 
looks like a blind person painted the place, nobody takes pride 
in the building.  It is not acceptable.  I just think we need to 
do a better job with the County monies that go in there and there 
needs to be more inspections because it looks horrible and it's 
pride.  I don't want to live in a place like that but I have no 
choice, this is what I am resorting to thank you for letting me 
find a place but I just ask for more places to be built for 
people like me in safer neighborhoods.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you for your comments, John Nicholson.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  John Nicholson Daytona Beach side.  Carrying 
on with what she said, you guys offered or gave $1.8 million to 
the city of Daytona Beach to create an unsafe affordable housing 
units.  It's unfortunate, she could have gone to a nice 
neighborhood if you had just put some regulations on the money 
you gave.  Daytona Beach took that money, gave without housing 
and now cops are there every single day.  So she could use that 
affordable housing the county provided that's an unsafe 
neighborhood because you didn't do what you were doing so I ask 
you to look at Clyde Morris Landing.  Secondly if you've been 
paying attention to FDOT A1A.  It is a mess and only getting 
worse.  We are down to 2 trees in the 5 miles of beachside 
oceanfront.  Two trees.  They took out 200 some odd and left us 
with 2. They can't put anymore back in the core area because they 
are putting in signage for the crossing and you can't put a tree 
in front of a sign so between ISP and university, there are going 
to be thousands of signs that give direction to people crossing 
the street so we cannot have a very attractive core area for our 
tourism industry so we've just screwed our tourism industry.  
They are also doing it on a peninsula by the Coptic church, that 
intersection.  They've decided to put blockage in the street.  So 
where the car is parked, it is a 10 foot right-of-way for cars to 
park their cars, they put a 14 foot bulb out so as you go down 
the street that yellow line in the middle now curves around the 
bump out, it is actually asinine and I'm asking you to pay 
attention because it will happen near you at one point or another 
and lastly on the cultural arts, again I ask Don, you mentioned 
that the meeting the other day you were thinking about bringing 
this backup, I hope you do.  Realize what's the value that we are 
putting into these buildings.  We've put millions and millions of 
dollars into cultural arts buildings and nobody anticipated they 
were going to pull the rug out so we're going to have these 
buildings and not all the things that could be going on so I'm 
asking you on 26 November, put a ballot asking if ECHO can use 
10% for cultural arts.  That will cover the $600,000.  It's 
already coming out of the budget already, people are paying this, 
you already know they want it, please consider it.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Norman Samper.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  Good afternoon gentlemen, ladies.  I also live 
on Marsh Road like Mary over here and I'm here to ask if we can 
work on this problem we have with that heavy traffic, not just 
the regular traffic, trucks, 18 wheelers, dump trucks and they 
are creating a big problem.  The speed and the noise, they are 
tearing up the road of course which you said but also the fact 
that it is a country road.  It was usually used by joggers who 
live down the road a ways, horse farms and so on but I'm just 
here to ask for your help to get these problems fixed, it's 
dangerous.  People are getting killed on that road, cyclists and 
these guys found a way to cut around Highway 11 and they are 
abusing the system.  They don't care.  It's not their homes or 
children playing out in the road so anyway, I asked for your 
help, guys.  I would appreciate it if you would get it fixed.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you, Kathy Thompson.  You will be followed 
by Morgan Denny.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  Kathy Thompson representing Daytona Playhouse 
in Daytona Beach.  Why are the arts important?  First of all it 
is an economic engine.  Nonprofit and cultural organizations and 
audiences generated $151.7 billion in economic activity 
nationwide last year.  That spending supports 2.6 million jobs 
and delivers $29 billion in tax revenue but most importantly 
local dollars stay local.  Performances spark restaurant 
reservations, ride chairs and hotel bookings.  Arts organizations 
employ across many job sectors in our community, we don't just 
hire artists, we hire electricians, plumbers, cleaners, pest 
control, landscapers.  Communities investing in culture as a 
proven fact rebound faster in a downturn than those that do not.  
Creativity is a top skill for 2025 and beyond.  Linked in 2025 
skills analysis shows 70% of today's jobs will change by 2030.  
Creativity drives many of those new competencies from AI literacy 
to adaptive problem-solving.  Live performance is good medicine, 
probably something you didn't know but you step into a concert 
hall or perform your self, it doesn't just lift the spirit.  It 
has actually been proven to measurably lower stress hormones and 
boost social bonding chemicals.  Arts education builds stronger 
students and communities.  As a study by the National endowment 
for the arts confirmed children who engage in the arts are in 
higher GPAs, attend school more regularly and show stronger 
emotional skills.  Stem energy, creative thinking, nurtured in 
art class boost problem-solving in math and science.  
Collaboration skills and I know this personally theater 
rehearsals teach conflict resolution and shared leadership.  
Skills employers flag as to scarce and civic engagement students 
involved in arts vote and volunteer at higher rates as adults.  
The arts are a cure for a loneliness epidemic.  In 2023 the US 
Surgeon General called social isolation a public health crisis 
real people who attend or create the arts significantly have 
higher feelings of belonging and trust than those who do not.  
Culture revitalizes downtowns.  Cities from San Francisco to 
Jacksonville whose cultural districts, sorry, you know what I'm 
asking.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you for your comments, Morgan Denny 
followed by Diane White taker.

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  Morgan Denny new Smyrna Beach.  This first 
picture is not a very good one, this first picture is a picture 
of the pipe that drains mission city.  Volusia County had to 
replace it after dump trucks hauling filter caved in three years 
ago.  You can clearly see this ditch has to be three quarters of 
the way full before it starts to flow and when the trail is 
underwater on the curve someone is going to die.  You can't see 
it at night, Volusia County has been informed of this and you see 
why the stone line where water stands running rainy season.  
Next.  This is a second washout.  I'm sorry.  Mr. Tyner has taken 
it upon himself to put these pipes and a lot of them in the 
public right-of-way.  The first washout after three days of rain, 
4 and a half inches is this area.  Mr. Tyner's property is 
littered with these pipes restricting water flow and every time 
he does it he gets another bite at the apple.  Next, this is the 
second washout about a month or so after the first one where they 
vetted rock, about two days of rain with 3 and a half inches of 
water and yet another bite at the apple and there's the fence 
across the public right-of-way.  Next, in the green highlight is 
the public right-of-way.  The arrows are what Mr. Tyner is 
proposing and why would anyone ever push water three times the 
distance away from the natural flow?  And through four pieces of 
private property and allow the county to take the people's land 
to appease one man who has already flooded properties adjacent to 
him and has violated environmental and code enforcement and has 
done so the past three years and continues to do so.  Next, this 
is for you all, so far the residents of mission city have been 
failed miserably.  They should never see a vacation hearing and 
could we please get our meeting we have been requesting the last 
three years.  You can't fit three years into three minutes and 
this is six months.  With liberty and justice for all please, it 
is time.  You said so yourself, it's been long enough.  That's 
all we are asking.  Thank you.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you for your comments Morgan.  Diane 
Whiteacre.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  My name is Diane Whiteacre and I one of those 
people that Mr. Tyner has blocked the water from flowing property 
and for three years since hurricane Ian we've been to this 
courthouse, met with you in meetings.  It comes to sitting here, 
it's frustrating.  Another hurricane season is coming.  FEMA lot 
insurance we pay for will only replace two times is what I've 
heard the fundamental.  I'm paying flood insurance but there is 
this magical word called depreciation so now you think you can 
rebuild your home but you can't.  I am a widow, I had to go back 
to work.  I've rebuilt my home and three years later hurricane 
season approaches and I say please, let the county do something.  
One man Jake Tyner has decided to close up this area where the 
water must flow.  I not smart with all that but it makes sense to 
me, send the water out.  You see trucks of dirt coming, I live 
around the corner and I see the dirt coming in.  At one meeting 
we were led here, that land had been filled in and we said why 
can't the county dig it out?  That way we would be going on 
property and we can't do it.  We are asking you within three 
years, is there something you can do, have a meeting with the 
environmental code enforcement, road and bridge, whatever it 
takes to please solve this problem.  Other people, my neighbor is 
a widow.  She's been through the same as I. Every piece of 
furniture, garbage, every piece of clothing below 3 feet in my 
closet, soaked.  The rainwater is so dirty that garbage after the 
hurricane everything in the bottom of our kitchen cupboards had 
to go out, soaked by filthy rainwater.  Who knows it could mix 
with sewer after the storm.  Every time we have a storm we have 
the same situation where we are holding our breath and praying it 
doesn't happen again.  Please do something so that water flows 
out and away from our neighborhood.  That's all I have to say but 
I thank you and hope the situation is important to your heart 
because we are little people who live in the neighborhood but it 
is important to us, thank you.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you for coming in.  Kevin Suzinski.  Now 
you're going to close?  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  I teach high school to so when my students see 
that.  It is Kevin Sezwick, currently and Altamonte Springs but 
we are building in the Silver Sands area and we are coming in to 
a lot of pickups with our building process because of the permit. 
 Our builder would come back to us with you have to have this and 
you have to have this.  We paid $12,000 to get rid of a turtle.  
That was the first pickup but the new fire sprinkler system that 
they are requiring us to have, that's pushed the cost of our 
house up even higher.  It is a three-story dwelling but it is 
cinderblock all three stories and the first floor is not a living 
area, it's a garage very much.  If you living in the area is on 
the second and third floor so we are trying to get it to where we 
don't have to purchase those sprinklers.  We live in Altamonte 
Springs and when we lived there in 1995 they required us to get 
the sprinklers put in our two-story home and then 10 years later 
they did away with that requirement because we met people and I 
meet a lot of people who teaches school and they say we didn't 
have to have those sprinklers so we don't want to run into that 
same situation where we will have to put them in a couple years 
down the road they say you don't have to do that anymore.  So I'm 
asking you to try to revisit what Dan Poehler was appear talking 
about.  Getting that why do we have to have it if the state 
doesn't require it?  It could be something on the part of did you 
have any major fires in new Smyrna Beach where it burned down a 
three-story home because it didn't have sprinklers?  There is a 
fire station not even one fourth of a mile down the street from 
where our home is being built.  But yeah, I don't want to be in 
the situation Dan is to where he's having to go through an appeal 
process already and trying to get that going.  We don't want to 
make it to where we have to do an appeal process and push back 
our build date because we would like to move in within a year.  
And we are going to have to do something, I'm not sure if we have 
to cut somewhere else to put those fire sprinklers in but just to 
have it to where we are supposed to have that where maybe we 
don't need it.  Thank you for listening to me.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you, Samuel.  

>>  Hello members of the Volusia County Council, staff.  My name 
is Samuel and I am from Ormond Beach.  I've been a resident there 
for 26 years and have experienced the many wonders of our county. 
 Much of these positive experiences came from the local art 
groups that have been pillars of our county culture for several 
years.  Indeed these groups or what largely inspired me to pursue 
my own artistic career in creative writing.  The recent 
discussion about whether these groups should receive funding has 
concerned me greatly as many of these groups have provided 
wonderful experiences for myself and others in the county.  I'm 
sure everyone on the consul have gotten long letters and emails 
giving extremely detailed arguments about why the arts funding 
should be continued.  So I am not going to regurgitate those 
discussion points here.  Instead I'm going to give three brief 
examples of some of my positive experiences with these groups.  
Example 1, the Cinematique theater in Daytona Beach where when I 
was a teenager my family would watch multiple movies from 
multiple different directors and creators and would often spark 
many wonderful conversations about art, politics and culture in 
general.  I particularly have a fondness for the Cinematique 
because it reignited my love for jazz music when they showed the 
Seminole documentary jazz on a summer's day.  Example 2, the 
Atlantic Center for the parts in new Smyrna Beach which was a 
haven for me and my fellow writers who went there to protect 
perfect our craft and get to expand our wings artistically.  Many 
of my professional artists friends and family have attended 
they're not just over the last few years but over several 
decades.  Final example, the pioneer settlement in Barboursville 
whose recreation of pioneer Floridian life inspired me to learn 
more about that area of Florida's history research lost part of 
candlemaking as many talented local artisans demonstrated that 
craft there.  Those are just a few of the ways these cultural 
groups have touched my life.  I can give more examples but I 
believe these instances prove the point well enough.  These are 
groups that promoted artistic and personal growth not just in 
many meet but many residents of Volusia County and I hope you 
take these experiences into account during any further discussion 
of arts and cultural funding and that we work towards providing 
many more of these positive experiences to our fellow County 
residents, visiting tourists and everybody in the present and in 
the future.  Thank you.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you, Ellen Wintermouth.

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  I live in Orange city and I'm a board member 
of Cinematique Daytona celebrating 35 years this year.  I'm going 
to reiterate what you already know.  Without the arts and culture 
from nonprofit organizations such as ours communities lose 
crucial spaces for connection identity learning and healing among 
other significant economic and educational benefits to the 
community.  The gap is not just entertainment options but in 
social cohesion, neighborhood vitality and the emotional health 
of the residents of the Volusia County area.  We see loss of 
connection and belonging when we are not there, the erosion of 
community identity, nonprofit arts organizations as you've heard 
through the day often act as custodians of local stories, 
heritage and underrepresented voices and without them a 
communities unique cultural identity becomes less visible and 
much more fragile.  There are fewer opportunities for learning 
and youth development, so many of our great nonprofit partners 
supply these in spades.  There is a decline in emotional and 
welcome well-being regular engagement with has been shown to 
reduce stress support the community loses release valve like 
films, concerts, performances that help process our times 
together.  Lord knows we are going through hard times.  It's 
economic and neighborhood impacts you know, nonprofit arts and 
culture generate billions in economic activity and support 
millions of jobs.  Losing events and venues means less revenue 
for nearby restaurants jobs and local workers.  I would like to 
think we contributed to Little Italy two doors down from us who 
were going to move 3 miles away because they want to triple the 
size of their business.  Art patrons went there.  Neighborhoods 
see reduced vibrancy and livability with programming decline.  An 
organization like a small nonprofit like Cinematique this 
translates into fewer places for thoughtful films, fewer 
conversations that build empathy and fewer reasons for people to 
come downtown and feel proud of their community.  I urge you to 
restore the funding and if you read my email last month I urge 
you to increase the funding, it is not enough.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you for your comments, Wendy Anderson.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  Good afternoon, my name is Wendy Anderson, I 
live in the land in district 1 and I am going to ask Councilman 
Dempsey if you will reintroduce the motion to fund the cultural 
and arts grants.  One of my most cherished friends is one of your 
most vocal opponents of funding the arts and I've heard him tell 
me over and over again why we should not be using public dollars 
to fund private organizations.  He himself is a donor to these 
organizations and he himself is currently as we speak in New York 
City visiting museums at a theater on his own dime.  But I and an 
ecosystem ecologist and I think about the connections among 
things.  Some of the things I've been learning about recently are 
were from visiting Daytona State College is falcon Hope Center 
where I learned about the ecosystem of funding from both private 
and public organizations to make sure that at risk students have 
enough clothing and food and other resources to be able to get 
through school to earn the degrees they need to have good jobs.  
I've learned about the program to help elderly folks in our 
community get assistance to pay their utility bills.  I learned 
about that from the community services desk at the MLK event 
yesterday at Earl Brown Park.  I know we have public-private 
partnerships that funded sporting events and sporting facilities 
and we value all of these public and private partnerships 
throughout our county and we fund them regularly.  Why would we 
stop funding arts organizations?  They are not depending 100% on 
public funding but this funding from the county as so many people 
have already explained really do help them level up to reach 
parts of our community that absolutely need and benefit from the 
arts.  We need this.  Everybody has skin in the game, even people 
who don't participate directly in the arts have skin in the game 
for the benefit of the arts.  I don't mind paying my one dollar 
per year to fund the parts and I think there are probably very 
few people in this county who do.  So I ask you do not rely on 
echo funding to fund operational and programmatic events for the 
arts.  Echo is for bricks and mortar.  Apparently it's for 
purchasing land as well, it is not for programming.  I ask you to 
put it back in the operational budget, fund it for last year, 
fund for next year, fund it for all future years but I ask you to 
bring it back to the table.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you very much and that concludes the 
public comments from the opening.  We have another chance at the 
end of the meeting and on each item, it takes us to item 1, 
approval of the agenda, can I get a motion to approve.

>>  Motion to approve.

>>  Second.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Motion to approve by Troy Kent and seconded by 
Vice chair Matt Reinhart.  Councilman Robins.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER ROBINS:  Nothing chair I was waiting for the 
Secretary.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Any discussion, all in favor of approving the 
agenda as written lease say aye.  Any opposed.  The agenda is 
approved 7 to 0. Consent agenda item 2, does anyone have an item 
they would like to call for a vote, let's do that one first, 
councilmember Robins.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER ROBINS:  Item I for a vote and the staff to 
highlight item S and T for discussion.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  I for vote, S and T to discuss, I would like to 
poll item X for a vote and Troy Kent.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER KENT:  Not a problem at all, I too wanted item I 
pulled for a vote but I want to briefly after we vote talk about 
item K, just comments.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  K for discussion so we have pulled item I and K 
so let's vote on the rest.

>>  Motion to approve the consent agenda absent items I and K.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Motion made by Councilman Kent, second by Vice 
chair Reinhart.  Any other discussion, all in favor of approving 
the consent agenda less item I and X say aye, any opposed, the 
consent agenda is approved as stated 7 to 0.  Let's start with 
those for discussion first.  Item S. 

>>  Donna Butler, transform 386, public works director.  Can I 
answer any questions or do you want to highlight?  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  I want a brief overview so people in district 3, 
I know there were folks in that pioneer trail area that some of 
this could be held for, special market in conjunction with the 
city complex item S is a text assignment with Halff Associates 
force new Smyrna Beach's second phase, phase 2 of their 
stormwater master plan so it is significant for them and we are 
looking forward to getting the results but the project itself in 
new Smyrna Beach is for the corporate park area and it's a large 
project, we talked to them but I would guess it's significant.  
So it is a fairly large project, 4.9, $6.9 million, 2 million of 
that coming from, you haven't switched.  2 million coming from 
the city of new Smyrna Beach and 4.9 coming from our program.  
They had actually proposed a new grant application that would 
come in higher, this is the first time in a long time something 
has come in lower so we are excited, we took the appropriate 
percentages they provided in their grant application and provided 
it so it's a win-win for us.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  If you could tell us what we could expect down 
there.

>>  The Corbin Park area is a great project by the city.  They 
did the design and permitting on their own.  It was one of the 
first projects that was ready to go.  To Donna's point, it did 
come in under budget and we come back to you with a contract for 
CEI work, this is a long-term project but it is stormwater 
improvements in the Colton Park neighborhood to improve drainage, 
and in new conveyance systems and swales and it really is a great 
project because it involves both areas in the city of new Smyrna 
Beach and unincorporated areas so it benefits both agencies in 
that sense and we are happy to get this one going.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you Ben, thank you Donna if folks have 
picked up on it last few meetings some of these projects in 
stormwater master plans and base studies have been coming out, 
pay attention through the county.  We received your list, thank 
you for your hard work in tackling this, it's a great undertaking 
so don't go away.

>>  First construction project coming before the board.  I want 
to let you know it took nine months.  They had the design ready 
and I told the team at the stormwater meeting today it took my 
nine months to get the review complete and I want you to know we 
are not going slow but with federal dollars comes some strings 
and takes a while.  We're doing everything we can to shrink that 
timeframe but because it's a large project it takes a lot of 
work.  Making us cross every t and dot every i.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  I saw emails about it, Ben, briefly 30 seconds 
or less the need because none of us like studies.  Can you 
explain why these studies in these cases have to be completed for 
these projects?  

>>  We had a great discussion about that and some of the studies 
are coming due and I show what the modeling is, we can show you 
the areas of flood and match that to what we saw during the 
storms and you use that model and come up with a solution but 
that solution in the model you see if it works and it reduces the 
flood stage and the example I used was Norman Beach, we cut that 
study, almost finished and they got to a point where they could 
show the different lugs stages with the solution implemented and 
it took during a 100 year storm event it took an area where there 
was 19 homes that flooded to get to zero and they cost it out and 
show you how much it would cost compared to the flooding impact 
and get you your cost benefit analysis which is important for 
these type of grants so it is a way of flushing out what 
solutions work, what solutions don't so we are pursuing projects 
that are cost-effective and effective in terms of lowering the 
flood stage and reducing flooding instructors.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  A lot of these requirements, do some of these 
grants require that study to be updated in order to capture that 
grant?  

>>  What they require is a cost-benefit analysis to determine 
whether their feasible especially federal dollars or going for 
other grants, you've got to be able to show those things will 
actually work and save money but also it allows us when we get 
these projects in it will allow us to compare them and determine 
the efficiency or effectiveness of those projects and their 
impact on the different areas.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you Ben, good job.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Before you go Councilman Santiago has a 
question.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  Just a comment.  Thanks for drilling 
down on this subject and Ben and Donna thanks for the detail, I 
thought it was very detailed because we often get accused of 
nothing happening.  This is one of several projects going on 
through the county and more to come so while some may be out 
there in social fate world there's a lot happening in the real 
world with this counseling staff and leadership team so we are 
doing a lot of projects and thank you for explaining the process 
is somewhat tedious but you have to cross a lot of t · a lot of i 
to do it the right way.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Before we move on to item I, one of them is 
Doctor Anderson but I have pulled X but you will be able to speak 
then.  John Nicholson, sorry I missed you, I think you wanted to 
speak on H which has been voted on, I hope it went away but if 
you would like to speak.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  John Nixon Daytona Beach side, normally I'd 
like to speak before you vote, it makes it a lot easier.  H, the 
Ocean Center gets its funding from taxes on the hotel.  As you 
know it is a 6% specifically three of which goes to the ocean 
center and three of which goes for advertising, PDD yet you're 
taking money from the hotels and are you getting it to the 
libraries?  Isn't that mixing apples and oranges?  Secondly I 
absolutely don't want you to toss it out and throw it away which 
we have done in the past at the airport, at the Votran etc..  But 
if you're going to get it to the libraries, I'm thinking if not 
the Echo Gallery that went around the outside it is the art being 
put on the inside which is huge.  That alleyway between the two 
buildings the old one and the new one is what, 60, 50 feet high 
like this?  Maybe a little bit higher?  So the artwork that goes 
in there will not go well in a one story building.  It won't even 
fit in a one story building.  So I've only been to four or five 
of the libraries the county owns.  Only the city of Daytona Beach 
has a lobby at one of those six artworks would fit.  Because it 
has a high enough ceiling.  But you wouldn't want to put it there 
because you wouldn't want people ducking under as they walk past. 
 It's that big.  So it's just another thing that tells the public 
about your value of art, your value of culture.  What are we 
doing here?  I know you want to reuse rather than throwing it 
away but I would ask you again to look at it and if it doesn't 
fit in the library, where are you going to put it?  Thank you.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you for your comments, that takes us to 
item I.  I'm sorry, Jake you just popped up.  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  I was going to wait till counsel 
comments but since we are talking about stormwater we had a 
subcommittee meeting today and there's some things that Michael 
Ryan and then and to a lesser extent in this program that Donna 
are doing to share to David Santiago's point that share what we 
are doing out in the public and I encourage all of you to repeat 
those on your social media platforms to get out the information 
that I say the county, Ben is putting out the information but 
it's geographic County and it's important we get it out.  To let 
people know what we are doing here in the County and the cities 
to combat flooding and there's some great things happening 
software wise, hardware wise and maintenance wise so all these 
things are getting put out in various and sundry information so 
just want to put that out.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Item I and item X were set apart for a vote, 
here's how we will do them.  Discuss who?  

>>  I believe item K.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Was also up for discussion.  Troy, was that you? 
 

>>COUNCIL MEMBER KENT:  That was me and chief and finance you 
don't need to come down.  I wanted to pull this because sometimes 
items like this can get lost initial and our residents don't know 
that we just spent $585,920 on a tanker truck for I believe, 
Northwest Volusia County that holds 3000 gallons of water and I 
just wanted to comment, complement our fire chief in not only 
making sure we have the correct apparatus needed to protect our 
residents also piggybacking with other communities so that we 
could get this tanker like, now and we don't have to wait for it 
to be ordered and built and all of that.  So sometimes people 
want to beat the county up about this huge budget but sometimes 
you have to buy pieces of equipment under $600,000 to take care 
of your residents of Volusia County, thank you Chairman.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you for bringing that up.  Item I and X 
for a vote, we will have staff come up and give us a brief 
synopsis of the book and the Council can ask any questions if 
they have and we will have public comments afterwards and the 
Council can discuss and just like any other item so item I.

>>  Community services Director so in 2014 the county provided a 
grant for $400,000 to the Halifax Humane Society.  The grant had 
two components to it, one was the pet services building which was 
described as a recreational rest area for dogs and providing 
services for people who may be traveling and locals in a public 
dog park so what you have before you today is a proposal the 
staff has worked on with Halifax Humane Society who was proactive 
in reaching out, their new CEO and telling us he believed they 
were out of compliance.  He went out and they were certainly out 
of compliance with what they were using the building for.  They 
made another proposal to use the building for another use and our 
legal team said no, this is not a ECHO use that would fall under 
the age, C, H or O categories so what we have before you is 
they'd like to keep the public dog park component of the grant 
and operate it.  I did pull the data and the average is 30,000 
visits per year in their annual report to ECHO so it is a busy 
dog park.  The closest dog park to that is in Holly Hill, 5 miles 
and second closest is 6.5 miles away so it is a dog park open to 
the public.  Interestingly and I don't think I've seen this 
anywhere on Google reviews it received a 4.7 out of five star 
reviews with 250 reviews so people like the part.  What's being 
proposed is they pay us back for the full portion of the building 
which is 186,539.  They've committed to reinvesting in the dog 
park to the tune of I believe over $30,000.  And continuing to 
operate it till 2054 as stated in the restrictive covenant.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you very much, questions for staff, 
Councilman Robins.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER ROBINS:  Thank you for that synopsis, you 
mentioned you are proactive in reaching out.  How long were they 
out of compliance or how many years?  

>>  I will say our last compliance visit it had been less than 
three years.  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER ROBINS:  So is it three years, is it two years?  


>>  I will pull the data for you.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER ROBINS:  What I'm looking for here.

>>  August 2023 we went out and they were in compliance.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER ROBINS:  I see a bit of a pattern and a couple 
things, I was wondering why this wasn't on the standard agenda 
because I saw we had other ECHO compliance issues but also what 
are we doing in the fact of going forward to maintain I guess 
continuity of the program which is a great program.  How are we 
adjusting our checks and balances so we can get these folks to 
stay in compliance and probably most importantly is making our 
residents whole, it is their tax dollars.

>>  I think our compliance program is working because everything 
we've brought back since I've been in this seat has been full 
reimbursement of the taxpayers.  So we have a compliance regime 
so typically during construction of the project our team visits 
two times per year, actual site visits.  During the monitoring 
process so after they have completed construction we enter them 
into a formal three year monitoring process so I say formal 
because when we go, when our team goes out to do compliance 
checks, if they go to the Humane Society for their formalized 
check which they notice the people, the CEO will meet with us or 
president will meet with us on the site and we will do a 
walk-through.  However we will also visit projects on the way to 
that site or informal visits and projects surrounding that site 
so in addition to formal visits we are doing in formal checks on 
the projects as well so that is an additional thing we have added 
to checks and balances.  I will say this is on the consent agenda 
because staff negotiated that with the Humane Society.  They 
initially wanted to pay us back over several installments like 
Lake City did but we had promised them to put it on the consent 
agenda in hopes it wouldn't be pulled if they paid us the full 
amount by March 1.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER ROBINS:  I want to make sure and I'm hitting on 
this for a reason is compliance.  So they were out of compliance 
for up to three years possibly, they proactively came forward and 
turned himself in so I see a gap there.  I want to know, I'm not 
going to get into why, it seems like we are on it now.  I want 
our people whole.  I want this money back in the program and I 
seat 180 K out of the 400 K is going to be paid back.  What is 
their due date, how do we enforce it and how will we get our 
money back and hold them to the coals just like everybody else.

>>  We would have found it, if we went on August 2023 and they 
were complaint we would have been back out in August 2026 so we 
would have found it in August but they reached out in 2025 and 
that is a requirement of the grant.  We are thankful when 
individuals do that, it is part of their agreement when they are 
not in compliance they are supposed to reach out so when we show 
up and there's compliance issues we don't know about their 
already starting off on a bad foot.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER ROBINS:  Can we shrink that yearly?  

>>  I would need to weigh in on that.  I don't want to get into 
more cost but we have a compliance system you guys have approved. 
 If you would like that that's something we could talk about that 
will start meeting more people so more people is more cost and it 
is something we will have to talk about filling in the budget 
season.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER ROBINS:  Follow-up and I will be quiet but we 
see more costs on that but we're losing on this and.  So possibly 
by them not being in compliance and having to chase this money 
back down and recapture what was ours so how do we avoid this 
conflict the easiest way to do it and I will wait or counsel 
weigh in on a plan going forward, that way we can tighten this up 
a bit.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Okay, Councilman Santiago for a question.  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  Thank you Mr. chair.  My question 
lies more in the remaining funds in the dog park they've agreed 
to do, you gave numbers on it.  My understanding is Halifax 
Humane Society has gone through changes in their structure and 
who is going to be utilizing this dog park?  I don't know the 
dynamics, I don't know if they are membership driven.

>>  It's a free dog park for the public.  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  The know people from outside are 
going there.

>>  Yes, 30,000 a year.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  I want to make sure, thank you.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you and County Manager George Recktenwald, 
I would ask can you refresh the Council's memory, I think Danny 
makes a good point, we shouldn't go three years and find out 
we've got several clawbacks on the agenda today.  What is the 
current policy, how often do we follow-up once we give somebody 
money?  

>>COUNTY MANAGER:  I just gave it to you, three years.

>>  Three years once the project is complete and two times.  They 
are required to submit an annual report and we asked them has 
there been any changes to the scope of services so each year they 
are testing they are still providing those services so if they 
answer otherwise is a trigger for staff to go out as well.

>>COUNTY MANAGER:  They also mentioned when we are in route to 
other areas they make informal spot checks so three years or the 
formal checks and in between as they are traveling through they 
the other spot checks.  We don't have an exact number because it 
is dependent on when they are traveling through.

>>  We have 302 project so that's 100 projects a year they are 
doing compliance monitoring.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  Would more frequent inspections have 
prevented the clawback from the two houses we are looking at 
today?  

>>  I don't think so.  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  You been working with those all along 
so that's a different situation, we've known about the 
situations, he's been trying to get them into compliance so that 
is a different issue.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Okay, Councilman Johansson.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  A couple of questions.  When is the 
last time they had a leadership change?  

>>  20 months ago.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  When did they tell us they were not 
in compliance?  

>>  February or higher.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  They hired to clean out and make 
things right, you made operational changes we are well aware of 
and we probably took a look and said we are out of compliance, we 
need to say something.  Good on them for announcing.  And he 
wants to make it right.  What I guess I'm saying is maybe in the 
past they were struggling to survive and that was somebody else's 
money let go and they're trying to survive.  I appreciate what 
they did and I think whether we go forward or not, this is one of 
three of how many?  

>>  302.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  302, however many, not that that's a 
good average but there comes a point of no return for risk 
mitigation and I want to make sure we are not spending double the 
amount of money to make sure there are no lapses in ECHO 
compliance.  I deferred to you in my case, if three years is 
enough for spot checks that's fine but we can't catch anything 
all the time.  I appreciate it if the executive director noticed 
there was a problem.

>>  It's incumbent upon them during the annual report and 
requirement of our agreement to report any changes in scope of 
services provided.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  But there's no punishment for not 
reporting other than they are not in compliance and you put them 
on double secret probation.

>>  Yes, sir.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Okay, Councilman Robins.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER ROBINS:  I want to make sure piggybacking off of 
Mr. Johansson real quick, we are going pretty much on a thinking 
process when they send in the reports, not trying to be a joker 
but I swear we are in compliance, what happens if a fib which 
could have possibly happened, what are our protections?  

>>  We will find out when they do the three year check.  I will 
tell you and I've shared with you, that determines whether our 
approach is hard or soft with them.  If we are finding stuff 
that's three years old that's a problem for us so we are much 
more strict on timelines in getting us a plan as to what their 
plan will be for remediation.  As using the restrictive covenants 
as a stick to say we will force you to sell the asset if you do 
not comply in a timely manner.  There are things we do at the 
staff level to ensure people take us seriously.  If they are 
lying on an annual report I don't think we can prosecute them for 
that but I am not an attorney.  This is a good faith partnership 
we've partnered with these people and that expectation is they 
operate in good faith with us.  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER ROBINS:  Thank you.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  That brings in attorney Michael Dyer.

>>COUNTY ATTORNEY:  What Brad is describing are the current rules 
of the program.  If you want to change those rules going forward 
for future projects like have a penalty if someone non-complies 
or some other provision you could apply that now on a project 
that's already recorded for future use, I think that's a 
discussion you can have, you set those rules.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Correct, thank you.  Okay, let me read what the 
proposed motion needs to be.  A 186,539 lump-sum payment due by 
March 1, 2026.  HHS ineligibility for ECHO funding until 
repayment is complete, continued operation of the public dog park 
through May 13, 2054 and completion of remediation item trail 
restoration signage update structure repairs and waste receptacle 
replacement by spring 2026, HHS must also maintain permanent ECHO 
signage and all maintenance standards specified in the grant 
agreement, would anybody like to make that motion?  Councilman 
Troy Kent.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER KENT:  I have a question if that's okay 
chairman.  Doctor, during the three-year inspection period if a 
violation is found does it trigger a more aggressive inspection 
going forward?  

>>  Are posture is different, when we find stuff on our own and 
it's not reported by the grantee.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER KENT:  What does that look like?  

>>  We are more strict in terms of the timeline that they have to 
provide a planet or remediation.  We also in that first letter 
discuss the restrictive covenant and what our legal options are 
in terms of enforcement to help them sit up straight and 
understand we are being serious.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER KENT:  Thank you.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Any other discussion, we still don't have a 
motion to approve the lump-sum payment.  And if we don't approve 
this.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER KENT:  Chairman, I will start with the motion 
because I had a conversation with Doctor Burbaugh earlier today.  
I was pleased to hear the numbers of people attending at the 
Halifax Humane Society but I will make the motion so we can get 
the 186,000+ dollars back so I will make that motion.

>>VICE CHAIR REINHART:  I will second that.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Motion comes from Councilman Kent, seconded by 
Vice chair Reinhart.  Any other discussion?  On the motion on the 
floor.  All in favor say aye.  Any opposed.  And item I is 
approved 7 - 0 and that takes us to item K. On the consent 
agenda.  And this is really for informational purposes but we do 
also need to vote on the letter the County attorney must propose.

>>  Thanks for pulling this for discussion, I have Chris Ryan 
here to give you background information.  You asked as a counsel 
to take a position at your last meeting on Senate Bill 718 and 
House Bill 479.  They were identical at that time.  It's the 
large water preemption bill.  Much of water, just a general 
statement, much when it comes to water is preempted by the state. 
 But this made it worse.  There's more preemptions.  So these two 
bills now no longer match.  The house bill was amended recently 
to be more favorable but it's still preempts and I wanted to give 
you an update on that because the letter that was attached to 
this agenda that was to oppose the bills but they were massed at 
the time so if it's okay Mr. Ryan can give recommendation to the 
Council and we will go from there.  

>>  Chris Ryan assistant county attorney and as Mike mentioned 
back in December 3 both these bills were filed with the state and 
at the time they were identical and since then 479 was referred 
to committee the 13th of this month, replaced with committee 
substitute that did away with the entirety of the bill and now 
has a different little preemption as Mike mentioned.  Much closer 
to what we'd like to see if we see any preemption, obviously we 
don't care for them but it's more palatable than in the 718.  
That bill moved the provisions preempting regulation of water 
quality pollution discharge prevention and removal to the states. 
 It does allow, disallows governments to regulate wetland buffers 
within 15 free feet from a different location.  479 one amended 
has now been reported with second committee whereas 7/19 still 
has no upward traction, it doesn't mean it won't.  The assessment 
is still early and we have until the end of March but it looks 
like for 79 is primed to make a more motion and the vote to amend 
it was 11 to 5 so there was a decent amount of people voting to 
amend it to be less preemptive so I'm here to speak on anything 
regarding the process.

>>  He can give a background on how this would impact Volusia 
County.

>>  Environmental management director, just a primer on our 
wetland code and wetland buffers as relates to this new bill 
particularly the change to 479.  Our comprehensive plan and 
chapter 50 minimum standards and land development code all have a 
wetland buffered standards in excess of what the state standard 
is right now.  Currently the state standard is a 15 foot minimum 
and a 25 foot average from wetland so from me to you is the 
buffer and in our code the minimum is 25 feet on all wetlands and 
in certain areas where prior councils have determined we have 
really high quality habitat, we require a minimum of a 50 foot 
buffer so those would include your national resource management 
areas and environmental core overlay which is also sort of 
coincident with much of the wildlife corridor and then anything 
adjacent to an outstanding Florida water so our code says in 
those areas the wetland buffer is a minimum of 50 feet.  It can 
be increased based on the site conditions and we have in some 
cases where we have OFW maybe there is a habitat, streamside 
habitats have increased those minimums so I wanted you to know 
what we have currently and how that differs from the state when 
you are making a determination if you want to continue to object 
to the committee substitute.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Miss Adair with the changes to house bill for 79 
and impact to or preemption on regulation of activities of 
wetland buffers, if that were adopted how would that impact what 
we have on the books today?  

>>  There are multiple places in the conference event plan that 
referred to buffers in excess of those requirements so that 
includes our future land use elements, our Osteen local plan has 
buffers higher than the state.  Our conservation elements, all 
those have requirements that are policies that have increased 
buffers and then we would have to make a significant number of 
changes to our land development code.

>>  The letter attached to this agenda item was originally based 
on feedback from counsel that was opposing these two bills.  One 
question we had and a reason why Miss Adair was here was would 
your staff recommend you oppose both, even the bill and I always 
get backwards, 479 that has a smaller preemption but still 
preempts?  I think the answer if you have any questions was Eric 
stated your staff would recommend opposition to both.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  That is important to know.  Are these questions 
for staff, Jake?  Jake Johansson.  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  Ginger, real quick.  What's the 
science behind our buffering plan, the 50 and 25, why 50?  

>>  That's a great question, the research that's been done in 
area says if you want to protect wildlife the optimum buffer in 
the wetland in our part of Florida is 300 feet.  Obviously that's 
difficult when these buffers get applied to single-family lots, 
commercial lots.  I wasn't here when we adopted 25 and 50.  That 
was a compromise between what the optimal would be if we are 
trying to protect wildlife and something that protects those 
property rights of the people on these lots.  The 50 certainly 
was intended to provide an additional buffer for those areas that 
are very valuable wetlands and part of the area we have decided 
we want to protect to a greater degree than maybe the urban 
areas.  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  This might be a question for you 
Mike or the staff.  We are talking a lot about wetlands but 718 
has more than just wetlands, it's septic to sewer.

>>  That would have been no pollution control, no wetland 
protection, water quality protection.  It would have severely 
impacted our ability to comply with state rules about water 
quality, they're asking us to make improvements to water quality 
we wouldn't be able to make if they preempted us from being able 
to regulate.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  So we're going to write a letter and 
I know where it's going to land and the question is going to be 
why these bills?  So are there people, are there other 
municipalities, other counties using 500 foot buffers and I don't 
want to call it outrageous, it's outrageous compared to what we 
have.  To the point where the Senate and House want to preempt 
this?  

>>  There aren't other local governments that have large buffers, 
there have been changes in areas on the West Coast, Manatee 
County I think was one where they were looking at changing their 
wetland buffer requirements, they got sued and changed and then 
it didn't change.  I can't really decide or know why somebody 
brought it forward but certainly I think in our county we are 
implementing these rules in a measured way to protect the things 
that need protecting and have sort of less of the standard in 
those areas that are maybe more urban.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  You know at least from my 
perspective and Councilman Robbins has brought things forward as 
well.  Our goal is to decrease regulation when it doesn't make 
sense and when it does make sense and we've had these wetland 
conversations before.  Then we want to keep them.  I want to make 
sure as we send this letter everything we are doing is based on 
science, not just we picked so-and-so because that was a good 
number.  Because then we don't have a leg to stand on up there.  
We might actually be part of the problem.  That's causing the 
preemption and I want to make sure we are not, doesn't sound like 
we are so thank you, I am done with the questions.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Don, did you have a question?  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  Let me make sure I'm clear what we are 
fighting against, we are in agreement we are trying to fight 
preemption in this state and what they're looking to do is 
control our water quality, water quantity, wetlands including any 
delineation and pollutant discharge prevention, correct?  

>>  That's the 718 language.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  So that is why are fighting against, 
right?  

>>  Yes, sir.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  They are trying to preempt us from any 
activities that would affect the hydrology, correct?  

>>  Yes, and water quality.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  So they're trying to preempt us from 
that and they will try to preempt us about commercial water wells 
on our property, correct?  

>>  Is that right, commercial water wells?  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  It says they will try to regulate our 
water quality and quantity so they would be trying to control our 
commercial wells to stop us from drawing water.

>>  It's more about us being able to regulate commercial water 
wells so already water we withdraw is regulated by the state are 
consumptive use permitting.  I think it's more about us being 
able to regulate other people in the commercial water was.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  So they would be preempting us.

>>  Correct.  Here's a for instance, we have a rule that says you 
can't do certain activities in a certain distance from a potable 
water well.  You can't do things like pour oil down the ground 
within a certain distance of a well.  We would be preempted from 
that wellhead protection ordinance if 718 passed in its current 
format.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  Right but I would think 718 would 
include commercial water wells.  Thank you, that's all.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Okay, Michael Dyer.

>>COUNTY ATTORNEY:  I think you have a couple options, one is do 
nothing, that's always an option, do not send a letter on weight 
and monitor the situation.  You could propose both bills related 
to your opinion as a counsel.  In the past it would be a letter, 
sent on behalf of the Council by the chair or you could say that 
listen, 718 was so broad I propose that we had as much as I don't 
like preemptions and House Bill 479 it's better than 718, I will 
support that and I think you've got a variety of options.  
Session ended March so we are still early in the process.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Councilmember Johansson you had a question.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  I guess another following question.  
As have the lawyers waiting on this?  

>>COUNTY ATTORNEY:  I should have said that.  I'm not aware of 
where the league of cities say, I do know they have not agreed to 
house bill for 79.  I did check on that Friday.  I think they are 
still monitoring and I think they were speaking against the 
original bill at the time.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  I have more to say about that when we come to 
discussion.  Okay, let's go to the public and then we can decide 
what we want to do, Doctor Wendy Anderson.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  Hello, my name is Wendy Anderson, I live in 
land, district 1. I want to thank you first of all Jeff and chair 
Brower for taking seriously my request of the January 8 meeting 
to take up this topic.  It's urgent.  It is in my opinion one of 
the highest priorities you all should be focusing your time and 
conversations on right now so thank you for that for in your 
closing remarks taking the time to follow up on it and all of you 
for asking staff to generate a letter.  The letter attorney Ryan 
has helped you craft was very nicely done.  It was clear in his 
position and provided strong support for local control.  It was 
clear and what your requests are.  I understand changes that have 
occurred in four $0.79 than do open up options to make minor 
edits to the letter and hopefully if you decide to do that can be 
done as quickly as possible.  Time is of the essence on this and 
I think it's important our legislative delegation here from you 
all as quickly as possible about your views of supporting local 
control and opposing any kind of preemption.  I do think of 
options that Mr. Dyer has offered to you continuing to oppose 
both bills is probably your best option.  Yes, it's nice when a 
bill gets softened a little bit it is ask staff has recommended 
still going to undermine very good ordinances we have on the 
books already.  I always say when I'm speaking in other contexts 
that the county actually does have already very good ordinances 
on the books if only we would follow them and uphold them which 
we do most of the time, but to have the state come in and 
actually undermine our very good ordinances is really 
unacceptable read I really like the line and I wish I printed out 
the letter read it directly but I like the line in the last 
paragraph of the letter that reminds the state it is their job to 
set the floor, not the ceiling on policy.  That they set minimum 
standards it is up to local governments to decide if they want 
higher standards than that based on particular situations in 
local geography and culture.  So I do urge you to continue your 
conversation about this and urge you to support sending this 
letter or a very minor edit to this letter to oppose both of 
them, thank you.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you Doctor Anderson.  That is a very 
important part of this letter.  It's a well-written letter.  
Thank you.  I don't think any of us mind, in fact we expect the 
state would provide minimum standards, that's typically what 
happens and then a charter County government can have higher 
standards that's what needs to remain in place what I wanted to 
relay to the Council because it is important for you to know a 
conversation that Michael Dyer had.  He and I participated in a 
Florida Association of County conference on all these bills 
coming up and he asked specifically about these bills.  They 
don't like it either.  The changes in the house bill for 79 
hadn't been made yet but asked what we could do there was an 
answer, contact your local delegation and then another speaker 
came on and said wait, and Mike, correct me if I'm wrong, I think 
they were talking about Senate Bill 180 that when came up said it 
became on the radar screen for the entire state of Florida 
because of the action Volusia County took and I'm not saying that 
to Pat Mike on the back who worked with all the lawyers to get an 
amendment.  I worked with a committee I'm on, I'm saying because 
they were talking about all of you.  That Volusia County stood up 
and wrote a massive number of letters to legislatures and said we 
want this changed.  And I think George is going to talk about 
Senate Bill 180 in his closing remarks, do I see a letter?  
That's a whole other animal what's important I think for the 
Council to keep in mind is the lobbyists in Tallahassee really 
depend on us letting the legislatures know directly, not just by 
lobbyists what we want.  And our constituents, that they need to 
reach out and when Mike asks which ones, their answer was all of 
them.  Send it to every state senator and legislature.  I am 
happy with the letter.  I think the Council needs to decide today 
do we say anything about 479?  I think we need to oppose 718.  Do 
we reference 479 at all?  It's trending in the right direction or 
just oppose it so those are the decisions I think we need to make 
today.

>>  I should have added before if you elect to oppose both we 
would generate a house bill on 479 that's largely the same but 
tailored to that bill.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Separate letter and just a house memo, 
Councilman Dempsey.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  Yeah, I am strongly in favor of 
writing this letter for 718 and I will wait to hear input on 479 
but I do want to highlight something that's been a topic of 
conversation over the last few weeks I just started by me but 
Ginger pointed out part of 718, the very thing we are fighting 
against is the state ability to regulate our ability to regulate 
water quantity or quality.  But looking at these conservation 
easements, that we are doing, Ginger said 718 would limit our 
ability to control commercial wells.  718 would affect our 
ability to control our hydrology of our land.  So even if we win 
this and we fight 718 either by petition or litigation, beat it, 
we've still given up by contract on these conservation easements 
in perpetuity because with every angle, not every, there's a 
couple out there but the majority according to Doctor Burbaugh 
the majority of these conservation easements we are contractually 
giving up our control of hydrology.  We are giving up our control 
of commercial wells so here we are fighting writing letters, 
we're going to fight 718 and even if we win if given it up 
because of conservation easements.  That is my complaint with 
conservation easements.  We can in this war but we will get 
preemption by 1000 paper cups, with every conservation easement 
more and more preemption.  Because we are now not just being 
subjected to regulations by this big brother state which we could 
fight legally on constitutional issues but now we have gone into 
bed with them by contract forever.  And we can't get out of it 
unless all parties agree.  The state, St. John's, whoever we are 
in bed with we have to get their blessing to get out of it.  
We've given up our preemption, given up our local control with 
every single one of these easements.  That's my beef with the 
program.  We've got to stop that.  We've got to leave it where 
Volusia County and Volusia County only is involved in these 
conservation easements cost 500 years from now the legislature 
counsel may say that may have been a good idea in 2026 in 2526 is 
not a good idea anymore, we need to get out so why do we need to 
be in bed with the state, why do we need to be preempted by the 
because with these easements you have to get their blessing.  
That's my point.  Thank you.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Johansson.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  I tried to figure out what I was 
going to say there.  I am leaning towards addressing Senate Bill 
718 and I think Mike Dyer said it.  House Bill 479 starts to go 
in the right direction.  We like it better than 718, but we 
prefer you get rid of both.  I think that would be the way we 
would want to go.  We don't want to be told what to do in any 
case but if we have to take the lesser of two evils we will take 
the house bill over the Senate bill right now it sounds like.  
That's just something I would talk about and demand the about.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  With that said you are in favor of opposing 
both.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  Yes, opposing both but if we have to 
suck an egg the house bill is the one we have to do.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Okay, Councilman Santiago.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  Don, your comments made me think of a 
question to go 2 to close it out.  I am curious if that bill does 
pass, would it preempt our contracts we've done there 
specifically to the wells or do we know how it would affect it if 
possible?  

>>  I will let Mr. Ryan answer.

>>COUNTY ATTORNEY:  718 has a contract that says it doesn't apply 
to an interlocal agreement between the department and agency what 
a management or government conducting programs materially 
affecting the water resources of the state so there is a carve 
out for that.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Okay, Don I wanted to say to bring up a good 
point and I think we need to discuss it and decide, I know we, 
why we do it because it saves money if we get money from the 
state or St. John's to buy but it makes our money go further but 
it is accomplishing the goal.  And I think we need to have that 
discussion as I'd be glad to put it on the agenda we can discuss 
it.  But it's outside of the decision we need to make right now 
for right now.  We need to decide if we oppose both of these, 
just oppose the Senate bill and halfheartedly.  I agree with Jake 
that we should oppose both of them at this point.  That's just my 
feeling.  Anyone else?  We need a motion on the floor what to do. 
 Right now we have the Senate Bill 718 letter which I will see 
requires any changes personally.  You all have to tell staff that 
if you do.  And I think we need to also give them directions do 
they also write a letter about house bill for 79.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  I would like to make a motion that 
we ask for relief from house bill 479 and put some language 
upfront that says although we are aware the house bill softens up 
718 it's still doesn't meet the needs of the County.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  Motion made by Jake Johansson, second by 
councilmember Robins.  I like that.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  Chairman, administrative item.  I 
think if we are going to approve this agreement with 718 that we 
send them separately, can we send 718 and work on house Bill 479.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  County attorney is nodding his head yes.  Okay, 
we have a motion and a second on the floor to send the 718 
letter, legal staff will bring back a letter to 479 at the next 
meeting perhaps or quicker.  

>>  We can do that next meeting.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  I know it's early but these bills are so bad.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  So many times this year and the year 
before when we've talked to our delegation I've heard that ship 
has left the station pretty early on so I'd like to get these 
appear early.

>>  Chris Ryan has promised he will not leave the building 
tonight.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Jake, you are absolutely correct, I'm glad you 
said that and I'm going to say more about that when George talks 
about Senate Bill 180 because it's kind of indicative of what's 
happening there.  That's the motion on the floor, 77 18, 479 will 
be brought back by staff.  Any other discussion, all in favor say 
aye.  Any opposed.  That motion carries 7 - 0.

>>  We could speak on that?  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  It would fit in, thank you.

>>  Everybody have the letter that George sent out?  It should 
have been handed out but it's regarding Senate Bill 840.  I can 
read it here quick.  We would like to take the opportunity to 
express our support for 840 which serves Senator DiCeglie's 
effort to correct unintended consequences created by last year's 
Senate Bill 180 and as you recall one 80 has been used to block 
local governments from making plan changes or establishing 
protection policies under the storm response.  Senate Bill 840 
would narrow current law to apply only to storm damage properties 
and policies that would delay rebuilding while allowing local 
governments to move forward with unrelated planning decisions.  
Furthermore we support Mr. DiCeglie's efforts to reduce affected 
areas from 100 miles to 50 miles from a hurricane track.  This 
allows local governments to continue certain actions after storm 
planning decisions and projects related to drinking water sewer 
warm water and flood protection.  Thank you for the attention to 
this letter, look forward to working with you on this during the 
2026 legislative session so if that's acceptable we would like to 
send that forth.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  We will get a consensus here.  I had one 
question for you or anybody else.  On the tracking of 100 miles 
to 50 miles, are they tracking that from the eye or from the 
furthest outer edge of the storm?  

>>  We asked that question.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  I bet you did.

>>  Chris Ryan, right now there's clarification needed on.  I 
believe they are saying from the outer edge that I don't believe 
that's been clarified yet.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.

>>  Is important given the size of the storms so we will try to 
get clarification.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Is John Booker here or maybe you can answer 
this.  We learned last week this is a much better bill than 180 
was.  It has some potency because it's from the original author 
who is now correcting his own bill.  But it had no house 
companion bill.  And I've talked to one of our local delegation 
and he wasn't aware that Senator DiCeglie even filed a bill.  But 
said and I think staff has confirmed this that that doesn't mean 
we are dead in the water.  It's not impossible to still change it 
to amend Senate Bill 180 with just Bill 840, it just makes it 
more difficult.  We are going to have to, the legislature will 
have to find and you may be able to correct me if I'm wrong, find 
language in another bill that can be attached.  So it's a harder 
process but the reason I bring that up is because of what the 
committee from Florida Association of Counties said to Mike and I 
when we asked what we should do, we said what made a difference 
on Senate Bill 180 especially was the amount of feedback they got 
from the public that said please don't do this and from the staff 
and the attorneys.  So I don't know if Councilman Sandy Iago.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  Moved to approve the letter.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  Second, Johansson.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  All in favor of sending this letter 
please say aye.  Any opposed.  Okay, that takes care of the 
consent agenda.  Thank you everybody and that takes us to item 3. 
 Approval to rescind ECHO grant EH 1201 and authorize release of 
the restricted covenant on all reimbursement of the $485,000 from 
Heritage preservation incorporated, Brad Burbaugh.

>>  Community services director so this is a voluntary request 
from the Heritage Preservation Trust which is a nonprofit 
organization.  We helped them I believe in 2009 and 2012 by two 
historic homes.  One was the Hotchkiss house in front of you 
today.  The organization has had some compliance issues 
identified in 23.  We've tried to work with them to come into 
compliance but I think now that they've realized that maintaining 
both properties is not feasible for them given the historic 
nature and just owning a home on the beach side you know 
maintenance costs are high.  What they have proposed for 
counsel's consideration is putting this house on the market and 
selling it and reimbursing County and taxpayers the full amount.  
So $485,000.  In order to do that they need counsel's approval to 
lift the restrictive covenant when we receive payment.  To 
protect ourselves, Sabrina has worked out a method we would hold, 
they would hold the money in escrow for the restrictive covenant 
so we would not lift the restrictive covenants unless the money 
was in escrow for us.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Acute, questions from Brad and Councilman Sandy 
Iago.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  Motion to approve.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  Second, Johansson.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Motion to approve, to rescind by David Santiago, 
second by Councilman Johansson.  Don Dempsey, did you have a 
question for staff?  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  Brad.  Brad, I heard through the vine 
at one point the property owner offered to give the property 
back, is that true?  

>>  We never owned it, it was owned privately.  That is what Mr. 
Dillard said.  My staff who has engaged with them since the 
beginning does not recollect that conversation.  It might have 
happened previous to Daniel being in the seat but Kendra Peterson 
was in that seat, he was now my office manager so neither one 
recalled having that conversation with Mr. Dillard.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  Would there be a problem asking him?  
I heard that was an offer and that might be something we need to 
discuss.

>>  Sure.  You would take on the maintenance cost of a house 
that's in disrepair but sure.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  Secondly, is there any superior liens 
on this house we would be subordinate to?  

>>  Good evening, assistant county attorney, we don't have a 
title policy or title work but a review of the clerk of courts 
website indicates there are no mortgages ahead of us on Arlene.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  For mechanic's liens?  

>>  Mechanics liens are typically recorded so I don't have a 
title policy but there are no judgments.  There are not judgments 
ahead of us.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  If they had a lot of work done by 
contractors and a lot of material supplied and they didn't pay 
their bills there would be a lien on the property.

>>  If the contract got a judgment, yes, there is no recorded 
clerk of court judgments prior to ours in time but I don't have a 
title policy.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  Have we done a title search?  

>>  We have not because I don't have authorization to move 
forward with foreclosure action so I would incur the cost of a 
title search at this point we had they are in the process of 
potentially selling it so they will get title work done and the 
title company would then prioritize.  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  Is our lien superior to a mechanics 
lien?  

>>  It would be in time so ours would be under priority.  If ours 
is recorded prior to a lien by a mechanic, yes.  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  If this property is in such disrepair 
it sold for 400,000 and they all is a lot more than that.

>>  I don't know what it's sold for currently, that's what it 
sold for.

>>  This was our portion of the purchase in 2000.  The house is 
listed for over a million and the price now is just under a 
million, 999 I believe.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  They are into before half a million 
basically.  My concern is if it sold for 400 we will be out 100, 
roughly.

>>  No, I don't follow.  Our ECHO lien is $485,499, that's all 
our money.  The restrictive covenants state we would have given 
them up to 500,000, we only actually gave them 489,509 so that's 
are complete.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  My question is if it's in such 
disrepair it sells for 300 we are out the 185.

>>  There is a board member here.

>>  As with any foreclosure sale Arlene is only secured by the 
value of the property so whatever the value is is the security of 
our lead we as with any person who has a lien we could go after 
personal judgment for the balance.  Have remedies and options but 
as we sit here today Arlene is that amount the property is the 
only thing that secures our lead if that's what you're asking.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  And you're confident the superior lien 
over any other leaseholder?  

>>  The contract is for $875,000 we are secure under the 
contract.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  I am just looking at the math.  These 
are historic homes.  Do you have any benefit to the county if we 
were to get the houses back into the counties list of assets?  

>>  Honest assessment is I think the Lillian house would be more 
appropriate given it was the first house on the beach side, then 
Hotchkiss and has less historical significance, if the Council 
wished to review that.  But as to your Director of Parks and 
Recreation understanding not director overseeing parks and direct 
understanding the operational cost of securing, preserving and 
maintaining historic homes like DeBary Hall, the cost for 
operation is elevated above atypical assets of the county.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Jake Johansson you have another question.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  On Don's line of questioning, this 
485 will go into escrow before we release the covenant.  So just 
play with me here, if it sells for 300, then 485 isn't going to 
be in escrow and we are not going to release the covenant so the 
new buyer will be stuck with that or that covenant will go with 
the property if we don't release it and they still want to buy 
it, yes?  

>>  If we don't release the covenants it would go with them.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  So basically 485 is coming to us one 
way or another, if they sell it for 800 or 700 we will get our 
money.  Understand Don's concern we are not going to get it.  Now 
chairman point of privilege I will make a comment.  Our 
government isn't in the business of buying property and flipping 
it for a profit or keeping it when we don't have the manpower to 
keep it to preserve.  I just caution we not get into that 
business, just my caution, thank you.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  We do have a member of the public on the board 
of Lillian Place, one of the properties.  That's owned here by 
heritage, David Glasser.  I only have one card to speak, are 
there two of you that are going to speak?  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  We have two members of the board that are 
here, myself and Miss Dillard is here to my left.  I'm not sure 
how this works.  I think we both signed up to speak.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  I only got a card from you, if she wants to 
speak that's fine, she needs to fill out a form with the clerk 
over here.  One is coming to her, thank you John, go ahead.

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  Items three and seven are closely related and 
we appreciate the opportunity to the board.  I want to give you a 
perspective.  Personally I've been here in Volusia County many 
years, I've been on the board for many years.  The prior director 
of the board was fantastic.  She was enthusiastic.  She built 
things up and Mr. Dillard, Fran Dillard husband and wife they 
picked up the ball on this particular property.  There are two 
properties, Hotchkiss house as well as Lillian Place and as 
indicated these are historical properties.  In my opinion they 
are priceless.  Stephen Crane the author was there.  I have 
watched personally the buildings are old.  It has been leaking, 
there's been windows, doors, kitchen, bathroom, obviously when 
the bridge was built on silver beach all the pounding loosened up 
the foundation.  Personally I am not a shaker and Baker on the 
board.  I go to the meetings to support, vote, etc., make 
suggestions.  There's a lot of incredible people on the board 
over the years.  Some former members unfortunately passed away 
over the years.  It's amazing the buildings are intact at this 
point.  There's been a lot of tremendous events, tea parties, 
dinners, plays, outdoor activities.  Everybody has worked hard.  
Unfortunately these buildings are old and they take a lot of 
maintenance.  The one Hotchkiss house we thought we should sell, 
we voted on that because it's hard to maintain both buildings so 
that's what's here today and obviously we would pay back the 
grant.  However the Council wanted to do that it would be paid 
back.  If I could kind of bind three with seven, seven involves 
Lillian Place which involves a lot of repairs.  We are asking for 
the monies that are above and beyond to be used for the Lillian 
place to preserve the building.  We are doing the best we can 
everybody to pay for this and I might add there's board members 
that have paid money out of their own pockets to keep things 
appear and the buildings are priceless.  I think the history of 
Daytona, there are condos going up etc., it's fantastic but 
that's not the history of Daytona Beach.  We don't have a lot of 
historical buildings on behalf of the board everybody would agree 
we have a terrific board right now, we are working hard.  We have 
a terrific employee working on maintenance for years, sorry.  
That's what we would ask, thank you.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Fran Dillard.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  I am Fran Dillard and I'm on the Board of 
Directors of the preservation trust, my husband's president, he 
can't be here.  He just went through a cornea transplant so he's 
recovering from that.  We did talk to Daniel and Jill Markham 
about giving the houses to the county.  That was our first choice 
because we felt when we ran into a brick wall and couldn't 
continue to maintain them?  They needed to, in addition we 
weren't able to get the money we needed to do some of the bigger 
projects like Hicks surveilling.  They would be in good hands 
with the county that they would be protected.  We were told there 
was no guarantee if we gave the houses to the county that they 
would continue to maintain and protect them and they gave us 
other options one of which he could sell one or both the we met 
again and realized we could sell Hotchkiss house and take the 
proceeds from the sale after the grant was paid off and use that 
money to continue to maintain Lillian which is what we are trying 
to do at this point.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Okay, thank you very much, Councilman Danny 
Robins.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER ROBINS:  This question may be directed at you 
chair if you know and Mr. Reinhart, have we approached the 
Daytona at all to see if they would want to get in on the fun for 
these projects or share some of this?  The only reason I say 
that, just west on Orange Avenue the old bridge there across from 
the stadium there was an old building they were able to save.  I 
don't member how they did it but maybe food for thought.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  I don't know if staff, okay.  The motion on the 
floor is to approve to rescind the grant of 485, 509.  

>>  If I may make this request so we don't have to bring this 
back but when the County approved this in 2012 it was the first 
of its kind, kind of the emergency historic stabilization grant.  
At that time the applicants did not have a public access plan in 
place so the County as a term of the grant requested an easement, 
public access easement over the entire property.  The County came 
back later when they had a public access plan and did the 
easement over a portion where the road goes down to the river to 
provide public access.  Because it was a condition of the grant, 
we'd like to request to lift the easement, without that they 
cannot move to closing as part of this motion.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  David Santiago, you made the motion.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  I will amend my motion to include the 
language included.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  Second, Johansson.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Brad, one other quick question, once it sold we 
have no control over what happens to that property?  It is sold 
as a condo.

>>  Yes, but the Dillard that we mentioned this at the ECHO 
committee they made sure to find a buyer who has committed to 
reserve the house, it's as good as a handshake it's made with 
what they have made a commitment and I believe have restored 
other historic homes, the buyer.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  You were done, your names?  All right, we have a 
motion in the second to rescind the grant.  All in favor say aye. 
 Any opposed.  And motion is approved 7 - 0 to rescind that 
grant.  Number four retirement recognition of John Boyd for 30 
years of service leaving the clerk's office.  Clerk of the court. 
 

>>  And Mark Weinberg County Court administrator.  This is John, 
our recent retiree and we are here to recognize John for 30 years 
of meritorious service to court administration and pretrial 
services and congratulate him on his recent retirement.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  He's not old enough to retire.

>>  I want to tell you a quick story about John.  John has worked 
the majority of his 30 years with pretrial services and one of 
the duties of pretrial is they work 365 days a year.  One of the 
things John did was he would volunteer to work on Christmas every 
year so the other employees could enjoy time with their families. 
 John retired in early December.  This Christmas I went out to 
the jail and who did I see but John Boyd and I don't know if 
that's just because he didn't remember doing anything else on 
Christmas except going to the jail.  I think it was though is 
just his way of wishing his fellow employees Mary Christmas but 
also expressing to them the importance of the work they do if you 
would join me incorrect graduating John on 30 years of service 
and wishing him well in his retirement.  [APPLAUSE] 

>>  He can go ahead.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  You know you're going to hear from Councilman 
Reinhart so if you want to go first go ahead.

>>  It's been a heck of a ride, I can't appreciate everybody, 
Mark Weinberg has been viable and we do a great job, it's been 
awesome, no regrets but I'm glad to be done.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  30 years is a long time.  Vice chair Matt 
Reinhart.

>>VICE CHAIR REINHART:  John, it is an absolute honor to have 
worked with you.  Many many years coming down and one thing 
consistency would be a keyword with you.  Always making people 
smile.  One of the funniest guys I ever ran into definitely and 
it could be jail environment is not a fun place but you made it 
that way so we appreciate you.  You will be missed so make sure 
you check back in within thank you again and we appreciate you.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  And Councilman Don Dempsey.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  I am floored, I didn't know this was 
the John Boyd I know.  I've known John since back in the 1900s.  
Does my wife know you're leaving?  

>>  I think so, everybody probably knows now.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  She is going to be upset to see you go 
to because every time I go to first appearance that's why deal 
with is John he's been present and respectful to the inmates.  
You're going to have, somebody will have tough shoes to fill, you 
replaced Janet.

>>  I started with Janet.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  I hate to see you go but 
congratulations, you've done a good job over the time I've known 
you and congratulations, you deserve it.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Can I get a motion to approve.

>>  I'm not approving your retirement, we are just voting to say 
congratulations and affirm your retirement, Don can twist your 
arm later.  So motion to approve.  The motion was by Matt, second 
was by Jake Johansson, all in favor say aye.  Any opposed, 
congratulations.  You wanted pictures, I think.  How do you want 
him for pictures?  

>>  Mr. Boyd, can you get right in the center here?  This way a 
little bit.  Big smiles.  Thank you all so much.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Where was Pat?  He didn't say that though.  We 
will move to item 6 which is a contract with Wharton Smith for 
the fire station 15 on state road 92 and read John Drive.  

>>  Moved to approve.

>>  Second.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Johansson, motion to a book by Santiago, who was 
the second?  Second by Jake Johansson and any questions for 
staff?  No public input.  Any comments, all in favor say aye, any 
opposed.  Great job.  

>>  You got applause.  All these firemen here to argue with us.

>>  Pat's presentation is the one that put it over the edge.  

>>  I want Tadd's job.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  He gets to announce all vacations, echo 
strategic plan presentation discussion and direction.

>>  One of the recommendations from the consultant is we used to 
have the ECHO committee chair will present, not co-present but 
support on behalf of the advisory committee.  The work that we 
are doing.  We have went back to that practice of inviting the 
committee chair so I have Reggie hear who is chair of our 
committee.  She's going to comment on the item if you'd like to 
hear before or after from the chair, it is up to you.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Just make it part of the presentation.  He just 
took half of your three minutes.  

>>  My name is Reggie Santilli, chair of the echo advisory 
committee speaking today on behalf of the committee guarding the 
strategic planning process and our review of the vision 2040 
recommendations.  The committee review was comprehensive and 
documented.  October 9, 2025 the committee engaged in extensive 
review of all five goals and 30 strategies that comprise the 
strategic plans final recommendations.  Staff explicitly stated 
on the record we reviewed that what we reviewed is not going to 
change between now counsel that the goals will be the same.  The 
meeting transcript the approved minutes, video recorded document, 
committee discussion and all the goals.  No requests for 
additional reviews were made and at no point during the October 9 
meeting did any committee member request the final plan be placed 
on future agenda from formal review discussion or vote.  No 
concerns were raised about the review process or adequacy of our 
opportunity to provide input.  At our January 6 meeting two weeks 
ago no committee members raised process concerns or requested 
additional review.  The committee received complete 
documentation.  ECHO staff distributed the plan document to all 
committee members October 29 2025.  All committee members had 
access to the full plan more than two months before tonight's 
presentation and no concerns were raised.  The committee formally 
acknowledged the process on January 6 the committee unanimously 
approved our 2026 work plan which included the action items to 
continue the implementation of recommendations that would be 
approved by counsel from the echo 20/40 strategic plan.  The vote 
acknowledged the plans progression to counsel for your 
consideration.  While I respect individual committee members may 
have different perspectives, the official meeting record 
demonstrates the committee fulfilled its advisory role in this 
process.  We reviewed the final recommendations, we provided 
substantial input and we had opportunities to request additional 
review if we felt it necessary.  I am confident the strategic 
plan reflects both professional expertise and community input.  
We appreciate the counties consideration of the vision 2040 
strategic plan.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you, questions for staff, Councilman 
Santiago.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  Before you sit down because I had a 
question for you to.  Brad, you first.  It's interesting you gave 
the update because today I read an email from a member of your 
committee that basically contradicts almost everything you said.  
Brad, did you read that letter?  Am I accurate in describing he 
basically is saying you're lying on your lying?  

>>  That's a mischaracterization of the process.

>>  I will use a louder work, okay.  Is he saying it's a 
mischaracterization of your comments?  

>>  Yes.

>>  To the body, for a member to do that, it's okay to disagree.  
It's okay to disagree with the outcome but for a member of a body 
we appoint is a reflection of us I've always said people we 
appoint to outright lie and call these individuals and probably 
the remainder of the committee a liar is very concerning to me.  
I would like for us, I guess we will deal with the item here but 
at the end of this item I will be making a motion to withdraw 
that member from this committee that doesn't reflect the 
principles I believe in and I think this counsel should not 
support to make a clear statement on these two fine individuals 
in my opinion calling them a liar we can continue and I will do 
that after the vote.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Don Dempsey.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  I know that gentleman, I don't have 
any reason, I don't know.  I really don't know what's going on 
here but my question is for Brad, what's the harm if we push this 
off to the next Council meeting and give them two weeks to get up 
to speed.  Because we're talking about it is going to be binding 
through 2040.

>>  There is no more work to do.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  Understand but he feet if he is not up 
to speed and he's part of the committee because this is such a 
long-term policy decision is the harm of waiting a couple of 
weeks?  

>>  We have the great cycle cutting up so it would push the grant 
cycle which we've already done so we have many organizations 
waiting for the grant cycle to open.  He also the individual in 
question praised staff for our work at the last meeting.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  I love what you do, you do a great job 
just what's the harm in waiting a couple weeks.

>>  We've kicked the can down the road and previously because 
this was postponed from November to this date.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  Any other prejudice than just 
principal?  It is two weeks.

>>  That would be calling a ECHO meeting.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  Just postponing this for 2 weeks.

>>  Point of order, I don't think that's up to Brad to decide, is 
for this counsel to decide whether we want to table this.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  That is what Don is asking, he's asking counsel 
what the repercussions would be.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  Is there something catastrophic, is 
there something due by the end of January and or can we wait till 
the first Tuesday?  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  I think Brad said there was except we've already 
pushed it to now but go ahead David, you had a reply.

>>  We've delayed this a few times already.  And without 
discussing maybe later the individual, he's asked the question, 
we hear from Brad here he's asked the questions, the individual 
door asking to delay this for has asked the questions in 
committee, participated in committee and he's either lying to us 
or he's incompetent in serving the committee and that's a whole 
different question.  That motion is coming up for us to delay the 
public's work someone who was in the meetings and the 
overwhelming majority of the board approved this, we need to move 
forward.  I don't think the Council should support stopping this 
for any one person.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  May I respond to David?  Okay.  So 
David just out of due process we're going to kick a guy off a 
committee and possibly disparages character without him even 
being here to offer himself a defense or explain his side of it 
so we could kill do birds with one stone if we postpone this a 
couple weeks and he will have time to read it whatever 
complaints, he may love it I don't know but I haven't spoken to 
the guy but I saw the email and am wondering what the prejudice 
is if we wait because especially anticipating your emotions I can 
tell you I would be a no not because I disbelieve Doctor Burbaugh 
and his staff, it's just that is no due process not even giving 
him a chance to come here and defend himself.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  I know you guys are in there but I 
will wait Mr. chair.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  We are still in questions, Councilman Robins you 
have a question for staff.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER ROBINS:  My question is today Brad there were 30 
recommendations you had sent.  Can we go down through that?  

>>  There's 11 policy questions, they're asking to be implemented 
by staff.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER ROBINS:  Can be implemented by staff but will 
this counsel way in almost possible things?  But I don't want is 
the buck to stop with you all per se.  Because I had questions in 
their.

>>  I wrote that in the memo, you can certainly bring those up.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER ROBINS:  I would like to discuss those 11 going 
forward, I think there will be spirited discussions that will 
need to happen.  And my goal counsel is a quick comment, I don't 
want to begin the program or undermine what the voters voted for. 
 I am interested to talk about those 11, thank you.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Brad, just a quick question, the meeting in 
question the most recent meeting, is there a video?  

>>  There are video and transcripts included in your memo.  The 
meeting they reviewed was October that had the plan ends October 
delaying it again ends October is up to counsel.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  That's why I think Don's comments have merit.  
This is so different, so opposite because this member says they 
had received the report, that they had a spreadsheet of it.  And 
I am certainly not going to vote to put him off the committee 
without hearing from him, without giving him his day.  I do agree 
Danny we should go through the recommendations that are made 
because there's choices that have to be made.  And then it sounds 
like we will take up putting this member off the committee later 
anyway if you're going to bring a motion to do that.  

>>  May I add a point for context and this states clearly in the 
memo the five goal areas and recommendations which the Council 
asked which the advisory role is to review those is what was 
presented.  We had the draft verbiage.  We didn't have the shiny 
report that had the rationale and data points informing.  All the 
advisory Council members have been briefed and we are fine with 
us sharing the strategic, the full kind of glossy shiny 
deliverable via email without bringing it back at the time of the 
October 9 meeting.

>>  That's what you told me.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Jake Johansson.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  That's what I wanted to verify.  The 
spreadsheet they saw with the recommendations in October are the 
same as the recommendations we are voting on tonight.  I know 
that can be correct but I'm saying for the public so what we are 
voting on tonight the committee approved in October and the only 
difference is it wasn't spreadsheet or it is in spreadsheet in 
the final document with the shiny page.

>>  They don't vote to approve on stuff like this, they are 
advisory in nature.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  And that feedback has been provided 
to us.  I understand there's a lot more to this.  But it sounds 
like nobody is redness in voting in these 11 policy things 
tonight.  

>>  I will share with you we've briefed the advisory committee at 
each step on the way.  In March we launched the community survey 
and in April at the advisory meeting we presented those survey 
results so to the committee and in April the committee or I'm 
sorry, in June as part of the committees design its friend's 
workshop they received a pre-briefing on the results of the 
strategic plan where the consultants came in and facilitated a 
process where we gave them the results of the survey, give them 
the results of the 52 interviews said here are the things we are 
seeing, here are the themes.  Proposed solutions with us.  When 
we brought those recommendations is not the first time they saw 
the results.  In this individual defense he was not appointed the 
committee until April having come in on the back of the process 
we've tried to brief him as much as possible this is part of the 
inevitability of reappointments based on elections.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Santiago.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  The individual in question they were 
participating in these meetings once October?  

>>  Since April.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  I got you, since April, they were not 
appointed in October.

>>  We typically reappoint ECHO in March so if you are elected in 
January reappoint you in March.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  But the question on these recent 
votes was done a few months ago and he was on the board.

>>  He was involved in the pre-briefing so when we brought the 
consultant in he was involved in that.  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  He was in all those meetings 
recently.  Mr. Chairman and to my colleagues, the reason, I am 
personally sick and tired of all the misinformation that goes on 
in this county.  We had to take a stand and say it's 
unacceptable.  I believe Brad, Miss Santilli I believe you that's 
why I want to take the drastic measure if we deal with it a 
different way I am open to discussion and I don't know if we have 
any rules of procedure for that but to me, and I will leave it 
there Mr. Chairman but I want to make it clear I am sick and 
tired of misinformation and this counsel needs to take a stand we 
won't accept it anymore especially from people appointed by us.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Kent did you have a question.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER KENT:  I don't have questions, I just had 
comments about what's been said.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Let's hear from the public first, John Nicholson 
wanted to speak on the topic.  Did you have another one for this 
item?  Clarissa?  Go ahead.

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  John Nicholson Daytona Beach side, one with 
this gentleman to be honest David his view is an honest view.  If 
he doesn't feel that, weights, that the procedure fit his concept 
of getting knowledge about everything that happened before him 
it's his fault but it's nothing that should be kicked off the 
board for.  It is an honest view and people have a right to their 
honest view.  Troy says it all the time, we may not agree but 
secondly I want to explain why I want you to put on the ballot 
the ECHO for the $600,000.  Because from what I understand when 
we voted 20 some odd years ago the concept was brick and mortar.  
We have done most of the brick and mortar.  There's only so much 
brick and mortar you can do so we've done most of it.  If I'm not 
mistaken we going to 2 grant cycles.  Because of the amount of 
money we have and the number of requests we have in not diverging 
it so we have extra money and at one point I heard $21 million 
that was still sitting in their.  So if we have two cycles and we 
have basically done all the brick and mortar we can do the idea 
of having the buildings not being used does not make sense to me. 
 You put all this money, $100 million or so into brick and mortar 
and now they are not fully used.  I like the highest and best use 
of buildings and highest and best use is having been viewed 
especially for cultural arts because that was the reason for the 
brick and mortar in the first place.  If we go before the public 
in November, we have plenty of time to put it on the ballot and 
ask them if we can use 10% which is not drastic in any kind of 
group whatsoever, to use it for the poor, the seniors, those that 
can't afford it, those that are creative.  All these things that 
they can't be used for right now but we've asked the art 
community to make it available to children, to make it available 
XY and Z. Whatever we have requested they've done it.  There are 
people like myself that cannot afford it.  You guys 120 bucks for 
the theater not a big deal, for me 120 box 4 or five times a 
month is a lot of money so I'm asking you to change it on the 
ballot.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you for your comments, Greg Gilbert.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  Good evening, Greg Gilbert, Daytona Beach, 
great to see you guys again, it's been a minute since I've been 
here.  You are probably surprised to see me on ECHO but I was an 
original supporter and forever because they felt like the right 
thing to do but those were different times and definitely 
different than now.  The way I see it we have some large concerns 
on the table.  There is fewer we can do anything about.  There is 
insurance, there's taxes and there's water protection and the 
only thing you can do anything about right now is the taxes and 
the legislature is not so with all due respect of all the things 
you consider doing I'm going to ask you to consider doing one 
more and it doesn't negate anything you plan to do or others may 
propose.  I want you to put them on the ballot for repeal, reveal 
of ECHO and forever.  There's a good case to say it was great but 
we can't afford it right now with the inflation and everything 
else, whatever we've got more than 30% of our land in one form or 
another which is two times too much for me.  We haven't got 
enough money to buy it all, stop changing the zoning, it's crazy, 
we've already overbought that taxation is oppressive yet not 
saying it's going to change the world and it's the only thing you 
can do or about the only thing.  You can sunset the CRA.  With 
the water pressure we don't need the gas development with tax 
dollars and we are not sure we can afford the money for the next 
one so that's it, thank you for the opportunity to participate 
and good night.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you for your comments.  We don't yet have 
a motion on the floor if we want to have a motion to go through 
the 11 items or the motion that Don talked about to table it, 
does anybody have a motion?  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  Motion to continue with the 11 
policy decisions.

>>VICE CHAIR REINHART:  Second.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Johansson makes a motion to continue 
with policy recommendations, second by Vice chair Reinhart.  
Okay.  I'm going to clear this meeting because we got a lot of 
old names, if you want to speak on this put your name backup.  
Brad, you're going to lead us through them.  Before you do that, 
did you want to say something?  

>>  As we go down these I have one important question on some of 
these, whether or not this program was renewed several years ago 
but recently, we are not at the tail end of this one, we are in 
the beginning.  With some of these, why wasn't this on the ballot 
or why is it being changed or wanting to be changed now or why 
are these recommendations coming for change when the voters just 
voted on it in a certain way?  

>>  Because Council approved a process and this is the result of 
that process.

>>  Perfect, thanks.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Kent.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER KENT:  Just because of the things stated earlier 
and these are some of my comments if you want to start my time 
it's fine.  I won't take up my time that I am allotted.  But I 
want to thank this counsel to begin with because the gentleman in 
question was my appointment.  I had an opening and you all 
approved that appointment 7 - 0 and I thank you for that.  David, 
it is your prerogative as an elected official to do what you want 
with this situation or any of you to do what you want but I'll 
tell you a couple of things, I respectfully request you don't do 
what you said you were going to do, at least not now and I will 
tell you why.  I know this man and I tell you he is a neighbor, I 
know him.  He lives across the street from me so when I'm walking 
my dog were taking out my trash he is a former Marine.  He is a 
good guy.  He really is.  I was surprised as probably many of you 
were with the email.  Doctor Burbaugh and I had a conversation 
today about it and Doctor Burbaugh responded to the email and 
gave me some information, made me feel more comfortable tonight 
about voting for it tonight but I agree with Don.  I don't like 
the idea of taking him or anybody else off unless we've given 
them their due process.  I don't like the way it feels with 
someone saying something don't take this out of context but 
saying something we don't like and now we are going to remove you 
and I know that's not where you were going, you're saying things 
that were factual and I believe these two individuals you're 
making the group look bad.  So I just am of the belief that 
cooler heads prevail.  And I am okay going through these 11 items 
this evening, I am okay with that.  In giving them a thumbs-up or 
thumbs down or a specific direction on what we want to do but I 
am not okay ripping this member out tonight or any other member 
for that matter without giving them an opportunity to respond to 
any questions we may have and to listen to what they're thinking 
is the reason I think this has come to a flashpoint is let's say 
it, there's been some problems with the ECHO program.  Look at 
our agenda tonight.  There are some issues with it and I asked 
Doctor Burbaugh Pointblank, do we need more people because I 
respect this man, do we need more people working full-time on 
this and I believe what he told me, he said I don't believe we 
do.  We are in a good spot and on the flipside when you have 302 
projects, come on, percentagewise you're going to have a couple 
that aren't going to follow through on what they said they're 
going to do.  I don't think you're ever going to get 100% 
alignment with what we want but we as the stewards and good 
stewards I might say of the taxpayer money is we want to make 
sure the public knows you're going to hold you accountable, ask 
for that money back and it needs to come back to the taxpayers 
and all that is appropriate.  I don't want us to do something 
that's not appropriate tonight or any night which is why I 
respectfully request you not follow through with what you said 
you were going to do and let cooler heads prevail and let this 
gentleman respond if he wants to, not saying he has to but if 
he's listening online if he wants to respond to any of it he can. 
 I know he's passionate about it but we have a couple people in 
our community we send those emails and they are smart people and 
they are passionate about this ECHO program and the forever 
program and they make me stop and think before I'm voting on 
these things and I like that and John, you've heard me say it 
there are things we agree on things we are not going to agree on. 
 That's okay.  That's okay.  Not to call him out and Greg giver, 
he had a couple numbers start thinking about possibly a question 
they never thought about before.  I am appreciative of that.  
Thank you for taking the time to drive to Deland to do that, I 
told you I was going to use all my time, 30 seconds.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Santiago.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  Greg, you said that before but I 
didn't know he was your appointee and out of respect for you I 
will not make that motion but to clarify, some of the things made 
over there, he didn't make opinion statements in his email.  In 
his emails he basically said findings of his fact.  He said the 
consultant's preliminary findings is what was given to the board, 
it was clear from these two individuals it was the final findings 
and there's at least three things in his email he says are 
findings of fact according to him.  Not I don't like the 
recommendations, I respect that.  Opinions are good, it's not 
what he did.  I respect your service and what's happening in 
Volusia and other parts of Florida, I'm tired of the 
misinformation, that is my motive and I didn't know he was your 
appointee but out of respect for you as a colleague I will not 
make that motion but I hope individuals know when they are 
representing this counsel they have to operate a higher standard 
like we all have to also.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you David, Councilman Dempsey.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  I don't know if we have a vote yet.  
This is whether even to proceed.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  Point of order, we have an open item 
to discuss, public policy for ECHO.  We haven't touched the first 
one yet and we've been talking for 20 minutes read point of order 
I request we start with public policy and go through all 11 and 
in counsel comments we can talk about this more.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  We don't have the vote for that yet so for the 
motion on the table to go through them because we don't know if 
the Council wants to go through them or not.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  Motion and the second to go through 
all 11.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  And then we will vote on 11, however many Brad 
wants to bring.  Did you want to that issue Don?  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  The issue of I don't see the harm 
waiting two weeks.  This guy even a broken clock tells the 
runtime twice a day, this guy might have good points to add.  
Just like you said, Mr. giver out there brought up 
thought-provoking statements up there.  I don't know what's going 
to come out of this but I don't see the harm in waiting two 
weeks.  On not here to decide if Brad's the bad guy, I don't 
care.  I trust Brad but I know of this gentleman and I have no 
reason, I don't know but I'd like to hear from him.  The 
obviously has a lot of time invested and wants to review it more. 
 I don't see the harm in waiting two weeks, people continue 
trials all the time a month or so because of different things 
that come up this guy wants to review everything and get his 
input I don't see the harm so I am a no on Jake's motion to move 
forward and asked we reset it for the first Tuesday in February.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  I will call the vote and whoever agrees we will 
vote that way and if this fails then you can make that motion to 
bring it up in 2 weeks, I think that's the proper way to handle 
it.  The motion on the table right now is to go through the 11 
items that Brad wants us to make a decision because each one has 
options we need to make a decision on.  Correct?  Okay.  All 
right.  I don't know.  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  I want Ted's job.

>>  Are you ready chair?  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  We have to have a vote on whether we proceed, 
Marissa called little motion on the table is do we proceed with 
Brad's 11 motions.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  No.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  No.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  Yes.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER KENT:  No.

>>VICE CHAIR REINHART:  Yes.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER ROBINS:  No.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  No.  So we don't proceed tonight.  

>>  Chair, do I get a raise?  This is my night shift job.  I make 
a motion we continue this bill the first Council meeting.

>>.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Second Johansson.

>>  First meeting in February if that's okay.  

>>  February 3. 

>>  Motion on the floor is to continue this discussion to the 
February 3 County Council.  If there is no questions for that 
discussion on that motion.

>>  Thank you Mr. chair, we don't have a second yet.

>>  Second Johansson.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  I must be losing my hearing on my right ear.  
Motion was by dawn, second by Jake Johansson.

>>  If the maker is okay to direct George our staff and make sure 
they meet with the individual we sent this email and maybe have 
minutes of that conversation afterwards Rhea, deposition if you 
want to call it that but I don't want to call it back, I love to 
have minutes to say what was discussed at that update.  

>>  Side amendment motion to reflect what David says.  

>>  I'm not clear how to word the motion.  The motion is to table 
but you want staff to make sure they discuss.

>>  Don's motive was to allow this individual time to do whatever 
they want to do so I supported that but I want to make sure that 
staff has a detailed record of what's discussed during those 
updates for that individual so we can proceed for the people.  

>>  Okay.  All right, County manager George Brecht and Walt.  

>>  Maybe to build on what Mr. Santiago said the individual in 
question, we are blind to all that, he didn't send any of those 
restaurants or emails or anything to my staff or myself.  So 
we'll be happy to talk with him, a matter of fact I look forward 
to it.  Because I don't understand why it went the way it did, 
there was no reason for that.  It's very malleable so we should 
have that conversation before we bother this counsel time and I 
apologize that we didn't do this.

>>  Not your team's fault, that's why I want the record to make a 
decision.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Motion on the floor is to table this until 
February 3. Motion by dawn, second by Councilman Johansson, all 
in favor say aye.  Motion carries 7 - 0.  Item 7, requesting 
authorization to enforce restrictive covenants and pursue legal 
remedies for ECHO projects, Lillian place historical.  

>>  Hotchkiss house was a voluntary request to rescind and 
reimburse.  The same time as we were having compliance issues 
with the Hotchkiss house we were having problems I would say not 
as many but still same problems with the Lillian place where they 
have committed to timelines to complete the work and it would not 
be done on multiple occasions.  So felt it was prudent to bring 
forward this compliance issue along with Hotchkiss.  Even though 
the grantees have agreed to use the proceeds from Hotchkiss to 
improve Lillian place.  What this motion to do today would 
authorize us to pursue all legal remedies associated with the 
restrictive covenant.  So it would allow us, the question was 
asked at the ECHO meeting could this lead to us for closing on a 
house forcing them to sell it and yes it could.  That's what we 
are asking for is to start that process.  Lillian House of 
Representatives will ask for additional time based on their plan 
to use the proceeds from Hotchkiss to improve Lillian.  

>>  Motion to approve.  

>>  We have a motion to approve enforcing the restrictive 
covenant, motion by Troy Kent and second I believe was my vice 
chair Lionheart.  Any questions for staff before we go to, 
there's several members of the public that want to speak, any 
questions first of Brad?  Then I will call your name and just 
come forward, you have three minutes to discuss item 7, first is 
Melissa Thornton.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  Good evening counsel, Miller supported the 
land district 1. So I'm speaking tonight about the two black eyes 
we now have with ECHO and I don't know how many other black eyes 
we had concerning this program but it is a shame we are here 
discussing these two homes that $900,000 of taxpayer money has 
gone to with zero results.  Zero use for the taxpayer.  And now 
we are trying to recoup this money and we are trying to figure 
out how to go about doing it.  Well suing is not going to help 
because that's going to cost more taxpayer money.  And 
technically the taxpayer should actually own this property by now 
they've had how long, how many years have had they had since they 
had our money.  So I'd just like to say I had a friend in the 
ECHO meeting attended and the friend said the house is supposed 
to be sold to some unidentified group for under the market value 
and while at the meeting we learned after being sold the house 
could be demolished and property developed with condos and 
someone could end up profiting greatly on the property that 
taxpayers and citizens invested greatly in.  It's quite a bit of 
money and it is in a very prominent locale.  So we don't really 
have any say once the properties are sold who buys it, who builds 
on it, what happens to those properties.  I think we should 
consider our options what we should do coming from a County wants 
to represent its constituents.  $900,000 Is quite a bit of money. 
 Some disturbing sign-ups, the heritage preservation trust, they 
received $900,000 from Echo, could sell the house and pass both 
grants and on a nice piece of property on the intercoastal.  That 
is zoned for condos.  And to think if the 20-year-old was in 
place as it is now forward new grants they could wait a few more 
years and have both homes on the intercoastal re-unclear.  Just a 
few thoughts Rhea I do appreciate you gentlemen, have a lovely 
evening.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you for your comments, John Nicholson.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  John Nicholson Daytona Beach side.  I guess 
that's true.  Anything is possible.  It's in my city.  I voted 
for ECHO.  I believe in its benefits.  I believe in the wording 
of ECHO.  Environmental, cultural, historic and outdoor.  
Outdoor, Don.  So we look at these things, all of us have the 
issue we would back.  Mine, one of them is historic.  Lillian 
place is a historic place and Danny, you said the city saved a 
historic property on the other side of the bridge, up or down 
last week.  The city has no interest in preserving historic.  It 
is for one of a better word under a new city manager who is 
definitely not controlling the city commission.  They are 
controlling him the money is going into Midtown so they don't 
have any money and no desire to save Lillian place so if you guys 
decide to come down with a hammer which is what it sounds like 
Brad wants to do, the city is not going to do anything.  It 
doesn't have the backing.  Because of the way we redistricted we 
basically have no representation on the Beachside.  We have 
someone who represents downtown and midtown that lives on the 
beach side.  We have one gentleman who lives on the Beachside and 
represents downtown and midtown and we have one third one who is 
city oriented, she doesn't know what she's doing but she wants to 
represent the whole city and doesn't want to represent Beachside 
alone so we basically have no one pushing for Beachside in which 
Lillian place exists without you it has the ability to be torn 
down.  By the lady who wants to my Hotchkiss house.  She says she 
wants to renovate it.  She owns property in Palm Coast, a bar and 
I believe she wants to live there.  This is what she says and I 
generally take people at their word.  So I'm asking you not to 
come down with a hammer, to give them time because they have not 
had money.  This gives them the money.  To fix all the things 
they need to fix and if they don't then you come down with a 
hammer but don't put the pressure on them to where they feel they 
have to sell the property or if they do something stupid and 
don't fix the things appropriately and with the character of the 
house, thank you.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you, David Glasser.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  Thank you again.  I'm not going to restate 
what I just said but it is a beautiful building with a long 
history in the city.  We've had a number of events over the years 
and for the public it is not an easy situation to maintain 
financially.  We acknowledge that.  Obviously if we were able to 
do that we would be selling Hotchkiss else but I ask you to 
consider if we receive the monies, the remaining monies from the 
sale of Hotchkiss else, Miss Stiller has formed a plan how the 
money would be spent is for the benefit of the community and the 
community's history.  Can you imagine right now selling Hotchkiss 
house to a third-party, private individual, that's not easy if 
this happens again, there's nothing magical.  It's a piece of the 
city's history that will be gone.  These buildings are on the 
beach side, not far from the beach.  Members of the public come, 
they are sent.  I don't know if you've seen it but inside it's 
like going back in time, when you go into the kitchen, the living 
area and take a tour, it is a piece of the history of Daytona.  
If it's gone, it is like an extinct animal.  It is going to be 
gone forever and we are working hard, Mr. and Mrs. Dillard are 
working hard along with the board, we will work with the city 
whatever needs to be done, if you want the money earmarked they 
will work with I'm sorry, the county, thank you.  They earmarked 
the monies, to track them down where they are spent, the 
timeline, something along that line as opposed to following what 
we call legal remedies, that's what we would ask your 
consideration for more time.  We are making progress.  We've made 
a lot of progress over the years.  Just having events, doing 
things, fixing things.  It is a process and you think about the 
age of the buildings, it's only like 16 years.  That's not a long 
time over a continuum with the maintenance so we ask you to 
consider, reject the request and keep this open for us to 
continue on the progress we've made, thank you for your 
consideration.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you for your comments, Fran Dillard.  

>>.

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  Fran Dillard, Ormond Beach.  The first thing I 
want to say is Lillian place is 143 years old.  There is always 
going to be something wrong.  The second thing is we don't have a 
history of noncompliance with Lillian place.  We met with Daniel 
and Jill in April.  We got a notice in May, we replied to that 
notice.  As to what our plan of action was to correct the issues 
at Lillian place.  What is written up and our opinion is a little 
overstated.  We do have Windows in the tower that have blown out 
many times during storms but we are working with a contractor and 
we told Daniel and Jill this in November, we had a contractor who 
is ready to go.  As soon as this property closes every bit of 
that money is going to go into stabilizing million, not just 
fixing what ECHO has written us up for but to establish accounts 
for capital improvements we know we are going to need in the 
future.  We have a preventative maintenance program so we can go 
through the problem areas which are the windows, railings.  We 
have a fund for doing the painting on the house which was only 
painted five years ago, it might need to be power washed.  The 
other thing we want to do is put a fence up.  When the Orange 
Avenue bridge went in they tore down the fence so we are overrun 
with homeless.  We have a guy that constantly goes under the 
porch and shoots up.  It scares our volunteers.  A fence around 
the property we would be able to do that to keep the property 
secure and keep our volunteers safe.  We did hit a brick wall, 
the project has always been underfunded but utilizing the funds 
from Hotchkiss house so we can continue with Lillian, I think we 
can stabilize the program, maybe get to the 40 year, the house 
would be another 16 years old.  So anyway, we just want another 
chance.  We have the funds, we plan to utilize them, we have a 
contractor ready to go as soon as we have the closing.  The 
prospective buyers are patient, waiting for us to work out all 
these issues but they are committed to buying Hotchkiss and we 
just need more time so we can move forward.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you.  Vice chair Max Reinhardt.

>>VICE CHAIR REINHART:  Thank you Mr. Chair. this is a tough one 
for me.  History and historical places holds a place in my heart 
especially in the area.  I guess my question was she had 
mentioned a preventative maintenance plan.  And I guess the first 
thing in my head was that costs money.  What do you do after you 
sustain it, you said it's 143 years old and it's not getting any 
younger.  It's on the beach side, exposed the elements of nature, 
exposed to storms, termites.  It's a wooden structure so that 
part kind of scares me.  But I would be interested if anybody 
else had any comments about that before we vote.  Thank you 
chair.

>>  If I may share two points of clarification, they did propose 
a plan to rectify the situation at Lillian.  The plan was not 
fully executed until 2027 so another year out of compliance, 
that's why we brought it to counsel.  It's an additional 27 years 
they have on the restrictive covenant.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Dempsey.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  This is such a historic landmark, I 
think we should give them all the opportunity reasonably they 
need to try and preserve this property because it really is a 
miracle it's still standing after all these years and storms.  I 
am in favor of just going along with Mr. Glasser's plan and see 
what happens after they sell the other parcel and hopefully they 
will keep their word, I have no reason to doubt Mr. Glasser, I've 
known him 30 years, he is a well respected attorney in the 
community and I have no reason to think he would lie about their 
game plan.  I would like to go along with their plan and let them 
sell the other property, use it for Lillian see if they can get 
it back into good shape so it will be for generations to look at 
and admire hopefully, thank you.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  It brought up a couple more questions for me, I 
guess we are past the question stage.  Looking at the motion that 
was made, what it requires is they come into compliance or rented 
payment of $425,000 by February 16 and that doesn't give them 
time to cash the check and make any repairs.  Brad, what you're 
telling us is you brought it here because you've already given 
them a second chance and they went two years and nothing 
happened.  My heart agrees with Don and Matt that we don't have 
many historic places like this available and I would like to see 
it preserved and not become a condominium but I also, we have an 
obligation not to keep throwing good money after bad because it's 
not our money, it's taxpayers money.  I am searching for a reason 
of how they can pull this off and I'm assuming the staff doesn't 
think it's possible.  

>>  I wouldn't characterize that.  If we brought it without 
Lillian it would be pointed out that we weren't doing the right 
thing, I thought it was the right thing to bring them both at the 
same time.  Just conferring with me, if we do allow them more 
time we would suggest entering into an agreement that says in 
lieu of legal action we give you this amount of time, if not then 
we will pursue legal action.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  That's not the motion now so we would have to 
vote this down and do another motion.

>>  Or I could withdraw my motion or amend it the only reason I 
would do that is because Don Dempsey is right.  David Glasser is 
an amazing human being and I'm appreciative he showed up tonight 
to speak on these issues.  And Brad, tell me what you would need 
in the motion because I can amend my motion.

>>  Authorization to enter an agreement with the heritage 
preservation trust and a timeline, a time you would allow them to 
come into compliance.

>>  How much time are we talking about?  David, how much time is 
required?  

>>  I would say six months is what they're mentioning, six months 
from the closing of Hotchkiss.

>>  They have to come into compliance?  

>>  Six months from the closing of the manner you just mentioned, 
someone brutalized the name.  

>>  Before you make a motion, this may be a legal question.  
Between now and that six months being proposed, if this thing 
falls in order termites take out a loadbearing wall and visiting 
caves in, floods, natural disaster, whatever the case may be how 
do taxpayers get their money back if that happens?  

>>  I am looking like Mr. Chairman and several others, I am 
looking at money as I understand we will protect this if we can 
but I need to know our taxpayers are protected from a bad 
investment.

>>  Assistant county attorney, there are protections in the 
restrictive covenants, we have a lien against the property so if 
the property was destroyed or whatever we would have to enforce 
our lien against the property if they couldn't comply because the 
property is no longer there it would be either through asking 
them to voluntarily pay back the lien amount or we'd have to file 
legal action to enforce the lien amount if there is destruction 
of the property, we would have to work with them to figure out 
how we recover our lien.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Miss Slack if we have 400 some odd thousand 
dollars and if they get more in line and this happens that 
exceeds the overall property value which will be land value 
because of a pile of sticks, how are we going to get the taxpayer 
money?  

>>  With the other property we are first priority on our lien 
right now.  Because our lien was a purchase lien.  Our monies 
were used to you purchase the property so our lien should be 
first in priority.  It's a restrictive covenant but it's first in 
time.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  So you know where I'm coming from down there 
near Cracker Creek original Disney, Jake, what's that called?  
Campbell place.  Probably at one point it was worth saving but 
the degradation and termites, it got to such a point where it was 
not cost effective or efficient, we would all like to save it, 
it's a part of Florida history.  But the amount of money to keep 
putting in it is not and that's why it has fallen into a state of 
disrepair.  I want to support the board as best I can but this 
needs to be a business deal, this is business and that's the way 
I'm looking at it.  Councilman Dempsey.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  So I'm clear what is the historic 
significance of this property?  

>>  It was the first house on Beachside in Daytona Beach and it's 
on the national register of historic places.  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  And how much land is there to sit on?  


>>  Just under an acre.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  And we have no best estimate of what 
it would be if it was just the land if everything collapsed.

>>  An acre on the river would probably go for more than 425.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  Even if the worst Senate case scenario 
proposed we would still be covered getting our money back.

>>  Yes, I believe so.  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  That's all, thank you.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Santiago.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  What happens with this six months if 
we approve this?  

>>  We can move to legal action in February so next month.  It 
allows them six more months to move through that process to 
either come into compliance.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  Which means what?  

>>  They will make the repairs and provide access and events for 
the public.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  How much in repairs today have over 
expenses?  

>>  Approximately, the guess is I believe they have some quotes 
from contractors but $11,000 is what being conveyed to me.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  $11,000 Is holding them up from being 
in compliance?  I think they would do the right thing if they 
have the money, they just don't have the money.  Do they have an 
adequate business plan to achieve the money?  

>>  I think the money would come from the Hotchkiss May 3 sale 
which if they proceed with their offer leaves them $300,000 to 
create a capital investment fund as she mentioned in addition.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  Thanks for reminding me, thank you 
chair.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  We are asking Brad questions because we have to 
get the trust.  It's an uncomfortable position but it sounds like 
we want the house to be saved, I'm wondering if six months is 
long enough to get contractors to repair everything.  It's a 
pretty busy County now.  So we're all going to have to decide 
that.  

>>  If you don't mind the sixth house, that's what they said, 
they said six months so I will amend my motion to add the six 
months we had talked about, that they had mentioned.  So they can 
get the other house hopefully sold and get this one in 
compliance.  That is my amended motion.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Matt, you made the second.  You still seconded.  
Basically we are amending items seven to postpone it for six 
months before we lower the hammer.  Pardon me?  

>>  It's only been 140 years.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  I don't know how the vote will go, I will call 
the vote in just a second but I'd asked for more time than six 
months, that kind of scares me.  But that's the motion on the 
floor is to postpone, to delay this for six months before we 
enforce the restrictive covenants, Krista would you call the will 
or say something else?  

>>  Clock starts when closing happens for Hotchkiss-Mather, not 
today.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  Yes.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER KENT:  Yes.

>>VICE CHAIR REINHART:  Yes.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER ROBINS:  No.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Yes.  And the motion passes 6 to 1. Go get it.  
It's time for vacations?  

>>  Moved to approve.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Hold on, this is a quasijudicial hearing, item 8 
is proposed vacation of a portion of the Green Land subdivision.  
Does anyone have any ex parte to declare on this item?  

>>  None for me.

>>  Moved to approve.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  This is why he wants your job.  Once he 
understands your job is not going to want that one.  David 
Santiago makes a motion to approve, who was the second?  Vice 
chair Reinhart.  Any questions, any comments, all in favor say 
aye, any opposed and that motion is approved 7 - 0.  Item 9 is 
also a quasijudicial hearing.  It is vacation of a portion of 
W.H. Pooser's subdivision, anyone have any ex parte to declare.

>>  Motion to approve.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Robbins makes a motion to approve, 
don't be so smug.  Is there a second and second is by Vice chair 
Robins, any questions, comments.  All in favor say aye.  Any 
opposed.  That vacation is approved also 7 - 0, item 10 is also a 
quasijudicial hearing for proposed vacation of a portion of point 
set apart.  Does anyone have any ex parte to declare?  There is 
no exportation, Councilman Robbins makes a motion to approve, 
Vice chair Reinhart ask a second.  Questions, discussion, all in 
favor say aye that vacation is approved 7 - 0.

>>  I had a question for Tadd, how is your night going, good?  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Item 11 is public hearing for Med Trans 
corporation doing business as ShandsCair public conveyance.

>>  Good evening, certificate of public necessity air transport 
for Med Trans UF health ShandsCair outlined in the agenda item in 
front of you, we have staff in-house as well as Med Trans.

>>  Move to approve.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Motion to approve by Councilman Reinhart, second 
by David Santiago, second was by Vice Chair Reinhart.  Any 
questions for he or staff?  And there is no questions, any 
comments, debate, we have one member absent, we will ask him when 
he comes into the room but we will call for the vote to approve 
this, all in favor say aye.  Any opposed.  It is approved 6 to 0 
so regardless of what the seventh vote does you are approved and 
we will get his vote.  Item number 12 is also an open public 
hearing ordinance 2026 – 01 amending the merit rules in the 
counties code of ordinances, Councilman Reinhart.

>>VICE CHAIR REINHART:  Dana, we all got receipt of your letter 
regarding the email, thank you for clarifying that, everybody got 
the same email guarding a citizen that had concerns over that.  I 
did try to explain the same scenario, you've got merit rules.  
I've been with the county 30+ years so it's there to protect its 
staff we have a great robust system as far as the grievance 
procedure, that is explained so thank you for clarifying back and 
I appreciate it.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  Mr. Chairman move to approve.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Motion to approve by David Santiago, second by 
Vice chair Reinhart.  

>>  Could have sent Tadd up to present.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Checking to see if I have one question, I think 
it was answered by your response, actually I have the question 
before I got that email.  Okay.  I am good with it.  So we have a 
motion and a second to pass, any questions, comments, all in 
favor say aye.  Any opposed and that passes 6 to 0, is he coming 
back?  

>>  Tadd coming you're not the only one that can do it this way.  


>>CHAIR BROWER:  But not been.  Item 13 is ordinance 2026 – 03, 
ordinance dissolving traffic engineering division.  We are 
actually shrinking the size of government saving money, is that 
what you're going to tell us and Mark go ahead.

>>  Before you is an ordinance that like you said dissolves the 
traffic engineering division.  We will move responsibility for 
maintenance of signals road and bridge engineering 
responsibilities associated with transportation planning studies 
and development engineering and construction.  Tadd clearly 
doesn't have enough work to do so we will give him more stuff 
joking aside, this counsel has been clear on looking at things, 
looking for efficiency, looking to reduce cost and that's what we 
did.  Here we will have an annual budget savings of $234,000 food 
through the reduction of positions and reduction in job 
classification and I'm here to answer any questions.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Questions, Councilman Dempsey.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  This doesn't mean more roundabouts in 
Volusia County?  

>>  Roundabouts are safe.  I'm going to stick up for roundabouts. 
 The traffic, serious traffic accidents and safety involved is 
significantly better during a hurricane with power outages you 
don't have to worry about signals.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  I know we don't have to have as many 
traffic light engineers.  Is this all geared towards roundabouts? 
 

>>  This has nothing to do with roundabouts, this is strictly, 
our previous traffic engineering director left, we stole him from 
the DOT, they stole him back and management is clear when we have 
position openings we should take a look and see is there room for 
efficiency, those kind of things and we talked about it, studied 
it and felt that was the best way to go in consolidating these 
functions into other divisions.  Eliminating some positions and 
saving us money.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Vice chair Matt Reinhart you had questions.

>>VICE CHAIR REINHART:  I already know the answer but for 
clarification so the public is aware we handle all the traffic 
lights in Volusia County with the exception of the city of 
Daytona Beach and we also handle ones for the state through 
contract agreement that we get reimbursed for and then everything 
else we handle, there are some roads that intersections, could 
you explain that one more time.  That's something I wanted 
clarification on.  Intersections that intersect with a state road 
or if it is a county road that intersects with the city Road who 
handles that like?  

>>  Most of the traffic signals within Daytona Beach are 
maintained.

>>  Regardless of the road intersection and the same would apply 
if there was a state road, they would take care of that so we are 
outside that.

>>  Even on the state system the state is responsible for timing.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  Thank you, thank you chair.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Kent.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER KENT:  Not that you need me to stick up for you 
but I will say it didn't matter if it was counsel, didn't matter 
if it was a morning meeting or afternoon meeting, when I left my 
suite Ormond Beach and came over to the big city of Deland and 
got off I believe on exit for State Road 44 I was always at that 
stoplight for at least five, maybe 10 minutes in the sense that 
roundabout I have yet to have to stop.  It is constant all the 
way through so your roundabouts, you've got me sold on that one 
anyway.  

>>  And it's not even finished yet.  I would love to take credit, 
that is a state project.  Correct.  In real quick, sorry.  That 
is an annual savings so that's reoccurring savings.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  If somebody made a motion I didn't write it 
down, motion to approve five vice chair Reinhart, is there a 
second?  Second by David Santiago and we had questions, any other 
discussion.  Half of us love roundabouts.  Maybe all of us.  All 
in favor say aye, any opposed?  An event is eliminated 720.  I 
need to get back with you on item 12, amending the mayoral rules. 
 6 to 0 to approve it.  Then also for the public hearing for med 
trans Corporation vote is 60 0 and it is now 7 to 0.  Item 13.  
Been waiting for this all night.  Item 14, discussion of backyard 
chicken regulations.

>>  That's right, Carol McFarland development services director.  
We are here to talk about chickens, backyard chickens have been 
allowed by ordinance and 2018.  They are allowed with a 
conditional use in certain zoning classifications, I will try to 
go through this quickly and I hope you are okay with that.  You 
have 11 conditions mostly, I'm not going to go through all of 
them.  They are mostly related to public health and nuisances.  
So the specific request from counsel is to look at minimum lot 
size that allows backyard chickens so what we find is one of the 
conditions is it be on one fourth of an acre three 10,890 feet² 
and what you see in yellow there is that several of the zoning 
classifications that backyard chickens are allowed they don't 
meet that.  The minimum lot size for the zoning classifications 
less than 10,890 feet² so we have a lot of properties in the 
right zoning but built at minimum lot size they don't meet the 
criteria.  So we did a little bit of research into municipalities 
and adjacent counties, 7/16 municipalities Volusia County have 
backyard and regulations.  Only to have a minimum lot size 
requirement, the rest default to the lot size of the zoning 
classification.  Since 2018 we had a total of three conditional 
use permits for backyard chickens.  I think two of them never 
finished going through the process, they didn't pick up their 
placard.  We had at the same time period 62 cases related to 
chickens, almost all of them were related to having a rooster and 
the roosters are terrible, I can attest to that.  So counsel we 
are asking some direction on where we go with this ordinance.  
Whatever we end up doing today we would have to take it up to the 
PRC for additional work shopping and it would come back the 
Council.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Looks like you need answers to 4 questions.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Four questions, vice chair Reinhart.

>>VICE CHAIR REINHART:  I am good with the is, Kenny requirement 
the county has a program there at the fairgrounds, can that they 
accompanied into this?  As a requirement?  

>>  Right now it's the US IFUS, that is a requirement now.  That 
you provide like a certification from that class.  That is 
something required now.

>>VICE CHAIR REINHART:  I'm good with this gentleman and I will 
let Miss child yield to Mr. Santiago and I had a comment.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  Did I hear they are required to take 
a class?  

>>  Yes.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  For me Mr. chair, I'll ask a 
question, can we just say in any residential property that is 
permitted and not worry about lot sizes?  

>>  There is a lot we can do to limit these, we can allow zoning 
districts, remove the minimum lot size altogether.  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  It to my colleagues this is 
unincorporated Volusia, if it's a residential property let them 
have it.  I don't think people should have to take a class 
either.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Let's finish with questions, did you have a 
question Matt?  Then let's go through the 4 things real quick so 
you know what we are telling you to do, the first one was it is 
either eliminating lot size or specifying, I'd like to see it 
eliminated.  Eliminate that.  Number two was fencing of pens 
required or a hedge.  No hedge for me, don't make it more 
expensive.  

>>  They don't work, they can go right through a hedge.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  What about fences?  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  If they have a group why should they 
have a fence?  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  They are not required to have a coupe yet.

>>  The code says they have to be visually screened from an 
adjacent neighbor, not that they have to be enclosed.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  So can the chicken go to the 
neighbors place?  

>>  That's what happened.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  Why did the chicken cross the road.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  They are pretty destructive when they do.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  I'm not a big fan of that.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  To simplify either have a fence or a coupe.  I 
think that's perfect.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  To have it maintained on their 
property somehow.  

>>  By fence or coupe.  And if they're smart they will go with a 
mobile coupe.  

>>  We recommend keeping the operational standards such as the 
creditor proofing sanitation, prohibition of roosters and 
composting controls.  One option we do have as far as whether we 
get a conditional use or not is would you want the property 
owners to possibly self certified for the conditional use that 
they are going to meet these regulations or another option is no 
conditional permit at all.  It would just be my right.  

>>  Let's deal with this, no requirements, just by right.  

>>  The only reason I could go along with this is a couple of my 
councilmembers I think have had or have chickens I don't.  I 
think staff has this list of things because I think things have 
gone sideways in the past with people that have chickens.  You 
live next to that, I'm always worried about that.  I'm worried 
about I don't live on unincorporated but I'm worried about my 
neighbor moving in it's a rental house and they have 30 chickens 
and the next thing you know it's my backyard is now not 
uninhabitable because of that.  Staff is, thank you rightfully 
trying to ring the bell a little bit and say, so I have a little 
hesitation because it seems like we are quickly, let's get rid of 
this.  If you're in the county unincorporated you can do this.  
Rules are off, let's just go.  I just say I don't want this to 
come back and bite us, I don't want us to have these chambers 
with people going what you did was wildly out of control.  That's 
all.  But I started this and I'll end with I've never had 
chickens.  Some of you I believe have if you're comfortable with 
this you can get me there.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Mass, your name is up.

>>  This item was brought May 6. Due to a constituent that had 
asked for this and I think we're only eliminating it to the five 
chickens, correct?  The limit is five.  And also based on the 
property size and whatnot.  

>>  That's all for consideration, if you had and a half acre or 
more.  Maybe you would want more chickens.

>>VICE CHAIR REINHART:  We had either a coupe or fencing 
requirement than they could have more.  

>>  Three eggs a day.  

>>  I will wait to hear what Mr. Robbins said.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  This is in urban areas.  So the rest 
of it is.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Robins.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER ROBINS:  Thank you Mr. Chair. I'd like to follow 
the same methodology like we did for the sheds.  Let's not 
overcomplicate this.  They are chickens.  If it's Matt's chicken 
or Jake's chicken comes in my yard it's going to be my chicken 
because it will be on my plate.  That's how things kind of work.  
If there's a problem we talk to our neighbors.  This is not a big 
deal, it's not the city.  I don't want overcomplicate this like 
building permits and all this stuff, the reason we are not having 
dissipation is because people are saying I'm going to do this 
anyway, there is no enforcement action, I have chickens, if I get 
a call I will fix it so I don't want to take a good thing, we're 
trying to promote agricultural stuff and knowing where your food 
comes from and you get rid of your scraps and put it in their for 
them to eat and send it to the landfill, there's 100 different 
pluses to this.  Let's approve it.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  I agree, staff has asked for answers on four 
items that's pretty simple and to be taken care of two important 
ones, no lot size and we are requiring either a fence or a coupe 
that protects the neighbors.  No permit required, retain 
operational standards.  I'd say if we want to give them something 
that tells them how to take care of Jill chickens, that's fine 
but I don't want to require them to go to a class.  So the only 
other thing left, the only other thing left for me is five 
chickens is a horribly low number.  I mean, the new pyramid for 
food has been turned upside down.  Eggs are at the top.  Most 
requirements recommendations say eat three eggs a day from five 
chickens, you might get two or three eggs a day, you're not going 
to get five rid they lay every other day.  Depending on weather.  
So if you are a family of three, five chickens, you can even have 
breakfast.  I'd love to see it if this counsel can determine it 
at least yeah, I was going to say 10.  I just heard many say 20.  
I was trying to make sure it would pass here.  But I would like 
to see the number of chickens change.  Since they are confined 
and not going to be a nuisance to the neighbors and if they are 
the neighbor will ring their next we is that against the law?  
Can they call animal control?  So numbers, Don Dempsey.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  I don't know if you've been next to a 
facility that has a lot of chickens and they smell.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  It stinks.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  Terribly smell so I saw you had a 
section about sanitation, that's the only thing, we don't want 
roosters because we don't want them waking up the neighborhood 
all the time.  Same thing, we've got to think about just 
unsanitary groups because it can smell bad.  If they are unkempt. 
 So that's, unnecessarily, I'm okay with roosters but the 
neighbors may not like that, same thing with having a chicken 
outfit right next to you that's not kept clean because it wreaks. 
 That's the only thing I'd like to discuss, if you limit it to 
chickens or require that odors infringe on the neighbors quiet 
enjoyment of their property.  

>>  Is that something code enforcement could handle, if that was 
a complaint.  I'm saying.  

>>  I'm glad to hear you acknowledged they smell.

>>  If you have a lot of chickens it smells bad, if you have 10 
that's why I said put them in a mobile coupe, you never have to 
clean it doesn't stink.  We had 200 egg birds, nobody knew we had 
read they don't smell because they were moved.  

>>  I think the thing when you're dealing with a group like this 
is it's got to be enforced.  So we don't want to put your staff 
in a situation to go out there, determine whether something 
stinks.  That's why you have number limits the size of the coop 
requirements because are trying to address it from an objective 
way more specifically rather than entirely subjective.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Correct, counsel and send the auto.  

>>  Don's point is valid, raising the number is an idea, an acre 
or more could have 10.  Stick to the five or six but how are you 
going to enforce any of this?  I'm with you.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  This is the last question to be determined, 
numbers currently or saying five.  

>>  We don't have to have that number nailed down tonight.  This 
will go back to the planning and land development regulation 
commission so if you want them to come up with some numbers as 
recommendations we can do that as well.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Okay, so are you done with this with what you 
just got?  All in favor of what we just said to go to the PLD RC. 
 And have them knocking around.  We have no, we have a motion to 
approve by Vice chair Reinhart.  And a second by.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  Johansson, I'm not going to be a 
chicken.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Okay we had all in favor say aye, any opposed.  
Backyard chickens.  And item 15, our last item is appointment of 
2 councilmembers and one citizen member for the 2026 property tax 
season selection of the chair and vice chair of the value 
adjustment board I think last year David was chair I was vice 
chair.  And I actually ended up sharing the I think all of them.  
We only have three.  

>>  I moved to make Jeff Broward chair of the value of value 
adjustment board and vice chair.  

>>  I would nominate Mrs. Patterson to be the citizen advisory, 
she makes every meeting, she did a good job.  So send Iago, 
Brower, Patterson, second by Vice chair Reinhart.  Motion came 
from David Santiago.  All in favor say aye.  Any opposed.  There 
are none.  Do we have any closing public participation, John is 
still here, we must.  Okay, first up John Nicholson.  You may 
speak on any item that concerns Volusia County, please watch your 
language.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  I went to school.  A couple things, one David 
I'm glad you're here.  Reefs, I know you're talking about.  I've 
seen the documentation and you still don't have a policy on the 
reefs.  Apparently you don't like reefs or you don't care to look 
into them but the idea of replacing the sand year after year when 
the city of Daytona Beach took out its cement steps to replace 
them with breakaway would, first hurricane they went so we went 
eight months without our tourists being able to get off the 
boardwalk, it doesn't make any sense.  It doesn't make any sense. 
 These people have to lose the beach every time there's a storm 
and we can prevent that.  20 years ago a guy from Cocoa came up 
because he was a server, came up with this plan, put a V-shaped 
reef off the coast and it adds not only land but protects the 
property land, there are benefits.  It stops the run outs so 
nobody dies.  And it costs $5 million a mile so I came up with a 
plan because we already do reefs with the previous city manager 
and we would get them for free.  Our city manager decided know 
because you can't control it, not to do it but I'm asking you to 
think about the problem with hurricanes and damage to the upland 
is the force of the waves so if you break that force then you 
don't have damage to the upland.  That's what the islands do on 
the intercoastal, it seems man land.  It breaks the waves so I'm 
asking you to look at that.  Secondly, I was hoping at your 
meeting you would discuss core responsibilities.  I still don't 
know what all of you consider poor responsibilities.  I read 
history and back I think in Turkey, it's 7000 years before 
Christ, they had a civilization that was interested in art and 
all of the cultural things that we now are deciding are not of 
value.  So what is the core responsibilities?  Jeff brought it 
up, one person spoke about it and it was dropped immediately 
personally we need to know what you all think core 
responsibilities are and I think the public needs to know because 
they can build on it.  If it's soft sand and they don't know 
what's going to happen they can't build on anything so we need to 
know what core responsibilities are and I want to bring up the 
half-penny sales tax.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Time is up.  Okay, Greg Gamber.  

>>PUBLIC SPEAKER:  We finally get to the one you know I was here 
for.  Daytona Beach Florida and before I get started what a 
difference from the last time I was here, it's like night and 
day.  I left Deltona before I came here and they had six cops on 
a list of things you couldn't do that read a lot like 
unconstitutional, the 58 Soviet tribunal and it was not the 
environment you have here, the collegiate and I didn't expect it 
based on the last time I was here so bravo to all of you for 
exceeding expectations based on those who came before you so what 
have I got left?  Two minutes, I'm hoping to have a public 
conversation I wasn't able to have one on one with some of you 
and we've been trying to have this conversation for a long time.  
Last counsel tried to forbid it and we are going to talk about 
what we do with the poop water Deltona is facing a heckuva thing. 
 For years we've talked about we are running out of water but any 
kid that played in the bathtub knows you got the drain going, you 
can turn on the water and determine whether you run out of water 
and the rain works the same way with our aquifer but we can't 
turn it on and off, the clean water bubble is shrinking the more 
we pump because we near drained Indian Lake before we started 
reselling it with Daytona's poopy water through the rehydration 
program so anyway all over the state we have this crazy notion 
that when we over pump we can be like Indiana Jones, switch the 
skull of the clean water with poopy water underground by shooting 
treated sewage and they do the best they can, scrape the big 
parts off and chemically treat it, irradiate it and let it settle 
in upon and scrape the clean off the top and bookmark tentacles 
and we did the best we could.  As close as we can get to drinking 
water it's still not good enough to put in that River anymore and 
you can't walk around on the ground but all of a sudden it's safe 
to put in the aquifer, if we bury it where it will never get to 
the clean stuff there is a magic cavern it will stay put so it's 
the beginning of a conversation that I hope you guys will start 
to have about the fallacy that we can take treated sewage and 
stick it in aquifer and think we are protecting clean water 
instead of poisoning it.  If it's not safe to bring straight to 
tap and it's not safe to put in the river, how the heck is it 
safe to put in the river source?  It doesn't make walking around 
sense and poured Deltona after trying hard not to acknowledge 
what was going to happen there they will come to grips I believe 
at the end of the meeting and there's no safe way to poison the 
first.  If you're going to take a little river water and call it 
Lake water, St. Johns River and beetle poopy water clean and mix 
it with other poopy water and they are really going to admit it 
tonight and I hope the city of the Deltona stops it, thank you 
for opening conversation and good night.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you for your comments.  We will go to 
County manager, you've taken care of one of your items, Senate 
Bill 180.  

>>COUNTY MANAGER:  I have another letter request.  This time it 
should have been passed out but the Department of Transportation 
has asked on behalf of the Sunrail, central Florida rail corridor 
folks to put a letter of support from our counsel to the US 
Secretary of transportation for monies to help with a bridge 
replacement over 17-92 in Maitland Florida, this is a railroad 
bridge to the river corridor so the central Florida rail corridor 
commission will be responsible along with the Department of 
Transportation were not replacement.  So we have penned up a 
letter of support as we would like to get that grant to offset 
any costs we would have.  He would be responsible if that bridge 
failed or needed replacement.  We are part of that unit and it's 
based on track miles so we would share about one fourth of the 
expense.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  Moved to approve.

>>VICE CHAIR REINHART:  Second.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Motion is to approve the letter we all have a 
copy of by David Santiago, second was by Vice chair Reinhart.  
Any questions for George on the letter?  All in favor say aye.  
Any opposed.  And thank you George for providing.

>>COUNTY MANAGER:  I have one more item, based on the earlier 
events I asked the Fire Chief Joe came in our fire marshal down 
here, they are here to answer any questions.  They do have an 
update I think on the timing, the decision as we passed the state 
fire marshal to weigh in on this sprinkler issue.  So why don't 
you guys come down and tell them what the timeline is.  

>>  Leaving, Fire Chief Joe King.  When the conversations were 
going on tonight I spoke to the assistant director of the state 
to find out where we were on our next statement we sent back in 
August 27th.  Since then he had told me they met this morning and 
he, it was kind of an apologetic, we know we are required in 90 
days to get you an answer he said you said expect to hear a 
response from us in the next week or so.  So we're hopeful that 
for two weeks the Council meets again we will have our response 
back which at least gives us guidance on where we should go 
moving forward.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Response from who?  

>>  We petitioned the state to clarify those questions, those 
single-family homes.  The regulatory statements.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Robbins you're up first and chief 
once you get that information we will be able to clean up that 
code.  

>>  It cleans up the intent to make a decision and we've talked 
to the counties legal about putting together the review board so 
if we need to do that at that point we can.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  I think this is a common sense kind of thing to 
be honest.  The quicker we can get rid of this and have our 
checks and balances in place that are, you will have my support.  
But we've dealt with it on the west side a couple of times.  Now 
we're dealing with it in mind.  It is a little much.  So like I 
said back there a little while ago, we have some of these 
instances that, and if they want to sign a waiver and it releases 
a liability turn them loose and as I said earlier you want to 
build back 5 miles down ranch you'd better get a quick pony if 
you want fire services.  But sign a release.  We are good with 
it.  Whatever we can do to simplify and get rid of this headache, 
I am 100% for.  Let these people start doing what they want with 
their property.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Ditto for me, I am surprised we are hearing 
this.  I've never heard that you had to have irrigation systems 
in a private home.  I thought the state law already prohibited 
that or said you didn't have to require that?  

>>  Life safety doesn't apply to one and two family dwellings but 
this code were getting nullification on is the fire code applies 
to all buildings.  That's why we're trying to get this next 
statement to differentiate if it does apply to single-family one 
and two family homes.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  So they don't have to have an irrigation system? 
 

>>  Right now if you look at the code it says all buildings three 
stories or higher and it's from the ground level.  

>>.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you, any other questions.  Okay, get it 
done.  Are you done, George?  Thank you for bringing that up, it 
takes care of one of my items in.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Santiago you are first today.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  I wasn't going to have anything but 
thank you, I do have an interest in that whole each thing, I've 
supported the concept of looking into it and your persistence is 
great.  But to my colleagues, the point is true.  We keep pumping 
sand and the next hurricane comes and takes the sand and millions 
of dollars continue to go down the tubes or into the ocean I 
should say.  And I don't have property on the beach but I keep 
buying sand.  That being said, I think it's worthy research.  I 
don't know if we've had anybody look into it.  Go for it, thank 
you.  Let's get an answer.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Deputy County manager Suzanne.  [Inaudible] 

>>  As I mentioned after workshop you received great information 
on the Taylor engineering coastal re-nourishment report which has 
been comprehensively reviewing all options for the beach for 
about a year now.  That study does include various structural 
alternatives in depth.  I urge everyone to take a look at it.  
That has been about a $400,000 study so you have a lot of good 
information.  We are in our final period of public comment writ 
which you can still take our survey and provide public comment on 
that study.  That report will be winding up in its final stage 
for presentation to the Council the next roughly 90 days.  You'll 
see that option as well as others and how they work in and 
compare with one another from costs to permitting feasibility.  
How they might work at standalone and how they may work together 
in concert with each other, all of them honestly are quite costly 
and there is no monetary source identified yet but that is a part 
of the report as well and I will be bringing back to your 
discussion here I would say by April if not sooner.  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  One follow-up Mr. chair, in your 
reading of what's been provided so far is there preliminary 
justification that it could potentially work?  These three 
systems?  

>>  There's some question on their profitability in the Atlantic 
ocean environment that we have here in Volusia County.  But they 
don't add sand to the system so what you'll see the study say is 
they may be part of the two-part approach with sand nourishment 
and of these reefs or barriers to try to retain the sand within 
your system.  Otherwise what they'll do is track sand coming down 
the littoral area and you'll have erosion on one side of the 
buildup on the other which can be problematic especially the way 
that our 37 miles of shoreline are created but you all received a 
booklet with some very helpful summary level information on these 
and I think there were about 10 options that were studied in 
quite good depth by this coastal engineering firm and I'm excited 
to have Taylor and Jessica bring it to you in the coming months 
and answer all your questions.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  Thank you Mr. chair, I am done.

>>  I'd like a follow-up question on that.  When the current 
dredging object came up to place the sand from the inlet on the 
beach where we had needed it, I think the Army Corps's original 
plan was to send it what, 18 miles offshore, 13 miles?  

>>  It was in when I think they called the nearshore or 20 feet 
of depth of water, I don't know it was quite that far offshore as 
you recall but it was far enough offshore that the amount that 
would come offshore and show any benefit was negligent.

>>  I remember being for it to try to move in the County staff 
worked hard to allow us to use that sand.  Now I'm getting 
reports and I'm bringing this up because I'm going to go look at 
it tomorrow or the next day and I wonder if this has come up in 
your research or reports from the public that I'm getting calls 
from numerous people in Ponce Inlet and actually in Ormond Beach 
as well that part of the dredging process is depositing pockets 
of sewage that the drainage comes across in the intercoastal or 
in the inlet.  Are you experiencing that?  Have you seen it?  

>>  During the very early weeks and months of the dredging 
project that place sand in Ponce Inlet there was question raised 
by one member of the public about some of the dark sand and 
whether there were problems with its quality.  It quickly 
bleached out and what I'd like to do is get Jessica to reach out 
to you and address that when she was here but the issue was very 
short-lived and had to do with microorganisms as I recall that 
quickly dissipated.  I don't know what you might be hearing from 
Ormond Beach because of course none of the sand got placed that 
far north.

>>  I got a call from somebody that said it traveled north and 
came on the beach there.

>>  Could not have possibly happened in that way but I'd love to 
hear what they said to get in touch to see what they saw help 
explain what we can to them.

>>  Suzanne, chairman, interesting, my wife and I walked the 
beach two days ago, there's more sand on the beach where I live 
in Ormond Beach and I've seen in 10 years.  It's wonderful.  

>>  Part of that may be from the Flagler nourishment project 
coming their way which is great for our benefit.  But we do have 
a project beginning I believe this month where the second part of 
the Rattlesnake Island depletion and placing in the beaches south 
of the inlet is going to occur and we will have one more batch of 
dollars to invest from the monies granted to us from the state 
and we are looking at the best way to utilize that last batch of 
money, the idea is to dredge some of the shoulder areas in the 
inlet which is really our beach sand that has come into the 
intercoastal or the inlet and where an how to place that we will 
bring some options to you.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  Councilman Dempsey.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  I'm glad Mr. Gimbert was here today 
and I've had the opportunity to speak with him a couple of times 
over the past few weeks and I have been following his let Volusia 
vote campaign and the toilet to tap issue and the deep well 
injection issue that seems to be circling around us in Florida 
and I just want to say it publicly I am supporting what he's 
doing.  I support the charter amendment he is presenting and I 
want to tell you why.  This has nothing to do with me disliking 
developers.  I actually appreciate developers because they are 
our sixth biggest employer in the community so my support of what 
Mr. Gimbert is supporting is not because of any disliking to 
developers but what I will say and I live on a 140 acre farm.  I 
depend on the wells for everything.  I'm not on city water but I 
don't want to be the guinea pig as to whether or not deep well 
injections are safe or not.  I think that's something that people 
should decide whether they want to be guinea pigs for toilet to 
tap claims of being safe or deep well injections claim of being 
safe.  I really liken this to Covid and the mandatory vaccines 
and there was discussion and it scared me because I thought the 
government was going to mandate vaccinations on what they say was 
a safe vaccine and we were supposed to accept their science and 
put their science in our body, hoping they are right, hoping it 
wouldn't cause later problems with children who were forced to 
take it.  I don't want the government in any way forcing their 
science on me and my family.  I don't like the fact once that 
stuff it's into my aquifer, gets into my well me and my family 
becoming guinea pigs as to lab rats as to whether or not their 
science is correct.  Who knows the long-term effects, we didn't 
know the long-term effects of Covid vaccines, we have one lady 
comes he routinely and look what it did to her read the science 
did her wrong.  And I'm afraid the science some of these 
purported scientists are trying to shovel on us, I don't want it 
in my water and I support the developers because they create 
jobs, I don't like to demonize them as the bad guys but I will 
say this, I will support a moratorium and I voted against every 
moratorium ever presented that I would vote against it if I felt 
it was going to endanger the community.  That's why I'm arguing 
so hard against these conservation easements.  We are nobly 
trying to preserve up to 50% of our conservation land, the water. 
 We are sending a letter to the state because we want to control 
our own water and yet we're talking about using us as guinea pigs 
so we can build more?  I don't like that, that's why I'm 
supporting it and the other thing I like, there is no preemption. 
 This is all Volusia County residents voting on this, this is 
home rule.  They are voting on it.  We don't have to worry about 
state legislature.  What I like is if they voted say we don't 
want it, we don't want to be your guinea pigs it won't happen.  
100 years from now when we can't build anymore and there's talk 
about a moratorium because we don't want deep well injections, 
maybe in 100 years the science will improve and maybe at that 
point it might be safe, they may have worked out the filtration 
but let them decide, then try it on true lab rats and not human 
beings to see if it's right so I'm in favor of letting local 
people vote because once they put that stuff in our drinking 
supply, we are trusting governments science and I don't feel 
comfortable with that so I appreciate what Mr., what Mr. Gimbert 
has been doing, appreciate the effort of everybody who supports 
this because our water supply, it's huge.  So that's why I'm 
supportive.  And I'll leave it out there.  That's all I have for 
now.  I don't have anything, on the cultural thing, I can talk 
about that but that's all I have for today.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Jake, did you want to respond.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  So I'm very supportive of the public 
voting on things they are well-informed about so I'll ask you 
this.  How long is the federal government approved deep well 
injection of the treated water?  You said we are guinea pigs, how 
long has this been going on?  50 years, 50 years.  EPA approved, 
federally approved and highly regulated.  I'm not opposed to the 
public voting on it.  I'm with you on that.  I just want to make 
sure people understand that we are not taking flushed toilet 
water and putting it in our aquifer number one, number two is our 
aquifer isn't Volusia County aquifer.  And there are a lot of 
people in Florida that already do this.  That have been doing 
this for years.  Deep injection.  So your water is already 
hitting other counties.  Treating effluent deep well injection.  
So again, I want to make sure the public is very understanding of 
what we are asking them for.  It isn't, I don't want the verbiage 
to say do you want to be water injected in your aquifer because 
that's very misleading.  It's been misleading on social media, 
it's misleading every time we talk about it.  The average 
individuals as you know that's not what I mean.  There's a lot of 
people starting to believe that.  I can't believe you're putting 
sewage into our aquifer.  They don't know any better.  So I think 
it's important that we ensure people are well informed on what 
they're voting on.  So that's all I want to say.  It's been going 
on for a long time.  I'm not saying it's good.  I'm not saying 
it's bad but we're not going to be guinea pigs.  We are well 
along on this thing.  And there are tons of things in this United 
States that are bad for us.  And yet we still do it on our own 
time and our own volition.  So I'm half with you and again, I 
don't mind voting for it.

>>  I think it's something that people should decide Jake.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  I do do after they are 
well-informed.

>>  As long as we can hold off, I'm not voting on this in 
perpetuity.  We are taking away the water supply in perpetuity, 
the commercial wells because of these easements but you wash your 
hands after you go to the bathroom, it's, Jake.  I would rather 
trust God's filtration system for my drinking water bent some 
man-made filtering system that I have to trust the government 
that is good.  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  I didn't say and I don't believe 
what you're saying, I'm saying make sure people are informed, 
that's all.

>>  I think that's what they're doing and open debate, I'm not a 
scientist, I don't purport to be a scientist.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  I haven't seen any facts.  All I've 
seen is stop the booby water.  

>>  That's all I have.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Michael Dyer.

>>COUNTY ATTORNEY:  Council last discussed this very subject in 
October 2022.  We did a memo on it.  Attached it to the agenda, 
happy to share it with you.  If I have not seen formal charter as 
Don mentioned a charter memo so I'm not going to comment on it.  
However, if you want to talk about this I would encourage you 
have an agenda item because there are a lot of things.  Water, 
one of the most preempted subjects in Florida law.  To the point 
when I first was with the county the Council adopted watering 
restrictions.  That were stricter than the irrigation schedule 
the St. Johns River water management District published.  We were 
saving water.  And the states position was you are violating the 
water management districts irrigation schedule.  So there are a 
lot of things each of us can have personal opinions on.  That are 
good or bad.  But I would recommend that we at least talk about 
what is out there and what is the form for attacking this 
concern.  If it is a concern.  And I will tell you that you're 
looking at Tallahassee.  And so I can see here and to be silent 
and not say a thing and you can tell me that, that's fine.  But I 
do think you need to know what we see and kind of where we stand 
and what options are out there and you can disregard that.  
That's okay but I think we ought to have that discussion because 
it is a complex issue.  And I understand a lot of people have 
strong opinions on it, I get it.  I would be doing a disservice 
to you if I didn't point out the legal environment we are 
operating in rehab not County rules, state rules.  

>>  May respond to that?  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Go ahead.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  I would be remiss if I didn't point 
out as a fellow attorney that we are giving away all our home 
rule through these conservation easements.  Even if we win these 
petitions in lawsuits, we are giving away by contract one at a 
time preemption by 1000 cuts.  We are giving it away.  I want to 
give at least some sort of home rule protection through County 
charter for the people can vote and say we don't want you 
touching our water because you just heard Ginger earlier today 
and we are giving away our ability to control our commercial 
wells, we are giving away our rights to control hydrology in the 
county.  We are recklessly giving that away.

>>  I want you to recognize that is a separate issue, it's a 
policy issue and it's governed by this counsel that I get it, I 
respected, not my call, it's your call if you want to tackle 
that, we can bring something back to talk about it.  But here we 
are talking about for example if somebody came and said you know 
what, I want Volusia County to be free of all guns.  And I want 
that to be voted on in our charter.  There are state and federal 
laws that apply to that question, that's all I'm saying and we 
need to have at least have that conversation.  I haven't had the 
opportunity to have that conversation and if you want to 
disregard that that is entirely your choice, won't hurt my 
feelings at all.

>>  You can challenge the constitutionality of the state 
preemption, it's going to be harder to challenge rejections to 
preemption.

>>  This is reminiscent of the discussion on Senate Bill 180.  I 
was frustrated at Senate Bill 180.  And I know I wasn't alone.  
There are many of you on this day's that were upset about it.  
But Florida, we are governed by the Florida Constitution, we can 
all agree on that.  We are a home rule county, we have a charter. 
 But in that vary language in the Constitution that allows us to 
exist it says we are subordinate to the laws passed by the 
legislature.  And a lot of people don't like that.  I don't like 
it.  Personally.  But doesn't matter what Mike Dyer thinks, it's 
the law.  So if you go to tackle something, our advice was you 
need to tackle that at the state level.  Seek a change to state 
law.  Other jurisdictions have sued, I won't question the best 
but they have obstacles, maybe they will prevail there are a lot 
of folks out there who do not understand what home rule means.  
It does not mean Volusia County government or the city of Deland 
makes its own decisions regardless of what the legislature wants. 
 Unfortunately.  I wish we had more authority over local issues 
but we don't because the legislature has taken that away from us. 
 All I'm saying is I think at least have some of your staff here 
about the issues maybe we will have language presented.  I don't 
want to prejudge it because I haven't seen what the final 
language is but on the subject of saying toilet to tap I want a 
charter amendment on it.  That concept in and of itself I think 
we could have something for an incorporated area and regulate 
that.  But if you're wanting to preempt what cities do in their 
water utility service area, there are state laws that govern 
that.  I think we ought to talk about what authority we would 
have as a county to try to interfere with city utility service 
area.  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER DEMPSEY:  I don't think you've said anything I 
disagree with, you can wipe out everything we do.  

>>  I am available to talk to you about it.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  I'm glad you brought it up Don, I'm glad you're 
supporting it.  This is a citizen led amendment and the citizens 
will have to get enough signatures to put it on the ballot.  What 
Jake said is true.  And I'm glad he said it.  It's been going on 
a wild because the last time I brought it up at this counsel it 
was like it's never going to happen in our lifetime and it's 
happening and it's still happening and you said you haven't seen 
any science yet for the argument for it or against it, you will, 
that will be part of the process.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  I've read the science for and 
against but I haven't seen it in the local argument.  

>>  I'm surprised you haven't seen it, I have, you can see it on 
social media, you will see it other ways as well.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  Can you get it to staff and staff 
share it with us?  

>>  Or you can just go to Volusia issues or let Volusia vote but 
I can do that.  There are interesting articles, well, research 
projects by the federal geology, geographic survey.

>>  It says they've been doing it and it's safe, we are putting 
it way underwater, way underground and it will never go mingle 
with our drinking water and you can't say that.  They've proved 
it.  They've set unfortunately we are finding it percolating up 
in other areas.  And not just cleaned up toilet to tap water that 
even if Deltona says we're going to clean it up to drinking water 
standards.  We can't put it in the river anymore because it's 
killing the fish, it's killing the shellfish, it's killing the 
grass.  I mean, that's been happening for a long time.  To not do 
something because it's been going on for a long time for me is a 
bad reason.  We need to stop doing more of it.  And I think the 
rest of the state is going to get involved in it as well.  There 
is nobody, well, there's very few people excited about injecting 
cleaned up sewage water into our aquifer especially here locally 
because it's not one giant aquifer, they are car 
compartmentalized.  The water does move around.  So now we are 
talking about Volusia's aquifer, particularly West Volusia's 
aquifer.  Don is right.  Everything I produce in my organic or 
regenerative farm depends on that water.  I don't want to be 
pumping the PFAS forever chemicals out that are already getting 
in our bladder so don't make it worse.  We are just asking to let 
the people vote on this and that will create a very dynamic 
discussion as we are hearing tonight.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Kent.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER KENT:  What is wrong with human beings?  That 
they would think that they could take any type of water whether 
it be from the black tank or the gray tank and think it's 
acceptable to pump it to your water supply and that it's going to 
be okay.  Don, I don't know why you are hesitant to believe your 
government.  The food pyramid they had for 40 years told you to 
eat between 6 to 9 servings of carbohydrates and grains a day, 
they got people fat and diabetic.  Said don't eat eggs, don't eat 
butter, don't eat meat, thank God for RFK.  I don't know why we 
don't trust the government.  I have not spoken to Greg Gimbert 
about this issue but shockingly I had a lovely conversation with 
Alina Kraft on my way to this council meeting and I'm here to 
tell you I told her as a resident I will be happy to sell that 
position, let the people vote on the issue.  What is wrong with 
human beings, with their thinking?  Don't worry about saving the 
money, just do the reverse osmosis, pole from the ocean, spend 
money pull from the ocean, spend the money, do reverse osmosis 
and drink that water.  Goodness gracious, that's all tear.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you, glad to hear that, that makes three 
of us on the Council supporting it and I hope everyone, the first 
time I brought this up first second and third time in a previous 
counsel it was shut down by Ben Johnson who said you can never 
talk about it again as long as this counsel is together and the 
reason he said that is because it's not happening so we don't 
have to worry about it and it won't happen in our lifetime.  I 
saw an article the Deland beacon did and I love Barb Shepard, she 
said it isn't happening and it's not going to happen for 20 or 30 
years.  It was happening then and now we know it, now the 
government admits it.  We've been doing it and it's not confined, 
it is coming up, water troubles, upward pressure pushes it up and 
animals don't even pee in their own bed.  So I'm supporting it 
and Mike, you're absolutely right, it's going to be be a hard 
lift.  It will go to the state, it will be legal hurdles and I 
think it's worth happening, Councilman Santiago.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  I wanted to put clarification, you 
made the statement at least three of us are supporting it, I 
haven't made any comment either way and I haven't because I value 
the opinion also from our legal team.  I don't like the concept, 
I'm not a scientist.  You just tell me from a novice point of 
view I am a no but we have a responsibility to do things the 
legal way so I'm not going to put myself in any position 
personally.  I don't like it but why don't we do this because 
they offered it.  Let's take staff on and up.  I don't even know 
what it is, entails.  We keep hearing these things but I call it 
the social fake world out there.  I'd rather get folks from who 
are specialists in this and I don't know where they are, give us 
an update and tell us what it is, give us background and get a 
legal perspective as to what position does the County Council 
have in anything, I get the citizen initiative.  But for this 
body to make a statement let's get some legal guidance on what we 
do in our own private lives.  That is my ask.  I don't want to 
put anybody on the staff saying you support it, you might support 
it but let's do our rule, what we do on the streets is our own 
calls so with that Mr. chair unless there is objection directed 
staff to give us a full explanation of what this is.  So at least 
we get knowledge on it and the legal position this County Counsel 
would have if a referendum gets proposed, it will probably help 
the people trying to do the referendum have a different strategy, 
I don't know the answers yet but I don't like the concept but 
unless there is objection I think we should do that.

>>  I was going to second it but Danny beat me.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Motion and the second is to give this to legal 
staff to discuss what the County Council's position should be on 
it?  

>>  It was direction to get an update on what this process is, 
this injection well system and what it entails so we could at 
least have knowledge of what the science, whether we believe it 
or not is.  What's being done, the history and what's being asked 
of some of our local cities from our applicants I'm guessing the 
second part of that was what Mike Dyer was saying in the 
conversation with Don that there may be legal challenges that we 
may have to consider based on the Florida Constitution.  I think 
that's what you say.  What the county can do about this and have 
a legal standing on.  

>>  Same thing we did with 180 and the Navy petition.

>>  I know you brought it up today, this is a preliminary 
conversation and social world is out there playing and hats off 
to them but I'd rather get it from people who care enough.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  But it's not just social world, it's the people 
in Volusia County.  We can do all this if you want, it doesn't 
matter the citizens will go ahead with this anyway and vote on 
it.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER SANTIAGO:  I didn't argue that Mr. chair.  
Listen a little bit clearer because I said it very clearly, I 
said what the citizens deal with the initiative is fine 300 I'm 
talking about us as a body.  What we do as a body.  That's all it 
is.  

>>  He's talking about a collective vote.  

>>  What is happening in the private sector whatever.  If it's 
being brought up here it's being brought up because they want to 
make a County business are not arguing for or against it.  I'm 
saying let's get information to find out what position as a body 
we can take.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  That would be good.  Okay.  I don't know if 
we're all going to take this on.  But that was dated, I'm sorry, 
you're done.  Jake Johansson.  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  Now that were done with that 
kerfuffle.  We need a vote for that?  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Motion and the second to send it to staff to 
bring back and educate us.  Tell us if we can take a position or 
not, what it should be.  

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  We are asking for information and 
legal opinion.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  I'm wondering if I need to call the bull but I 
will call the vote, all in favor say aye, any opposed.  Jake 
Johansson.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  Thank you sir, today we were asked 
about our core responsibilities.  The chairman spouted off five 
of them and we all kind of looked at each other but I guess we 
didn't formalize them.  So maybe we don't do that.  We are having 
more meetings through the year and we can make sure those are 
clear, I don't want to get into them now but I didn't have any 
problem with the chairman said basically.  It was brought up that 
Volusia could go away just as easy as it was voted for it.  I 
think the reason that was said is because we could save money.  
Well, we can stop charging the millage.  Until the system kind of 
starts taking care of itself and then work it out.  I don't think 
we have to get rid of it, I don't think we should get rid of it, 
I don't think it would pass but again, up to the folks out there. 
 I think these things Evan flow.  People save up money, they have 
good projects.  They asked for the echo match and they are out 
for a while, it happened in Port Orange, we got a few things 
accomplished then we ran out of money.  So I think there is merit 
to keeping echo.  What I will say about echo though is it's easy 
to ask for that echo money to get a project but sometimes people 
don't have the foresight and Brad does a good job of asking for 
their business case but some people don't have the foresight that 
with that bigger building, with more programs comes more 
operational costs and if they can't sustain that operational 
cost, I don't know if I am a big fan of echo paying operational 
costs versus just capital.  So we will see how that goes but 
those are my initial feelings on that.  Lastly I mentioned at the 
beginning we have a subcommittee meeting.  A few points that were 
brought out by the mayors, I think you'll hear about them at the 
next roundtable possibly.  But one of the things brought up by 
Mayor Cleveland in new Smyrna that Ben and Michael Ryan and Don 
Butler are doing great work.  But he feels those folks might be 
neglecting some of their day jobs.  I don't know about that.  But 
for George, Suzanne was there they talked about a new job, a 
flooding Czar if you will to keep the pressure on for taking care 
of flooding.  I don't know if that's necessary but I report that 
was brought up.  Then did not say I'd love to have an extra 
person but it was brought up.

>>  We have added one already engineer.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  She was there.  So just so you know, 
then we went to, we decided to go to quarterly meetings.  So we 
are no longer monthly.  We are kind of in a maintenance phase 
right now.  So the projects are going, the studies are going.  We 
are starting to turn dirt on the first project.  Things are 
looking forward.  The longest pole in the tent and I think we 
talked about that earlier today is the environmental approval 
process so as those projects get approved more dirt will be 
turned and more stuff will be done but we ask you to take the 
flooding newsletters we get and turn them around in your social 
media as you see fit.  You see a good picture in George's 
summary, weekly summary, turn those around on your social media.  
Again, for me it is all about public information.  The more they 
know, the less they think we are not doing anything and we as the 
royal government we it's every subject we deal with so keep up 
the good work, get the information out there and I think we will 
be less distrustful, it's two negatives I know but other than 
that that's all I have chairman, thank you.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Kent.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER KENT:  A couple brief items, George and Suzanne 
just a thank you and to John Nicholson and David Santiago, thank 
you both for talking about the reef because they did it is a 
discussion that should be have.  In my younger days I served a 
lot and I don't know if you thought about this or not but any of 
the tropical beaches you've been to where they have incredible 
serve on a reef and then where you are on the beach because for 
the most part if there were huge waves out there it's like a lake 
and there is not any erosion going on because the reef has taken 
all the energy out of the wave and it's something we should be 
talking about.  I am pleased that came up today.  Counsel, thank 
you for almost 3 years ago agreeing to support the regrow the 
loop and now regrow Volusia because Reid wrote Volusia and regrow 
the loop announced their full schedule of environmental education 
events and they have so many topics, here's a few of them, save 
the native bees.  You think of Mr. Reinhart with the honey we 
talked about at the jails, rain barrel workshop, pruning trees.  
They have some good topics that our residents can participate in 
free of charge.  And last but not least I'd be remiss, I saw him 
earlier in the maybe he's gone, George you will have to tell him 
but Tim Bailey, we've got you have great staff members and you 
hold them accountable and these people are professional and 
punctual and good at what they do.  And in your evaluation I 
always say it every year it's one of my favorite things about you 
is you have an uncanny ability to put the right people in the 
right spots and hold them accountable to make sure they produce 
for our residents but I saw there Councilman Johansson and Robins 
will have a town hall and I love that for you guys but I love it 
more for your residence because I just had my district dialogue 
on January 12 Bicentennial Park, there were over 50 people there 
and they are jazzed up to talk about different things and it's 
beneficial and it's helpful and it helps me as one of the seven 
leaders to make decisions of Volusia County and I am excited for 
you two guys down in New Smyrna to have a town hall like this.  I 
wanted you to know I am rooting for you, I'm rooting for your 
residence because it's going to be good for them but George, Tim 
Bailey was fantastic giving that room open making sure the seats 
were there.  There was one question I told the group, I have no 
idea but Tim Bailey jumped up and said may I and he gave a 
three-minute answer and I was so pleased that remember that, 
John?  John took the trek from Daytona to come to that meeting 
and it was standing room only.  Standing room only up there in 
Ormond by the sea.  It put a smile on my face.  So George, if you 
will please share and Suzanne if you will share with Mr. Bailey 
that I certainly appreciate it and the next one is the Ormond 
library.  That is in May and I'll talk about that when we get 
closer to it.  Great to see you all again and happy new year and 
have a good night.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Councilmember Johansson.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  I have been in Don's town hall when 
we had it here.  I'm supporting Danny and if any of you want it 
adds a little bit of staff taking minutes but I'm more than 
willing.  I don't like encroaching on your district but I 
appreciate it, thank you.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  But your job encroaches on all other districts.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER JOHANSSON:  But I don't go meddling without 
giving them a chance first.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Vice chair Reinhart.

>>VICE CHAIR REINHART:  Jake, you can join in any time.  Two 
quick things I already promised Danny I would make a quick.  
First thing tomorrow afternoon Marine science Center dedication, 
you and I both chaired it so I encourage those that enjoy the 
area we have out there, number two this is an apology I have to 
make.  My wife is probably recording this right now.  The apology 
has to do with something we all talked about appear and staff is 
bringing it back is the domestic abuse database we were talking 
about.  I did a news reporter did an interview with me and it was 
in the studio and I got a phone call right away from my daughter 
because in the studio I said my daughter's boyfriend had 
assaulted her.  It was her ex.  Let me clear that because they 
like the new guy so I made the public apology as any dad appear 
wood, five of us I think had daughters so we totally understand 
so I made the apology, hopefully I will get out of the doghouse 
so that's all I had.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  We understand that Jake, okay.  Councilman 
Robins.

>>COUNCIL MEMBER ROBINS:  Thank you chairman, we went over the 
sprinklers too.  I want to, I'd like to address some of the 
comments made here because they are in my district.  Mr. Morgan 
Denny, if anybody has questions about that counsel we have been 
in contact with this gentleman in that neighborhood for years.  
We've been mitigating certain issues, we highlighted some 
projects that will be going on down that way.  But also nobody is 
neglecting him or others.  Then and I have been out there several 
times.  Throughout the years.  And we've got to give, with our 
enforcement system and everything we've got to give people a 
corrective action.  Just because you don't like it doesn't mean 
they are not entitled to that process and they have the four same 
process as well if it happens to them and they make some mistakes 
and that's what they're doing but our staff is doing a good job, 
Ben and his team are doing a good job, code enforcement on 
working through some of these issues and mitigating some of the 
impacts or if there is a negative impact or was that it gets 
corrected so I want to put that out there in case you get emails 
but there's over 100 email correspondence between legal and 
multiple departments handling that.  So other than that the only 
other topic I might bring back that will get more information, 
several years ago I believe we dissolved an agricultural board 
and combined it with the value adjustment board.  I'm getting 
some contact from members of the agricultural community to 
possibly restore that and I will get more information and have 
them get that out to the board, if it's even feasible.  I 
volunteer for if needed but other than that that's it.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Michael Ryan, Michael Dyer.  I need to talk to 
Michael Ryan but he's not here, is he here?  

>>  I think you should ask a question of Michael Ryan.

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Did you hear Danny's request?  

>>COUNTY ATTORNEY:  We will have to talk.  We will dig into it.  

>>CHAIR BROWER:  Everything I had the brought bring up has been 
brought up, toilet to tap.  Between nourishment.  And I know I 
think David, you've got a little little frustrated with me 
talking about the bills and but it goes along with toilet to tap, 
if we don't get rid of Bill 718 and its corresponding house bill 
it just gets worse and worse so that's the reason I wanted to 
talk about those.  After reviewing the Florida Association of 
Counties conference, they made it so clear our residents need to 
weigh in so that's why I bring it up publicly.  I know they get 
frustrated, they feel like Tallahassee doesn't listen.  I get 
frustrated for the same reason sometimes but please don't give 
up.  Don't give up contacting your representative senators.  
Especially the Volusia County delegation.  So with that at 9:04 
this meeting is adjourned.