Volusia County 
County Council Meeting 
Tuesday, August 3, 2021 
Remote CART Captioning 

>> SPEAKER:
If everybody wants to take their seat we will get started in just a minute. We are already one minute over.

Sorry for the delay. As you can see looking at the dais we have several members out. We do have a quorum. We will call the meeting to order at 9:34 AM. If you would like to stand for the invocation room to remind everybody that you can have your faith leader, and deliver an invocation, you just have to get the name to Clarissa greene@volusia.org and we are an equal opportunity praying counsel.

After the invocation stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.

PASTOR MARK WINKLER:
Thank you for having me. I am a pastor for church and Victoria Hills. We have been here for a little over eight years. There's a real sense of something important happening here today and I'm grateful to be a part of it this morning. Let's get God to show up this morning. That's what the invocation is, to get God to show up and make his presence known.

Holy and precious God we give thanks for the joy of this day. For the joy of gathering together in freedom, gathering together to hear the voices of people coming together, sharing concerns, and understanding one another. We give thanks for this County Counsel and for the collective wisdom that they share. We ask God that this Council will turn to you for wisdom. We pray that you bless them, not just today at this time but always throughout their lives wherever they go and whatever they do. Bless the families and whatever they are doing today. Bless the concerns and make the work of this day affect many people in a positive way. Pray God that hungry people will be fed, and homeless people will be sheltered, and jobless people will find meaningful labour.

We pray God that you would touch our lives and our hearts, that you would make this day a blessing for us and for all. We pray all of these things in Jesus holy name, amen.

SPEAKER:
I Pledge of 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.

SPEAKER:
Billie has a gift for you.
Carissa, would you call the roll?

SPEAKER:
(Roll Call)

SPEAKER:
Before we go into public participation and want to make an announcement. We change the agenda a little bit yesterday at the request of one of the councilmembers to have a spokesman from Halifax health speak about the current COVID-19 outbreak.

They can do that at 10:30 AM. So, wherever we are at 10:30 AM we are going to pause, take that break, and it will be virtual. Just let her bring us up-to-date. And then my understanding is later in the day we also have a similar presentation from (unknown term) health. We will start with public participation, but I need to ask the council, there are several members who want to speak on 24, 25.

SPEAKER:
Is 25 and 26.

JEFFREY BROWER:
It's 25 and 26. It would be an all-day thing. I need to get your vote this morning to allow them to speak. In order to do that I would need a motion and a second vote.

SPEAKER:
So moved.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Motion by Post. Second by Robbins. All in favour say aye. Uh-oh. This is going to be an interesting day. (Laughs).

Let me ask for the vote again
so Carissa has all in favour of allowing several people to speak this morning, if you are in favour of that say aye. Any opposed? Got it. You're busy.

Instead of everybody staring at me we will wait so she can…

We are going to take the public participation in the order it was received. The first one will be Christopher Edge, we will call you up in a minute followed by Russ (Unknown Name) and John Nicholson. We need a bullpen to keep everybody ready.

Did you get your computer? Everybody has heard of Murphy's Law? Whatever could go wrong will go wrong.

You're welcome. I wanted you to be able… To listen to the public. Christopher Edge. If you come up if you would tell us your name and where you are from and then you have three minutes. I will holding to the three minutes. There's a timer up there you can see how much time you have left and we have a lot of people want to talk so please be respectful of everyone's time.

SPEAKER:
I did not know I was going to be the first one called up. I want to speak to the noise ordinance as it applies to the unincorporated areas of Volusia County. I think right now the way it stands the current explosion of growth and people moving into our area is not sufficient.

I had several instances of myself and of the residence army had to call Volusia County, through no fault of their own, to make reports of hearing either parties, music, dance whatever it may be until all hours of the morning, sometimes to 5 AM. For miles around.

The way the current bill is written as I understand it has to be, as a resident, you have to file an official complaint for $50 fine with the courts. An officer would have to come out and do a decibel reading. I don't think that is sufficient and what I propose is that we adopt the city commission that passed an ordinance on September 2, 2019 where if the responding officer has the ability to decide the impact of the noise from the distance being 150 feet during nighttime hours or 300 during daylight hours.

I think this would better help residents out trying to relax in their homes because a lot of us moved out for the quiet, the land, the nature, and that is starting to be impacted by more and more people moving in.

I think adopting that same, and nothing to reiterate the entire law, but give the officers an ability to make a decision by saying, OK I can hear there is noise 150 feet from your house and I am going to go and talk.

With that will come more power to the officer I would hope that this ordinance that gives them the power to shut the noisemaker down. Possibly arrest them if they turn the music back up. Also large fines if they have to (indiscernible). Other than that I think this is something we should look at, I don't know exactly how it would work but I appreciate you listening to some of my complaints online. I have emailed Mr Brauer and Mr (Unknown Name) on many occasions on this for speeding and this in our area. Sometimes I wasn't so nice and I apologize.

Thank you for your time, and have a great day.

JEFFREY BROWER:
I'll just remind everybody as you come up to speak the Council does not reply to what you're saying. I don't want you to misinterpret that to mean that we do not care. In means that we do not reply to your comments because this is your time. I guarantee we do here and discuss this at the agenda meetings. We really appreciate your input, it is critical.

Next is Russ Moulton.

SPEAKER:
Thank you, Mr Chairman and members of the Council. My name is Russ Moulton. I represent an organization called Floridians for affordability and real estate in sales taxes. I represent this group, this group is made up of taxpayers who are outraged, we emphasize, outraged, at the exorbitantly high property taxes we have here in Volusia County.

They are so high now that many of us feel that we do not on our homes anymore, we rent them from the county. I am not kidding. Some of the rates we are paying on homes are that high.

Over the last 10 years this counsel has steadily, not all of you, but some of you, but the Council for the last 10 years has steadily raised property taxes in Volusia County. It's like the frog in the pot. You guys with the frog and when it is cold and heat it up a little bit each year. I have to tell you our property taxes are now boiling. The pot is boiling.

Tax rates.org shows that Volusia County, in terms of property taxes well into the median income is in the highest 15% bracket of all counties in the country. Let me say that again, the top 15% highest is a function of median income. Of all 3143 counties in the nation.

That's outrageous. Absolutely outrageous. I hear members of this Council, with all due respect Mr Robbins, I hear you talk about cutting to the bone. Cutting to the bone, frankly sir, and I do mean this with all due respect, you all don't know the meaning of the words.

Ask the residents, the taxpayers of this county that lost their jobs. That lost their restaurants, shops, livelihoods. The retail workers at the box source that went out of business permanently during COVID-19 that we will never see again. Ask them what cutting to the bone really means.

I hear County staff like the CFO talk about $70 million you going to lose you don't keep the tax rate the same, that is so deceptive. The appraiser's office shows that the full rollback rate, you will make an additional $5.8 million on the current real estate inventory. And at the full rollback rate you're probably making over 5.2 million in new construction, that's $11 million more than last year. At the full rollback rate. That's 5% more, 5%, you can't live with 5% more? Why not?

We are not making 5% more. What about the working poor of this county? The working poor who have to pay the higher taxes, nearly 10% that the landlords are going to face. Folks, Democrats, Republicans, independents all agree that the property taxes are too high and it's time to cut them, thank you.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Thank you. John Nicholson.

SPEAKER:
John Nicholson, Daytona Beach. Last meeting I asked for you guys to do me a favour and fixed often Park. The weeds were yea hi. Within 14 hours they had started. They had a crew out there and by noon it was done. One of your members was nice enough to drive over and take a look and see what I'm talking about.

People say they don't get things done and things take forever, and I am one of those. There are things I have been pushing for forever. The last three years the parking lots etc. But it can get done and with a little oversight it was fixed. Some thinking you publicly from fast work that the county did and the backing of the Council.

Secondly with regard to that area, I have said it before, there's love synergy going on in the repent. The property values are going, to me, through the roof. One of the houses behind me sold for $600,000 and was purchased by this woman seven years ago for hundred $50,000. The house at the end of the block that is going for almost (indiscernible).

There are 4 Huge Hotels Being Renovated near Seabreeze. Everything is beginning to move. Whatever you do and whatever you budget please look at that area, whatever the county owns, fix it up and clean it up. Same thing with the city, we need that because the synergy is there, it is starting to move and if the city gets involved in cleaning it up and you get involved and clean your property it is going to move, and it only increases the taxes. The more valuable the property is the more taxes you will get which brings me to my last item.

Please do not do what our last chair did. The public is not ignorant. The public will understand if you explain it to them. Remember he said, "They won't understand." They had a big thing, the (unknown term) sales tax. Residents in the community, we were too stupid to understand. We are not too stupid to understand taxes if you tell us. That gentleman did not realize, and if I am not mistaken, you will have a bill for some rail this year.

If I'm not mistaken there was a 15%… $15 minimum that you have to put into your budget. There are things you have to put in and I believe it adds up to more than $11 million. So, please explain to these people that you do not want to do it because you want to waste the money. There are things that your hands are tied, there are a lot of you that did not want to do (unknown term) we were forced to, so whatever you do please do what you have to do. Thank you.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Corban Star.

SPEAKER:
Hello, my name is Corban and I'm here to represent children are our future of Volusia County. I think it is a good thing that (unknown term) is doing because kids that were in wheelchairs typically the parks are different and sometimes they will be in the same park, but on the side.

I like how she is going to try and combine them to where we can, kids not in wheelchairs and kids with disabilities and kids with not can play together and learn stuff about each other. Learn how one of the kids got in the wheelchairs, I think what she is doing is very good because it's good for the kids to learn and see what else is going on.

And… I am scared.

SPEAKER:
You are doing amazing! I already want to vote for it.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Your fine, you are doing an excellent job.

SPEAKER:
I don't know what else to say.

JEFFREY BROWER:
That's OK. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

(Applause)

JEFFREY BROWER:
Every survey in America that asked what we fear the most the number one thing is public speaking. This young man at a young age is learning to conquer that fear.

Let's see, can you read that name? Last name is Jones. Is there an Andrew? All that is constant. OK. Sorry, you have very creative writing.

SPEAKER:
Thank you for having me. My name is Constance Jones. I am also known as Momma C of Daytona Beach. I was named that by the children of Volusia County that I had worked with throughout the years at DCF. I was working with abused children for 17 years. When I left DCF in 2016 I decided to take my legacy out into the community. Which I did. I formed an organization in the name of it is Children Are Our Future of Volusia County Inc. It is a 501(c)(3) and we are through the state of Florida recognized and known to have children with disabilities and severe medical diagnosis.

I have taken our community as a whole, but my heart is with our special-needs children, and I have worked and sponsored with many of them, probably close to 20 different families and I have raised money for different medical needs that they have needed through poker runs in the community and also benefits I have pulled together.

I would say at least 96 or 97% of the funds raised have gone to these children for medical needs. I did, in 2018, do some exploring in our parts. I noticed that a lot of our parks do not have all-inclusive play. We have very little. I have taken it upon myself to help with the situation and I'm not here to ask for any funding. We have already started raising money on our own, and we also have community businesses that are sponsoring us. Our biggest question is, where do we start? I already put one structure in (unknown term) Beach.

I went to the city and I put a rocketship wheelchair glider and we raised the money and it took us two years, but the city came behind us and pitched in the rest of the money. We broke ground February 2020.

That was our first adventure. Now we are expanding and so I said I have already gone to the city, now I need to go to the county. I have been here my entire life and this is actually my initiative to upgrade these playgrounds and I just spoke with Corban, he is my counsel. In fact the Council is made up of all children and he said, let's just start upgrading, Ma C. Thank you.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Thank you. Jeremiah (Unknown Name). I am sorry, it is Jeremy.

SPEAKER:
Good morning, Mr chair and counsel. My name is Jeremy (Unknown Name) president of the Bush County firefighters Association, local 3574. I like to thank the members of Council had knowledge and the concerns and Public Safety and at the last meeting in the previous emails I have sent you.

I'm here today in support of Mr (Unknown Name)'s budget. Your dual certified firefighter paramedics collectively continue to work thousands of forced hours beyond their scheduled T-bar community say. We continue to sacrifice our health and time with loved ones and we are proud to do so. The firefighter paramedics are being stretched then and we have no staffing factor or flexibility to compensate with the workflows.

Our most recent testing process for hiring has been completed, but I feel waiting until October 1 to offer jobs can be detrimental to securing healthy, passionate firefighters. Although the fire fund supports most of our efforts and is currently healthy due to the housing market we are greatly affected by changes to the General fund. Hazardous materials, technical rescue, while fire response rely greatly on general fund monies.

Fire rescue currently supplements the EMS transport system and requiring to firebase transports to fire stations in the corners of the county. We rely on the services of the general fund to help assure the safety of the community in terms of many of our services. The general fund helps our fleet workers keeps our support trucks running, facilities departments to keep fire stations operational, our road and bridge helps clear the way for vehicles and helps us during fires with clearing debris.

Cutting those departments and their essential services to us in community will have a detrimental effect to our operation. Last year the rollback of the fund suffered a one million-dollar loss in a system that is requiring more demand than ever before with overworked firefighters and paramedics.

I have seen many changes in government through my 16 year career and I feel Public Safety will be cut. With that being said, and with Mr (Unknown Name) at the helm, I support the budget has proposed. Thank you.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Thank you. Lee Johnson.

SPEAKER:
Good morning. My name is Lee Johnson. I live at 1575 Manner Way. I have been a resident here in this beautiful county for a little bit better than a year, but came over from Lake County. We live in an area of beautiful trails, a lot of wildlife, we have felt the last time we are ever going to live in.

But there are some issues. We have traffic issues. I have been a part of the next-door group and it's quite a heavy topic on it. I sent an email to Commissioner Johnson who forwarded that email on to Sheriff Chitwood and within a matter of hours had deputies call, you deputies out there and had electronic speed signs set up.

We realize this is a big county and you have a lot of demands. After a while the deputies have to move on to somewhere else, electronic speed signs came down. What we're looking for is trying to develop some long-term solutions. It seems like grand, Glenwood and autobahn are the worst. It is 7 miles of roadway was just one stop sign. It is used as a way to get off of 27 and get through that part of the county much quicker.

With the sun rail station coming in I think this is only going to get worse. What we are going to want to do is work with the county, with law enforcement and the residence to try and come up with some long-term solutions. Whether that's additional stop signs, speed bumps, we want to work with you all. It's a beautiful area and we don't want to see accidents happen. There was one last Friday night I believe. They had to shut down Grant for a while. I don't know if it was a pedestrian involved or not, but we are here to work with you all. Thank you Commissioner Johnson for being very proactive.

What can we do? Who can we talk to? That's it, thank you.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Thank you. That takes us to item 25. Speakers of first which is Jennifer Scott.

SPEAKER:
You're right, it is scary up here. (Laughs) Good morning, thank you for your time. I'm speaking today in favour of the resolution of reestablishing and affirming our constitutional rights. We the people request and demand that each of you, as representatives on the county level uphold our rights afforded to us under our Constitution. More specifically the Bill of Rights.

Despite what may happen in other counties and states, or despite what may be proposed at the federal level you should not entertain any mandate regarding masks, quarantines or vaccines. Or ones that affect our freedom of speech, freedom of press, or freedom to gather.

It is your obligation to protect the sovereign rights of the citizens of Volusia County. We urge you to do what is right and uphold your oath of office. We urge you to make this the Bill of Rights sanctuary County.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Marybeth Michael.

SPEAKER:
Hello, my name is Marybeth Michael and I reside in Volusia County. I would like to thank all of you for the time speaker today. I agree interesting resolution regarding Bill of Rights. Ships of all the men below would be doing all the hard work, huffing and sweating while the captain of the ship would sit quietly at the start guiding and making decisions. The depiction is true today with regards to the hard-working taxpayers behind the scenes while you all make decisions and guide the direction of our county.

I would like to say that this resolution has been misrepresented. The media has planted a seed of deception is spreading repairs that this is an anti-vaccine ordinance. What is this resolution even mention vaccines? The media would want you to think that because vaccines are all that they ever talk about anymore. I feel that now is the perfect time for this resolution. It is forward thinking, much like our forefathers were able to do, which has protected us this far into history. Why now? Look at the influx of people that have relocated to Florida. I am sure that all of you, just like I have, have felt the sun rising population to our county. Why do people choose to come to Florida in droves? I think that it is obvious because of the Linda Friedman travels past our borders into their hearts and minds.

The Bill of Rights should be considered the greatest addition to our Constitution and securing them what set Volusia County apart. US leaders would be known as individuals who truly represent the people because he would be securing our borders with Liberty. Especially at a time when the federal government is showing its allegiance to big tech, big corporations and China. We need our liberal government now more than ever. As you know, not all people. The citizens within the county go on to retire in that same position. With that being said you as members may return to the under the direction of future elected persons.

We must always remember that what we are doing today affects and can also protect individuals far into the future. By adopting this resolution you would be leaving her posterity to future generations, which, like our forefathers did, liberty of the individual is necessary for growth in the arts, sciences and economic prosperity which leads to good light. Vanderbilt University allows you to fully enjoy our freedoms, freedom from control or oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's own way of life, behaviour or political views would be secure. They could the growth that will come from that. People would want to enter into our sovereign gates of liberty and the county would automatically flourish. We also have an extra hedge of protection securing us from the tyranny that that someday come from the federal government.

Something that affords its citizens to fully enjoy their freedoms should be celebrated and not fear. We must never forget that the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights were intended as the foundation of our Republic. Much like forgers are to a home or building, like any building that the construct as you have not, I am wrapping it up, you must secure structure reinforcements. I feel that this resolution will only secure protection and security that will be enjoyed for many generations, and you will go down in history as being wise leaders who were thoughtful and considerate in the building of future freedom and liberty.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Thank you very much, we have a lot of other speakers. Paul Richardson.

SPEAKER:
I also would like to support this resolution regarding the Bill of Rights. It's great, I love it. Can I say? I've only got a few minutes I want to talk about a little bit more. Some people are connecting this with the vaccine and some people are saying this is vaccine hesitancy or something like that, this is not. This is in support of vaccine.

(indiscernible) to get it. It's already been paid for by you, your children, grandchildren, grandchildren. A lot of people in federal government are trying to scare people into thinking vaccine doesn't work for some reason, I don't know why. Hundred and 25,000 people in 38 states breakthrough cases, that means they got the vaccine but they also got COVID-19 again or the Delta variant. When you look at the numbers it's only .08% of people got vaccinated, that's amazing. That means that the vaccine is working as intended.

Unfortunately COVID-19 is an mRNA virus and it will mutate and change a little bit and the variance would appear. That's unfortunate. It will happen. The flu is the same way. Even with the flu shot you can still possibly get the flu, but it will be… It will hit you less as well. This doesn't mean the vaccine is not good.

I rise in support of this resolution. Also weekly I want to say that despite some of our authorities and the federal government I do believe this fire escape from the Wuhan Lab and they should take responsibility for that. The federal (indiscernible) all kinds of diseases, not just Dumbfounded but ban it. This is what happens when viruses get out into the world. I do support the resolution so that our rights trump federal government overreach. Thank you.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Now for item 26. We have three requests to speak. Douglas Kenney.

SPEAKER:
My name is Douglas Kenney and I am the third fellow talked a lot about the budget. As far as the assessed value of the homes everybody here knows that story of the house costing $100,000 and selling for $600,000. What happens is that sale, $600,000 gets put in the books and the person coming in there, especially this year, will not get a homestead. The taxes will go up, OK? If you increase the rate along with the assessed value, I call it a double whammy.

We are going to get taxed to death. (indiscernible) 15th County, whatever he said. That amazed me. The four commissioners who are against, who want to raise the taxes I wish you would reconsider. We all don't live on John Anderson. I live in (unknown term), 42% of the people on my street do not live there full time. They are getting taxed without a homestead. Also understand it was 38 million more dollars that came out this past year than in 2019.

I guess it was COVID relief or whatever. I wish the four commissioners who want to raise it and misdirected Walt Miss

We don't all live in houses on John Anderson. I see people in my neighbourhood their lines are going down the tubes because they cannot get someone to cut their lawn. There's a lot of people at least in (unknown term) and at least throughout the county who are greater than 70 years old and they live on Social Security. You keep taxing us and you are going to lose a lot of your support. I appreciate everybody look back. I spent 30 some years in finance as an internal auditor for Fortune 500 company and we had to do budgets every year. Every year we were told to cut, and guess what? We did it. We did it every year.

We went in and looked, we got outside people to come in and look at our books to look at our processes. The processes were the biggest thing. One of the things I used to do with my supervisor is you have to be able to cut your budget to be able to save your salary every year. These people are making $80,000 a year, guess what? They found out how to cut the budget. Thank you.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Bob McGuire.

SPEAKER:
Good morning, my name is Bob McGuire and I'm with Edgewater. No fence to the Council in all honesty I rather be anywhere but here this morning, but after attending a Council meeting for the first time last month I felt it was time to speak. Like many of my fellow property owners I am here to voice my objection to the decision that would increase my property taxes further. Although it has been voiced by different members of Council keeping the rate the same as last year is indeed an automatic tax increase. Most certainly the assessed value on my property will increase for 2021, just as it has dramatically over the past two years.

I can only speak for my own situation but in my case my property's assessed value increased 90% from 2018 to 2019. Yes, I said 90% increase of $80,000. Additional increase of 18% occurred from 2019 2020. My understanding is that property assessments are not to increase more than 3% each year, which is the justification some of you are making for not rolling back the village. The actual increase to a homeowner would be very small.

Clearly, at least in my situation, this 2% Is not being observed. If this is happening to other property owners than this year's property tax revenue, with no rollbacks in the village, should create a huge windfall from County. Perhaps counsel and the assessor's office need to get on the same page about this. I don't owe you that responsibility for having to handle the financial and fiscal affairs of the county, it is a difficult task. I'm not going to claim I understand how to do any better than any of you do, I understand economics and budgets. I understand that when you only have so much money you cannot spend more than that amount unless you choose to go into debt.

I understand my income does not equal or exceed my expenses my expenses must be cut to balance my budget. It is also easier to raise taxes than it is to find ways to cut expenses. But considering as a previous speaker said earlier this morning the Volusia County ranks and the highest 15% in the country with property taxes. Shouldn't that give us pause to consider some of the things we are presently doing? Any residents like me are retiring and their only source of income is Social Security.

I am blessed more than many but based on my property taxes for master it would take three months of Social Security income to pay those taxes, that's 25% of my annual income and easily my business expense. That kind of taxation greatly hurts the vast majority of our low income.

Paying taxes gets fewer goods and services and has less discretionary spending hurting local businesses that rely on purchases for economic vitality. Your responsibility is to (indiscernible) I call upon you not to forsake…

JEFFREY BROWER:
Thank you, I appreciate it. Tricia Cobb is our last speaker.

SPEAKER:
I am Tricia Cobb. I live in (unknown term) beach and I was born in Daytona many years ago. Many of you today I know on the Council have had a very challenging time. So many controversial decisions, and I witnessed in the chambers, issues and things that were very difficult for you. I thank you for your service and I really, really hope you have a more enjoyable time working together for a better Volusia County.

I have talked to you often and you know I want you to manage what we give you better. That's all I want. I want you to assure me you will really work hard at this. Please look for tax cuts, expose needless spending, and recommend revenue-producing ideas along with ideas we might be able to give you.

This is a difficult task for you, I do not envy you. I know you can do it. I believe you can.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Thank you. That brings us to the consent agenda. We have 10 minutes before we will have a presentation. We have one speaker who would like to speak on a consent agenda item. I'd like to ask any other council members is there an item you would like to pull for comment? No?

OK, I will entertain…

SPEAKER:
Moved to approve agenda.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Motion by

SPEAKER:
We would need to hear the consent agenda item before the vote.

JEFFREY BROWER:
April (Unknown Name).

SPEAKER:
Good morning. I am April, I am currently homeless. I am one of millions of people were homeless. I started out with a whole packet of resources to call for assistance. Each one of those agencies turned us down. And is that we did not qualify, or their funding did not allow relocation. It only allowed them to pay the landlord that money. Some of the landlords aren't wanting money, some of us are behind. My situation we were on a month to month and on the CDC memorandum and granted to say by the judge, the owner of the property hired an attorney that found a glitch in the system and went back in and amended it and said that we no longer will behind on any monies, we were on a month-to-month that had expired.

In that timeframe we were told to give possession of the property, but in the meanwhile we had a teenage son that was being quarantined with COVID-19 and we were in the home in quarantine. We were in panic mode trying to find a place to go and find help. The help at Volusia County is not helping people. It is a long process and what do we do? Where do we go? We don't have any answers.

Yes, there is money, but how do we get it? It's sad because now we are homeless. I have a restaurant, I closed it down because of the issues in the community and the world, you know. It's sad that we have to go from good people trying to make a living into the situation and there is no resource. The resources are limited. What do we do?

Sleep in our cars? What do we do? Everybody here has somewhere to go. It's sad, and it's heartbreaking that myself and millions of other people have to go through this. I know you guys have prepared yourself for this day, but I think it has been prepared enough because the help that is out there is not really helping us at all.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Donna Butler, you.to come forward but I'm going to ask if I you this woman's contact information can you…

I can guarantee you that Donna Butler cares. Homeless people, low-income people all over the county and she can give you some counsel. She's doing that right now, thank you.

(Applause)

OK, we have five minutes.

SPEAKER:
Mr chair for the record I need to know what item that was impossible.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Item C.

SPEAKER:
The Council needs to…

JEFFREY BROWER:
Yes, can I get a motion to accept the consent agenda?

SPEAKER:
(indiscernible)

JEFFREY BROWER:
Seconded. All in favour say Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously 5 to 0.

The next item is a confirmation. I don't want to ask you to try and do that in four minutes. You can?

SPEAKER:
I think we can do that.

JEFFREY BROWER:
OK, then we will take one more item. Item 2.

SPEAKER:
Mr (Unknown Name), our candidate. This morning it is my pleasure to present to you Mr Michael Coleman who is the EMS director. Michael has excellent credentials and for 22 years of EMS and Public Safety experience, most recently he was the chief operating officer of the Richmond ambulance authority where he worked since 2018. Prior to that he held a number of positions with Grady health system in Atlanta. That was going back to 2009.

While there he was also director of EMS operations, Vice President of EMS mobile advanced practice, Vice President of EMS operations and director of the EMS education and training. He has served as a paramedic and a flight paramedic and he was a lead instructor for the paramedic program at (unknown term) college.

He has a bachelor's degree of applied science from Clayton State University, Master's degree in public administration from Columbia University. He's won several prestigious awards including the Old Dominion EMS alliance outstanding leadership award. An PMS Pioneer award and EMS service Director of the year.

I think one thing we should mention is not only does Michael have obviously a well-rounded EMS management and everything that goes with it like logistics, budget, resources, staffing, quality assurance but he also has some experience relevant to our county such as nurse triage which we will be talking about in a minute.

And special events management. All those reasons I am confident that Michael would be a great fit for our organization. I am extremely pleased to present Michael Coleman to you for your confirmation.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Thank you. Is there a motion to accept?

SPEAKER:
I would like to confirm the appointment of Michael Coleman.

SPEAKER:
Second.

JEFFREY BROWER:
The second was my Post. All in favour say aye. And you post? Heather Post, did you want to speak?

SPEAKER:
Good morning. We have the County manager that talked a lot about your background in I've done some research as well. I did see that you, in Richmond, have extensive experience with nurse triage. I'm very thankful. I look forward to your service as our emergency medical services director.

I'm definitely going to chat with you and discuss some of the things with EMS. I'm really looking forward to you taking us to a new level. I just want to let that out there and I'm willing to offer you all the resources that you need to be successful in your role.

Know that and also know that I will be one of your biggest advocates if we do that. Thank you so much. Welcome.

SPEAKER:
I'm excited about the opportunity.

SPEAKER:
You are coming on at a fantastic time.

SPEAKER:
I appreciate everyone. I hated to come down here. Thank Mr Pozo for making me feel welcome and taking me around the county and showing me around all the services. I'm excited to get started.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Thank you very much. Congratulations and welcome. (Applause) Mr Captain, are we set up for the presentation? Who is going first? First speaker will be Margaret Crossman. If you would direct your attention to the screen.

SPEAKER:
Can you ask a question?

JEFFREY BROWER:
Can you hear me?

SPEAKER:
Yes, I can. We are anxious to hear what you have to say.

SPEAKER:
I'm the chief medical officer here at Halifax health. I'm here to share with you what's going on here at Halifax. I understand that you are interested in some of the numbers that we are having. We have about almost 150 admitted COVID patients.

About 50 of those are in critical care. That's about 1/3 of the COVID missions. And 1/4 of those require ventilation. The admitted age of the last month have been increased a little bit. Averaging around 61 years old that had been pretty stable for a while. It has crept down now. It's around 58.

That's an average. Overall, we are seeing more younger patients and more seriously ill younger patients. I think the other thing, just to point out, and you probably heard elsewhere - 90% of these admissions are related to, or are happening in unvaccinated individuals. We will look at the critical care settings. That is tended 15% of critical care... 90% are unvaccinated that are being admitted. 85 to 90% and critical care are unvaccinated. And 80% to 90% on critical care ventilators are also unvaccinated.

What questions do you have for me?

SPEAKER:
The initial question was, can the public see her if they are viewing our screen? Is she visible to them? They can see and hear her?

JEFFREY BROWER:
I think Kevin…

SPEAKER:
You said 150 at this time, and you are one facility?

SPEAKER:
This is in three facility. Halifax in Daytona, Orange, and Delta as well.

SPEAKER:
Thank you. That's good to know. I don't know that there's much more to hear rather than, how does this compare to previous times? Speaker Mike our prior surgery in January, we maxed out around 55 between all three sides. We are triple what we were there. It's quite a bit. The challenges are predominantly staffing. We have plenty of critical care beds available.

We have plenty of ventilators available. As far as elective procedures, some people can ask questions about what we are doing with elective surgeries. Yesterday, we did convene and discuss where we are with that.

The only change we are making for elective procedures and surgeries, it requires an admission to the hospital - and overnight a admission following the surgery. We are eliminating guests to a certain number per day. Otherwise we are still open for elective procedures and our trauma and anything else that comes in we are handling acutely.

SPEAKER:
I also heard that visitors were being limited again?

SPEAKER:
It did change for COVID patients. We have returned to virtual visits only for our COVID patients.

SPEAKER:
Even if someone is severe and critical, they may not see their loved ones prior to anything critical happening?

SPEAKER:
We take those on a case-by-case basis. End-of-life or severe illness, we do make exceptions. We make sure the individuals visiting Arun good protective gear. And, we definitely make exceptions in those situations.

SPEAKER:
Thank you.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Anyone else? Thank you for coming and bringing us up to date. And pointing out the severity of the situation. I think we also have Doctor Smith to speak. He's pretty right now. Thank you very much, doctor.

SPEAKER:
You are welcome.

SPEAKER:
Thank you for having me as well. Similar to our colleagues at Halifax we are continuing to see a significant sharp rise in the number of cases. We are at approximately double our previous census at Daytona Beach. Throughout the Central Florida division, we are caring for approximately 1200 COVID patients. About 300 in Justin Volusia County. Similar to what Doctor Crossman are seeing, about 90% are unvaccinated.

I think that's really the number one thing that I can get out there right now. This is a surge that perhaps did not have to happen. The vaccine is ubiquitous now. It's widely available and free of charge.

90% of patients that we see hop splice with this infection were unvaccinated. The majority of those happen in the community setting and 98% of those were unvaccinated. The number one thing you can do, not a link to help yourself but on the helping hand to the healthcare community at large, get yourself vaccinated. Encourage your friends to get vaccinated. If you're an employer, encourage your employees to get vaccinated.

It remains the number one most effective means that we have to not only stop the surge but prevent future surges. We have adopted a very similar visitation policy that Doctor Crossman just discussed. We are limiting visitors.

There are situations where it's important to have their patients with their families. Overall, we are trying to limit the number of people who come into contact with COVID. This is in terms of having the appropriate personal protective equipment. We've been able to shift resources throughout the organization to meet those needs. But, I want to make another plea to the public, if you have not gotten vaccinated, take time, reviewed the research. The same curiosity that made you pause, apply the same curiosity to the scientific literature and I think you will come to the same conclusion that I have and that I have come to my for my family.

We have moved into black status. Which might sound more exciting with the performance of elective procedures. We have gotten a lot of questions about that. We have put off on time sensitive cases.

Cases that are acute, such as surgical emergency or infection, those cases are proceeding as normal. But this allows us to redeploy staff to care for acutely ill patients. Mostly COVID patients that have come in and utilize more space and resources to care for those needs in the cases where we have the opportunity to delay some of that surgical care.

That would perhaps be the biggest difference. We made that change at the request of our medical staff for the most part. Our physicians were overwhelmingly in favor of both limiting visitation as well as ramping down the elective surgeries and that was really the consensus from our leadership. That's why we have brought in that direction.

I don't have much else for you in terms of specifics but I'm very happy to answer any questions.

SPEAKER:
Mr chair, I do have a question. Thank you very much for being here, Doctor Smith. I want to ask, you mentioned to children. Do we have very many children hospitalized right now?

SPEAKER:
Relatively small number, but that is still a significant increase from the previous urges. The Delta variant does seem to have not only a greater affinity for the receptor in the lungs and causing more respiratory illness, but it seems to actually attack children and younger adults more aggressively than the previous strain.

Relatively small number, but again, it's the increase… That's what I find most alarming particularly when you move back into the school year. More to come there, but I think the same principles apply. Get everyone in the home vaccinated. Where your masks when you cannot social distance, washer hand, and please, if your child is sick get yourself tested. Stay home and see your primary care physician. So you know that you are not sending your child out there to be a spreader.

SPEAKER:
If you will indulge me a little bit on this, I have received an email and I'm sure all of us stated from Beth a couple of days ago. Some of the things she brought up were very important to get out there. There were several questions that people were asking that maybe had misinformation.

If I could ask you, because she has the information here but I think it's important for the public who did not receive this email. The first one, I'm concerned if I get vaccinated I will be unable to have a child. What effect do those vaccines have on fertility?

SPEAKER:
Great question. The healthcare workforce is predominantly female when you look at the clinicians of that side. A lot of variation. This has been a frequent question. Vaccine hesitancy in our front-line teammates. Let's put this one to bed. The American College of obstetrics and gynecology said this is safe to take in pregnancy. It is safe to take if you are thinking about become pregnant or lactating or nursing. There is no link between the vaccine and future or even immediate fertility.

In fact, when we look at the initial study that Doctor Crossman and I discussed back in the first wave of the pandemic was look at the vaccines, that was about 45,000 people. Some of those became pregnant and they were not supposed to during the study. There is no link between this vaccine and fertility. There is no scientific mechanism through that would makes sense. I would reiterate, if you don't like the idea of a little piece of the mRNA from this virus, you will not like the idea of the virus hijacking yourselves and replicating itself inside your body.

If that's the reason why you're holding out out there in Volusia County, and you don't want to get the vaccine, you can put the baby to bed and look forward to put your own baby to bed after you get the vaccine.

SPEAKER:
Thank you, their 2 more brief questions but it's important the public hear this. The 2nd one says it seems the vaccines were developed very quickly, how can we know that they are safe?

SPEAKER:
The most stringent standards have been met, they were developed quickly only through a global outpouring of unprecedented resources and effort, okay? What we have seen has been the platform, yes, this would have taken years to develop, but when you take literally the global resource, the brain trust of the entire scientific community and focus through a test on one single project, that is why we have been able to see this vaccine really come to light so quickly.

MRNA vaccines have been conceptually been around for a long time they were just logistically very difficult to deploy because the cold storage needs. Obviously now that we have this need, that was a barrier that became much easier to overcome, and I would remind everybody now, with millions and millions and millions of people taking this vaccine, myself included, many of our staff, we are now the living breathing proof this vaccine is not only safe, but effective.

SPEAKER:
And the 3rd and final, thank you again, this is so important to ghetto, the 3rd and final question was the vaccines have only been in wide use for a year or less, how do we know there won't be long term side effects?

SPEAKER:
Again, what we are dealing with here is really just a small snippet of the genetic material of this virus. You know, I have been asked how many know you are not going to get sick later on? And that would be like putting the tire from a car in your garage. That is never going to turn into an entire car. Okay?

What you really got here is this tiny little piece of M NRA from the virus that teaches your body to recognize the protein on the outside of this virus, the idea that there are going to be long term side effects from that. Other than immunity, does not vary out in the literature, does not bear out in our own experience. Again, those of us put up our hands up and said I will take a vaccine, we effectively completed the clinical trial and I consider this to be put to bed.

SPEAKER:
Thank you so much.

SPEAKER:
Thank you, chair. This is my usual personal plea, because I know throughout this pandemic, we have talked about our staff, our healthcare, staff, how much we love them and know how much work they have put into this over these 18 months. And how much fatigue they must have, after having gone through this now having a double and triple surge. So, again, for me, what I do is for you, for your children, for your family, and for our community. I am making a personal plea for the same for anyone who would, our healthcare, our healthcare workers and the people who have to attend to our loved ones, when they are getting sick because many of them are. And I know again in my small circle, there is death recently, there is extreme sickness, there is people being in the hospital for 2 and 3 weeks, and coming out of the hospital with bills that are in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Who can afford that? Who can afford 2 to 3 weeks off of their life and who can afford to have caretakers not work and take care of you? This is no joke. This is real, this is no hoax, this is real life in our own community. And if you are knocking to take the vaccine, please, when you are around others, please mask up, that is why we haven't seen the flu to the degree that we haven't seen it because it is not spreading.

So, I have to make my personal plea because I know for me this is critical, it has been critical in my community, and my family, and in our lives. And I just hope, I thank you Drs. for being here and sharing the reality of what is happening directly in our community, this is not hearsay, this people who are there saving lives right now, so I thank you.

SPEAKER:
Thank you for that, I know would agree the health and outpouring support that the community has gotten over the last year and 1/2 has been really heartwarming. If I could ask you one thing, if you could help me help my staff, please, go out and get vaccinated, please, when you are out in public, where your mass, wash your hands, and please stay home if you are sick.

SPEAKER:
Thank you. Just one quick question for either of you. You said there is a very small percentage of vaccinated people getting this variant. Are you finding that the symptoms are less significant in a vaccinated person?

SPEAKER:
Chris, do you want me to take that one?

SPEAKER:
Yes, please.

SPEAKER:
Yes, it answers your question, by and large, those that are vaccinated, their symptoms are milder, even when they present to the hospital in general, they are milder symptoms. One of the things that I think helps people to understand is we knew from the beginning that the vaccine would be very effective, based on trials at preventing severe disease and death, and that is basically what we are seeing now, and it is performing very consistent with what we saw in the trials. There are those that have been vaccinated that are getting mild symptoms, some that are more severe and as you heard, severe enough to even be hospitalized, we are seeing that more in Florida, even though 85% of our individuals, 65 and older are vaccinated, we are seeing a few more of those individuals breakthrough, these breakthrough cases, especially if they have been in someone that is older, there is an increased risk of more disease.

That said, these are the individuals left for the most part are able to leave the hospital, there is about a one in a million chance that someone who is vaccinated, and this is all comers in all ages, about 1 million chance that the individual would not lead the hospital being hospitalized.

The thing about the Delta variant is that it's had several mutations that make it easier to get into cells, quicker to replicate, quicker to quell the antibody response, and so, even in vaccinated individuals, we are finding that this virus can kind of land on the beach, I heard this analogy and I think it is very helpful, land on the beach respiratory passages. Land on the beach, but has more difficulty going in which is into your system because that is what the vaccine has created for is that in land migration or onslaught of this virus.

And so it is less likely to end up in your body, you may end up with mild symptoms, and that has a lot to do which is landing there on the beach in beginning its process before the body that has been prepped through vaccination or prior infection, even. Is able to respond. So, that is making a difference in how severe the disease it gets, and certainly, are hospitalized and even those that may go on to require ventilation, it is making a difference.

SPEAKER:
Good, thank you, that is encouraging. I wonder is there anything that you can offer to vaccinated or un-vaccinated people to boost their immune systems so that this doesn't happen, especially if you've had a vaccine, is there anything that individuals can do?

SPEAKER:
Probably some of the biggest things, and we have talked about that, Dr. Smith and I both in multiple settings from the beginning, optimize your health, make sure they are optimally controlled, make sure it is optimally controlled, exercise to the extent that you are able to, getting outdoors, having fresh air, ventilating, your home and keeping doors open, having opportunity to get doors and breathe fresh air, we are so blessed to have a beach in a wide open ocean to breathe over, it's wonderful. Exercise nutrition, optimizing your health, eating right, trying to get out, all those things are known to improve your immune system.

SPEAKER:
Thank you. I just think that is wise, even after COVID and hopefully, we will get to a point where we can say COVID is behind us. But, we all have a responsibility to take care of our own health and provide to build up our immune system. For some of us, that means we got to change how we eat, whether or not we take vitamins. If we are overweight, really appreciate that, I don't see any more questions by staff.

Do you have just another minute?

SPEAKER:
Sure.

SPEAKER:
Patricia Boswell is here, and I'm going to ask her to speak and I don't know if she will have questions for you all, if you all will want to respond to anything that she says, Patricia?

SPEAKER:
And I just ask a couple of questions? Drs., thank you for everything that you guys do and your staff as well for stop just a couple of things a piggyback off of. I've seen some hangups and some questions, is any of these vaccines or whatnot, or any of these methods, are they approved by the FDA yet or is there anything on the horizon if that is not the case?

I have been hearing that more and more not going to take it because of this. Do you guys hear anything like that?

SPEAKER:
Sure, Chris, you are me,

SPEAKER:
I think you are asking waiting for the approval, full approval before they take the vaccine, is that the question? I have heard some of that, that DUA understandably so, did provoke some curiosity about what are the facts and what do we really know about this, I think all of that was very reasonable, actually, for people to ask those questions. The really good news is is that this is been such a topic of discussion and scientific in the medical community in particular, those questions have been answered. I do not feel, I'm putting my money where my mouth is, I've administered it to patient myself and family members, the reasons behind hesitating really have been a sort of dispelled. Anticipate we will have approval relatively soon for a number of these vaccines, and that that will no longer be a very meant, the truth is I don't think it should be a barrier now.

SPEAKER:
And are there other formulations underway, there are certainly many formulations, one that a lot of individuals are kind of excited about is an intranasal formulation course, being a little easier on those I have needle phobia but it will also help build a ber, we talked about the beach, landing on the beach so to speak, it would help build ber mucosal protection in those who had-- so we will see what happens, that is still very early, they are a while away and I think would be down the line when we are living with COVID. Because we likely will, but it's certainly going to be one of the other options among others for vaccinating individuals.

SPEAKER:
Thank you, and lastly are we seeing any increased death rates from the last, from the original COVID strain? And then now that we are in the Delta variant, have we seen any increases there?

SPEAKER:
I would say the death rates are staying pretty steady, but we know after the surgeons, it may be a week or 2 before we start seeing more death rates. I think it will be interesting to look back and see the difference in death rates among the vaccinated versus unvaccinated looked at by every age group. My suspicion is that overall, at least based on what we have seen today, that we are not going to see higher death rates per age group, per vaccinated or unvaccinated. But that remains to be seen. And the reason I am saying that is because more of the unvaccinated individuals are at least younger than what we had previously will we had a lots of everybody was unvaccinated. And so the death rates were even higher there. We've got a pretty good population that is vaccinated, I think that is going to help a little bit and certainly in her older populations that would have been more vulnerable to the severe complications of COVID.

So, we will see, the next few weeks hopefully will give us more information.

SPEAKER:
Same story here. Over 65 population really did take the brunt of the first wave, and they in turn, were very responsive to the call to get vaccinated. They really have sort of, I don't want to see faded into the background, but they were almost exclusively the target of the first wave, in fact almost considered the nursing home type or nursing facilities for a couple of weeks.

The real tragedy here is what we are seeing is people, young people, people in their 30s and 40s, on ventilators in the ICU, a heart machine, because they said I'm good, I don't have diabetes, I am not overweight, I don't smoke, this isn't really something I need to worry about. And they were almost encouraged in the first wave, that they did fairly well for the most part. Overseeing now is that with the Delta variant, that is exactly who I am seeing in overwhelming numbers here, getting extremely sick that is what I meant when I said earlier on, this is a search that probably did not have to happen at least to this variant we are seeing now. Even if you consider yourself to be low-risk, please, understand, Delta variant is a different animal, this is attacking young and healthy people creating critical illness. You are at risk, I promise you. Please, take the time if I haven't said it 100 times yet, take the time and investigate your options to go and get vaccinated today.

SPEAKER:
Do they use the same testing for the COVID versus the Delta? As they are distinguishing between what you have with the testing?

SPEAKER:
When we test for the virus here at the hospital level, we are testing for SARS COV2. We are not determining which variant the given patient has had. That something that has been surveyed and sampled through the department of health and that's where we get through the numbers for, how much Delta variant that we get in our community.

SPEAKER:
Those are sent to the CDC, and that's how they determined the percentage of however much is in your community. The original strain, the Wuhan strain is now a single digit percentage of what is out there. The prevalent strain right now is in fact Delta.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Before I asked Patricia to come up again, let me tell you what I heard. And confirm it or do not confirm it. Get a vaccine, go to the beach, walk in the sunshine, breathe the fresh air, move your body. Take your health responsibly. And one other thing. Is that the advice you are giving? Your advice is, get a vaccine.

SPEAKER:
That's pretty correct. Take care of your health, get exercise, eat right. There's never been a better time to quit smoking. Get rest, stay away from sick people. Wear a mask in public. If you want to get vaccinated, the closest thing that we have to pre-COVID, get your vaccine.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Are you proponent for any flu, colds, just general health vitamin C, zinc, and vitamin D?

SPEAKER:
Sure. That gets back to nutrition. Usually a well-rounded diet will cover those things. Some of those micronutrients that could help your immune system function optimally. I think extra vitamin C, zinc, possibly even D - in and around cold and flu season is a good idea. It typically does no harm, may help.

SPEAKER:
I recommend a well-balanced diet and we would not want to get the impression that it will give you added protection, but if it works for you and your primary care physician, by all means. But not a substitute for vaccination.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Thank you. I don't see any other questions. Patricia, would you like to… Give us your report?

SPEAKER:
Good morning, and Chairman, members of the Council. Florida Department of Health Volusia County, administrator. I will provide the data this morning and be available for questions. Volusia County has had 54,926 reported cases of COVID to date. 916 individuals have died. We are seeing an increase infections. The state of Florida recently experienced 51% increase in cases dumping from 73,106 cases two weeks ago to 110 477,000 for the week.

In Volusia County, cases have increased 15% during the past two weeks from 2976 cases to 3400 cases in the last few days. The 14 day average of cases is 456. Our current seven day rate is 2.8% and the 14 day average is 22.62%.

96.5% of our cases reported this month are within the unvaccinated publishing. The remaining 3.5% of cases met the criteria of a breakthrough case. Since July 1, we are seeing increased infections among the residents. The average age of an unvaccinated case reporting this month, the month of July, is 38 years of age.

The average vaccinated case age is 66. Presently, 56% of Volusia County eligible population is vaccinated which means one dose. Our most recent report indicated that 6458 individuals were vaccinated during the week of July 23 to July 29.

That's good news. The presence of variance and the large number of unvaccinated residents contributing to the use increases in cases. I do want to remind everyone that CDC has a data tracker. So you can go in and get Volusia County data available on that website. I also want to mention that for testing locations, there is a site - the Department of Health of Florida has COVID 19 testing sites locator and that's that Florida health COVID 19.gov.

Right now we are offering testing in our urgent care, med express, and Cedric care. CVS and Walgreens also offer testing and the health department. We are doing testing based on our case investigations.

We are adjusting our testing hours and days of the week based on demand. We have extended hours, next week we plan to add another day for testing. There is a vaccine available, we have vaccine available at County health Department locations. We will go out and vaccinate if we are asked or requested, we have done this with employers. We have done this with hair salons, bars, any location in the county that once the vaccine brought up to them and we are still continuing to do the homebound vaccinations. With that, I will open it up to questions.

SPEAKER:
There is a question that's been brought up to me where people do not have their vaccination cards anymore. There's a potential for having to show record in the future for a cruise or whatever it is. Is the health department responding to that? In regards to replacement vaccination cards? What is that process?

SPEAKER:
People have lost the cards, what we have been able to do and any physician office that's of Florida the provider can do it as well. You just print out your vaccination history through Florida's shots and it will show that you have had your COVID vaccines. We only received a certain amount of cards and we were told initially not to duplicate cards because there were some bad behavior around creating fraudulent cards. I'm not sure, but we have always used our Florida shot system to create a vaccine history for anyone that is requesting it. We see that a lot around school-age. I do want to put a plug-in. We have kids that are starting school. We do not want to see them in the health department prior to starting school. It's important that we get them in the classroom.

SPEAKER:
The people that came out of the stadium and those different Fairgrounds and things like that, to get vaccinated overnight and everything, those people can just go on to… What's the website?

SPEAKER:
They would come to the health department or of Florida shots provider and they should be able to print it now. We have mailed it out to people that have called or emailed to us receiving documentation. It's all entered through that system.

SPEAKER:
Can they do that at a pharmacy?

SPEAKER:
I don't know. I know that they are a Florida shots provider. I don't know if they will print out for you. I will find out.

SPEAKER:
Quick question, that is – are the tests free?

SPEAKER:
It depends. Through the health department we test for you. And according to the information that we printed off of the website of the vaccine locator, there was indication that the tests are free but they will ask for your insurance information. There might be some of that behind this.

SPEAKER:
I was going to ask that. Where they can go and get a free tests. If we can update any of our sites with that information, that would be helpful.

SPEAKER:
I will share that. When we did call Walgreens this morning, we received a message, that due to the high call volume you were not actually able to talk to somebody. You don't necessarily get to speak somebody about getting a test when you get to some of these sites.

SPEAKER:
Thank you for allowing us this time to really get this out. This is critical for our community and I thank you for allowing the opportunity up front of everything. Because it is that critical. Thank you.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Billy has a question before I call on her, I would like to... Both of the doctors that I'm looking at on the screen had a very limited time to come this morning and I really appreciate you taking this time. If you need to go, that is fine. We are about to wrap up. Billy, did you have a question?

SPEAKER:
A quick confirmation that you can get that... You can get your shot records at any pharmacy and someone even did it at Publix.

SPEAKER:
Thank you so much for taking this time to come. If there's anything you would like to conclude with…?

SPEAKER:
No, but thank you for all your doing and deliberating about how best to leave this community.

SPEAKER:
Thank you for spreading the truth.

SPEAKER:
Thank you, and I will think Bob who asked for this to occur yesterday. It was a last-minute change, but it was agreed by everyone that it was a much needed change. Thank you very much. (Applause)

JEFFREY BROWER:
Is Laura still here? This is item 3. Proclamation (inaudible) presented. Go ahead, Kevin.

SPEAKER:
Good morning. Community information director. Item 3 is a proclamation that was requested by Volusia County Council vice chair Billy Wheeler to honor Miss Laura Roth. The clerk of Circuit Court. Upon of her recognition as clerk of the year by the Florida court clerks and controllers. (Applause)

SPEAKER:
You know me, I am a big one for community needs to hear some of the good things that happen, this is quite an honour. If you don't mind, I would like to read this. Where Laura Roth has served as the clerk for the court with dedication and distinction since 2016. And whereas as an elected constitutional officer, she records and maintains Volusia County's official records and serves as the custodian of official court records for county and circuit courts.

And whereas Miss Roth did an exemplary job of leading her staff through the COVID-19 Pandemic, providing uninterrupted services to the public, through a window. Where she is a mighty advocate for her constituents and her staff, never shying away from taking on new responsibilities and initiatives. And whereas is an active member of Florida clerk, she has shared the group's best practices committee and the quick response team handling changes brought on by mercies law, and applying its exceptions to court records. Exemptions, I'm sorry, that court records and where is an honour of her outstanding leadership skills and commitment to improving the ability of clerks and controllers, to serve Floridians.

Florida court and controllers recently named her 2020- 2021 clerk of the year. Now therefore, we the County Council of Volusia County Florida do hereby proclaim August 3, 2021 as Laura rough day and it is signed by every member of the Council, congratulations, Laura, we love you.

(Applause)

SPEAKER:
And then Laura, we are going to give you a chance to speak.

SPEAKER:
Thank you.

SPEAKER:
Laura, before you begin, I would like to just add that there was probably a lot of people in Volusia County that never think about the clerk of the court. You have taken your office to a whole new level where you are actually providing services that help people save money, it has been an amazing thing to watch and congratulations for this award. Good job.

SPEAKER:
Thank you so much, thank you all very much and thank you especially to Billy Wheeler, for noticing that we got this award, and I do say we, they named me as clerk of the year and that is very nice. But I love the way your proclamation, I was so excited to see it because you mentioned the walk-up window because what really happened is the staff. Representing Volusia, the people we have working with the Volusia County clerk office are some of the amazing dedicated, you cannot believe the effort that they put in. I cannot overstate the challenges. Like you said, we are not well-known because we are behind the scene but clerks have a thousand statutory duties in law enforcement records and courts continuing to operate domestic violence, child support, all kinds of extremely important community issues are handled by your office.

So, I just want to thank my leadership team in particular, some of them are here today, I think we work 24 7 a lot during COVID and honestly, it is back, just like it is affecting the hospitals, we are back to struggling was shortstaffed, sick employees. We are having a hard time but they really did fight the good fight and we call ourselves team clerk, we love helping people, and that is what got this award for Volusia, and I'm glad, just thank you all for acknowledging and I just want to give all of the shouts out to team clerk, thank you all very much.

(Applause)

SPEAKER:
Are we going to get a picture? We need team clerk to come up too, I think.

SPEAKER:
Now everyone in Volusia County is aware of team clerk.

SPEAKER:
Okay, moving right along to item 4. National Association of County achievement award.

SPEAKER:
Thank you Mr. Chair, community information Dir., on May 21, 2021, the County of Volusia was recognized by the National Association of Counties for an achievement award in the health category for the D911 redirect nurse triage program. The 911 redirector's triage program was initially recommended and approved by the Volusia County Council on March 5, 2019.

The program's implementation began on December 9 of 2019, same year, which is fast tracked at the recommendation of the Council. 8 registered nurses were recruited. With one of them, Pamela K worth who serves as the full-time lead coordinator for the program. I have personally had the pleasure to work with many of these RNs, and I can tell you that each of them are highly skilled, and experienced in emergency and critical care medicine and many of them continue to work in our area emergency departments as acute care clinicians. The program's implementation required extensive planning and training on the development of emergency care protocols and algorithms.

As well as each nurse going through telecommunications training. To date, the program has demonstrated the ability to eliminate the need for EMS and fire response, to EMS incidence for approximately one of every 8 patients required or transported. And equally important to note, the program success could not have been accomplished without the relentless support of the Volusia Sheriff's office communications team. With us today is Pamela Kayworth and Mike Vincent with Volusia County EMS.

(Applause)

They are so humble, they have no words.

SPEAKER:
Thank you, Kevin, I've worked with Kevin so we have known each other for a long time. This is an honour, it came out of a dream and some goals and big ambitions. But it takes a team. So, not only are my team nurses, there is 9 of us now, are we nurses, but between all of us, we have over 120 years of nursing experience that we pass on to our patients in the community. We are all tele-communicators as well, we had to get trained to the Volusia County sheriffs office. As public safety communicators. We do work in the 911 system, and we are looking forward to our growth in the future.

But it does take a team, Volusia County sheriffs office help to train us, the fire and EMS also work closely with us every day, and like I said, we are looking forward to the growth in our community to make our care for our patients better, for Volusia County, thank you.

(Applause)

SPEAKER:
Do we have comments? (Laughter)

SPEAKER:
Heather Post.

SPEAKER:
Not to detract from this presentation, I do just want to make a comment, the Pentagon is on lockdown after a shooting at the Pentagon transit Centre, so I just wanted everybody to know that that the Pentagon is on lockdown right now, I thought that was important for us to be aware of.

On a side note, congratulations on your recent award. As most of you know, one of the National Association County conferences we have a few years ago when we were thinking of doing our triage, was in Las Vegas, and while out there, I took the opportunity to spend the entire day with the Las Vegas fire department in their emergency responders in regards to their nurse triage because they were one of the few that were actually doing it and was very excited to hear our new director the new EMS director, has worked with the nurse triage as well in Richmond, and have learned a lot about what you do and certainly reduce the strain on our EMS and fire response. So, I appreciate all that you do and thank you for your service.

SPEAKER:
George?

SPEAKER:
Mr. Chair, thank you, I just wanted to add this was an idea that had been worked on, really beginning back in 2017. This Council, which I was very proud of, I was brought to, was an idea by Mr. Pozo, and you supported it, and I'm very proud of that and proud of the fact that Mr. Pozo shepherd the program together and put it together after several years, being talked about and turned it into a reality along with his team over incorporate protection. And so, I want to thank him as well and he had to make this work and this is a great program to help us with the resources and making sure that our valuable resources are used correctly and giving great information people call and in a time of need, and I thank the nurses and people who run this program greatly and that makes us a top-tier county and appreciate that, thank you.

SPEAKER:
Nobody else? Congratulations, let's get some pictures.

SPEAKER:
Economic development by the powerhouse team of Cyrus and Helga Van, do you have a voice?

SPEAKER:
My voice is back, thank you.

SPEAKER:
Good morning, Mr. Chair, County Counsel, it would be my pleasure to introduce Helga Van Eckerd she is the division Dir. of economic resources and she has some welcoming news about some things that are going on for the 2nd quarter of the Q2 presentation for the county.

SPEAKER:
Thanks, good morning or close afternoon, everyone. Appreciate the opportunity to chat with you this morning for a couple of minutes, just to give you an update on where we are with the quarterly metrics that we evaluate. Do we have the presentation?

SPEAKER:
Okay, there we go. As you know, we put these metrics out every quarter, and each time we have some standards that are in there all the time, like a number of permits and so forth, but every quarter we try to address one topic with a little more detail than we have prior to that, so that there is a little more depth. This quarter what we focused on was actually workforce. It is a big topic right now, whether you cover it, donated, trained or not trained and so forth. I just want to give an overview of how the county looks. The chart that we have up right now actually shows the in migration of employees in the outmigration of employees.

Where on the average showing 1/3 of our workforce within the county comes from outside the county. Two thirds remain within the county and work here of a total amount. However, our total workforce, 50% of Volusia residents migrate outside of the county for work. We are bringing in one third of our workforce, two thirds but half of our total residence who are of age to be employed migrate outside.

And from this chart, which you can see is the majority of the jobs that they have are related to retail, trade, administration, office work, leisure and hospitality, those are the top 3 areas of outmigration. Which is interesting because being so close to the space Coast, further south we figured there would be more engineering migration but it is actually admin and retail. the other thing I wanted to show you as our workforce by industry.

This shows you how the breakdown is, which are our review of education and staff and we have retail in hospitality. On the right side it also talks about year-over-year. From the second quarter of last year, which was admits to COVID, to this quarter, it shows you the change in the number of people employed in those industries.

The big winner of job growth over this past year, not surprisingly, has been leisure and hospitality. We've had so many people have had facilities closed that were laid off during that time. We are showing increase of close to 7000 people who have gone back to work in those industries. The second runner-up to that, mind you that's almost 7000.

The second runner-up is construction. That makes sense with the growth that we are seeing within the community with the permits and additional facilities being constructed. What's interesting is, despite the owning notice of government, the workforce is actually decreased by 133.

That's just an interesting dynamic that I thought you would like to be informed about. If you look at our unemployment trend, obviously last April we had a big jump in unemployment. We actually work with the nation and state but we had a very rapid reduction in unemployment over the year once facilities started to open up again.

We were down to just over 3%, or under 4% at the end of last year, and this year we are seeing that the trend is going back up a little bit. We are at 5.9 right now. It's actually good news. If you look at this chart, and if you can't how I'm a bit of a data geek, so if I'm moving quickly please stop me. This is one of my favorite charts that we are seeing right now.

The blue at the base are the number employed. And the beige is the possible unemployed. The purple line is the summation. The employment forces growing up.

But at the same time, that the employment… Potential employees are going up, unemployment numbers are still going down. The ratio between the two appears that it's growing. Does that make sense? That's a little confusing. That's why we did it in the chart. At the end of the day, what is says is that people are looking to get back to work. They are reentering the workforce.

People who had taken a step back because of COVID either forward necessity or desire, they are now coming back and feeling comfortable enough. That's a positive trend that we are seeing.

This chart shows you where Volusia County stacks up against the state and nation. The only thing here that I did want to mention is that if you look at the row where it talks about unemployment labor force, the percent change column - you can see that our unemployment rate has decreased faster than the state and nation. The unemployment numbers are still there but the percent change is higher for us. Unemployment has decreased at a faster rate. Part of that is because of the industries that we have. Retail, leisure, hospitality, manufacturing - those types of facilities were hit hard during the initial kick of COVID.

Because they are much more service-oriented. People cannot work from home and a lot of those industries. When they started opening up, we saw a big jump in the workforce again. On a national basis, there were a lot of people that were able to work from home so they did not fill up the unemployment numbers because they changed how they were working.

This breaks it down by the cities. I'm not going to go into detail on that. If you have any questions, I can answer them. I did want to mention, residential construction permits. If you look at the second quarter of 2021, the number is the highest number of residential (inaudible) since 1/4 in 2005. Permits are definitely on the rise. We have a breakdown on where it's growing, and municipalities if we want to dive deeper into that.

New commercial construction has also maintained a steady number. We are not going to see the same dollar investment as quickly as we saw in the first quarter of 2020. As you all were probably aware, that what is Amazon's and that's why the numbers so high. This breaks it down by municipality. Redevelopment. Minutes are promised that we added to our report just this year. Because we were seeing a lot of rehabilitation of existing facilities.

We wanted to show an accurate reflection of the investment with the community. Not everything is new construction or green development, a lot of it is being rehabbed. We are seeing a positive turn on that front as well. And that's the report. Do you have any questions? I know I moved very quickly through that. I'm sure that you are all hungry for lunch.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Questions anyone? Do you have an idea of why the commercial permits are lagging?

SPEAKER:
Commercial is a much bigger investment. We don't see as much spec building when it comes to permits. Residentially we see a lot of spec. The constructions have started on those, but the turnover is quicker for the commercial. But we have seen an increase in general of construction on that front and we know that there's a very demand. We've had a lot of calls on commercial and industrial.

We know that there are not a lot of amenities available. I think we will be seeing a bigger increase in the next six months.

SPEAKER:
Thank you, chair. Thank you for all you've been doing in the community. We've been working on a couple of initiatives. One being the (inaudible). The youth initiative training. There were several programs in the community for new employment. Connected to a number of 501(c)(3). I'm working with career services trying to plan the seeds of youth leadership, employment skills and I think it is well coupled with this effort to talk about how we seed future workers and to develop a workforce, or at least a leadership group that has employment in mind.

That starts development skills at a younger level. For me, we are missing that piece. You don't have most 16 to 18-year-olds working in a variety of environments. Thank you for your support toward those efforts and I look forward to us strengthening these programs.

SPEAKER:
That's a wonderful program that's out there. It's very often that you talk about recruitment, retention and expansion of businesses within a community. I spent most of my life doing that. It's equally important to do the recruitment, retention and expansion of skills of your workforce.

We are seeing that more now than ever. Being able to combine those two things is just an amazing opportunity.

SPEAKER:
I just wanted to thank you.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Thank you, and I will tell you both, I don't know which one of you put it on for our workshop, but you asked for funding for the one stop. That is going to be so critical to make Volusia County the place to do business. I don't know if it will survive. I hope it will. I'm going to push for it. Whichever one of you did that, thank you.

SPEAKER:
No, thank you. It's going to be a great program. As you know, we have been doing some outreach to the community. We have reached out to stakeholders, and providers for workforce and job creation as well as entrepreneurship. And we've been reaching out to businesses. It's just amazing, the amount of information that we have. To show the need for that kind of the facility.

SPEAKER:
I will add Mr chair, she is a true visionary when it comes to these type of topics and subjects. She was truly the county subject matter expert.

JEFFREY BROWER:
And she's accessible to. Thank you both.

SPEAKER:
Mr chair? We were my stolen items three. I know we read the proclamation, we just failed to get a motion to approve it.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Motion to approve, second, any opposed? The motion carries 5 to 0.

SPEAKER:
I will let Laura know.

JEFFREY BROWER:
Item 6. This is just a discussion item about sun rail.

SPEAKER:
Mr chair, Mr Welker is under the weather today. So myself and Mike will handle this item. It's really just an update. This County and a member of commission has always been good at legislative body being updated and I'm going to continue that. August 12 will be the next meeting. We do know that bright line, the private rail firm that's coming out of South Florida is expected to attend that meeting and give a presentation. There have been discussions about that railroad as it comes through. Sharing a mile of rail corridor or with the Central Florida rail line commission. And right now with the department of transportation.

In anticipation of that sharing of the area, the working groups have met and tried to come up with what they are calling a term sheet. Basically a set of points that, will need to be negotiated and discussed.

Should there end up being an agreement between bright line, and the department of transportation. That document has been included in it has the type of things one would expect, discussing the priority use in the line, payment, which will be very interesting to us, what type of payment will Brightline give to use that corridor… and possibly per train charge, similar to what occurs now with CSX and Entrack use the line today.

I am just going to say it has the type of things one would expect: discussing the priorities of the line; the payment, which will be very interesting to us, the type of payment Brightline will give to use that corridor. We are looking at possibly a per train charge, similar to what occurs now with CSX and Entrack use the line today. 
 
Really, gets down into things. When you're running a railroad, things like dispatching and who has control over dispatching; what occurs with accidents and incidents; who has priority on the track. These kind of things need to be worked out. There will be some capital improvements that will need to be done in the term sheet as well and just other legal matters that need to get discussed. 
 
If you have any questions on anything individually, we can answer that. Mike, I don't know if you had anything you wanted to add? 
 
SPEAKER: 
Yes, sir. Just briefly, as George said, we call the term sheet a starting point for negotiations between Brightline and the Sun Rail Commission as well as FDOT. The changes you see in redline format are from your staff, so consistent with what we have done in the past, what we were seeking from you was Council's approval to, as the chair and representative on the Sun Rail Commission, to relay these changes. On behalf of Volusia, we have shared them with the other staff, the funding partners, and also be authorized to speak to them at the Sun Rail Commission meeting. We don't know yet whether at the August 12 meeting that this will be a voting item or not, but in the event that it is, speaking with the chair, we want to be prepared to be able to walk through these at the meeting. The concept is that whatever negotiations would occur with Brightline would return in the form of a written contract that would need to be approved by the Sun Rail Commission. 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: Can I get a motion to that effect? 

>> So moved. 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: And a second? Wheeler. Motion to accept by Girtman. All in favour say Aye. 

>> Aye. 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: Any opposed? Thank you. OK, Item 7, Council direction concerning whether to amend the code of ordinance to allow the majority of the criteria for a variance to be met instead of all five criteria of for the planning and land development commission to be able to grant a variance. Clay? 

>> Good morning. Clay Ervin, Director of Resource Management. What you see before you is a request from both the staff and your Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission regarding the criteria that we utilize when we grant a variance. This is pertaining to the County zoning ordinance, and I need to make sure we are clear that the variance process we have here in Volusia County only applies to dimensional standards. It only applies to the setbacks that we would apply to principal and accessory structures. So therefore, if you are looking for a side yard setback for your principal structure or accessory structure, building height, building coverage, those are the dimensional standards that you can come in and request the variance. The variance is granted by the Planning and Land Development Commission who reviews a staff report which takes in the applications and evaluated based on the five criteria that are shown in the first two pages of your agenda sheet. Staff makes a recommendation based on their evaluation of criteria and whether or not the application complies, and then it is up to the Planning and Land Development Commission to hold a public hearing. At the hearing, they take in the staff's report, take in comments from the public, and any other reports or information provided them via emails, calls, letters, etc. What we are seeing on a regular basis is a situation where I would say 90%-95% of the time, they are recommending denial. Many of our applications do not meet all five of the criteria. At that point, the Planning and Land Development Commission, when they hear these things at the public hearing, many times come forward with a recommendation of approval because they hear other information that helps clarify some of these things the staff may not have available. What you are saying is this kind of internal struggle between staff and the Planning and Land Development Commission because they both want to be able to provide a service to the public without creating conflict. One of the concepts that we have discussed with the board, as well as amongst our staff, was instead of having to meet all five of the criteria, that you would have to meet a majority: 3/5. Just took clarify what those criteria are, the first one is that there are special circumstances that exist particular to that piece of land and are peculiar to that piece of property. The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. So, that is what we call the non-self-imposed criteria. The third is literal interpretation would deprive it of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning classification. The variance is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the property's planned building a structure. If granted, the variance will be in harmony with the intended purpose of this article. The one item that typically holds up staff from being able to sit there and say, "It meets all five criteria," is that it is a non-self-imposed hardship. Many times, folks are coming in trying to get a variance because of how they have their building, how they have their home set up, how they want their backyard, their side yard to look. It is completely different than what is allowed by our zoning standards. So, what they feel is that it is non-self-imposed, but if you look at what they are saying, there may be room somewhere to put that thing that they want to add, or you can expand your house somewhere else and still comply with the code. So, where we come back to it is that if we have 3/5, the staff can sit there and identify whether or not they believe that it meets 3/5 criteria, and the recommendation can go forward based on that rather than a very strict adherence to all five. Again, this is a policy decision of the County Council. It is really intended to make sure that the PLDRC, Planning and Land Development Commission staff, can work to assist with those homeowners. It also applies to nonresidential, those nonresidential structures that are out there. If there are any questions for me, I will be glad to answer them. Susan Jackson, our manager, is here in attendance as well. 

>> Thank you, chair. What is the downside? What is the unforeseen impact of...? 

>> The unintended consequences? It is going to make it much more lenient for people to come in and get approval of the variance. 

>> OK, and let me say, what is the downside of that? I mean, it is their property. That's just the first look. Then, it goes to the PD... 

>> PLDRC, Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission. That cannot grant the variance. All we are doing is doing any valuation. The only board that can grant a variance is the Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission, and appeals of their decisions come to y'all. 

>> OK. So, only the appeals will come to us. 

>> Yes, ma'am. 

>> Right, so for me, we put the Commission in place to do what it is there to do and to review and document the case as much as you, the staff, can prior to that review. I mean, I am open to it. I would like to hear why it shouldn't be done. I would like to hear from anyone that can give some insight why they feel that would be a greater problem. It is difficult when you're working and there are two different priorities, right? The staff's priority is to make this fit into this box, to check all five boxes. And the Planning Commission is to look at the whole picture inclusive of those boxes but not limited, right? So they are usually getting more information to help them make a more defined decision. For me, we are putting the staff in a box by limiting them to have to only recommend it go forward if it checks these five boxes. 

>> Just to clarify what I will be saying in regards, it will be more difficult to deny a variance. You may have a situation where someone comes in and meets three of the five criteria. Staff recommends approval. You could have a packed house of people who are objecting from the neighbourhood. And again, then what are you facing at that point in regards to the fact that the criteria doesn't help you in denying it? At the same point, you have a neighbourhood that may be against it. So, the fact is that it does open up a great deal of leniency in the awarding of a variance. I just want to make sure that is clear. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: I still feel like it is the public's opportunity as the property owners, and if they are requesting a variance for their property, I think that's what we should be here to hear and to consider, and that is what the Planning Commission is there to also support us in doing. I don't have a problem with it unless somebody can understand where the downside is. 

>> Thank you, Ms Girtman. Paul, Senior Assistant County Attorney. The downside, of course, is that a variance is a formal way that an applicant or a property owner can get a waiver or break the rules that you set up for that particular zoning district. So, as Clay pointed out, it provides a way for structures or houses to be closer to property lines. Right now, there's a very clear and defined hurdle. You need to meet all five. If you don't, you should not be granted the variance. One of the aspects is OK, as Clay pointed out, if there is a request that seems unreasonable for the neighbourhood but they meet three of the five criteria, legally, that variance should be granted. A variance is a quasijudicial process. It is a quasijudicial hearing. The PLDRC is acting like a judge, and they are supposed to take into account all the information. If they meet the standard that you set, which today, you need to meet all five of the criteria, the variance must be granted. If you change it ? say you need to meet three out of the five or four out of the five ? if they show us competent, substantial evidence that they have provided all of that evidence, the variance must be granted. The unforeseen circumstances is that we don't know what type of request that variance is going to appear as. It could be something that would be unreasonable to the neighbourhood, and if the missing criteria that they don't meet is that the variance is not unreasonable to the neighbourhood, they don't have to take that box. That is kind of the downside. We don't know what the request would be, but if they meet that revised criteria, under the law and under the rules, the variance must be granted. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: So, that makes me ask, the five boxes we are checking in the criteria, is that what needs to change? Not, "Do you meet 3/5?" Do we need to change the criteria where that better fits the reality with what people want and need to do with their home? I don't have the answer to that question. 

>> As Clay pointed out, this is a policy discussion. He has provided you the criteria for a person to request an exemption from the rules that you set up. We use the, I believe, standard model of variance-granting. Those typical criterias can change. You can reduce it down to only having four criteria and eliminate the one that the Council deems unnecessary for granting a variance. Or, you can modify it such that you have to meet one of the three but absolutely meet the other two. There is some policy and some discussion and direction that we can look at and provide some language. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: I would consider that more than three out of the five. I think we should be more specific and define those three or those four, and when you say it is based on the standard, based on whose standards? What standard? 

>> Well, I would say when the first zoning ordinance was created in Ohio, there was a court case that established it. The next day, there was variance criteria created. We have basically kept the criteria going since then. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Since 1972? 

>> Oh, no... But in all reality, that is the truth. What you're saying is that the criteria's come through a series of court cases and different situations where local governments do establish zoning regulations. At that point, they do realize there may be a unique circumstance where that round peg won't fit into that square hole, so therefore, how do we address that situation? And that is why you see this criteria. I would say that our five criteria, if you looked at other counties in the state of Florida, cities within the state of Florida, they are very, very similar. I can tell you, having worked in other cities in Florida, we have basically the same criteria, including the one about it not being a self-imposed hardship. Again, the idea is that the zoning ordinance should apply, and there really should be unique circumstances as to why the zoning ordinance does not apply to that particular property. It should be a unique, basically one-off situation, and you have to prove that. Right now, what we are seeing is that there's other weight, I guess, being placed on if it is in harmony with the neighbourhood. That seems to be the prevailing concern from what we're hearing at the Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission. So, that is why you see what is in front of you right now. If you would like us to come back to the drawing board and come back, as was brought up, derivations of what we currently have and see what we can do as far as that goes so if we can make sure that it's not just we're giving away a variance, per se ? "giving away" ? we can do that and see what we bring back to you. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: I would support that, Clay. I am kind of like where Barbara is. Is there something that needs to be updated? I understand that is the standard. Let me ask you: so, it goes to staff first and then goes to the PLDRC. How many times do we have that the staff says no and it goes to...? What is the average? 

>> I would say that 90%-95% of our staff evaluations are a recommendation of denial. I'm looking at Susan. Roughly... Susan, please come up. What I have seen is that many times, the Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission are approving the variances. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: They are approving the ones that you have denied? Is that what you are saying? 

>> Recommended for denial. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Recommended for denial, thank you, Mike. 

>> That's correct. We can very rarely make a recommendation of approval. When we do, those cases are always approved, but the majority of the cases, no matter if it's a variance cost because they bought a piece of property where the previous owner built something that wasn't with permits and did not meet setbacks. So, people have to go through the variance process to legitimize that structure. We can't find, using these criteria, that they actually meet all five, so we have to recommend denial even though it isn't really fair to these people. But, staff recommends denial, but the Board... 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Weeds it out? 

>> Yes, I would typically say they have a pretty high approval rate. I would say their approval rate is about 95% at least. They almost always find approval. They want to find approval. They want to help out the citizens. That is why we are before you today asking if you would take a look at these criteria and maybe make the burden of little bit less on the Planning Board with regard to evaluating these variance cases. 

>> DANNY ROBINS: Thanks, Clay. It sounds to me like this may improve or has the ability to improve efficiency within our layers here, but we don't know, and I don't think we can sit here and worry about things. We don't know what we don't know yet, and these things aren't going to come up. I recently saw an instance where years ago, 40 x 100 building was not acceptable, but a 40 x 99.5 building was. What's the difference, you know? Clay, can this bring up home values? Will this additional revenue -- do we know kind of what we're looking at? Will this help us out? Would also be good for the homeowners while preserving the integrity of these areas? Is this going to be minuscule or impactful? 

>> I can't speak specifically about valuation, whether or not it will or will not, but I can tell you what this does is allow for owners of property, be it residential or nonresidential ? please be aware, the variance criteria apply to both ? does make it easier for them to get both the recommendation of approval for both the staff and both the Planning and Development Regulation Commission. The burden of proof has been reduced from meeting all five to just three of the five criteria. So, that will allow for potentially deviations from setbacks, building coverage, building height, those types of things. How that translated to value, I wish -- I really can't say, not with any kind of certainty. 

>> DANNY ROBINS: My biggest concern was just preserving integrity of these neighbourhoods and not creating a scenario that would be detrimental, but we do have a lot of layers here as we are all seeing. There was a good presentation done on attracting businesses. If this helps speed up economic development in some areas where ordinarily it wouldn't, I'm for it. If it is going to benefit the taxpayers and bring our taxes down, I think it's definitely something to look at. Thank you. 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: Heather Post? 

>> HEATHER POST: So, Clay, the recommending of denial from staff is based on guidelines, right? 

>> Those five criteria. 

>> HEATHER POST: Right, so it is based on the criteria we have in place. Then, in order to get the exceptions or to get the final decision pushed through, the homeowner doesn't need approval from both currently, correct? 

>> No, it just needs approval from the Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission. 

>> HEATHER POST: The PLDRC. So... Does it delay the process that all when you give a denial? 

>> No, ma'am. 

>> HEATHER POST: So, really, this does nothing. It just makes it easy for the PDL... PLDRC to save face. Is that what we're looking at? 

>> I would not say "save face". (Unknown Name) can elaborate on this more than anyone else. This is the scenario we play out. Resident A comes in, and under the current situation, staff will review, make a recommendation of denial. The PLDRC makes an approval. If that is an adjacent property owner, they can appeal the variance granting to the County Council. Again, it's a situation where you all will be sitting as judge and jury trying to understand where staff came from and if there is sufficient evidence that the Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission got enough information at the public hearing to substantiate that all five criteria were met. Then, if that is even appealed more, it is going to be up to us to be able to reconcile why a staff recommendation was for denial, whereas the Board itself finally decided for approval. Was there competent, substantial evidence to support that? 

>> HEATHER POST: So, that's the process... I mean, that is Council's role, to look at both. It is the PLDRC's role to look at everything involved and to make a decision completely not based on one or the other, just to look at all the facts, right? It is Council's role to look at all the facts. Again, I'm not really for making more regulations just for no real final purpose other than to match up more what staff says with what the PLDRC might approve or disapprove. If you're just making it easier for the Commission, then maybe we do need to be looking at those other guidelines that you are actually basing it on. This really seems to me to have no purpose other than for staff to be able to say, "Well, we were in agreement with them," but you're following guidelines. That's literally the purpose of staff's recommendation is this. The purpose of the Commission is this post of the purpose of us is this. Those purposes all still exist. 

>> Yes. 

>> HEATHER POST: Whether we make it easier for you guys are not. So... 

>> Again, it is basely making sure that we are able to have consistent application of the criteria from the staff to the advisory board to the County Council. What I'm hearing, and I'll be... 

>> HEATHER POST: I don't see any reason to make more guidelines for no reason. So. 

>> We can take this back and look at the criteria. If there is something we feel can be tweaked, we will run it through the Commission and let them know that the County Council wants the system to operate as it is because it does have very specific guidelines and responsible is, so we will look at the criteria and see if there's a way we can provide for the flex ability but also the consistency as to how we are currently operating. 

>> HEATHER POST: Well, sometimes, the 7-0 is not always the best, so everybody agreeing is not always the best, right? There is a specific reason for each of those purposes and processes, so I think it is important that we look at those guidelines. If those needs to be changed, if we have to make it easier for the public, then those guidelines have to be changed. 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: Let's pause one second. I think the county attorney would like to weigh in. 

>> Oh, thank you. Yes, I understand. I know and appreciate that Ms Post hesitated when saying PLDRC. I often hesitate. Planning Commission is a lot easier to say. I know ? Clay can correct me ? but I used to sit with PLDRC. One of the common variances ? I don't know statistically how common ? but some bits, you have folks come in for folks to resolve an issue with the code enforcement issue. Maybe something was constructed due to a setback or a dimensional requirement was exceeded, and one of the roadblocks with the current set of criteria ? I'm not saying they're bad, but one of the five criteria was that the hardship can't be self-created. It can't be something you did yourself. So, oftentimes, staff finding that criteria had to recommend denial. Maybe that is a good thing, that the policy outcome, but I think that's a practical example. The way it was written was intended to be very tight, and may be Council wants to keep it that way, but we can certainly go back and have staff take a look at it and bring something back to you. 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: To answer your question, Barb, for me, what's the downside is I think the public is very reluctant to continue to change zoning and land use for more development construction. This is not an infringement on property rights. It's a change. The property is bought with a certain zoning, certain land-use, and they are able to develop according to those standards. Clay, correct me if I'm wrong. These come before the Council almost every meeting, even with these five criteria for special exceptions for one use or another. 

>> I think you're getting the two mixed up. Variance is only heard by the PLDRC. The only time shows appear is if there is an appeal. Otherwise, the final approval is there. Special exception is a different issue. It's a use that has been identified that is allowed in a zoning district subject to complying to other types of criteria. So, it's a different concept in that the variance is not an automatic. You have to meet these five criteria. The special exception is a land-use, not a dimensional standard. It's allowed and subject to pruning that it doesn't comply. So, it's a different burden of proof. It's a different method of analysis. Again, special exception is a use, not a dimensional standard. A variance is only to dimensional standards. 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: But they are both still coming to us, and we approve them. 

>> The variances do not come to the County Council. Variances only go to the Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission. 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: And they have sole criteria to approve or not approve, and the Council gets no input on it? 

>> No, sir. It has been determined that the Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission shall have the authority to approve variances. 

>> That was a delegation of authority by the Council by ordinance to the PLDRC on variances. It doesn't have to be that way, but that's why you're hearing only the appeal. 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: For me, that's a problem. I think the Council should be responsible for changing the zoning and land use. Billie Wheeler? 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: I just had a clarification. Like, you had said that we have the same criteria for residential and nonresidential? 

>> There are some additional standards in there, but those basic five are required for both residential and nonresidential. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Does that work? (Laughs) 

>> Yep! 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: Danny Robins. 

>> DANNY ROBINS: Clay, sorry for the back-and-forth. Did we just have this down in (Unknown Name) beach? There was a corner lot. Is this kind of the same scenario? We have to think about, we are all in this game to bring taxes down. That is a perfect example. Do we allow somebody not to build on their land and not capture that here in Volusia County, that revenue, but not allow them to build on their land over a couple feet because of a corner setback? 

>> Just to clarify, that was a situation where staff recommended approval. They went to the Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission for approval. The Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission approved. The adjacent property owner appealed to the County Council because they objected to the granting of the variance by the Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission because they felt it did not meet all the criteria. Correction: Staff did not recommend approval at that point. I apologize for that confusion. Again, that was the scenario we were just talking about. Staff make the recommendation of denial because it doesn't meet all five. It goes to the Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission. They, based on testimony and evidence at the hearing, grant approval. The adjacent property owner appealed. Y'all upheld the determination by the Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission to allow for the variance to proceed. 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: Heather Post? 

>> HEATHER POST: Sorry, I just wanted to point out. So, no matter what staff decides, no matter if staff approves or disapproves, it is the role of the Planning Commission to look at everything in totality and to make these decisions. So, that is happening either way. We should be vested in that, vested in them, and vested in their decisions and confident in their decisions. That is literally their role. If there is an appeal, it comes to us, but whether staff agrees or disagrees based on the guidelines, it is still the Planning Commission's will to make this decision. I really don't see a need for this at this point. 

>> Just a clarification on that. Previously, staff makes a recommendation based on those five criteria and the Planning Commission has to find currently that there is evidence that the applicant has met every single one of those criteria. So, the request to drop the criteria from five to three protects the final decision of the Planning Commission. If it does get appealed before this Council, you are determining whether or not the Planning Commission had enough evidence that they met the revised criteria. So, that is the standard. The Planning Commission is subject to those revised criteria, and they have to find evidence ? and at this point, because staff is saying, "We don't have enough evidence that it meets all the criteria," ? the Planning Commission has to take an extra step and ask additional questions and get the applicant to state a reason of why we should grant this. "Why do you think you meet all five criteria?" So, if there isn't enough evidence that all five criteria are met, their decision is vulnerable to an appeal. When it gets to an appeal before this Council, if they appeal that decision, the court is going to look if there was enough evidence for the criteria whether that is five or three. Dropping it down kind of protects the decision of the PLDRC and ultimately would protect the decision of this Council. Ultimately, it is a policy decision of how much of a hurdle you want an applicant or property owner to go through to get a variance from the dimensional rules that you set up. 

>> HEATHER POST: But there have been many cases where the planning commission has voted opposite of staff, correct? 

>> Yes, almost all of them. Staff is looking based on the evidence that was presented, that is usually just the application itself. 

>> HEATHER POST: So, still in following the guidelines, they are able to do their investigation, do their role, and still find means or reason to...? 

>> Yes, it just makes it subject to additional challenge and makes it a little bit more vulnerable than if you had a revised criteria than a strict "You must meet all five." 

>> HEATHER POST: I like the fact that they are working a little harder, actually, and looking into a little bit more. 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: Barb Girtman? 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Thank you, Chair. What I don't like about this process is that a resident will come to the Council for variance, and their first experience with us is what I heard was 95% denial from the criteria. To me, that's a problem, right? So, this is our process to come to us based on X criteria, but to me, it's a set up to fail. I just... That doesn't sit well with me. If we are going to have staff look at it and only approve 5% of them, why are we even doing that, you know? Let it go direct. To me, there's something wrong with the process if you're denying 95% of something. Something needs to change in that process, that our first communication and connection with this customer is, "You don't meet these five criteria, so we are going to deny. You will still have an opportunity, but your first experience with me, 'Denied'." I don't like that. 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: Billie Wheeler. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Yeah, I get what you're saying, Barb, and I agree with you on that. I think that first impression with government, for them to be denied. Clay, I guess what I'm going to ask you is, should we look at those five criteria and see what the major holdbacks or hold ups are. Is there one of them that we're constantly having to...? You know, maybe that needs to be changed. We still have the standards, but maybe there is one or two that we are constantly getting hung up on, and to look at those to see how do we get to a yes. That we are not overstepping the surrounding areas. Is that...? 

>> I think that's what Paolo and I are hearing loud and clear from the five you'll setting up there. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: That is my thought. 

>> There is a lot of concern with opening up the ability to just have this nonstop, but at the same time, we need to look hard and fasted our criteria to see if there something we can do to address that issue. 

>> DANNY ROBINS: I agree with you, Barb and Billie, that 95% denial is a little much. I think this is a good example of how it can be less government and less hurdles and be beneficial to a lot of people while still maintaining that high level of the community standards. Clay, I have the utmost faith in you to look through this and hopefully tweak or bring us back something that we can tweak, if that is the direction that Council wants to go. I'm with you guys, thank you. 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: I think you heard it right, Clay. I think that's what everyone is suggesting. If you would bring back more information on the five criteria ? do we need to change those? I don't want to be the Council that says no, but we also need to protect the neighbourhoods and their ability to have input. I mean, we have changed criteria because it just made sense for a homeowner that needed a little bit of a change in their zoning. I'm not opposed to doing that. I'm just -- I think it should be difficult. So, with that, no one else is waiting to speak. Do you need further...? 

>> It would be helpful if the Council could approve a motion that the direction is to staff to go back to the drawing board, look at the criteria to see if the criteria can be evaluated and modified to address the concerns that have been identified by the Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Motion to approve that. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Second. 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: Motion by Wheeler, second by Girtman. All in favour, say Aye. 

>> Aye. 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: Any opposed? Motion carries, 5-0. OK, I am assuming that the Council wishes to continue. Nobody needs a break yet? We can stop for lunch at any time. 

>> (Indiscernible) 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: No. (Laughs) OK, let's do one more. Item 8, Council direction concerning the establishment of an online submittal of comprehensive planning. Clay? 

>> Thank you very much. This is a request coming from your Volusia Growth Management Commission. The Volusia Growth Management Commission is a charter created organization that is independent, and its sole duty is to review proposed comprehensive plan amendments of the 16 cities and unincorporated Volusia County to ensure for consistency and compatibility. Part of the ordinances that we have currently for the Volusia Growth Management Commission contains very specific criteria and process requirements. Part of that is a requirement for hard copies of these proposed amendments to be delivered. The Volusia Growth Management Commission acknowledges that this is a bit of an antiquated process, and they would prefer to be able to do so solely by electronic transmittal. This is exactly what we do right now with the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, and we also have similar permitting capabilities online. This is bringing forward to you because it does require County Council direction in order for us to amend this ordinance. Staff has looked at it. We wholeheartedly support anything that can help reduce the production of paper and make things more efficient. I believe that the Growth Management Commission is 100% behind this as well. 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: Is there a discussion or a motion? 

>> DANNY ROBINS: Motion to approve. 

>> HEATHER POST: Second. 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: Motion to approve by Robins, second by Post. All in favour say Aye. Any opposed? That was easy! Every now and then... Let's try one more. I don't know how difficult this one will be. Billie, I'll tell you that the reason that lunch is not being brought in is my fault. I am growing more and more hesitant to having the taxpayers pay for our lunch. I know it saves some time, but if we take an hour, we can all get lunch. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Well, you know, we do have restaurants that are now close, so it makes it a little bit better. I'm perfectly fine to pay for what's right in, but it does save time to have it here if we don't have to wait in the line or whatever. I'm perfectly fine for paying for my own lunch when they do bring it in, but that's my... It does make it easier. We don't have to stand in line or whatever else. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: I certainly don't agree with that. We are here to serve the public. Time is money, and that hour that we spend, we could be spending 30 minutes having lunch, coming back, and taking care of business. Again, that $20 lunch or whatever is certainly worth our time. I don't think that difference will make a difference to the public. 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: I don't want to belabour this, but when we do that, we don't take 30 minutes. We still take one hour. It's the same amount of time either way. We rarely take 30 minutes and come right back. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Again, I just think it's a distraction. The dollars... Our time is our money as well, so we are here to serve. If somebody has a problem with a sandwich, then we have a much bigger issue in our county. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: I thought we had discussed this once before and agreed. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: I thought so, too. 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: And we agreed to have lunch brought in every meeting? 

>> HEATHER POST: I mean, I don't even like lobster, so... (Laughs) 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: If a sub sandwich for lunch is a problem, then we have much bigger issues. I think we, as a Council, should be deciding if we have time to go out and get or do whatever. Because it's all fluid! We don't know if we're going to have two hours of conversation. We don't know how the day is going to go, so why inconvenience us and staff and others instead of just making it available and moving forward with doing our job? 

>> DANNY ROBINS: This might be a good time to talk about that in the quorum that is coming up today. We can all decide on our lunch break time, but I think it is a waste of 10 minutes figuring this out if time is the issue. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: It was decided on a while back. We did all talk about that, and that was the decision. It was easier for us to just stay focused and whatever if it was just brought in. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Anyway, can we take the break now and come back if we are not doing that? 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: Certainly, if that's your preference. Do you want to make a motion that we break? 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: I make the motion. I'm assuming we're going to take the hour, then. So, what? We come back at 1:30? 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: OK, seconded by Post. Motion by Girtman. All in favour say Aye? 

>> Aye. 

>> JEFFREY BROWER: Any opposed? Motion carries, 5-0.

(Missed 2:19:38-4:11)

>> CHAIR BROWER: Okay, if everybody is ready, we will continue.  This is appropriate after lunch.  Item nine, council direction regarding mobile food dispensing vehicles.

>> Good afternoon.  Clay Ervin.  There was preemption of local government's ability to regulate food trucks.  The specific restriction was we could not prohibit them.  It still allows for us to regulate them and allows for us to put restrictions in their operations to ensure safety, but we cannot outright prohibit them, which we currently do.  What we as your staff are bringing forward some ideas that allowing for the use of these vehicles in all non‑residential zoning districts.  So, that means that it would not be allowed in residential‑zoned areas or agricultural zoned areas, however areas which could be used for commercial retail, office, or industrial may be able to be utilized for these vehicles.  There is other restrictions in that it has to be a developed and occupied site.  So, if it was a commercial shopping center, it would have to be built, constructed, and operating.  The proposed regulations from your staff also include provisions that the parking that's going to be occupied by the food dispensing vehicle has to be above and bow beyond what is required by our zoning regulations.  Retail is 3 per 1,000 square feet.  So, if you had the exact number of parking spaces that are required for that use, you could not have one of these vehicles on the property.  If, however, you had additional parking above and beyond what the code required, you could park those vehicles there.  Also, we are recommending that it not be allowed to park in loading zones, driveways, access aisles, landscape buffers, or other areas required for open space.  The reason why is that many times folks can drive up on a curb, drive into a grassed area, drive into a loading zone which is not necessarily being used at that time.  We wanted to make sure this was parked in a manner that was safe and convenient and not going to create a problem for those who are coming to the office or industrial site for the purpose of what it's developed for.  The other thing that we've identified is that the hours of operation for the mobile food dispensing vehicle also have to coincide with the principle use on the site.  So, if I have an office building that closes at five, you will not be dispensing food from that office building after 5 o'clock.  Again, this is seeking direction from you.  This is a situation where we are kind of broadening where it can be allowed.  If you don't feel that it's appropriate in all of those different zoning areas, we need to hear from that now.  If you feel that we are being too lenient with some of the criteria and you have other specific concerns, we need to hear that now so that we can go in and address it through our zoning ordnance.  So, again, one way or the other, we cannot prohibit them outright.  And that's basically the presentation here.  Al is available.  He was very instrumental in helping us develop what we could and couldn't accomplish.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Barb Girtman?

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Two questions.  Why not agriculture?

>> Good question.  The primary reason is they typically don't have parking lots.
Agricultural areas are out in areas without parking areas.  These are in urban areas, and their primary purpose is to be ancillary, as opposed to drawing people out to a parking lot and doesn't have the typical amenities that you see with a non‑developed, non‑residential site.

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Okay.  I don't know that I particularly agree with that one.  The other question I have is if it's allowed at an office complex, and an office complex closes at 5:00, why couldn't it be there beyond that period?

>> The whole point is the site is being primarily used for that office use and the food vending vehicle is an ancillary use to it.  So that way, and if again, if y'all don't want that restriction, tell us.  We'll take it out. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Right.  I was interested in hearing your logic behind linking the two, but I mean what I see is that many times these are on a busier thoroughfare.  And yeah, they may be serving that office building, but they're also serving the public. 

>> Again, it's a situation where it was the primary use of the site.  Is it for the restaurant on wheels type of use or not?  The fact is that many of our office uses may be adjacent to some of the residential areas in here.  Again, it is primarily just trying to tie it to the principle structure. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Okay.  All right.  Those two would be my questions.  I kind of envision in the ag having say like out in Deleon Springs and Pearson and other areas that are ag that they also tie to some of these more mobile food units and I wouldn't want to restrict, because I think it's becoming more of an extension into those communities and I think it helps financially contribute to the ag owner, but also to the base of small business development in some of those areas and I kind of feel the same way about the use of an office parking lot.  As long as it doesn't obstruct and doesn't go against the other parking criterias, as far as parking restrictions.  If they're approved and they're contributing or, you know, they have that agreement with the owner of that facility, I wouldn't want to restrict it, but that's just me. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: I'll agree with you, Barb, especially with agriculture in west Volusia.  They like to take advantage of this.  They may not have a parking lot, although most of them do.  But if the owner gives permission to provide lunch for the employees and the farm workers, because there's not a lot of other options for them sometimes.  Heather?

>> HEATHER POST: I'm in with agreement with that.  I think restricting of the hours, too, one of the parts of that that we would typically think of, and I know this was in our discussion Clay was more thinking okay, so if they close at 5:00, so if the food truck is not sitting there until 1:00 in the morning or something, but we also have to think about a.m.  So, if they don't open until 9:00, you know, I actually think it would be good if they were there in the morning, right?  To bring breakfast to the area or things like that.  So, I think we're sort of cutting them off at both ends when we say that they have to be specific to the opening of that business.  So, I would definitely be in agreement with changing the restricting of the hours and certainly the ag area.  Have we heard from any of the food truck businesses? 

>> No, ma'am. 

>> HEATHER POST: Okay.  I don't think any have reached out to me at all via e‑mail.  Certainly not by phone.

>> This is the first discussion we brought forward.  We didn't want to go forward until we got feedback from you.

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Is there an association?  I thought there was a food truck.

>> There is an organization.  Obviously, that's how they got the legislation passed.  They lobbied quite hard at the state level.

>> HEATHER POST: I guess obviously not here.

>> Once we get direction from y'all, then we can send out the draft regulation to them and get comments from the membership. 

>> HEATHER POST: But I would say we also keep in mind food desert areas.  Like Deleon, specifically the food desert areas.  Because that's really their role.  Thank you.

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Yeah.  I'll do it briefly because I kind of go along with what Barb and Heather and even you said. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Even me? 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Yeah, we've agreed on many things.  The time and the hours are things I've agreed on, too.  If the business is closes at 5:00, they should at least be extended to 6:00, because people are going to want to grab food before they go home.  I think the hours may need to be extended.  Does this eliminate people just going into an area and pulling alongside of the road? 

>> Yes, ma'am.  The whole point.  Right now we have ...

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Designated areas where it's accessible. 

>> The whole point is if you have a mobile food dispensing vehicle, you should be able to vend safely and not impact the surrounding properties. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: I wouldn't want an ice cream truck like it used to be with kids running out.  That creates a whole nother avenue.  But if there are safe places to park and areas designated.
Thank you. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Danny?

>> DANNY ROBINS: I agree with you Barb and Billie.  Ag areas are going to be big for boiled peanuts and ag products produced on the property.  If we could look at private property clause, even if they're not allowed in some areas, if that landowner, if it's deemed to be safe, proper lighting, an area to pull off where it's not creating a hazard, we should, in my opinion maybe open that up just a little bit and make sure that we still protect the integrity of the neighborhood.  Yeah.  Thanks. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Anybody else?  It sounds like you're getting agreement here that for me it's agriculture.  I think it should be allowed with the permission of the property owner and the hours of restriction, I agree it would be helpful to be open in the morning as employees are getting there and in the afternoon, as well.  So, Danny?

>> DANNY ROBINS: Sorry.  Please, sir?  Is there going to be a permit associated with this?  Or a business license with the county?

>> We're working through that whole process, as well.  Because again, it would have to be either through our conditional use process, which is a staff approval where you come in and meet the criteria established for that particular use so that staff can verify all of the requirements are in place and we issue the conditional use for that.

>> DANNY ROBINS: And do we have any properties owned by the county if we mark them and put them out for bid.  Like the food truck, if it's a hot location, is that something we can use to make money at this?

>> We haven't looked at that yet.  I would say it's going to have to be procured through purchasing, because it's basically assigning a lease to county property for non‑governmental use.
So, that would have to go through the process.

>> DANNY ROBINS: Okay, thank you. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Attorney Polo, I'm watching your eyes.  Is there something you would like to add?

>> I think the concerns was about the permitting.  That we can't license these food trucks.  By license, we can't take away their authority to operate, essentially.  As Clay stated, it's mainly a site plan conditional use permit where that designated site that wants to have a food truck as an ancillary use meets our criteria.  And once they meet it, so long as they keep it, we're not issuing a license that we can revoke essentially is how the preemption goes kind of set up.

>> CHAIR BROWER: And Billie? 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: They still have to go through all the regular permitting, like the health department license and everything like that.  So, we're not just having anybody come along. 

>> Right.  Danny referenced the boiled peanut salesman.  They don't go through the department of health.  They're out there vending and agricultural use.  It would not be the same process for them as it would be for say someone who is coming in and preparing in the truck a meal for sale.  And that's where they have to go through the health department as well as being registered with the DBPR at the state. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Okay. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Clay, do you feel like you got the direction that you were seeking?

>> If I restate it and there could be a motion and an action from the council, that would be greatly appreciated by staff.  First of all, you do believe we need to put in place some sort of oversight of mobile food dispensing vehicles.  In regards to where they should be allowed, right now I'm not hearing anything saying that they can be in residential, but in agriculture and non‑residential areas they would be allowed.  That you would have to get the permission from the property owner.  That there has to be room for safe parking access and that on developed, non‑residential sites, it would have to be above the minimum parking required by the code.  We'll have to work out something in regard to agricultural areas as regards to minimum requirements for safe parking.
And there's no restrictions on the hours of operation. 

>> No restrictions? 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: I don't want it to open until 11 o'clock.  That wasn't my thought.  I just thought if a business closes at 5:00, it should be maybe an hour. 

>> Nothing past midnight and no earlier than 7:00? 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: That's reasonable. 

>> So, I believe that's what I heard so far.  Is there anything else? 

>> CHAIR BROWER: That was pretty good. 

>> HEATHER POST: Quick question before we give direction.  Do any municipalities in the county have any current regulations or ordnances or anything related to food trucks?

>> Some have them on the books right now but they're going to be out of date because of what Palo was saying in that you cannot license them anymore.  Most of them have prohibitions because actually many of your brick and mortar restaurants do not like mobile food dispensing vehicles, because they see that as a threat to their business and they feel that because they have a brick and mortar site they're paying taxes, whereas the other person is paying a tag for their truck.  But again, all of us are going to be facing this.  Obviously, we're going to be reaching out to our fellow planners at the city level to let them know what we're doing because there has been questions.  So, we will reach out to the cities, as well. 

>> HEATHER POST: So, I'd be curious if you could, if we could just see what anybody in the county currently has, because that probably means they've already vetted any typical issues just so I'd be curious just to see what those issues are before we make any kind of ruling. 

>> Okay, we'll include that in with the staff report.  Just for clarify of process, once we get your direction, we'll go ahead, draft up, send it to the planning development and regulation commission.  We'll make sure to incorporate the data that y'all requested just now.  After the planning and development regulation commission has reviewed it, it will be coming to you for formal action on the ordnance.

>> HEATHER POST: So moved. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Motion by Post.  Second by Wheeler to as you have stated the criteria and the addition that Councilwoman Post just added that we get information from the cities.  All in favor say aye. 

>> Aye.

>> Aye.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Any opposed?  Thank you.  Motion carries 5‑0.  And Clay, you're still with us.  Item 10.  Implementation of the home‑based business regulations.

>> Yes, sir.  Once again, Clay Ervin.  Keeping in the vain of state actions that have preempted local zoning, this is one where the state has created laws for what they call home‑based businesses.  It thereby preempts any local zoning regulations that prohibit non‑residential uses in residential districts.  So, this applies to both family single, duplex, triplex, and multifamily.  The issue at hand is that we at Volusia County can no longer enforce our current rules.  We currently have what we call Home Occupation A and Home Occupation B.  These are defined in our zoning ordnance.  And they identify within residential areas, for home occupation A, up to 25% of the gross floor area of the residence and utilize it for office and those types of uses such that it doesn't increase any kind of foot traffic or vehicular traffic to the home beyond what would normally be expected at the home, as well as limitations that employees, outside uses, storage, are not allowed.  In home occupation B, we elaborate a little bit more because it's allowed in the larger rural areas, which allows for some limited outside uses.  All of that is moot at this point because with this preemption we cannot enforce those regulations.
The state law that created home‑based businesses did not provide a clean definition as to what is a home‑based business.  They did identify criteria that was identified as what is allowable for a home‑based business.  What we would like to do is go through and in our zoning ordnance strike all of our references to home occupations A and B to ensure that our ordnance is not in conflict with state law and then include a reference to the state law for home‑based businesses so that we can include the criteria that's on page two of your agenda report and it begins there.  I'll kind of go through those real quickly.  Employees of the business who work for the residential dwelling must also reside except up to two employees or independent contractors who may not work at the business.  So, that means if you own a home, if you own a duplex or apartment unit, only people who live there can work for you, but you are allowed to have upwards of two employees or contractors coming to the home.  Parking related to the home‑based business shall comply with local zoning requirements and the need for parking generated at the business may not be greater in volume that would normally be conducted at a similar residence where no business is conducted.  They also go onto talk about trailers.  They must be parked in legal parking spaces that are not located over a right of way or sidewalk or any unapproved surfaces.  For the purposes of this paragraph, the term heavy equipment means commercial, industrial, or agricultural equipment, or machinery.  Then the C, paragraph C on page of your agenda sheet, as viewed from the street, the residential property is consistent with the residential areas that surround the property.  So, in other words, it has to look like a home from the street.  The activities in the business have to be secondary to the property's use as a residential dwelling.  The state law does not clarify what secondary means.  So, I just want to make sure that y'all understand from an enforcement purpose, if somebody has got a homesteaded piece of property or if there is proof that someone lives at their home, it's going to be hard for us to prove otherwise.  So, I just want to say that out of all the criteria that the state has identified, this one is going to be difficult to enforce.  The business must comply with relevant local and state regulations.  We can only treat this as we would a single‑family home, or multi‑family home.  This is the one that's kind of interesting to all of us.  All local regulations on businesses with respect to storage or disposal of corrosive or hazardous or flammable materials or liquids may not be more stringent than to those applied to a residence where no business is conducted.  I believe that what we have is the Florida Fire Prevention Code and some provisions that will help us there.  But again, it's one of those things that we want to make sure that if we have storage of material that should not be in a single family home, we have the capabilities of ensuring that that's not going to happen.  So, basically, those would be the criteria that we would be able to enforce through a complaint‑driven system of our code enforcement.  Also please be aware because of state law we are no longer able to take anonymous complaints.  So, this really is just a request for you to get direction to amend our code and also to kind of give y'all a reality check on what we're going to be able to do from a code enforcement perspective once all of this is in place.
Currently, we would have very limited ability to do anything at this point anyway because we've been preempted by the enforcement of our zoning ordnance by state law.  So, the options available to you is really to get rid of home occupations A and B.  That's a no‑brainer because we have to.  And then whether or not we include in our code the reference to the state law so that our local code enforcement officers can enforce it as our own code.  Please be aware that if they don't do that, then we would have to enforce this through the sheriff's office.  Is there anything I needed to add on that?

>> I believe you received a few questions about how this impacts short‑term rentals.  The bill specifically excludes its application for transient public law establishments, IE short‑term rentals.  It does not affect the county's grandfathered definition of hotel/motel for residential uses.  It does not affect the county's existing short‑term rental regulations. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Danny Robins?

>> DANNY ROBINS: How will this affect the ag properties?  Maybe I'm confused.  I saw some verbiage in there about not allowing heavy machinery and stuff like that to be on a residential piece of property, which most of the time it's going to be residential. 

>> Agricultural property, the use of the equipment associated with that is not an issue.  Where we have had issues in the past is I have a road construction company and I've got road construction equipment out in the front of my house that's on ten acres, and zoned A1.  That is not associated with a bona fide agricultural use.  That's how we differentiate it.  If it's an ag business and it's got ag equipment, it's actually preempted from local zoning regulations.  If, however, it's a commercial enterprise that's not agricultural in nature and the equipment is clearly identified for that, we would identify it as a commercial use. 

>> Okay.  Is this throughout Volusia?  Or this is the unincorporated? 

>> This is applying only to the unincorporated areas, but the cities are going to have to follow suit, because the state law applies to all cities and counties throughout.

>> BILLIE WHEELER: All right.  I just wanted to make sure.

>> This is for unincorporated.

>> CHAIR BROWER: And the cities can modify it any way they want?

>> Basically they have the same option y'all do. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: But they may choose options that we didn't choose.

>> Basically, we are preempted from it, and all we can really do is reference the state law.  And utilize their criteria to ensure that we're not having negative impacts from these home‑based business owners and adjacent property owners. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you.  Anybody else?  And you need direction from us? 

>> Yes, sir.  Just to begin to restate what I hear is that you want us to go forward with the correction to the zoning ordnances to eliminate home occupations A and B, and to incorn rate in the zoning ordnance a reference to home‑based business so we can enforce the state law through our code enforcement process. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Motion to approve. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Second. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: All in favor say aye.  Any opposed?  Motion carries 5‑0.  Thank you. 

>> Thank you. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Okay, moving right along.  Item 11:  Budget resolutions.  Submission of fiscal year 2021‑22 HUD one‑year action plan.  Dona? 

>> Good afternoon, Chair, members of council, Dona Butler, community service director.  We have a brief PowerPoint for you today that will take you through this one‑year action plan that is a requirement from HUD.  They tell us what amounts of funds we're going to have and then we tell them how it's going to be spent as close as we can.  You see many amendments, so there's always changes.  But we still have to provide them a strategy and activities for this.  Power point?  Oh, it's up.  Great.  Awesome.  All right.  So, here you'll see that the Community Development Block Grant has received, we are receiving a little bit more than $1.7 million.  About $700,000 in home funds.  And $159 in ESG funds.  This is approximately $195,000, almost $196,000 less than what we received last year.  But on a good news note, if you look on this very first page of your agenda for this, we have itemized $80,000 and $100,000 which is program income, that as these projects move forward, especially in the residential assistance program, we receive moneys back.  So, that helps perpetuate these programs, not as much as of course we'd like, but this is really good program income.  So, that's a nice benefit.  So, this is our CDBG program.  And this shows all of the cities that are currently involved with CDBG.  There are several cities that have opted out of being in our program because they can apply for small cities grant at the state level, which is very competitive.  But they have a greater chance of getting a larger dollar amount.  If they had stayed in our program, their dollar amount would have been so low that it really wouldn't have been worth their while to complete a project.  They would have had to save up multiple years, which is very problematic with HUD.  They like their money spent as quickly as possible; not saved up.  Our home program focuses on homeowner housing construction.  That's the largest portion of it.  And then we also have some money reserved for community housing development organizations.  We call them CHODOs for rental housing and operating expense.  This would allow them to purchase a home or rehabilitate a home and have it for permanent rental housing as part of their stock.
And then ESG, this is a rapid housing activity.  Once you approve that these activities are okay to proceed with, then we put a note out on the street and allow for them to apply and then award them once they have done so.  And that's that agenda item.  Any questions? 

>> CHAIR BROWER: You must have done a good job.  Post makes a motion for approval.  Second by Girtman.  All in favor say aye.  Any opposed?  Motion carries 5‑0. 

>> Okay, thank you.  So, the next item, item 12, is award recommendations for uncommitted Community Development Block Grant Coronavirus funding.  It's our CV3 funds, the third round of funds that they put out into the community.  We are receiving $1.5 million and change to be able to complete a public facility and park improvement project.  On the next slide, you'll see that we have three parks that will be receiving new playgrounds.  And while they may seem a little bit odd, I want to share with you that first of all they have to be in low income census tract areas.  These playgrounds are old.  The youngest is 18 years old.  The oldest is 20.  If we do not replace them, we will remove them and there will be no playground available.  They will be ADA, handicapped accessible.  If you want more information about that, I have Tim on board and he can talk to you about each of those.  These are highly used playgrounds.  An easy way for kids to have recreation outside at no cost.  And the Davis Center, they expressed some concerns.  We contacted them and we are programming here for your view an HVAC replacement.  There was some discussion on what it takes for us to assist a non‑profit with moving through a project.  And so I wanted to kind of share that with you so you might understand a little bit that it's not just as easy as you approve it and we pay a check.  So, when we're using federal dollars, there is a long, long list of things that we have to do.  First, we have to determine if it's eligible compared to the national objectives that HUD sets for us, but then we have to do a risk assessment to determine where it might fall within our projects.  We have to do a pre‑bid and pre‑construction meetings with every single construction group, subcontractor, anyone that's even interested in applying, and explain to them the Davis Bacon rules, the Section III rules, and the women and minority business rules.  (Coughing) Excuse me. 

So, once the contract is awarded, we start making regular bids and they start moving forward the project, we have to go on site and make sure that we're evaluating client files to make sure that the folks that they indicated would help us meet the national objective are actually there.  So, we do that.  We also have weekly payroll review for all contractors and subcontractors to make sure that the Davis Bacon rules are being followed.  What that means is they have to have their employees properly classified, not underpaid, and we have to do a page determination weekly.  And we have to interview folks that are on the construction site at the same time.  So, let's see.  We have ongoing desk monitoring.  We process all of the reimbursement requests so the agency doesn't pay it out.  They send it to us and our reimbursement requests from the subcontractors to us.  We make sure the work has been done and we pay them out using our own accounting division.  So, in a project like this, at a minimum, it's going to be 18 months, and that's if construction doesn't become, the other regular construction issues do not take place.  I just wanted to give you a little snapshot.  I'm sure I missed something.  If you have more specific questions, I have the staff lined up here ready to go.  Did I cover everything okay?  I just wanted to share that with you, because it probably seems like it's really easy, but it takes a few minutes to get it all done, but we're happy to do it. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Heather Post? 

>> HEATHER POST: I just wanted to say I'm really excited about the parks, as well, but especially the Davis Center.  They desperately need the HVAC.  With that, I'll move approval. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Motion to approve by Post.  Second by Danny Robins.  He beat ya to it.  All in favor say aye.  Any opposed?  Motion carries.  Dona, before you go, I just want to commend you.  You demonstrated this morning to the entire public the compassion that you're known for and immediate service to a person in great need. 

>> Well, if you'd allow me an indulgence, I'd be happy to give you some good news.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Yes.

>> Let me get the text out so I read it accurately.  I took her down to my office and I brought Diana Phillips.  And I brought Clay Jackson in, who you may have seen before who manages our family self‑sufficiency program.  So, the client had not, she had submitted just recently, two weeks ago when we opened.
And she got her application in, but she did not have all of her documents in.  And you can't move forward until you have all your documents in.  So, we got her into my conference room and she had submitted them online, but they hadn't been reviewed yet.  We switched caseworkers for her to give her an immediate boost, had her come over and meet with her and determined that she was, let me pull it up.  We income qualified her.  She has turned in all documents.  We will provide a letter for her stating that she has qualified in ERA rent and utilities and certifications so she can take it with her when she is looking for apartments.  She has been evicted so it will be a little bit more challenging for her to find an apartment, but hopefully this letter will help her because the landlord will know when they're signing a lease with her that she has a letter saying she will be covered.  But one of my concerns is that she is currently homeless.  She had been, she had been in contact with the Coalition for the Homeless and they had put her into a hotel, but she had not yet received a caseworker or a referral to another agency, so we went ahead and took that referral ourselves.  So, Clay Jackson is going to help her pay for deposits.  He'll pay the first month and then the next 12 would come from the other program, thus enabling us to provide family self‑sufficiency services which are wrap‑around services.  Win‑win for all.  She'll be set.  She's just got to find a place to live.

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Question?

>> Yes, ma'am?

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Rapid rehousing, is that part of the sufficiency program you just spoke of?

>> Sort of, yes.  We use our CSBG money for that.  Someone has to be homeless in order to receive family self‑sufficiency services.  The regular program allows us to provide three months of full‑paid rent and utility assistance and then the next three months are a sliding scale down so they're becoming more self‑sufficient during that time.  But during the entire six months, it's very intensive case management.  We work to find out what barriers they're facing, do they need some education?  Their car has been not working.  Whatever the case may be.

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: That's great.  You're trying to service the whole person, not just that one concern.

>> Absolutely.  Do they have child care issues?  So, all those things are taken care of.  If they wish, after we stop providing them assistance to say case managed for six more months, they can do so.  So, it's a 12‑month program.  It's been very successful.  And we can't serve a lot because there's only so much money, but we had a really good return on our investment, if you will, into those individuals we assisted. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: That brings us back to where we are with the impending evictions.  Don't walk away.  Get back over here. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: (Chuckling).

>> Don't look at him.  I'm looking at the attorney. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: I know.  You're probably going to need some help.  Because just like I was asking about this scenario is probably a good example of what we're going to be facing as of yesterday.  And rapid rehousing, I know there's not a lot of money there.

>> There's not.

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: However, through our COVID dollars, I don't recall us making any preparation for those types of programs or supporting that need.  And I know can our rental assistance supplement that? 

>> I can sort of answer that question for you.  The dollars so far.  If we're helping clients for a full year, the number of clients we serve go down.  However, the ERA2, the second round of funds that you all just approved that we started expending can be used for people who are homeless or very near to homeless and we can use it for rent, utilities, and other expenses that may come their way to help them get back on their feet.  We recently just took in 1600 or 1580 applications during this round.  The client today was part of that round.

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Right.  My question is with the evictions with the moratorium ending, those people would have missed that window if they hadn't already applied during the second round.

>> We anticipate we'll be able to open again.  How much we have, we don't know.  A lot of it depends.  If we can move people quickly into self‑sufficiency so they do not have to have our rental assistance for 12 months, if they need it for six or nine, each time that happens and we're successful in getting them back on their feet, then we can potentially serve more clients.  If everyone chooses to receive assistance for 12 months, the number goes down.  We anticipate being able to reopen.  We have a percentage rate that we find are not eligible because they make too much money.  We had folks that were receiving a lot of assistance because they were out of work and they were making $60,000 a year.  So, they could afford to pay their rent and they did not meet the criteria of the program.  So, this gives us a lot more wiggle room in this program. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: I guess my question still is if someone finds themselves in a bind today and they haven't already applied through that opening second round, can they come to us for rapid rehousing or for any resources that can help them get placed?  Or they don't have an option with us until that window opens again? 

>> I'm not sure about the answer to your first part.  At this point, I would say the latter.  However, I would like to go back and talk to not just my staff, but some of the community organizations that have different pots of money.  Because I believe the homeless coalition plans on spending money for rapid rehousing.  They get a different pot of ESG funds that they completely designate towards rapid rehousing.  I believe HUM sometimes gets that money sometimes, teach I would be happy to give you an e‑mail getting you up to speed on that.  But I don't want to give an inaccurate answer. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: I appreciate that.  I just want to kind of put it out there because I think our inboxes are going to open up with some concerns about this very issue now that the eviction moratorium ended.  I thank you.  I thank you for all you do, you and your staff.

>> Yeah, they're fantastic.

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Yeah, they are.  And so are you.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Heather, did you have something?  Dona, you're not off the hook yet.  This was meant to be a simple congratulations.

>> HEATHER POST: So, we've talked about the persons or the families that are in their homes getting ready to be evicted and then we've talked about actually people like the woman today who is living in her car who is homeless.  But what about the people who still have their apartments?  I know I got an e‑mail yesterday and I sent it along.  So, the people that are actually still living somewhere and haven't crossed that threshold, will that pertain to them?  Because then you're talking about rapid rehousing, and isn't rapid rehousing once they actually have no options.

>> ER2A crosses everything.  We can provide rapid rehousing if they're in that situation.  So, this woman applied through our ERA2 program.  It's being billed as ERA.  We're not separating out hey, if you're one or two, then you go in this pot or that pot.  That's not how we are doing it.  But these federal dollars now allow us to provide that funding to those types of situations.  So, I actually got that e‑mail and I forwarded it onto Clay because he might be able to help her out a little differently. 

>> Even if you haven't been evicted yet. 

>> The majority of the clients that we've received applications from are housed. 

>> HEATHER POST: I know you responded quickly to that lady, but let's assume there will be many more.

>> I think there probably will. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you, Dona.  Item 13.  Renewal of contract with consolidated resource recovery for yard trash grinding and hauling.  Is John here?  You're not John.

>> Good afternoon, Gina Montgomery, solid waste director.  Reduction of yard trash green waste is part of our normal operations.  We process each year 120,000 tons of yard trash and debris.  It's mulched for soil.  Staff recommends approval.

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Move to approve. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Motion to approve by Girtman second by Wheeler.  All in favor say aye. 

>> Aye.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Any opposed?  Motion carries 5‑0.  Nice job.  (Chuckling) okay, that brings us to item 14.  The first of three quasi‑judicial hearings.  So, 14 is a quasijudicial item related to a land use matter before this council.  If you've had any ex parte communications, now would be the time to disclose the sum and substance of those communications and who those communications were made with consistent with Section 2‑3 of the county code, all decisions of this council in a quasi‑judicial proceeding related to land use matters must be supported by substantial competent evidence in the record pertinent to the proceedings irrespective of such communications.  I'll go first.  I have provided the county clerk and attorney of written ex parte communications sent and received by me that they are made a part of the record for this item.  However, I want to ensure everybody that my decision this morning will be based on the law.  It's the only thing it can be based on and the evidence produced this morning.  Is there any other ex parte to be ...

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: I had a request for meeting, but did not.

>> BILLIE WHEELER: I also had a request, but did not. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Okay.  This is a public hearing.
I'll open the hearing now.

>> Good afternoon.  Clay Ervin.  It's a request to rezone a 5.02 acre parcel from its current zoning classification from A2 to A4.  It's a vacant piece of land, as you can see on the screen.  These are from pages 1420, 1421, 1422, and 1423 of your agenda packet.  1420 gives you the location, 1421 gives you an aerial, 1422 gives the current but shows the A2, and 1423 gives you the proposed, which shows the A4 zoning on the property.  The owners would like to subdivide this into two 2.5 acre tracts.  But it requires a minimum lot size of 5 acres.  They're seeking the rezoning so they can reduce it to a 2.5 acre parcel.  This will allow them to provide half the property to one of their family members and they will be able to retain it for their personal purposes.  There's been discussions about uses for agricultural purposes, as well.  The staff has reviewed to the comprehensive plan to the planning and regulation commission.  Staff made a recommendation of approval.  The planning land and development regulation commission held a public hearing.  They did identify that there were some people who spoke in opposition because they were concerned about increasing density in this relatively rural area.  After much discussion with their staff and contemplation, they made a recommendation of approval unanimously to the county council.  In regards to that particular topic, your staff is aware of the concerns that many of our property owners in the rural and agricultural areas are facing.  Right now, the state of Florida is feeling a great deal of pressure for development.  We see that happen in our rural areas.  We are aware of the balance that we are able to maintain, so we can ensure that we are enhancing and protecting our rural areas and our agricultural sources as well as honoring people's personal property rights.  In this particular situation we believe that balance is being met otherwise we would not have made a recommendation for approval.  If there are any questions for me, I would be glad to answer them.  Their applicant's attorney is here in attendance.  If there are any questions for them, they would be glad to answer them, as well. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Did they care to speak? 

>> Good evening or good afternoon, sorry.

>> CHAIR BROWER: It feels like evening.

>> It's been one of those days for me, too.  Appreciate the opportunity to be here.  I'm the attorney on behalf of the property owners.  It's perhaps a more straightforward rezoning request than some of the other requests that I've brought before you.  They own Pinnacle Landscaping.  And the primary goal when they bought this property was because of the agricultural zoning, in addition to allowing them to have a nursery and also store their vehicle on the premises.  If you've been down to that neck of the woods, it's very beautiful.
And the secondary demand or desire they had once we got the clear for the nursery operation and the vehicle storage there was to allow for half the property to go to the son.  Now, in full disclosure, under the existing zoning, both of those uses can happen on that property now and they can both happen simultaneously now.  The reason why we're coming before you with this extra step of a lot split is more to do with property insurance and liability.  It's just cleaner and neater and safer for the son to have a home and have that be his home lot rather than the whole structure owned and then subleased over for the entity to utilize.  We're going from A2 to A4.  My initial thought was A3 is right in between there.  A3 allows for even smaller lots.  The one‑acre per unit.  We weren't ready for that.  But predominantly in our area it's the A4.  One of the two elements for you to be aware of, the setbacks are pretty much the same, whether it's A2 or A4.  We get a slight reduction on front yard and rear yard.  But on a front acre or two and a half acre parcel, it's not that big of a deal.  The minimum lot side has to be 150 feet.  We have enough wiggle room so one of these lots is probably going to be oversize from a front‑end standpoint.  And with respect to the comments, we did have two neighbors who spoke up.  Density was the issue.  And in all honesty, it's a doubling of the density.  We're going from 5 acres to 2.5.  But still in keeping with the nature of the community, even with that A4 zoning that's in there, most of those lots are A4, but they are substandard from a size perspective.  They're closer to two and a half acres, some are three.  We're not really changing the characterization.  In fact, one of our neighbors who raised the issue and said hey what is this going to do for traffic, his own property is non‑conforming for size, I think 2.6 acres.  That was a primary concern for county before, that we're not going to change the character or attitude of the community, and I think we're doing okay with that.  I'm happy to answer any questions you may have and I appreciate your consideration on this. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Right now we have no requests if the public to speak, so I'll close the public hearing.  But council, do you have questions for Mr. Woods or Clay? 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Motion to approve. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Motion to approve and seconded by Wheeler.  All in favor say aye.?

>> Aye.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Any opposed?  Thank you very much.  Good afternoon.  Item 15, also a quasi‑judicial hearing.  I'll open up the public hearing on that and make the same statement.  This item is a quasi‑judicial item.  This is a time to declare any ex parte communications that you have.  Again, I have provided to the county attorney and the clerk with written ex parte communication sent and received by me.  They are made a part of the record of this item.  Again, however, I want to make it clear that my vote as well as the rest of the council has to be based on the law that we see now and the evidence produced.  Is there any other ex parte to be declared? 

>> HEATHER POST: Here. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Okay? 

>> HEATHER POST: I spoke to them, to Cobb Cole, about this. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Okay.  Clay, we'll let you start and then we do have one member of the public who would like to speak. 

>> Clay Ervin, director of growth and resource management.  This is a special exception.  It's a use that may be appropriate in certain zoning districts, ensuring it applies with certain criteria.  The rural event center is a use established to address the interest of those in the farmland and agricultural areas who may not have an agricultural classification and do not qualify for agrotourism, but want to be able to carry out things such as a wedding barn or similar types of events out in this rural setting.  This came about because we had received multiple complaints starting in 2016‑2017 about some of these operations.  We put together a set of criteria, which would address the operation to ensure consistency and compatibility with those existing agricultural and rural operations.  The owners of this property are seeking approval of it and have agreed to work with staff both from a building code, life safety code, and zoning regulation to ensure that this facility meets all of our criteria.  They have been working through some issues because they did start operations without receiving this special exception.  So, there was an issuance of violation of a use not otherwise permitted.  They have now gone through the site planning process and have drafted and understand the 13 criteria that the planning and land development regulation commission approved as part of their recommendation to you for approval.  The critical part about this project is it is located out on State Road 44.  As you can see, it's a very long, linear piece that's fronting on I‑4.  On the aerial, which is on 15‑48, you can see where the facility is located.  In the agenda packet, there are a series of photographs provided by the applicant which shows what the structure looks like, how the grounds look, those types of things.  There's also included a site plan, which shows how they will be addressing the parking demand that is required per the code.  It's also talking about some of the buffering.  They do have some cattle in the front, so, there's some requests that we will work out through the development review committee to ensure that the buffer if it's not out on 44 will at least be between 44 and the primary structure.  Again, they are showing that they are going to come in to compliance with Florida Fire Prevention Code as well as the Florida Building Code.  They agreed to limit the capacity to 120 people to ensure that there is adequate safety and access to and from the building.  These were all brought out to the planning and land development regulation commission that they're hearing.  We did not hear any other comment on this.  We recommend approval, consistent with the staff recommendations.  The owners are here as are their legal representatives.  If there's any questions for me or them, I'm sure they would be happy to answer them. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Michael Dyer?  Or is it Pollo? 

>> Thank you, Miss Post.  When you had contact with Cobb Cole, was it just the staff report?  Or any information outside of the that information?

>> HEATHER POST: I think it was just the gist of what it was.  Basically just what the agenda item entails. 

>> Thank you. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: We have Jessica Gall who has asked to speak.

>> Hello, we have a request today from the property owners.  We have them here if you want to hear some of their story and our engineer, Rick Dixon, for any technical questions.  They had a vision to have a wedding venue out on the property.  They were excited.  They started a little too early.  We see that sometimes.  These regulations can be confusing.  They said we want to follow everything by the rules.  That was probably about two years ago now.  They've been great kind of every step of the way.  Everything from installing elevators in the barn house that exists now to convert it to a commercial structure, what kind of kitchen can be in there, and the recommendation for approval.  It's been a long journey.  I think that we've worked out a really great product.  I got married in a barn venue in Tallahassee.  If I had been here, I think I would have gotten married here if it had been opened.  And if you have questions, I'm happy to answer them. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: The pictures of the facility are beautiful.  It's stunning.  The owners are here? 

>> Cynthia and Greg.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you very much.  I remember.  That was.

>> (Speaking off mic)

>> CHAIR BROWER: I remember that conversation and what you had been through and the struggles that you faced.  So, I'm happy to see you here at this point today. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Mr. Chair, I move approval.

>> DANNY ROBINS: Second. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Motion to approve by Wheeler and second by Robins.  I'll close the public hearing.  Clay, did you have anything else?  No.  All in favor say aye. 

>> Aye. 

>> Any opposed? 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Motion carries 5‑0.  Okay, and we have one more quasi‑judicial hearing.  So, I'm going to ask again for council to declare any ex parte communications that they've had.  I have already done so with staff by providing to the county attorney and the clerk with written ex parte communications sent and received by me that are now made part of the public record.  Again, I'll say my decision on this matter will be focused on the law and the evidence presented today.  Clay? 

>> Good afternoon, clay Ervin, director of growth and resource management.  Today I did receive a request from Kim C. Booker who is the attorney and applicant for today's reinstatement of the Burch Trust PUD.  She has requested that the county council continue this to the first meeting in September, which would be September 7th, 2021, at 10:30 a.m. in order for her to address some of the concerns she's heard from the public regarding potential impacts regarding the Indian River Lagoon and those natural resources.  That will require an action on the council's behalf to agree to that continuance and setting that time frame. 

>> HEATHER POST: So moved. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Second, wheeler. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Okay, did anyone else have any ex parte?  No?  The motion was by Post and the second by Wheeler.  All in favor say aye.

>> Aye. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Any opposed?  Thank you very much.  Okay, now we're going to hear the next three items from Jonathan Edwards who has had a busy year.  This item 17, the first one, is his internal audit of the purchasing department.  Thank you, Jonathan. 

>> Thank you.  Jonathan Edwards.  This is the internal audit of the purchasing function.  The audit scope was January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2020.  Or the two most recent calendar years.  The purpose was to gain a reasonable degree of assurance that the procurement of goods and services processed in compliance with laws and regulations, policies, and procedures.  To accomplish the objectives, I obtained and reviewed resolutions, laws, county regulations, and procedures.  I also reviewed the NIGP best practices in how the county implemented those practices.  I also matched and compared vendor records to employer records to determine if employees received inappropriate or fraudulent payments, which testing did not reveal any inappropriate payments.  Also due to the limited competition and the possibility of inappropriate use of a single and sole sourced purchase methods, I did additional testing to ensure that process was adequate.  The test did not reveal any use of the single sole source procurement methods.  The audit consisted of 84 separate solicitations tested of the 185 active contracts or 6% of the contracts out there.  I also tested 559 procurement card or P card transactions which tested almost 750,000 dollars or 15 of the total spent of the almost 5 million dollars.  Overall, controls of our purchasing are operating as intended, but I did find some opportunities for improvement to help safe guard against fraud, waste, and abuse.  Delegate the vendor performance monitoring to the end users who may not always be aware of the contract requirements or the pricing.  I tested the solicitations, but I also randomly selected paid invoices to ensure that the vendors with complying with the contracts.  There were two vendors where I noted a few issues.  Over $5,000 was a paid to a paving contractor who included charges for mobilization and maintenance of traffic and those two items were not in the approved contract.  Another vendor had a few issues with their invoices and their contract.  They included a shop supply rate on all their service repairs and that was not agreed to in their master agreement.  Their invoices are also all rounded to even and round hours for their service calls.  Invoices do not indicate when the technician started or stopped their work or the destination to and from on their travel calls.  They also agreed to provide a 10% discount, but they did not include this on the invoice.  It's unclear how staff could determine if we are receiving the discount appropriately.  The procurement life cycle includes monitoring and delivering the performance of the vendors.  The best practices advises that self‑assessments be done by staff on a regular basis, this includes the procurement to help strengthen that vendor monitoring.  Staff agree with the recommendations and they do hold regular trainings to the end users and they'll continue to stress the importance of properly reviewing invoices prior to payment.  Staff have also reached out to the vendor and the master agreement was recently updated and now the invoices will reflect the rates and the discounts as agreed upon.  And purchasing staff are developing an internal review process that will be conducted on a quarterly basis.  The audit report also listed a few concerns which are defined as infrequent or isolated opportunities for improvement.  During the pandemic, the county purchased two payment kiosks to help accept utility payments which cost $165,000 for both of those.  Federal CARES Act money was used to purchase these kiosks.  During this time customers were expected to wait in long lines, often outside, and this caused safety concerns for the customers standing in the parking lots.  There were roughly 53 payments each month.  The average utility payment is about $55, meaning roughly $2,500 was collected each month.  If you average that over three years, that's approximately $3,500 per month.  To cover these costs, at least 82 payments would need to be received each month.  A cost benefit analysis was not performed by staff or presented to council.  Without performing such analysis, taxpayer money may be more prone to waste.  Management was looking for the best alternatives to alleviate long lines and the frustrations at the tag offices.  Staff are looking at expanding the kiosk by accepting other forms of payment.  The P‑card testing revealed some other areas for retraining as there were a few instances of policies not being followed.  The other areas noted in the report related to policy considerations and areas to enhance key performance indicators.  Some of these may take direction from council and staff are looking into those, researching those areas, and they may be coming to council in the future months for discussion.  Also in the report, appendix one lists common fraud schemes that can occur in the purchasing function.  It also lists red flags and the controls and safe guards that the purchasing staff have implemented to help combat fraud.  Fraud is a matter of when, not if, and your purchasing staff have implemented very good safe guards to help prevent, deter, and detect fraud.  Any questions?

>> CHAIR BROWER: Heather Post? 

>> HEATHER POST: It's not morning anymore.  Good afternoon, John.  We talked about the vendors and we looked at the contract requirements in correlation to vendors.  But did we do any vendor vetting?  So, actually looking at the vendors to see if they are appropriate businesses, if they have the licensing, that kind of stuff?

>> Yes, yep. 

>> HEATHER POST: And then what type of actions does the division do normally to vet that kind of stuff?

>> So, Miss Wilsky can probably answer that better than I can.

>> HEATHER POST: What's the process?  That's what I'm asking.

>> Yeah. 

>> Good afternoon, Pam Wilsky, director of purchasing and contracts.  When we are soliciting for vendors and vetting vendors, a couple of didn't processes, but the main thing we do is we go out to the Florida department of corporations and vet them to make sure they are registered with the state of Florida to do business in the state of Florida.  It's called the sun business report.  We vet it through that way.  We also take into consideration at that point if someone is having to sign a contract or an agreement that those folks and/or elicit there as one of their officers or we obtain a memorandum of agreement that gives them the authority to bind to a contract.

>> HEATHER POST: And that's being done now on every.  I'm just checking.  Thanks. 

>> And currently the audit is making sure they did that.

>> HEATHER POST: Yes, thank you, Jonathan. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Any other questions?  Nope.  Sounds like you're good. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Motion to accept the internal auditor's purchasing report. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Motion to accept by Wheeler, second by Girtman to accept your report.  All in favor say aye.

>> Aye.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Any opposed?  Motion carries.  Item 18. 

>> All right, Jonathan Edwards.  Internal auditor.  This is for the ECHO report for fiscal year 2020.  The purpose was to perform audit procedures to gain a reasonable degree of assurance that ECHO revenue and expenditures were accounted for and in compliance with established resolutions and guidelines.  During fiscal year 2020 there was 2.6 million expended on different projects.  I tested four of the municipality projects, and two nonprofit projects.  I tested 33% of the expenditures of the years.  There were no findings or concerns on the current year projects.  I followed up on the previous audit report recommendations and that report was issued in May of last year.  That report had two findings, nine concerns, and seven general comments.  ECHO staff have implemented the recommendations that can be handled on a staff level.  Many of the recommendations required ECHO committee and council approval.  In the past year the ECHO committee has vetted those and discussed at a workshop a few weeks ago and they'll be coming to council for further approval the near future.  That's all on that one. 

>> Moved.

>> Second.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Motion by Post, second by Wheeler.  All in favor say aye.  Any opposed?  Motion carries 5‑0.  Item 20.  You're almost there. 

>> Jonathan Edwards, internal auditor.  This is for the Volusia Forever program.  2020.  The purpose was to gain a reasonable assurance that Volusia Forever expenditures were accounted for.  There were no land acquisitions for the year.  The only other activity was the ongoing land management expenditures for the forever properties by using the 10% set aside and general fund moneys.  I selected and tested revenues received from the timber sales and the hunting lease payments.  There were 33,000 and I tested about 41% of that will revenue.  I also selected expenditures related to managing the lands.  There was about $590,000 of Volusia Forever expenditures and I counted 44%.  No findings or concerns.  I followed up on the audit report from the report issued last year.  That report had no findings, no concerns and two general comments.  Again, thank you to staff for their assistance during the audit.  Any questions? 

>> Move to approve.

>> Second.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Motion to approve by wheeler.  Second by Robins.  All in favor say aye.  Any opposed?  Motion carries 5‑0.  Thank you Jonathan and staff.  Okay.  Item 20.  Sponsorship request from the Childhood Cancer Foundation.  Kevin? 

>> Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.  Honorable members of council.  Kevin Captain.  It's a request from the Childhood Cancer Foundation for the glitter and gold cocktail gala.  On September 11th.  It will help families of children with cancer as well as to include everyday expenses such as rent, mortgage payments, gas, food, utilities, car insurance, and repairs.  We have provided sponsorship to this 501(c)(3) organization in the past. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Motion to approve. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Second, wheeler. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Heather Post, did you have a question? 

>> HEATHER POST: I have a comment.  I have to tell you we have a lot of amazing, amazing nonprofits.  One of our line items today was for the Beacon Center to provide them with building updates.  One of our line items today was the HVAC replacement of the Conklin Davis Center.  A lot of amazing nonprofits.  But I have to tell you I've spent some time with this foundation, and this is the one that my husband loves to go to, this event every year, because these are children in our community, in Volusia, specifically in our county that have cancer.  And this group specifically deals with them and their caregivers and their friends and REALLY just has such an impact in helping those families.  And I can't even imagine, you know, dealing with that on your own knowing that your child has cancer.  But the fact that they deal with that and specifically to those families within Volusia County that are dealing with this, they're just an amazing organization.  So, approve, approve, approve.  Thank you. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: And is there a motion to accept? 

>> We did that. 

>> You have a motion from Miss Girtman, seconded from Miss wheeler.  You just need the vote.

>> All in favor say aye?

>> Aye.

>> Any opposed?

>> CHAIR BROWER: Motion carries 5‑0. 

>> HEATHER POST: And if I could just say childhoodcancerfoundationinc.org.  If anybody is wanting to donate. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Okay, events. 

>> Kevin Captain.  I'll give you the events update here.  For the affordable housing initiative, this is just another reminder that we still have it all planned for August 27th and community information is continuing to collaborate with community services on this initiative.  The economic development Q‑breakfast is scheduled for Friday, August 13th at 8 a.m.  The guest speaker is Frank DiBello, president and CEO of Space Florida.  Our Vax Up, Volusia campaigns on social media continue and make headway with reach and impressions.  In addition to that, when we spoke about testing earlier, on our PIN Page, our public information page, which is at the very top of Volusia.org, if you scroll down, we have vaccination information there first and then the testing info is towards the bottom of the page.  But in particular, these links and the one link with the Florida Department of Health takes you right to the page where Patricia Boswell and her team update the local areas offering COVID testing.  That's continually updated.  DeBary Hall events, we have a couple of events coming up that will allure the public.  Some may be limited to participants.  Public meetings, again they can be reached through the county council agenda.
And that pretty much wraps up the events. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you, sir, very much. 

>> Thank you.  Okay.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Okay.  Item 22, appointments to the business incubator advisory board.  We have four applicants.  How many is the council? 

>> You have five applicants and four nominations for appointment to a two‑year term.  Any council member can make the nomination. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Heather Post? 

>> HEATHER POST: Mr. Chair, I'd like to nominate Adrian Barker to the Business Incubator advisory board. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: I'd like to nominate Edith Shelly. 

>> DANNY ROBINS: I'd like to nominate Jeffrey Badavik. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: And we need one more.

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Louis Paris. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: And I'll take a motion to approve all four? 

>> Motion to approve. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Second. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: All in favor say aye? 

>> Aye.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Any opposed?  There being none.  Okay, item 23.  District one, district two, district four, and chair nominations to the Historic Preservation Board.  And I would like to nominate, where did they go?  Larry French.  Other nominations?

>> Mr. Chair, this has to be in your district, correct, staff?  It has to be in our district?  Yes? 

>> Yes, they do have to be within your district.

>> I'm going to be ask that my position be held right now.  I'm having a hard time getting somebody.  Thank you. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: So, then I'm going to nominate Tom Roberts. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Any others? 

>> HEATHER POST: I just want to make sure, I don't know if Billie saw.  Margaret Beardsford.  Hers was entered later. 

>> I apologize.  It does not require the member to live in your district. 

>> It just has to be an elector within the county. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Then I'll nominate Terry Bledsoe.  And I didn't see that last one, Heather.  I'm sorry. 

>> HEATHER POST: Does everybody else have Margaret Beardsford?  It was an additional application? 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: It was an additional supplement.

>> HEATHER POST: I actually have two of them in mine.  So, maybe I have somebody's. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Make a choice. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Do you want to nominate?  She said someone else.  Margaret Bledsoe, but I don't know who that is.

>> HEATHER POST: I'm going to hold off, because I haven't talked to Margaret.  And it looks like she is the only one left.  Let me just talk to her.  I'd hate to appoint just a phantom.  But I'm sure she is very nice.  But let me talk to her. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: And she is in district three, correct?

>> HEATHER POST: Yes, she's in Port Orange. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: So, entertaining a motion to approve these nominees.

>> Tom Roberts.  Terry Bledsoe, Larry French. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Motion to approve. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Second.

>> CHAIR BROWER: All in favor say aye? 

>> Aye. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Any opposed?  Motion carries 5‑0. 

>> HEATHER POST: And she's district two. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: It looked like district three marked on there, didn't it?

>> HEATHER POST: She's got district two marked. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Third dot over.  Wasn't that in district three? 

>> Miss Bledsoe, is district three east side?  Mr. Brower, you could also appoint her as your east side appointment, if you wish? 

>> CHAIR BROWER: I'll wait until next time to investigate that.  I'm not familiar with her.  All right.  Item 24.  Discussion and direction regarding public meeting rule ordnance. 

>> Yes, Mr. Chair, at the last item this item was on the agenda and it was deferred.  I was particularly happy about that because Russ Brown was on a much deserved leave and he has the opportunity to be here today on this item.  Russ has worked with me to put the proposal together, really a set of decision points for council to give us some direction and return back with something if that's your direction.  If it's the pleasure of the council, Russ will walk through a presentation with a series of decision points, realizing that you may want to make motions along the way as you address particular issues.  I'll hand it over to Russ. 

>> Chairman, members of council, Russ Brown.  I'm here today to talk to you about the rules of decorum and discussion for council.  At the May meeting, council directed staff to take a look at the rules and come back regarding rules of decorum for counsel to consider and amending the current section 2‑63.  The existing rules were adopted in 1994 and have not been amended since.  Upon direction, staff will bring back your direction as an ordnance.  Pursuant to Florida's statute and case law, the council may provide content‑neutral time, place, and manner restrictions for public participants to participate in county council meetings.  Sorry, I think my tongue is still on vacation.  It's a limited public forum.  So you can limit.  There's a significant government interest in ensuring efficient and orderly meetings and that's how you come up to the rules that are content neutral for limited time, place, and manner restrictions.  You can prohibit disruptive conduct.  That's a permissible limitation upon First Amendment protections.  Similar rules have been routinely upheld as constitutional by the courts and this draft ordnance is merely just a guide and whatever input you have today, we'll go through it.
I'm going to ask, or if it's okay with you Mr. Chair, if at the certain decision points, if that's okay with council, to vote on how to bring the ordnance back. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Yes, that makes sense. 

>> So, the decision point number one.  I think you all had the memo that was part of the draft ordnance that was a part of the agenda item.  So, the decision point number one.  Does the council wish to expressly adopt the Robert's Rules of Order to governance meetings unless otherwise provided by law, the charter, or general ordnance?  The current ordnance references the general principles of Roberts rules.  The draft ordnance that you have would specifically adopt the Robert's Rules of Order, but it does say that the council recognizes that Robert's Rules of Order are not applicable to every single matter governing a public official and these parliamentary rules shall not govern to the extent consistent with Florida law or other procedural rules the council may adopt from time to time.  Failure to adhere to this may not serve as a basis to invalidate a decision made by the council.  That version, those two sentences that I just read, the draft ordnance makes it clear while you're still following them, it's not going to overturn an action of the council if somehow there's a procedural hiccup, for lack of a better word, from the formal procedure of Roberts Rules.  That's the first decision point, Mr. Chair. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: I highly recommend we continue with the adoption of the Robert's Rules of Order.  I think it's important for us to maintain that business sense and an organized business sense as our guiding rules. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Barbara Girtman?

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: I would be interested at some point either through a workshop or through a presentation having an outline of the expectation of Roberts Rules in this arena?  In this setting?  Because I think there's a different level of understanding and interpretation by each council member, right?  So, I think if there's at least an establishment of, you know, what the base is, then I think we're kind of all on the same page.  Because I think as we are now each time a different person is coming in and there's different leadership and different expectations.  How do we get on board with what this looks like for us?

>> I agree. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: I think it's important.  So, we're not stepping on each other thinking one is right and one is wrong, when there really isn't a right or wrong.  It's what we've established as acceptable.  Right? 

>> CHAIR BROWER: So, what I'm hearing from you is you're not opposed to accepting Robert's Rules of Order, but you would like to see a workshop. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Yes.

>> CHAIR BROWER: For council members.

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: I would.

>> CHAIR BROWER: That's reasonable. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Yeah. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Can I get a motion in? 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: I'll make the motion to accept Roberts rules and request staff schedule a time to do a short overview of those expectations.

>> Second.

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: And establish standards. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Motion by Girtman and second by Wheeler.  And Heather Post? 

>> HEATHER POST: I had a long discussion with Mike about this.
The Robert's Rules, what I'm reading is crossed out and what we've always gone on are parliamentary rules for the council are basically as outlined in Robert's rules.  I think we've basically run on Robert's Rules and there have been many times when we've been more relaxed and really worked as a council and not been as efficious.  And I've also seen many times Robert's Rules being used as a sword and not as a shield.  I think really that's the point as Robert's Rules in any kind of meeting to use it as a shield and to use it as a basic sense of order.  So, I don't see anything wrong with leaving it as hey, our county council so that in the future it is not continued to be used as a shield, that we continue to say our meetings will run as basically as outlined in Robert's Rules and still setting amongst ourselves what that expectation is so that there's not a definitive so we don't get one or two people who come along and use it as a shield.  Or sword.  Yeah. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Are you amending the motion?  Because I think that was Barb Girtman's? 

>> HEATHER POST: I'm worried about changing the language of this because what we had before would still encompass the general guidelines of what this council expect that to mean.  But if we are now saying I've just seen it used quite a bit in the past as a sword and I see no reason to change that language.  I definitely see it being advantageous for us to lay out what our expectations are.  But just thinking of future councils, you know.  I don't want someone else to be out here with a Robert's Rules book this thick and actually figuring out how to speak when things are happening. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Barbara, isn't that what you were asking, that we kind of discuss?

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Yes, we wish to discuss Robert's Rules of Order.  I don't think we're talking about changing any language. 

>> HEATHER POST: But we are changing the language in this.  It used to say parliamentary rules for the council are basically as outlined in Roberts rules.  Now we're saying. 

>> Right.  The current ordnance pretty much as the spirit of Roberts rules.  The draft ordnance suggest adopting it formally, although there are a couple sentences.  It should not serve as a basis to invalidate an action.  It's just cementing it a little bit more.  That's the difference in the current version as opposed to the draft language. 

>> I've seen it both ways in some of the examples.  Some expressly adopt the Robert's Rules.  An example of what that could look like is on page 19‑8 of the agenda item, and Miss Post is correct.  The current language in the ordnance adopts principles of Robert's Rules, but not expressly those rules.  And so that is two different approaches.  As I understand the motion would be to adopt expressly adopt those rules.  But it's certainly a policy decision. 

>> I'm in favor of adopting those rules, Barbara.  I'm with you on that.

>> HEATHER POST: But our version, what we're laying out, is that going to be different than the rules? 

>> Robert's Rules are going to be our standard, our foundation.

>> HEATHER POST: That's what it currently says, right? 

>> Mine is 24‑8.

>> I'm sorry.  The current version of the ordnance says parliamentary rules for the county council are basically as outlined in Robert's Rules of Order.  Courtesy of all, justice of all.  The draft as proposed would formally adopt the Robert's Rules of Order and strike through that kind of spirit of the rules language that I just read. 

>> Basically what you see and what this draft language would do is, what the motion would do, we're to expressly adopt Robert's Rules unless otherwise provided in this charter or this code would address something differently.  For example, you have a charter that defines expressly the rules and responsibilities of each council member, the chair, and the vice chair.  And so those would override anything in Robert's Rules of Order.  If it were changed.  And that's the case today under the current language. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: So, what benefit is it legally to change this? 

>> HEATHER POST: That's my point.

>> I don't think it's so much a legal issue, but a rules of operations of the council.  I think Miss Post identified a dis advantage of it.  That's correct.  An advantage would be if you do want rules in place that could be enforceable, you should have them written and established.  And when I say enforceable, I mean enforceable as you by a council. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Robert's Rules means we can refer to a base.  Here we're referring to I guess these six points, but that's not based on anything other than language someone created there.  So.  So, my motion stands. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: My second stands.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Okay.  Heather Post? 

>> HEATHER POST: So, I'm just going to say I wish I had seen this in the last five years.  I don't remember seeing this little section at all that we currently have in place.  (Chuckling) I wish I had seen this and was able to make a copy and carry it into some of the meetings.  So, I'm just going to withdrawal my discussion on this.  It is what it is and I'm good with adopting Robert's Rules and I think from here forward we can just deal with it as each situation arises and hopefully as council progresses it will no longer be used as a sword. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Okay.  Then I'll call for a vote on the motion.  All in favor say aye?

>> Aye.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Any opposed?  Motion carries for your point number one. 

>> Thank you, sir.  Did I go backwards?  Oh, okay.  All right.  Number two.  Does the council wish to address how points of order may be raised and handled.  A model is similarly adopted for other local governments.  The current ordnance already provides a means for appeal.  So, on page 24‑9, subsection E, that last section we were just referring to with Robert's Rules, there's an added line in there that says members of the council may raise questions and point of record order to the chair and may decide a subject of appeal as provided in Section 2‑25‑E of the code.  And you can see where it references that subsection E, which is already part of the current code.  You have a point of procedure.  The chair would make a decision or a point of order.  The chair would make a decision as to that point of order.  And that decision can be appealed.  Subject to that process and the ordnance based on the chair's decision. 

>> As Russ said, your current code language already provides for an appeal process.  This really just clarifies that.  I know it's come up a couple time, questions about how a point of order is raised.  It's an element of Robert's Rules.  Sometimes there's confusion that some perceive it to be a motion.  It's not a motion.  It's something that a member of a body raises for action by the chair to consider.  And your current ordnance already provides for a method of appeal that would be an example of where you have some specific language on a point that's maybe a little different than a Robert's Rules process, although Robert's Rules has an appeal process, as well.  But you just have one already in your code. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Barb Girtman? 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Are we putting the cart before the horse if we're going to do an overview training and understanding of this?  Shouldn't we establish any changes once we have a clear path?  And expectation amongst us?  Because it seems to me we may want to make some additional changes to what we may decide today because when I consider the call to order, there may be a different expectation, understanding.  I want to know does that stop whatever conversation is going at that time?  How does that impact, you know?  Are we all on the same page with what that means?  And I'm not sure we are.  I don't know.  Will we spend the time now to get into that depth, or do we spend the time to really delve into this so we're all on the same page? 

>> CHAIR BROWER: As far as it affects Robert's Rules of Order or the entire question? 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Birth.

>> If it affects Robert's Rules, we can always refer to Ernie and Mike and Mr. Dyer if you have any questions. 

>> It's council's pleasure how you want to proceed.  Point of order is just a fancy way of saying that a member believes that a rule is not being followed.  For example, if the somebody were to speak, we have a three‑minute rule.  If a timer goes off and a person was still speaking and it's five or six minutes, a member could say, you know, Mr. Chair, hypothetical, Mr. Chair, I believe the time limit has been exceeded.  It's a parliamentary way of bringing attention to your rules so you can give the chair the an opportunity to enforce.  But as to your point, Miss Girtman, it's entirely up to council on how you wish to proceed here. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: That's why I'm asking my fellow councilmen what their thoughts are as far as points of order or call for a vote or whatever comes up.  Are we all on the same page to now review this discussion draft, make changes to it, go then talk about it again, and not come back and make additional changes based on maybe what we've all determined to be the way forward.  That's just my thought. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Mr. Chair, I get where Barbara is coming from and I think there are a couple of these that we can address.  But I understand the point of order and I'm okay with that one.  But I do think we do need to have clarification on if it means the same thing to all of us, you know?  And I don't know if that's a brief discussion or what it entails. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Okay, well let's proceed then.  Thank you. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you.  Any other questions?  Can I get a motion to accept point of order?  Barbara, if we're going to approve Robert's Rules of Order, we're not going to change it, but I do agree with you that we may change our own understanding.

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Right. 

>> And Mr. Chair and members of council, just to clarify, the question is do you want your meeting rules to address points of order.  This would just be an example, if you did so.  You may not want to. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: What's your pleasure, council?  Is there a motion? 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: A motion to what he just said.  To address points of order.  Is that what you're saying, basically? 

>> Yes, ma'am. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: That we can discuss it with the rest of it.

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: And I'll second that we wish to address how points of order may be raised.  Yeah. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Is that giving you clarification at all?

>> Yes, ma'am.

>> CHAIR BROWER: And the motion was by Wheeler and seconded by Girtman.  All in favor say aye.  Any opposed? 

>> HEATHER POST: Mr. Chair?  How is this any different than what we're currently doing?  So, the points of order?  Because the points of order that have been brought up prior were in essence according to to Robert's Rules of Order.  So, if as a council we are saying we are putting this to officially in here, what does that mean?  How is that going to change how previously addressed?  It's not.  It's just laying it out that it's part of Robert's Rules of Order?  So, I'm not sure what exactly we're accomplishing. 

>> It's like as you said Miss Post, it's just formally saying that these are the procedures we're going to follow.  You were following them under the current spirit of the code, if you will.  But it lays out that everybody has the same understanding that there's points of order and then how the appeal process that's already codified in the ordnance based on the chair's decision.  It kind of codifies the baseline and puts everybody on the same playing field. 

>> HEATHER POST: But it really doesn't put us on the same plan of how we're going to respond to it.  I think it's the responding that we need to be on the same page about rather than just the fact that is there an idea of a point of order.  I think we're all with the understanding.

>> If we have a standard and we need a refresher course.

>> HEATHER POST: Yeah. 

>> DANNY ROBINS: We're adopting a standard that everybody will be held accountable to.  That's the way I'm understanding it.  If we don't, we can have a refresher course to bring us up to speed if there's any questions.
It's not a big deal. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: I think getting us all on the same page.  Here's the standard. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: I just think in here it doesn't say anywhere point of order.  It's just updating that language so I have something to reference. 

>> Okay.

>> Decision point number three.  Does the council wish to put aside a time period for public input matters that may warrant discussion from the council?  There's nothing in the draft ordnance that changes anything.  It's just a point of decision for the council.  If you do want to institute one specific timeframe or, you know, non‑agenda matters would be handled at the end of the agenda as opposed to the beginning.  Now you have it on both ends.  The draft ordnance does not change the current function.  It's a decision point for council. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: You're talking about at the beginning of the meeting?  The public input?  Here are my thoughts on that.  I think we've been trying this new form of it in public input and it's  important to all of us.  We certainly want to hear it.  But I do think we need to limit the public input at the beginning of the meeting to a half an hour or the maximum an hour and then the remaining public input can go at the end of the meeting because I think it's extremely important that we get our business accomplished and there are actions that people are bringing in, attorneys with them, or other people to testify on a situation that we're asking them to wait until after all of the public comments on another topic.  They may be sitting here for four hours until their topic is discussed.  I think we need to be very respectful of them, too.  And I think having a half an hour or an hour at the beginning of the meeting to hear public comment and then we can conclude with public comments again at the very end.  I think this detains us for a specific topic and they've brought their attorneys or representatives in and they're being charged by the hour.  I don't think that's a fair way to handle all of the people in here with the items. 

>> And just so I'm clear, decision three is about non‑agenda public comment.  So, items on the agenda are required to give the public an opportunity to comment.  Do you want to set a specific time aside for the public to comment on non‑agenda items at that meeting.  There's nothing in the ordnance, this draft ordnance doesn't change anything.  Yes, ma'am. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: That was limited at the beginning.  And the remaining can go at the end.  It's just like I said we're in here with a full agenda and like the one meeting we even had to postpone some things to the next one.  I just think it's a critically important 'that we get the business done.  Not say not listening to the people, that's extremely important and we all want to hear it.  But I think we just have to get our business completed, give them an hour, and then they can speak again at the end of the meeting. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Barb Girtman? 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: I agree.  I would like to see the first hour.  And I mean I think that's an increase the time from 30 minutes.  I think that's a fair opportunity.  And if it so happens that the public that came to speak there's time allowed like today where we approved for people who were here for a subject numbered items.  But for me, the public needs to speak first.  And if they're here for those items, then they come behind that.  And if there's not time, then they have to wait until those items are presented.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Heather Post? 

>> HEATHER POST: I know there's been a lot of discussion about this and let's be real.  It is a pain, right?  To have to have two hours.  I don't think we've had three hours of public discussion before.  But to have a long period of time where we're listening to the public.  But really I think that's our role.  And we had it before where we had the public discussion at the beginning and public discussion until the end.  And we always know that no one ever stays until the end, except John.  Everyone is pointing at John.  Thank you, John.  But it doesn't, we have our meetings during the day.  We've had votes in the past about changing our meeting times to allow those who work to be able to attend.  We decided not to do that.  So, only during the day on a weekday.  It's in DeLand.  It's on the west side.  I'm in the northeast side.  On a workday, it's a long way for them to come on a workday.  The opportunity to be heard is to be lessened.  I don't think it's unreasonable to allow that to be heard at the beginning of the meetings.  We can change things around a bit.  This morning, we did that for the doctors to speak about COVID.  If we could do that for COVID, why couldn't we do that if there was an attorney who has to leave or something like that.  Certainly, we can still have time, what do we call it?  Time certain.  We can still have time‑certain items that could break in if they're that important.  But I'm definitely for having as much public comment available at a specific time for the public to be able to come.  We saw this morning there weren't a lot of people here at all.  So, it's going to vary.  And, you know, if we say the number‑one thing we need to focus on is actually focusing on the meeting and having the meeting and working on the specific agenda items, we get that done anyway.  It's just after.
So, it's being handled.  It's just being handled after the public gets to speak.  So, it's not keeping us from handling our duties.  So, I would be in favor of keeping it how it is and again if some special thing comes up, just like this morning with the doctors, we can certainly address it. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Danny Robins?

>> DANNY ROBINS: I think really what it comes down to guys is about efficiency.  Just kind of like what we experienced with trying to determine what time our lunch is going to be.  But it is 2021.  No one here is trying to silence anybody.  But it's too easy to communicate as a representative with our constituents.  We're provided with laptops, cell phones, way to get e‑mail, where we can hear some of these and better accommodate our constituents so they don't have to sit here and miss work.  I think we have to keep that in mind, but also respect what Councilwoman Wheeler said.  There's a lot of people that sit in the audience at $300‑400 more sometimes with legal staff and that's not fair on them either.  But if it's something we can plan ahead for and Chair has been gracious enough to get the people with an immediate time constraint up to the front, I'd be in support of that.  Chair, on a case‑to‑case basis to help those folks out.  But definitely allowing a block and having some sort of schedule.  I mean that's ultimately what an agenda is.  That's just my two cents.  Thanks.

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion that we hold it to one hour at the beginning and the remaining comments are at the end of the meeting.  Again, this is not telling the people we don't want to hear them.  I just think that's being fair to the rest of the people in the audience and any of the time‑sensitive items that are on there, time‑certain items that are on our agenda, that is my motion. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Motion by Wheeler, seconded by Robins.  I'll just add that I can't support that.  I think one of the most important things that we do is listen to the public.  I don't know how we represent them without it.  And we can say what we are, but just not all at once.  I think we have public coming here taking time off work, coming here to sit.  I understand lawyers sitting here and everybody else.  We can be flexible, but I don't believe we can restrict people's ability to approach their public servants and they're not going to be able to stay all day and speak again at the end of the meeting.  They left businesses and employment to come and speak to us and I think we owe it to them to give them a voice in the morning and we can code it any other way, but we're restricting the public's ability to have input with the council.  Danny?

>> DANNY ROBINS: And Chair, I respect that.  I really do.  But we are their voice.  And once again, for efficiency, I'd like to have it, as well.  But it comes down to should we hand in all of our equipment, thousands and thousands, that's what it's there for, for communication.
So, we can relay that whether it's behind the scenes and speak for them.  That's the whole purpose of being an elected official is to speak on folks' behalf.  But we do have to have some sort of efficiency and some sort of schedule to go by.  Nobody is trying to, I don't want to hear this and I can see it now where it's turned back on this council.  No one up here is trying to limit it.  We're trying to get a standard, we're trying to get an organization more organized.  And we're trying to be efficient, because it's taxpayer money.  Thanks. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Michael Dyer?

>> MICHAEL DYER: Thank you, Mr. Chair.  I just want to make sure we're on the same page with the maker of the motion and the second.  I think we are.  But we're speaking as to the comments on county business, not on the agenda in the morning, not a limitation on time for the agendad items.  Okay.  Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: But the motion was to limit the morning's public input to one hour.  Still continue it to the end.  I'm just saying they're not going to stay here all day.  They have businesses to run.  So, efficiency or being attentive to our constituents.

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Mr. Chair, I do feel that we're being attentive to them.  I mean we hear from them all the time.  I certainly have an open door policy and I hear from them all the time.  I'm just saying efficiency of our office, too.  We've got staff in here that's waiting all day long so they can get back to work.  You know, it's worked in the past.  It works in other governments.  There's a lot of governments that have half an hour.  I think we've expanded it to an hour where we can hear what they have to say.  And quite honestly, if there's 10 or 15 people speaking on the same item, you know, they can coordinate who is going to be their spokesperson, you know?  We've talked before if you're going to say the same things as five people ahead of you, you might want to pass your time off to someone else.  We certainly are not denying them any time to speak.  It's just trying to get it organized so we can also conduct business afterwards.  My motion is on the floor with a second. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: I would just say we are restricting them.  We do have a policy and we allow people to come.  I get probably, like all of you, I get dozens of e‑mail every day that I answer.  But people will still come here.  They want to look us in the eye.  They want to ask questions and they want to hear our response.  That's their prerogative.  And I think it's a mistake to restrict it.  Danny Robins? 

>> DANNY ROBINS: We need to kind of put this to bed and move on.  There's no restricting whatsoever.  We can only try our best to accommodate everybody, you know?  We're providing time in the morning.  We're providing time in the afternoon.  We're also providing time for council during council comments to raise any other issues if people were not to attend.  This is turning into a divisive matter when it doesn't have to be where it's pitted on this council and members of this council that don't agree with one side and I don't want to see that because it's not the case.  The case is we have time in the morning, time in the evening or excuse me, afternoon.  And then council, we have e‑mails.  We have ways to check those e‑mails.  We have county phones.  We can agree to disagree, Chair.  But it's turning very divisive.  I want to call for the vote. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: This shouldn't be divisive at all.  But somebody should speak for the public who want to speak in the morning and they're not going to be able to wait all day.  Barb Girtman? 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Chair, I respect and appreciate that now we start our meeting earlier so the public's comments are included.  And we had, I've been here three years.  And those three years, it was 30 minutes until you came on.  So, I appreciate that we've increased that, you know, to an hour at least.  And I also agree that that's the most appropriate way to go.  But I also wondered if to move our day up since we've been having very, very long days, if it wouldn't be appropriate to move us to nine.  I know that's something different.  But again, I'm still on board with the first hour of the day is non‑agendad items for the public.  Whether that's we start at 9:30 or whenever that is.  I'm really glad that Councilwoman Post mentioned it previously.  That we would include that and start our meeting then so it would be all inclusive.  But beyond that, I'm definitely in support of the first hour.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Okay.  Clarissa, I'm going to ask you to call the role on this because it's important to the public and they want to know what each of us think. 

>> Miss Wheeler made a motion to hold the public participation for one hour and then the remaining comments will be brought up at the end of the meeting.  Seconded by Mr. Robins.  Miss Post? 

>> No. 

>> Mr. Robins? 

>> Miss Wheeler?

>> Yes.

>> Miss Girtman?

>> Yes. 

>> Mr. Brower?

>> No.

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Mr. Chair, may I make a comment?  When you make comments like you did a few minutes ago, so the public knows, I think we need to show our council as a cohesive council.  When a vote is made, it's not pitted against each other.  That's something that we've been missing, a united council.  It's been us against them.  That's what we're trying to do.  Trying to come together for the betterment of the county.  I think the us and them doesn't behoove us in any way, shape, or form.  That we're moving forward as a unified, nonpartisan participants in representing our constituents.  I just had to say that. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: And I can appreciate that, but I don't see our role as having consistent 7‑0 votes on everything.  We each will vote for according to what we think our constituents and the public want.  And sometimes there will be differences.

>> DANNY ROBINS: Excuse me, Chair.  And we're not disagreeing with that, Chair.  I think what Miss Wheeler was trying to say that wasn't clear was the comments that were made.  We're not going to vote 7‑0.  But the comments afterward, Miss Green, can you call for a vote so we can let the public know.  In other words, who was with you, who was not.  Who doesn't.  That stuff is not going to fly anymore.  That's not necessary.  And it's exactly what I was talking about when I made my comments earlier about divisiveness.  And that's why it's mandatory at this point to combat comments like that and divide.  That doesn't unify, those comments.  And that's why it's imperative that we go towards Roberts Rules and why those rules should be in effect. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Which is what we do.  Okay, Russ? 

>> Number four, does the council wish to limit the use of videos in lieu of public comment in meetings.  The current draft would limit such use unless approved by majority of vote.  If you look at agenda item 24‑13 subsection 2‑66B3, I believe it starts on page 24‑13 in that first paragraph, that last sentence.  As currently drafted, a video or audio recording will not be substitute for public comment during the public comment of a meeting unless approved by part of a majority vote or quasi‑judicial hearing. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Billie Wheeler?

>> BILLIE WHEELER: You know, there's mixed feelings on this.  I've never seen the use of videos, but what I do object to is having 40 minutes of 3 minute slots of video.  Because if those people all came in, they would be interspersed with people on the other side of that equation.  So, I think to have a video of more than one person, the person who is making the comments, is not fair to the other constituents that are sitting in here that they should take up 40 minutes with just all of the people with the way they feel on that agenda item.  I absolutely would like to get rid of that having a combined team effort of a 40‑minute video.  They're three‑minute segments.  They shouldn't have their whole team have a consistency without the other people having a chance to voice their opinions. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Did that preclude anybody else from sharing their opinion?

>> BILLIE WHEELER: I don't know.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Okay, Heather Post? 

>> HEATHER POST: I'm not sure, and I talked with Mike about this, why we're even really addressing the video or audio recording.  To me, it's public comment.  It's public comment.  Danny, you mentioned before, it is 2021 and we have all this technology.  So, public comment could be in the form of sending an e‑mail to us.  It could be in the form of possibly even Zoom for someone or sending in a video or audio recording.  As long as it was the three minutes, just like everyone else is allotted.  I don't see the difference.  So, I'm not sure it even needs to be addressed.  If it is addressed, I would just say it's public comment just like everything else, three minutes, and perhaps provided before the meeting actually starts because we certainly wouldn't want anything to pop up on screen that shouldn't be up on screen maybe.  I'm not sure why we were addressing the video or audio recording.  To me, three minutes is three minutes, however you want to do it. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Barb Girtman? 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: I don't have a problem with the video.  What I'm concerned with is that someone will get 15 videos submitted, right?  There's people here in the room for public comment and people have the convenience of sending in a video, which now why are you coming here?  Right?  So, to me that video needs to be you, that person, and that person needs to be in this room.  It's not a video of you videoing others that you're in consensus with and that's what we get to hear.  Now we're not hearing from you.  We're hearing from you and the three other people that are in your video.  That's not one public comment; that's four.  Or more.  I'm just using that as an example.  I'm saying I'm good with video, but that person needs to be here and needs to fill out that yellow card.  And if they're going to play their video instead of standing there, you know, speaking, then to me that's the alternative.  But I'm not good with somebody just submitting 20 various videos, right?  And not being in this room to represent their public comment.  Because then it's not a public comment.  If you're going to send me a video, send it to me in e‑mail so I have an opportunity to review it and do whatever's next.  But I don't think that's how our time should be used and I don't think that's how we should allow our time to be used.

>> CHAIR BROWER: When that happened before, it went to county staff, specifically the attorneys, and they require that the person had to be here in the room and they had to submit a speaking request.  The problem was there were so many of them, we also decided with staff that they would all be played one after another to save some time instead of stopping between each one.  But I think that's quite reasonable. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: But none of those on the video were here other than the one who stood here.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Yes they were.

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: No, sir.  None of the businesses were here. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Okay.  You're not opposed to videos.  Heather is not.  I'm not.  Let's have some standards and requirements that people have to follow. 

>> DANNY ROBINS: Chair? 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Oh, Danny.  Go ahead. 

>> DANNY ROBINS: Miss Girtman, I agree with you.  But a lot of these videos, I don't think it was appropriate.  Some of the content was very misleading and not factual.  But besides the point, all that, and they can be as long as they want.  But everyone has our e‑mails.  If they want to make a video, they can.  But it still gives us an idea of their side, their point of view beforehand.  And that way we can research if there's any claims or research their point of views.  But to have a standard where, you know, it's like a free for all with videos and they're not here, I don't see the point or the efficiency in that. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Can we vote on this item, we'll see whether or not the council wants to allow videos, and if we do, can you come back with standards that have to be met?  Time limit, the person has to be here, and it has to be them in the video. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: And one person per video. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: That's fine.

>> MICHAEL DYER: If Miss Girtman or someone else wants to make that motion along those lines.

>> BILLIE WHEELER: I'll make the motion.  That we include the videos, that we allow videos, that the person needs to be present, and it needs to be one person per video.  Is there anything else on that? 

>> HEATHER POST: Three minutes, just like you're speaking. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: And staff review it? 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: And it's not only one person per video, it's that person for the public comment.  They're representing themselves.  They're not representing somebody else's voice.  They're not representing someone else. 

>> DANNY ROBINS: Can they send it in prior for staff review?  We had kids in the audience.  If staff say hey this is kosher, I got no problem with that. 

>> HEATHER POST: That's censoring.  But I think Billie made a good point.  I had agreed with you, Danny, and I immediately thought of that.  But just like Billie is saying, someone can get up here and start ranting and saying all kinds of things and doing whatever, just the same. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Well, maybe not obscene.  We'll know if they're getting naked in front of us, right? 

>> HEATHER POST: I think we can push the stop button way quicker than someone can. 

>> We're going to talk about that next. 

>> Yes, ma'am.  So, what I have is a draft to come back with standards.  Limited to three minutes.  The person must be here who submits the video.  The person who submits the video must be the person in the video and a group of people and one person per video. 

>> And to turn the video in prior. 

>> A security issue associated with it, too. 

>> I'll be honest with you.  It would not be reviewed for content, that type of thing.  It would not be a censorship issue. 

>> HEATHER POST: It would be reviewed for what then?

>> Viruses. 

>> HEATHER POST: Okay. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: That's my motion. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: It sounds like we just rewrote the requirements.  That's Billie's motion.  Who seconded it before? 

>> Girtman.

>> CHAIR BROWER: You're still good.  All in favor say aye?  Any opposed?  Motion carries 5‑0. 

>> Mr. Chair, I would like to add Karissa Green worked with IT when we went through those videos before and did a good job of setting up a place where folks could submit the videos.  That was the first time we'd done that and just spent a lot of time on it.
I just want to thank her for that.  She's definitely laid the groundwork for the future on that. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you. 

>> Mr. Chair, the last decision point for this, and this is the decorum part, how does the council wish to address decorum standards for a meeting?  So, you inherently have the ability to run an efficient meeting because it's a limited public forum.  You can take action to do so to have rules to ensure an efficient meeting is held.  If you look if your agenda packet 24‑14, it starts in that subsection C there.  The chair shall preserve decorum at all county meetings as follows.  A preamble.  As you're committed to conducting an efficient meeting.  Two, it says it's a violation of this division for any county council person to engage in hand clapping, stomping of feet, whistling, using fighting words, use of profane language, yelling, or similar gestures when that substantially delays or impedes the running of the council.  It's not the conduct alone necessarily, it's how it's carried out.  Facts matter.  This ordnance would give you the ability to enforce that, Mr. Chair.  If they don't adhere to your warning, you could escort them out.  The council, if they don't like the action the chair takes, can make a motion, second, and then by majority vote has the opportunity in there to take action if it deems that the commenter's gestures rise to that substantial interruption.  That's what is before you in the draft ordnance. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: I was going to suggest until you just said it that way that I'm good with everything except for the hand clapping, but this morning we had people applauding Corbin, a young man.  It was not disruptive.  The standard is it disruptive? 

>> For a hypothetical I'll give you, you know, somebody like you said gets up here and gets recognized, clapping, no big deal.  My grandmother gets up here and starts dropping the F word.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Would she do that?

>> God rest her soul, no she wouldn't.  But that's not in and of itself running the efficient run of thing meeting.  But if she starts saying the F word and that gets comments and clapping from the audience, that could go given a warning, and if she continues to do it, that causes audience behavior, the facts matter, you could take action to have her removed from the meeting.  It just lays out the rules for the meeting, an inherent governmental interest, to substantially interrupt.  Facts matter.  Clapping, as you mentioned this morning, that didn't do anything in my opinion.  But it's all how it comes about. 

>> MICHAEL DYER: Mr. Chair, I know I've spoke on the you all.  This is the area of everything we've talked about on this agenda item that has led to more litigation because it involves the First Amendment.  What you have in front of you now is written conservatively in that there have been some recent cases where this standard has been discussed and as Russ has said, it really comes down to you cannot regulate what they say, but the effect of a person's behavior on the meeting.  And so it has to be disruptive.  We have included the phrase substantially disruptive or substantial disruption.  The hand clapping, that's language we took from a set of rules that were upheld by a federal court, but they're just examples and they would not be disruptive in and of themselves, but it's an attempt to describe what could be.  Where I think local governments have gotten in trouble or are subject to challenges is where restrictions are directed or give the appearance at regulating the content of what somebody says.  And so that's why this is written the way it is.  But anyway. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Barb Girtman? 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Chair, similar to you, when I saw hand clapping I felt that way.  But for me, hand clapping and booing is part of your public response, right?  And no, I don't want to be booed.  Know that.  But I respect if you do.  Right?  If it's not substantially disruptive.  Right?  So, I'm good with the language leaving hand clapping because I think again if it gets over the top and aggressive, it's really riling up the audience for something negative, then I can see us having to take some action.  So, thank you. 

>> DANNY ROBINS: I think we can all agree with it, but like he said it's easier to try to keep things under control than try to regain that once it gets out of hand.  One of the meetings we had an individual who was ballistic, went sideways quick.  And there was another individual egging it on, taking pictures, coming out of the crowd.  That's something, too, if we could add verbiage.  It was just being done to irritate and make the situation worse.  But we have video, we have audio, that's more than sufficient and allowing that would make it worse. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: I'd like to see us keep it simple.  I think we should keep it simple.  If you give it too much air, it becomes explosive.  If we let it distinguish itself, it needs to go to the next level.  But I think there's been incidents in here that I've seen evolve a lot faster and a lot deeper and more extensive than in my opinion it needed to.  So, yeah.  I'd like for us to keep it simple from my perspective. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: I make a motion that we approve it the way it is written here that you've changed. 

>> Yes, ma'am.

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Okay, that's my motion.

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Second. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Motion by Wheeler, second by Girtman.  All in favor say aye. 

>> Aye.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Any opposed?  Motion carries 5‑0. 

>> Thank you, Mr. Chair.  So, we'll make those changes and then we'll bring the ordnance back probably sometime in September, I would imagine. 

>> MICHAEL DYER: And we'll also work with the county manager on the direction for the presentation or workshop.  Thank you for your direction and patience with us today. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you for navigating us through that.  It was almost painless. 

>> DANNY ROBINS: Is there something where we would want to do a set lunchtime period, or is that something we just do day‑to‑day or meeting to meeting?

>> BILLIE WHEELER: We had mutually agreed on that.  It wasn't an ordnance or a vote.  We did that around the table that we all were there and decided it was easier to have that. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: She's got a better memory than I do. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: I don't remember having that discussion.  I asked the county attorney if he remembers us doing that and he did not.  But I'll go with the will of the council. 

>> DANNY ROBINS: I don't think it's necessary that we need to order in.  Everybody needs to pay their own lunch and have a set time.  That's what I was getting at. 

>> I think you need to allow some flexibility because of the items.  12 on one day works, but 12:30 or 1:00 on another, especially depending on the agenda itself.  I think one thing I would ask more on behalf of the staff is an hour.  Even if we can plow through and do a half an hour, they may not be in that position and may have to run out and get something.  So, my only request would be that we try to keep an hour, but when the hour is, we're very good with being flexible. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: I like being flexible because of what was said before.  There are sometimes attorneys here who need to speak or a staff member. 

>> GEORGE RECKTENWALD: And there have been times depending on a lighter schedule, we may be able to power through and finish the meeting by 2 o'clock.  So, we just got to allow for that flexibility is the most important thing.  But, and like I say, staff is very resilient.  But I think an hour gives them the opportunity to get out and get something that they may not normally have. 

>> HEATHER POST: Mr. Chair?

>> CHAIR BROWER: Yes, Heather Post? 

>> HEATHER POST: So, instead of saying definitively that we would definitely have one hour every time, because keep in mind, too, sometimes we have shade meetings during lunch, sometimes we have other meetings during lunch.  What I absolutely do not want to see is those meetings, you know, being crushed down to where by the time you get food you have 15 minutes to actually discuss things.  So, I think we've been going well.  Why mess that up?  I think we've been going okay by just saying whenever we do end up breaking for lunchtime, we just say when we're coming back.  I would be in agreement with a minimum of the one hour. 

>> GEORGE RECKTENWALD: Yeah, I think we should have made that clear.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Can we require that Kevin Captain does barbecue for us every day?

>> GEORGE RECKTENWALD: We can work on that for sure.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Okay.  No action there, I guess, required.  That brings us to item 25, which was mine.  A Bill of Rights resolution.  This should be really simple.  It's not scary, which is why I brought it up.  I'm hearing from the public on two different sides.  I see the public being pitted against one another.  I would like to end that and reassure people.  That's all that this does.  Every member of this council swore an oath to uphold and defend the constitution of Florida, the constitution of the United States.  The Bill of Rights is arguably one of the most important set of amendments to protect our freedom and to make us the greatest country in the world.  The whole purpose of this is to ensure the public that we take our responsibility absolutely seriously, that it's essential, that the main role of government is to protect your God‑given constitutionally protected rights and that we will do that.  It's not an anti‑vaccine resolution.  It's not a gun resolution.  It's exactly what it says.  Bill of rights, to remind the republic that their rights will be defended, that there is a process of judicial review.  If there is any infringement on that, it does not mean that everybody in the public now has a right to come and sue the county or sue anybody else.  It says that we will be diligent and we'll work with county staff.  And if there is an infringement from the state, from the federal government on your rights as listed in the bill of right, and that's what's printed in this document, that we take that seriously.  And it's that.  My hope is that this stops the rancor and it brings people together that I might not think that there's any loss of liberty.  Somebody else over here thinks there's a big great loss of liberty.  We don't have to argue about that.  We just have to know that there is protection and that this council takes it seriously. 

>> DANNY ROBINS: Motion to approve. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: You do get to speak.  I'm sorry.  Carolyn Evans? 

>> I'm Carolyn Evans.  I've been a resident of Volusia County for 35 years.  I live here in DeLand.  Nobody in this county needs a reminder of our bill of rights.  I'll assure you of that.  We're not stupid.  You all have a duty.  Every single one of you has a duty to protect the health and safety of our citizens here in this county.  That includes funding our police officers and our law enforcement, making sure we have good school crossing guards, making sure our roads are safe, we have stop signs, we have lights.  Making sure that we have things in place to protect us from this COVID that's going around like crazy.  If you have personal views that keep you from protecting every citizen in this county, you have a duty not to vote.  You have a duty from abstaining from those issues.  People come to my door all the time, right here in DeLand.  Knock, knock.  I'm trimming trees in the neighborhood, could I give you a quote?  Hey, I'm not interested, no thanks.  Hey, I've got a lawn service business, can I give you a quote for cutting your grass?  Hey, no thanks, not interested.  (Knocking) Would you like an opportunity to get a vaccination?  Hey, not interested.  No thanks.  Real simple.  I don't need a bill of rights to protect me from knocking on my door, giving me an opportunity.  While I was here waiting, I received a call on my phone.  My husband's ashes and his death certificates are not available from the crematorium.  He died July 25th from COVID.  I am not here for sympathy.  I am here to give you the realities of what is going on in our county.  He was fully vaccinated.  We're smart.  But he got COVID.  He was going to get treated at home, ended up having to go to the ER, having some trouble breathing.  We had the same conversation with all seven physicians.  Hey, he's been vaccinated.  He is going to be fine.  He'll be going home.  But, just in case, he has to get on that ventilator, you all need to have the end of life discussion and you need to have it now before you get to that point because it's too emotional to be able to make that decision then.  He would have been fine.  Unfortunately, he had to have emergency surgery on something else, which meant a ventilator.  You cannot get on that ventilator.  You can't.  He got off the ventilator, had to put it back on.  I had to make the gut wrenching, heart wrenching decision to take him off of that.  Now, that was on July 25th.  Luckily, at that time, my four daughters and I could be with him.  You want to be with your loved one telling them it's okay to go, it's okay to pass on.  It's important.  Now, because of this huge outbreak, they're not letting you go in and be with your family.  They're dying alone and they're dying without you.  It's atrocious.  It's terrible.  You don't want to do that to anybody.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you. 

>> I just need two more minutes, honestly.  (Beeping)

>> CHAIR BROWER: Is anybody opposed? 

>> Shut that buzzer off. 

>> I'm sorry. 

>> We don't need a bill of rights.  We don't need anything.  We have this incredible opportunity to make our county a place that it's easy to get a COVID vaccine.  If you don't believe in 'em, like so many of your constituents, I'm not interested, thanks.  All they have to do is put up a no solicitation sign on their door.  That's all.  Or simply be civil.  And that needs to start here with us right now.  Hey, thanks, but I'm not interested.  You're going to get nasty e‑mails if you don't pass that.  You know how your constituents are.  Get some backbone!  Some of you have it, some of you don't!  But when you leave this here today, every single one of you get some backbone!  Stand up to our more ignorant neighbors and simply tell them hey, put up a no solicitation sign if you don't want an opportunity to get it.  But lots of people in our county need that opportunity.  Rest assured the lives you save will be more than made up for the nasty e‑mails you receive. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you.  Heather Post? 

>> HEATHER POST: How do I follow that?  Gosh?  I'm sorry for your loss.  So, I've heard lots of different viewpoints on this and I've heard from a lot of people for sure.  But I also know that when we were sworn in, and it's actually in this resolution, each of us took the oath of office and the oath of office reads, it's two sentences.  I do solemnly swear or affirm that I will protect the constitution and government of the United States and the state of Florida, that I'm dually qualified to hold office and I will well and faithly perform the duties of a Volusia County council member, so help me God.  We all took that oath and I know when I took that oath, I took it very seriously.  You know, there was discussion about just bringing in one person to swear you in.  And I didn't want to just have one person swearing us in.  I wanted to have the person who meant a great deal to me swearing me in.  And to me, it meant a great deal.  And, you know, I'm all about a number of the things that are listed and certainly about defending the constitution of the United States.  I'll tell you certainly about defending myself.  Everyone knows I'm a really good shot.  And, you know, I'll just say if anybody ever tried to come and take the things that I use to defend myself and my family, they'd have to pry it from my cold, dead hands.  So, I feel very, very strongly about these kinds of things.  But I also am not really sure that a resolution is going to make us do that.  Either you have that in you or you don't.  And I just really want to hear very seriously what is the, we all took the oath.  What is the purpose of us doing this for the public.  Certainly if in fact people do come in and start banging down the doors, there are search warrants.  There is anarchy.  That's absolutely something I hope, and if it isn't, I'll absolutely make sure the council responds to, absolutely, in a heartbeat.  But we're not there.  So, I would just love to hear more about what is the end game here that we're looking for?  Just to ensure that everybody's going to be defending our county, you know, there are lots of different people and certainly we're all a different makeup on the council for sure.  But us doing a resolution isn't going to make, you know, when the time comes perhaps a 7‑0.  It's not going to perform the end game I think that we're looking for.  So, you either have that in you or you don't.  So, I'm just really wondering with all due respect what the end game is here?  What exactly are we looking for in this? 

>> CHAIR BROWER: I would say, and then Barb, I'll call on you, that it's not for us.  It's for the public to be reassured that I feel like we do need the bill of rights.  It's the most important set of amendments that the constitution has.  It's critically important.  This is just to reassure the public that if unconstitutional orders come down from whatever source that there is a system of judicial review that we're aware of that and we'll take it.  There are people in the community.  We can say that they're ignorant.  I think they have some room for concern.  Yesterday we heard on the news that New York and New York City have both said that voluntary compliance with vaccine is over and now it will be forced.  I don't know what that looks like yet.  But if that happens, it would be a terrible turn in America for an individual's ability to choose their own healthcare.  The way to get more vaccines done is what happened this morning with what Barb asked for.  Doctors coming in, telling us the importance of it.  This is not an anti‑vaccine ordnance.  It's just to reassure the public that we take our position and our service to them very seriously and that their rights will be protected.  It's not a sanctuary.  It's not a declaration that this is a sanctuary county.  It's just a resolution that says your Bill of Rights will be upheld.  I trust that you're going to do that and everybody on this council.  But the public doesn't know that.  They don't feel that. 

>> HEATHER POST: Okay.  Well I'm going to state for the record then that should any you already know what my feelings are on protecting myself.  But should any infringement occur like that, I absolutely will respond swiftly and according to address it for sure.  That's not, I think there's zero question in that.  So, if we're just wanting to alleviate the public, I think there's a lot of other things that we should be talking about to alleviate the public's mindset about the public.  Then, if the soldiers are going to come in.  And if we're going to in fact appropriately respond should something truly horrible be impending.  You know, in the past, we've vetted issues, we've talked about issues.  I mean just, and this seems to be a repeated MO.  But we'll vet the issue, we'll talk about it.  We'll agree.  It's voted on.  And we say okay, staff's going to bring it back.  And the very next, and that's when all the people are here.  And then the very next meeting, it's brought back and then the decision is changed.  So, if we can't get on board with that, how are we going to get on board with this?  When the time comes?  I'm not saying making a resolution.  We can all sit up here and make a resolution.  If the true intent is to really understand that we will absolutely do these things, then I think we need to start showing that at a very basic level when anarchy and danger are not impending.  And doing a resolution I don't think is going to solve that in the public's eye.  Again, I will say, I will absolutely do that and take immediate action, but I'm not sure if that's really getting the end game of what you're looking for. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Councilman Post, I agree with you.  Since I was elected, I took an oath, and since that time I believe I have protected and served to the best of my ability and will continue to do so.  And I do not find a resolution regarding a Bill of Rights that someone feels needs to be taken at this time.  I've heard from my public and from the feedback I have received this is not the direction they're interested in going.  They feel that it's very divisive.  And again, we took an oath to protect and to stay and to do the right thing for our community.  And that means whatever that takes.  So, that's where I stand.  I stood here before my God, my pastor, the judge that held the Bible, and beyond that, I don't feel that I need to explain anything further than let my work speak for me.  And I think that's where we need to be at this time.  And I don't see how this resolution is really going to bring people together.  And again, for me, it's creating more divisiveness.  And that may not be the intent, but that certainly is some of the feedback that I'm betting in the community.  So, I think as Councilwoman Post said, there's other ways that we can be addressing the concerns throughout the community, and I'm certainly interested in supporting any of those efforts forward, but I certainly don't see this as being one of those if it's in relation to vaccines or guns or whatever this is, I don't think it's the way for our community to go forward. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: How was the Bill of Rights divisive? 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: The bill of rights is not divisive.  The request for the resolution at this time on this dias is? 

>> DANNY ROBINS: Miss Girtman, Miss Post, go with your gut.  Don't let this deter from what your gut is telling you.  I've taken this oath twice and I take it very seriously.  And I would like to know what this council, and really I don't think we should get down in the weeds with this.  That's what some folks want.  That's not who we are.  That is divisive.  We all took an oath.  That means something.  My word means something.  Everybody else's word means something.  At the end of the day, that is all we have.  I agree with you, there is nothing wrong with taking an oath to the constitution of the United States and to the state of Florida.  We've all done it.  Don't get down in the weeds on it.  There's a motion on the floor.  If it did you want get a second, it fails.  Let's move on.  Don't give them what they want. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Billie Wheeler? 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Thank you.  I'm pretty much saying what all the three before me have stated, Heather.  You stated it pretty clearly and Barbara you stated it passionately.  I'm right there.  I took that oath and I took it very seriously, and I feel like every day I represent and stand for the people that I represent in Volusia County.  I certainly believe in the Bill of Rights and my oath was on the Constitution and everything that it entails.  And I also got many phone calls, e‑mails and whatever.  And it really came out very, again, dividing Volusia County.  And I really, if we don't resolve anything else but just what I'm going to say out of this issue, I really pray that we stop this divisiveness that we're creating and work together.  We're all here to make Volusia better.  We're all here to stand up for our people.  Like Heather, you know, I pack. 

>> HEATHER POST: Great start.  Good start. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: I carry.  My rights are very valuable to me.  I just don't see the purpose in this when we've done what we've done.  I would like to see us move towards other concerns in the community that we can pull together as a council and a community crossing all lines and barriers that we have and stop the divisiveness and work together for a better Volusia.  Again, very passionately took my oath and I just absolutely uphold my oath under my God.  And there's not much going to sway me off of that.  So, I really don't see the purpose in this and I would like to make a motion that we do not move this forward. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: There's already a motion. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: His motion failed, though? 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Was there a second or Danny's? 

>> HEATHER POST: There was not. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: I hadn't called for one, because everybody wanted to speak.  If there is no second, then yes, it dies. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: So, my motion was we do not move forward this resolution. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Heather Post?

>> HEATHER POST: I really do want to address, Chair, I don't believe you brought this up to be divisive.  I fully don't believe that in any way that you brought this up to pit anyone else against anyone else in the community or otherwise.  I think you brought this up because you're very passionate about this and I can tell you I remember in the law enforcement academy, one of the instructors stood up in the beginning and said, you know, which one of you in this room would lay down your life for the person next to you and I immediately raised my hand.  And which one of you right now would hop up and join the military if we were being overrun?  I would immediately raise my hand.  And I would do that again today, both of those.  Some of you may be a little slower than others, but I would absolutely lay down my life for any of you in the room.  Some are a little slower.  I may not be as quick to jump up.  But I would absolutely defend anyone in this room if they were in danger or any of that.  And I certainly believe in God and my country and defending it for sure.  So, I don't believe, you know, we keep talking about all this divisiveness.  But I think it still comes down to the point of, you know, this is just you're asking council to just say something out loud.  It's really, I think action is what the public needs.  So, when we vet issues, when we make decisions, when we give them to staff to come back to us with the final product for us to push through and then a 180 is done and the same thing can be done on a resolution like this.  I think those are the kind of things we need to focus on as a council.  I applaud you for believing in our country.  When I say the pledge in the morning, I say the pledge in the morning.  I believe in it wholeheartedly.  But I just am looking at your end game.  And I think there's, if the end game is truly giving the message to the public that we are here for them, that we will defend them, that we will make the right decisions for them, I think we really, this is way up here and we need to get back to a very basic level of doing that.  So, that's what I would say. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you.  I don't think there's anything more basic than the Bill of Rights.  Again, this is not for us.  It's for the public who says what is our protection.  Here it is.  And here is the remedy that they can look forward to.  That should not be controversial to give the public that information.  It's not asking you to prove yourself.  It's giving the public a clear vision of what the remedy is and that's all that it is.  Danny? 

>> DANNY ROBINS: Respectfully, Chair, I think she was just trying to say that it's a duplication of resources.  There should be no question in anybody's mind in Volusia County where we stand.  I said it in a staff meeting with the sheriff's office, we'll be elbow to elbow in the streets if it came down to it.  We need to move on. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Billie, you had a motion to not proceed.  Second by Girtman.  All in favor say aye.

>> Aye.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Any opposed?  Aye.  The motion carries, 4‑1.  Item 26, budget discussion.  Ryan? 

>> Good afternoon, Council and Chair.  I'm Ryan Ossowski, Chief Financial Officer.  Before we get started with a small presentation, recently there's been some discussion about how much growth will bring in tax revenues to the county.  And it's not been clear.  There was actually a public comment today that said that it was $11 million.  And the property appraiser's office has recently been meeting with constituents to talk about that, the values, and what the new construction, the amount of taxes that would come in under our rollback rate.  Under the new construction.  So, I've been working recently with the property appraiser's office to bring a resolution to this issue.  Mark Wright is the director of appraisal for the property appraiser.  I was meeting with him and the property appraiser himself today to make sure my numbers were not inaccurate.  There are some differences between what the property appraiser calculates and what I calculate.  The two differences are there is a 4% discount that taxpayers are entitled to for early payment of their taxes.  The property appraiser's office does not factor that in when they come up with the difference in the tax levy from one year to the next.  In addition to that, when the property appraiser's office is providing one year versus the next, they're looking at the post‑value adjustment board numbers.  Versus this year's certified values that were certified June 23rd for the July 1st regular, that would be the date that they have to do it by.  So, I asked the property appraiser's office is it $11 million or is it $5 million something?  And I say something because of those differences that I just said.  The post‑VAB versus pre‑VAB.  Marcus, can you come up here for a second?  Sorry to put you on the spot.  But Mark has provided $8.65 million, is that the number that you've provided that the county would collect under a rollback rate. 

>> It's $5,846,049. 

>> I have a spreadsheet that explains why the 5.8 million is different than the 5.2 million that I said before.  One is the discounts.  That's about $200,000 of it and the other is the value adjustment board.  In a memo that I recently provided to council, we included what the budget amount was for this year versus the budget amount for last year.  When we set the budget today, that's based on pre‑value adjustment board.  The value adjustment board meets during the fall and the winter, maybe not the fall.  Was it the fall?  Late fall and the winter.  And with all the adjustments that are approved to the value adjustment board, it does make a reduction in how much tax revenues we will receive for this current year.  We do not go back and amend our budget to say we're going to collect less.  There's a reason we don't do that.  We know that not everybody is going to take the discount either.  Not everybody is going to take the 4% discount.  So, in my recent memo, I said it was 96.2%.  That's what the number now represents as a percentage of collection versus the post‑VAB. 
So, if you compare last year's budget number done at this time to this year's budget number, if we were at a rollback rate, there's going to be a difference for that VAB adjustment.  What was the VAB adjustment?  $455,000?

>> Yes, I believe. 

>> Is that close?  So, the $455,000 VAB adjustment is another reconciling item between the $5.8 and the $5.2.  Then there was another question.  Well, is there anything else that gets added on top of that?  There are some adjust that times the property appraiser's office does on their roll right now?  New construction, is that correct?  As of today, there are going to be changes, but the new construction changes that aren't on the certified form, the 1.4% so far?

>> Yes.

>> 1.4%, that's $80,000.  That pales in comparison to how the VAB will change.  I'm going to effectively say there are no material additions to the numbers that the property appraiser's office has given us.  I hope that puts this issue to bed.  I'll stop there. 

>> GEORGE RECKTENWALD: Okay. 

>> Do you have any questions for the property appraiser?  Director of appraisal? 

>> DANNY ROBINS: There was an e‑mail that came out from the property appraiser, a $38 million increase. Ryan, can you explain?

>> I can go into that.  But I would like to let Mark go.  Mark was not prepared to do this.  Larry put him on the spot.  I appreciate Larry in the public getting this cleared up because I want to move on.  So, if there are any other questions for Mark, I would like to do that before we talk about that with Councilmember Robins. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: It doesn't look like there's any. 

>> Thank you so much, Mark.

>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you, Mark. 

>> GEORGE RECKTENWALD: So, just to summarize and make this clear, the statement this morning about the $11 million made by the gentleman is not factual; it is incorrect.  The number is what Ryan has given you.  So, again, this needs to be, you know, a point of fact that's out there. 

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Can we also clear up the highest tax, 15% tax?

>> GEORGE RECKTENWALD: We're going to talk about that.

>> That's in the presentation.

>> BILLIE WHEELER: Figured it would be. 

>> HEATHER POST: Thank you for making it big print, Ryan. 

>> For real!

>> (Chuckling) There are a lot of numbers there, he confirmed the yellow number.  That's the difference in VAB to post‑VAB.  That's one of the differences in the property appraiser's 5.9 to 5.2.  The discount of 400,000 is the other difference.  You can see that.  I tried to lay it out a bunch of different ways, but that spreadsheet will tell you all that.  It's definitely not $11‑12 million as he just confirmed. Can that spreadsheet be on the overhead? 
I'm waiting on the overhead. 

>> CHAIR BROWER: Certainly. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Ryan, is there anything that shows the actual county tax.  If you look at city of Deland and the county and everything combined and then you looked at an unincorporated county resident, everything else was equal, have we been able to do that type of comparison so we can see what's really being impacted through county fees and taxes versus all of the funds that impact here versus impact here.

>> The spreadsheet on the screen may be part of that.  But we have some additional information on the slides about where we rank as a county for county taxes and where we rank when you add everything else in. 

>> BARBARA GIRTMAN: Okay, thank you.

>> Okay, I received questions about the amount of taxes that was recently been reported.  About a $38 million increase.  It's the total on the first ELO headed column.  The property, sorry, the tax collector's office did not prepare this summary.  I want to put that as a disclaimer.  They gave me all the details to go behind this.  I think they would agree with this and I could provide that to them, but they provided me the details so I could do my own summary.  The total amount collected of $37.9 million was the FY19 to FY20 change.  And that was broken out in the $17 million for the county, $9.8 million for the school board, $11.1 million for the cities, and I'm not going to read the rest of the numbers.  You can see the differences there.  But in addition to that, that was FY19 to 20.  I also asked them for FY20 to 21.  And you'll see the break down there.  It was actually even more than the $38 million when you add everything together.  It was $41.5 million.  $7.1 million of that was the county.  The remainder was the school board, cities, and other types of agencies that are listed here.  Does that answer your question, Councilman Robins?  Okay.  All right. 

So, that kind of gives you a breakdown as far as all taxes, what part of it is the county and what part of it is everything else, Miss Girtman.  But we also have the rankings.  I will have Aaron come up to start going through the presentation. 

>> Good afternoon, Council.  Aaron, budget director.  This slide here gives you the national ranking based on 2017 data.  It was calculated from the census bureau annual state and local government finances that we could access. 

>>  I will go into a little bit more specifics. 
If any council member wants to see any data behind this, I have it prepared.  It is a large set of data.  The county equivalence census bureau county equivalence.  I have heard a lot about it. 
Anyway, as we look at all of the data, the 2017 set of data is the most recent.  The Census Bureau takes a long time to come up with all government finance statistics and file was over a million lines long of census data that the county provides about government census and focused on part that Excel can't handle a million rows and I downloaded the data to look at the property taxes.  Property tax side to be imported population Census Bureau 2017 apples to apples property taxes for 2017 versus population for 2017 and from the boar oh of economic analis got per capitia income to do calculations for every county in the country to accurately rank ourselves. 
Now is as good of time as any other. 
There is a Website tax rates.org that is invoked about our ranking and they don't provide data.  I'm sure it was necessary for us. 
We can try to reach out to the company and get the data behind it. 
When I was looking just at the state of Florida and where we RAFSHG with the state of Florida on per taxes per capitia Franklin countery was one of the highest taxes as a percentage of income capitia.  Franklin County was one of the highest in property taxes as percentage of per cap income. 
I wanted to go what does this Website say about that county is ranked negative 1th.  It mentions Dixie County is one of the web sites or counties with the lowest tax and wanted to see what is their factor we are being claimed to be in the top 15%?  
They are also negative oneth. 
It is hard to see if the data is accurate when counties don't even have the right ranking on their Website. 
I have all of the data behind this.  Anybody can check it out and analyze it.  I have spent time aggreating this to come up with a fair metric to compare.  We haven't been tasked re we rank nationally.  We know.  We look at state ranking that puts out metrics or all of the counties. 
Erin will cover that. 
State ranking is based on 2020 tax information that is directly from department of revenues property tax Website oversite that has downloadable files for anybody to go in and download and mess with the data and also population comes from economic office of demographic re search. 
In population, we rank 11th out of the state. 
Total mileage that includes municipalities and independent taxing and hospital districts and our inland navigation district St. John's water management district, we rank 6th in the state and county mileage and County Council is responsible for levying if you look at the mileage ranking and exclude cities in insomeday pendens, we rank 42nd. 
Taxes per resident with the county levies we rank 3 fifth total amount of taxes levied depending on the population turning out to be $548 and $0.22 per average and taxable value, we rank 14th. 

>>  Carissa will hand out a spreadsheet. 
Sorry I don't have bigger paper than the previous one.  Numbers are small there.  Any column with the yellow, I added that that is a rank formula and Excel that automatically tells you where you are. 
You will see various ways we can rank county government operating which is 49th out of 66.  Duval doesn't have a number listed there because of county joint city structure and school board is ranked -- total countywide mileage is 49th. 
Independent special districts rank third and cities rank second. 
That is why average comes up to 6th. 
Mrs. Girtman, is this what you were looking for?  

>>  Yes, it is.  That is exactly what I was looking for. 
What impact do we have on the numbers?  I'm doing the squint independent special district. 

>>  These are mileage rates in state department revenue countywide levy is easy they add up county mileages and add together and four less than countywide Levi's, the state does a calculation.  How much does total property taxes measured by cities and divided by total value in the county to come up with composite mileage rate.  There is no individual city in the county mileage rate of 4.769.  If you take taxes levied by city as of 2020.  State is putting out data after the fact. 
For 2020, if you take taxes levied by cities and divide by taxable value is mileage rate of 4.769 is what they did there and what state did with this calculation. 

>>  Gotcha.  

>>  So, moving on.  

>>  Hold on one second. 

>>  Sorry. 

>>  Barb is still thinking.  Heather had a question as well. 

>>  Yes, she is.  I guess my question is when you get your -- when you get your tax bill, right?  
And it shows that different and, again, if you are talking the municipality or talking unincorporated. 
So, I'm really interested to see the difference in unincorporated and that of a municipality and where -- where that range stacks up.  I know you have that. 

>>  That would be MSD and the -- remember, our municipal comparison would be MSD. 
In fairness, also, with the fire fund, because in the city, they would probably have that all together in their general fund. 
In our case, we are the separate fire fund, you have to take MSD and fire fund and combine. 
That would be what we need really essentially for the unincorporated plus we do, do fire, of course, for a couple small cities. 

>>  Right. 

>>  Slightly different than MSD but fairly close. 

>>  We can work on -- if you want to meet some other time?  

>>  Yeah, yeah.  Some other time. 
I'm not expecting it at this moment. 
What this continues to remind me of is the county is the heavy for any of this; right?  
You receive your bill that says Val Oeschia County, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah; right?  
No matter what goes in to make that up, you know?  The label is Valusia County.  It comes down as we are the shiny object of this.  If there is any burden, it is coming down to it is Volusia County's problem and we are not managing appropriately that, you know, these numbers are being represented the way that they are.  I think that the best way that we can communicate with the public to break these numbers down and show, okay.  This is our part of the pie. 
This is not. 
This is what we don't have control over; right?  
And I just think that it doesn't -- it is not clear when a person gets their bill.  
It is not explainable. 

>>  So, what we can do is take the county mileage rates and put them in 1 piece of the pie and school board mileage rates. I will use aggregate mileage rates that will be a composite of entire county as the city ones city will be lower than one city. 

>>  Sure.  Sure. 

>>  The city does the average mileage rate to do that.  We will put together a pi chart to do that. 

>>  Again, on a high level, that is -- we have 16 cities. 
See, not every county faces that. 
There is a built-in inefficiency factor when you have that. 
So, it is a trade-off between local control. 
People want to be able to control their area, their city. 
That is great.  Within that, probably a higher level of service than what we have in the unincorporated in many cases. 
So  but when you have 16 of them like we do, and what they are doing as a state is aggregating that. 
So, it gives you a better comparison. 
You know?  
A county with maybe just a few cities would be more efficiency. 
Therefore, when they aggregate that number, it is slightly lower and what we are up against. 

>>  Right. 

>>  Kind of inefficiency of the structure that we are. 

>>  I think helping the public understand the message and messaging is difficult to ball it down to that understandable bite, but I think that is where we are.  You know?  
To help people understand what part is county and what isn't. 

>>  I can tell you we have never had anyone before since I have been here in 20-some odd years try to boil down a million lines of data like Ryan has done. 
That is what we are heading towards, trying to get that to an understandable bite. 
But it takes that kind of research and work that he is doing and think we are lucky to have these guys and to do this and be able to attempt this.  
Our IT people probably get whacked out.  He is trying to -- like I say, take up a host server. 
If that is necessary, I think it is important. 
It is -- years we have had lots of misunderstandings and issues. 
You have to know where you are at to get to some of the meat of it to decide where we are going to go. 
Again, just I agree with you. 
And we are trying to take a look at the -- we have the pie charts. 
We have the things we have done for years. 
We will take different eyes, different looks, and try to do this differently so that people can understand the outcome, you know, in the end. 
I understand that people want efficient government and don't want to pay high taxes. 
I -- I'm one of them. 
We all are. 
So, but we have to really understand where things are and where expenses are and so that we can help to fix them. 
I think that some of these will really in the long run mean some model changes. 
That is why I'm open to the model changes. 
We have to be because of the type of data that they are going to try to boil down to those nuggets. 
So, with that, I will -- back to you guys. 
The guys in black, by the way. 

>>  One second, please. 

>>  They are always coordinated when they come here. 
They are in men in black uniforms. 

>>  Not planned.  I will buy another suit tomorrow. 

>>  Heather, you had another question?  

>>  Yes.  So, I just want to make sure that I'm hearing correctly. 
So, when we say rank 6th, 6th, Volusia County, am I hearing you correctly that Volusia County ranks 6th in the state as far as the taxes that we require from our citizens when you include everything that I'm looking at on the screen?  So the different districts and school board and all of the taxes that we -- that we as a collective government body, everyone, puts on our citizens?  
We are 6th in the state in terms of highest taxes. 

>>  That is correct.  Not with what is on the screen.  What is on the screen is representative in unincorporated Edgewater. 

>>  Yes. 

>>  All taxes districts combined we rank 6th. 

>>  County's part of that is in the 40s?  

>>  County's part is 42nd. 

>>  I am hearing you break it down.  I get it.  I hear what you are saying, well, the county is only charging this much. 
We are down here.  I hear you.  I'm also hearing the citizens and know they need to buy bread and clothes and gas and rent and all of those kinds of things and we also have low incomes and low medium middle class incomes.  
There is a reason that we are talking about needing to raise the pay levels. 
So, so I understand that you are breaking it out saying, well, the county is only charging this much. 
We should be able to charge more to get us maybe to the 30th percentile, or whatever, which would be in general, considerably low if you think about it out of the 67 counties, but -- but I -- as the public servant, I can't look at it in that way but have to look at it in the totality. 
We as a government put these different authorities on the citizens. 
We -- they are paying these taxes. 
They are not paying the taxes; right?  

>>  You are saying we put these authorities. 
Cities incorporated themselves.  We didn't -- 

>>  When I say we, again, when I say we, the government bodies. 
Someone.  Someone in charge at some point put this on the citizens. 
I'm not hounding the county; right?  
I'm just saying it is what it is is what I'm saying. 
It is what it is. 
We -- here is the deal. 
This is where we are at. 
Where we are at is 6th.  You know, I heard the guy this morning say we are 15th highest in the state, in the nation.  Okay?  
But, we are actually -- if we drill down, we are 6th highest in the state in taxes on our citizens in Volusia county. 
To me, that is very high; right?  
So, I'm taking that into consideration when I look at this and when I look at the rollback decisions. 
I hear what you are saying. 
It is what it is.  So -- I will come back for further later. 

>>  Barb, did you have another question for Aaron?  

>>  Yeah.  When I look at the first taxing districts and it is 50.48 and $45 of that is Volusia echo and Volusia forever. 
So, when you look at the percentage of increase, the majority of increase is coming from what the voters voted for. 
What they voted to tax themselves. 
Because last year, there wasn't any echo dollars. 
It was zero. 
So, I think that we have got to be realistic with the increase and what that number really boils down to. 
Because, again, if it is what they voted to tax themselves for; right?  
For the benefit of the community, I just think we have to be more realistic. 

>>  And so what we have on the screen here is a result from the public participation.  A gentleman who spoke had a home in Edgewater and speaking of the value increase.  I went to the property appraiser's Website.  A fantastic Website with tons of data available for any taxpayer and looked at 2020 tax year and market and assessed and taxable values were and what this is is what you see on the screen here which is a comparison from 2020 to 2021 taxes for that home based on current recommended mime age rates for counties and cities and this breaks down with county streaks being $58.40. 
Clarification on that full transparency echo and whatever doesn't account for $45. 
Debt service for forever that we paid off this year comes off the tax roll.  We no longer have that debt.  11-year credit they paid this year and last year and combined is $33 of $50 or $34 of the $50. 
Then your -- the City of Edgewater would be responsible for $16 of that increase and independent districts would account for $3.60 and the school board would go down $2.12. 
Increase for the home is -- for the year.  We will have more examples like these when trend notices come out to pull actual trend bills. 
     It will look like this.  Data is on the property appraiser's site already that is available for anybody to see. 

>>  So, I'm over -- the reason I'm over here is I want to put stuff on the projector and explain what it is at the same time. 
The -- in addition, I have done my own calculations. 
I want everybody to know there are independent groups out there that do this too. 
So, can you zoom out a little bit?  
Nope?  All right.  I will just put it down. 
So, this is Florida tax watch there.  Every year they put out how counties compare.  This is the November 2019 I don't know why they don't have a November 2020. 
Maybe they were busy with Covid problems. 
So, we are good here. 
This chart is total per capitia property tax levies by county. 
You can see the statewide average in 2019 was the bold.  It was 1,597.  You can see where we rank, 21st. 
This is -- I'm not taking credit for their work. 
This is available on Florida tax watch's Website.  They are an independent group. 
While our mileage rate might be the rate or the 6th after you take into account the things that the county doesn't control, our tax number here per this independent group is 21.  

>>  So -- 

>>  6th is the mileage rate. 

>>  I understand the 6th, but -- 
Go back to the screen, please, Ryan. 
It is just the caveat of what you are saying is when you take out the things that the county cannot control.  So, you are removing from the picture. 

>>  This one is actually percapitia total property taxes. 

>>  So, not -- so, not what you were saying?  

>>  This is per capitia county government taxes.  I haven't highlighted where we are but where are we?  There we are.  30th. 
We come down like we do in tax rates. 
First page I showed you was everything. 

>>  You can stop now.  It is just. 

>>  I will stop moving in after this.  This is Florida tax watches guide their latest version per capitia total tax levies next is counties and cities and charts for school board.  This is everything put together.  You see where we rank frommin dependent group .  You don't have to go into my calculations this is our range. 

>>  20NSA just looking at property tax?  

>>  Per capitia total property tax levies. 

>>  What is the second one you were showing?  

>>  Second one is the county without the city. 
This is hard to rotate. 

>>  Okay. 

>>  The county without the cities, I'm trying to push it in there. 

>>  [Indiscernible]. 

>>  We were -- yeah.  We can't get the 30 and the label. 
There is 520. 

>>  Okay. 

>>  That is 2019. 

>>  Well, I'm -- 

>>  You see the statewide average there as well. 

>>  Then my -- okay.  My response would still be the same even though we are looking at indifferent aspects, the picture is still the same. 
Even though our portion might be something, I think it is responsible of us to look at the totality and look at the whole picture when looking at access. 
We have to look at what citizens are facing in totality. 
We have to look at the whole picture and appreciate the breakdowns. 

>>  This is the whole picture. 
We are below the statewide average. 

>>  I think another . Point on property tax Levi's. 
Property appraiser's office provides appraisals for county, cities, school board to levy taxes and tax collector collects taxes and cost for the offices doesn't get passed along to the school board or passed along to the cities. 
We cover the costs.  Statutorily required they are covered by the costs but costs are by county and city not necessarily the school board. 

>>  Yeah.  But still, it is what it is. 

>>  Absolutely. 
We have a great relationship with cities and school board and provide high quality of life in Volusia County.  I have lived here my whole life and not known any place better that I have visited. 
Next slide is cost increases impacting Volusia County in the general fund.  $14 million independent Constitutional officer and court increases 3 million in other external expenses and state mandated requirements and 18 new corrections officers budgeted over next 4 years and all funds face $15 minimum wage by 2026 and we have inflation increases that are facing us in all fundeds. 
6% inflation in health insurance contributions and 6.8% increase in state mandated retirement contributions. 

>>  To be fair of the next ones as of May or next things Aaron was about to say is May SLB June CY percent report.  

>>  24.5% inflation in energy and fuel and electricity and 3.1% inflation in contracted services less energy services and 2.8% inflation in construction input costs that effects capital project and what we put out to bid. 
Fiscal year 2021-22 general fund revenue increase at rollback rate is $6.9 million and property taxes on new construction is 5 -- nonproperty tax revenues increases $8.1 million. 
I already mentioned Constitutional offices and courts being 13.3 million of that and county increased approximately 9 million and deficit based on current recommendations is $15.4 million and recommended budget plan to address the deficit is no change in tax rate flat mileage rate not a rate increase but is a tax increase because of the value change which is $10.2 million increase in revenue and in the general fund. 
Additional use of reserves or one-time savings to fund the rest of the deficit based on our recommended plan. 
Additional use of reserves one-time savings would fund capital transfers we have E19 system corrections network infrastructure upgrades and this gives you -- go ahead. 

>>  Can you go back one more slide?  
I just want to -- I know what the answer will be. 
You -- when we look at all of the inflation and all of the cost increases that the county is facing is here is my dilemma. 
Every taxpayer in the county is looking at same cost increases too.  Every taxpayer in the county has to make ends meet.  Can't go to employer I need a 7% pay increase. 
They could, but they might get fired. 
So, that is the -- that is the tightrope that we have to walk. 
It is that it is not just us facing that.  Every household faces it.  They have to make cuts according to it.  
Advance that to where you just were. 
I don't think that is the one that I wanted. 
I had seen a -- a slide that -- that I think that Ryan had sent out.  
It is showing the amount of tax increases from year to year for the last was it 5 years, maybe?  
Do you have that slide?  
I think that I will take us -- a swag at it.  Correct -- there was some years the increase was $2 million more in taxes and 1 year it was $10 million more. 
And you have stated here that at rollback, at the rollback rate, we take in more taxes than last year and your point you are making is that increase is not enough to cover increases in cost like every homeowner has to face. 
It means more cuts and revenue and ways to be efficient which is the argument I keep hearing from constituents. 
It is that they understood you were saying at rollback that we are not taking in anymore money than last year. 
I'm not blaming you.  We have to deal with reality of what is out there. 
At rollback we take in more money as listed on this slide of 5.17 million. 

>>  Right. 

>>  In construction only from new construction.  Other value changes are mitigated by rollback rates. 
So, when property values change, everything that is except for a new construction gets neutralized by the rollback rate. 
That -- I -- that is the way that the calculation works. 
Existing inventory before this role collectively pays no more than the year before even though their values went up is what the rollback rate does. 
Only thing that is new is the new construction. 

>>  Okay.  Then we keep seeing this figure of on a $150,000 home it is a $10 a year increase. 
What we don't see is numbers of renters who live in places that are not homesteaded. 
When a non-homesteaded property's taxes go up, the renter and people that can afford it the least is they will pay more in rent. 
On the other end from houses that are $300,000 up to several million dollars more, we don't see numbers what their tax increase will be. 
It is significant. 
I'm not arguing with you. 
I'm telling -- I'm pointing out that is the dilemma here that some people will face huge tax increases. 
Renters will increase a -- face increased rent. 
Some can't afford to rent now. 
They will go to see Donna Butler. 

>>  I agree with everything that you are saying in terms of once the Florida system is problematic.  
And it shifts the burden and that is part of the problem.  You know, when you have -- when you have some exemptions and things that you have, it shifts it, you know, to those that don't have those exemptions. 
The other part, you know, I want to be clear.  
It is in this budget. 
All these division and department heads out there, they didn't get everything they asked for. 
We worked really hard to have a budget and even with what we are putting on, we are spending one-time money. 
I'm dipping into the reserves. 
And, you know, so -- yeah.  It is a flat mileage. 
I knew that I couldn't go any farther. 
We had to work with everybody else to drive down costs. 
The other part, remember, is the biggest part of the cost in these areas is the protective services. 
So, it -- that is the thing that I want everyone to remember. 
It is 2/3 of general fund is just in that alone. 
Then you get into other things that back it up like the IT system that is behind all those guys to make sure that they are dispatched correctly and radio systems work. 
On top of that, you know, you have things behind it to support them. 
You have the court system that takes care of people after that.  
It is a big system and, again, we are for and have been for years cutting and trying not to grow at a rate that touches inflation. 
We are at a point now where, you know, when you have these kind of increased costs and things we don't control, we have to start to look at what would be the level of service or what don't we provide anymore. 
That is what we are getting ready to face and was predicted talking about it coming into this for years.  One caveat we said is thank God we don't have inflation.  We have been able to shave down and cut down and sometimes to our detriment.  We have been criticized for maybe not having systems or pay for things we would like to have here. 
I want that to be understood. 
I never had a time where we said, hey, let's go on out and increase the budget and spend it has been what are we doing to cut or be more efficient. 
Sometimes you can't efficient your way out of these increases that are at us like healthcare and stuff like the pension. 
You know, that is dictated down to us. 
When you have the amount of employees we have, it is a lot of cost and I will say lots of the employees have been working at an underpaid rate. 
Looking at what deputies are making out there and what correctional guys are making out there and looking at what fire guys are making that is causing a lot of this.  Some of the other areas, there is not enough money to make a debt in some of the increases. 
We can continue to do that.  You did get into also quality of issues. 
This county just voted in forever an echo.  That tells me that people want to have property and want to have parks and want to have these things.
They cost money.  Lots of times money is available to build but rarely available to operate 
Every single one of these beautiful trails we have out there will some day have to be resurfaced and will constantly have to be maintained. 
I don't think anyone is arguing, thank God we have got them. 
So, I think that is where we really, again, have to think about it. 
I understand everything and agree.  These are tough times out there for people and people working hard with economic development and other things to make sure they get better jobs to afford better places and we are working on affordable housing. 
I mean, everything we do, we work at having a more prosperous broad-based county so everybody can enjoy the happiness that many of us get to enjoy. 
That is absolutely in the minds of all your leadership here in the County government. 

>>  Yeah.  We also need a lot more commercial construction in Volusia County to take depression off homeowners. 

>>  I would say commercial and what we work for is manufacturing and. 

>>  Yes. 

>>  Other type jobs higher on the wage of scale that builds communities where you see prosperity.  
It is when they have, you know, Hewlett Packard plant and a Dell and some things where you have that the average wage is probably 80 to $90,000 a year. 
And you have, you know, you have that kind of a tax base that can cover a lot of costs. 
And, unfortunately, we are not there yet. 
The beautiful thing is we are in a very desirable location and people want to come here. 
You can go to communities in the northeast that have not seen growth in years. 
They will probably die to have, you know, some of the problems that we have to wrestle with every day. 
They are factories and people are not coming back. 
They are empty. 
They are left with, you know, unfortunately, not a lot of hope in lots of cases. 
Here, you know, we have people that are wanting to be here. 
It is how do we harness that or do it like we talked earlier, Mr. Chair.  It is not just rooftops. 
You are right.  We need commercial and need jobs from companies that produce things or produce software or produce some of our things. 
It is right at our footstep.  Things are happening right now in our community and happening to the south of us in Orlando. 
So, again, I'm optimistic because of what is out and around there. 
But, not that -- these are tough times to wrestle through. 
Our programs are meant to help those people. 
We will continue to do that. 
So, I just want to say that I think that certainly what we are asking for here is reasonable if we -- where we go.  We will continue to debate and talk about, but I don't think anyone asked for anything that was out of line at all.  

>>  I will add to that on a positive note that you didn't get to go, but three of us recently went to the business incubator 10-year celebration that was nothing short inspiring to meet young entrepreneurs that are being guided in Volusia County that have created multimillion dollar businesses. 
We will be here. 
They will be building and will be hiring people. 
Jobs will pay more. 
A lot of the things that Cyrus and Helga are working on are -- will do the same thing. 
So, the problem is:  How do we get there and not send more people to Donna Butler for financial help?  
So, I think that one more -- a couple more questions, barb Girtman and then Danny. 

>>  I was just going to make the comment that you will always hear me talk about fresh eyes; right?  
You hear me talk about always interested to have somebody new at the table who is looking at things from a different perspective. 
Chair, you are one of those; right?  
So, I was looking forward to your -- you are looking at the budget. 
And making your fresh eyes see something that maybe I didn't see when I came. 
I had some of the same concerns. 
I thought there was a -- I think it was a $500 million pot of gold I was told there was a little rainbow somewhere I could go and identify it and there was waste and there was -- you know?  
What I found was that there was very frugal handling. 
Almost, to me, where we could have spent more to maybe spend less now. 
We were -- what did we -- we went to zero in our debt; right?  
There are things that went unmet; right?  

>>  Right. 

>>  So, I just think that fresh eyes and fresh perspective to look at this from your view and see if you are seeing the same thing that I'm seeing; right?  
I met with auditors who were like -- I said, where is the waste?  
They were like, I can't help you. 
We can't find it.  They are very frugal.  They are very efficient in what they do. 
Again, I was looking ford to having someone that we are not always on the same page. 
It is fresh eyes and different perspective.  I was really and still am interested to hear your perspective how we can do this differently maybe not this year but going forward how we can approach some of these things a little differently. 
Again, it takes different perspectives. 
I'm certainly someone who is concerned about the underserved and lower income; right?  
I certainly also would rather see incremental increase; right?  
Then a big chunk.  To me, if we don't hold the line or we don't make a difference this year, I'm concerned what does it look like next year or look like beyond that. 
I would much rather see an increment increase because everything around us is increasing. 
Then to see we step back to give a discount today to then have to add maybe two or three times more because something else catastrophic happens in-between time. 
So, that is my perspective on where we are now unless someone can show me something different. 

>>  Danny?  

>>  Regardless, I think we can always do better, I think. 
We can always agree to that. 
One thing we all-despite what people probably see, we don't like taxes. 
It might be a good opportunity, council, to look at -- we talked about cuts in all departments except for our own. 
Would it be a good idea to lead by example on this to cut our salaries by 5 or 10% to get to Donna Butler?  

>>  Excuse me. 

>>  I'm being serious.  

>>  I know you are. 

>>  And, two, cut down on government spending. 

>>  I hear you. 

>>  Everyone is struggling but it is what it is.  Like you said, we have to do something if we are going to have ends meet.  It has to start with us, as far as I'm concerned.  

>>  Heather?  

>>  Well, I had a whole other thing to talk to and respond to barb's. 
Let me please respond to that first. 
So, this is not about -- my response is not about, you know, hey, don't cut ours but everybody else's that is in no way what my response is about.  My response is about because of our Camuratier, we make 50% of the state guidelines. 
I make 40 something thousand dollars a year to do this job 24 hours a day and spend a hell of a lot of money on my own travel and drive to other counties consistently and don't pay for it.  I pay for lots of things myself. 
I'm consistently asking me daily is the juice worth the squeeze if my husband didn't work 102 hours of overtime every week he is in public safety we wouldn't be able to buy milk, so, I think that -- I think that the pay of this position is a tremendous problem in part of the reason that councils in the past have operated the way that they have.  
Because you have to be rich to come into this position. 
I have a training company. 
I will tell you, I have had one client in the 5 years. 
You know why?  
That was in the first year. 
After that, I said, I'm either in this or I'm either all in or I'm not. 
I can't be, you know, half assing it.  
And so I made that decision to be all-in.  That means my company is sitting over here doing nothing.  You tell me, Danny, I don't mean to be rude but you tell me in 2 years if your company is over here doing nothing if you will have the same mindset.  I would love to talk about it. 

>>  It is.  It is making money, Heather.  I'm serious.  We can all do it.  You don't have to have money to get into this job.  It really shouldn't be a job.  I say some of this stuff because we are asking everybody to take cuts to take services away and we are not willing to do it ourselves?  If you manage your time right, this, at best, can be a part-time job.  If you manage your time.  I work 2 to 3 hustles 16 to 17 to 18 hours a day and I still manage it.  I make a living, a good one.  When I see spending across the boards, we can do better.  Cut down on travel.  Stuff is virtual. 
You know, there is ways to do it now that Covid surfaced where we can do a lot of these things where we don't have to travel to these meetings.  They are virtual.  Put a cap on spending send information back to staff.  Nobody wants to take a pay cut.  We can't be pointing a finger not willing to do it ourselves if we have to put it on the ballot and let people decide what we will get paid so be it we have to be able to throw ourselves on that sword to do it, Heather.  It is what it is.  When I see or get a chart in my e-mail where we are spending $50,000 on government credit cards for traveling when we have our own problems here in Volusia County.  It is frustrating.  Imagine what that person doing that came up here today.  That $50,000 could have been helping out her business.  Our 5 or 10%.  $4,000, will it make or break any of us?  
No.  Means we work a little bit harder and we figure it out.  We can't sit here and eat steak and lobster and travel across this going to Vegas or wherever and expect people to take us seriously.  It is phot leadership.  It isn't. 

>>  All right.  I'm still up, by the way.  I will hang on.  Hang on.  I'm addressing that.  I have a whole thing I had -- I was going to discuss in the first place. 
Not eating steak and lobster, for sure.  
You know, that is fine for you to say 6 months in, seriously. 
Welcome. 
But I think for me daily it is not about time management.  
For me, daily, I say -- I actually talk with George a lot about this. 
If you -- if George gave me more people, holy crap. 
I would be on fire in this position. 
Seriously. 
Like this -- I think that is really what is wrong with the council of the past is this should not and is not a part-time position.  
It really isn't. 
And I just completely disagree with anyone that says that.  
You know, they -- the only reason I put in for a second term was that my heart wouldn't let me go anywhere.  I knew if I left it would go bloop and we would be right back to the old ways. 
This is -- I don't know what more to say about that but I think -- I think that is horrible. 
The -- that is really what has been wrong with the leadership of Volusia County in the past.  This is considered a part-time position and people up here have had zero authority. 
It has all been staff-driven. 
And, you know, the public wonders why -- why the people that come up here that make 50% of the state guidelines, by the way, are not invested in the position wholeheartedly.  
When you put caveats like that in for a position like ours, what you end up with is, No. 1, people who don't care so much about the position. 
People maybe that might not attend agenda meetings or, you know, look at that kind of stuff and it is not that important or people that have plenty of money and just want it to be -- that love to be with the people who are rich, popular, or powerful. 
I don't think that in public service this should be the focus at all and is what you end up with when you set those different guidelines. 
You know?  
I'm all about jumping out there.  And with the people.  I will get out there and I will be sweaty and will be, you know, boots on the ground frontlines absolutely 100%.  Like I said before, I will lay down my life for any one of my constituents.
Some are a little slower, but absolutely 
I don't know what else to say about that. 
It -- except that it doesn't start with accountability. 
It does not start here. 
It really starts with our priorities as a council and ensuring that we are focused on the right things. 
You know, there have been years and years and years where facilities and operations and personnel were all completely ignored. 
That is really a lot of reasons why we are in the spot that we are in now is because all those kinds of things happen probably because you had people that didn't take these roles seriously as much for whatever reasons. 
And that they had no authority.  They had no voice. 
It meant people had no voice and this is what we ended up with. 
When we look at savings and priorities, to me, to me personnel, No. 1 priority. 
Pay, that has not been a priority at all. 
Pay, No. 1 priority. 
First and second, very close, safety.  Anything safety, oh, my gosh. 

>>  Excuse me.  How do we get there?  If we are not willing to -- that is the problem with government.  We are pointing the finger. 

>>  That is discussion and what I'm discussing right now. 

>>  Pointing the finger. 

>>  Not pointing the finger.  

>>  10 minutes of salad and nothing.  No merit to it. 
I want to find solutions. 
It gets real frustrating when we are not willing to lower our standards and expecting people to struggle and we are not willing to do it ourselves.  Period.  End of story. 

>>  About you SDMR we are making excuses for ourselves it is time to volunteer something, something.  We get paid healthcare and all sorts of stuff.  Can we put a cap on our travel and do something to get to the 5 or 10% that Chair and everybody wants to make cuts with?  
Starts there. 

>>  Giving back 20 or $30,000 to the county is not going to fix our issues. 

>>  It is something.  Everything counts though. 

>>  What will fix our issues is changing our priorities.  We have to change our priorities. 

>>  I know where my priorities are. 

>>  I have to say that to me there is a disconnect when you think that travel and relationships and building resources to bring back to our county because we are meeting with and establishing relationships with others to. 

>>  To get the job done. 

>>  To get the job done.  You see that as some benefit and you think that is a luxury ride to go and create relationships so you can bring back other sources and opportunities and learn more yourself. 
You don't learn more sitting in the seat. 
You learn more by getting involved and spending your time with others who are experienced and have already done what you have done. 
So, don't take advantage or think that someone is taking advantage because they are traveling or going to a FAQ conference and spending their time getting educated about how to bring back more.  
So, I am -- so, I'm disappointed that is a perspective that a sandwich is too much and travel is too much for us to work through.  Okay?  
Because it is ridiculous for the amount of time, opportunity, and resources we have to pour into this position to do the job right and have someone sitting up here think that I would like for you to spend some more time; right?  
Working through some of the relationships and seeing the value of serving on these boards and being able to bring that back and identify ways of enhancing what we are doing to save money and to bring back dollars to cover and do more than cover the cost of your sandwich and your travel. 

>>  Barb, I agree with you.  Barb, that wasn't the whole entire thing.  We can do better.  We can squeeze just a little bit, you know, a little bit here.  Every little bit will count. 
I want to see our people get a little more return on their investment than what they are getting.  That is all. 

>>  Okay. 

>>  Heather?  

>>  So, let me go back to the -- you know, you are looking for ways to cut costs and I can tell you that in my 5 years, I have had many discussions with staff about different things. 
Much has been brought up on the dais. 
Not a lot of discussion.  Then behind the scenes is when things actually get resolved. 
There have been a number of those kinds of things where we have resolved them and made them priority and resolved them. 
Meaning being more efficient and meaning saving monies.  
There is a whole slew of things over the last several years that -- I just thought of another one. 
But that I think for whatever reasons we invested money in and wasted money on and spent money on that could possibly have been spent better. 
And the reason that those things are done is, No. 1, council needs more authority this way instead of this way. 
And we also need to ensure that our priorities are correct when we are making these decisions because these decisions have giant ripple effects. 
I'm -- there is a number of things, a number of things over the last however many years I have been here where we could have done or should have done those things but we did not. 
So, I'm looking at it on a deeper level that those things need to change and needs to be us giving direction to staff not staff giving direction to us. 
Needs to be us having priorities personnel and public safety and public protection, No. 1. 
Whatever it is that the rest of council decides is priority. 
We make those decisions and when we ask questions that information provided to us on the dais is not talking in circles to get us to forget about whatever it is we are asking is an actual answer to the question so we can make decisions we need to make.  We don't get that an awful lot.  Very last meeting were three things where responses were probably not what they should have been.  We can have discussions behind the scenes, but council has to make the correct information to make the right decisions as well.  I think that has been a long-standing issue.  
So, to me, I'm all about the base and foundation and root before we go out and tax citizens that if that is not being fixed, we can continue to tax every year, but still we will be in the same boat every year.  
Thank you. 

>>  Okay.  This slide here gives you general fund changes by expense category. 
You have seen a version of this at last two council meetings. 
Numbers here are the same as shown here FY21 general funded budget to FY22 recommended general fund budget and external expenses category, we are increasing $16.3 million.  I have been over what external expenses are in the past and they include office of the share if tax collector property appraiser Supervisor of collections clerk of court court and DJJ cost and children families advisory board and Department of Health and a few other cultural arts and things like that. 

>>  So, now is a good time to address something else. 
The tax collector's office is a fee office fees we pay is part of ad valorem tax and why there is a tax in our budget I just want to make clear. 

>>  Public protection increase from 70 million to 74. 
Operational support is increasing 3.1 and general fund subsidies is increasing 21,000. 
You can see decrease in carry forwards and decrease in major capital projects sustainable use fund balance bringing total recommended fund budget down to -- which is a $22,336,057 taen increase. 
We have had discussions about 5% reduction to 2 one's general fund adopted budget.  This slide gives a look at what that is excluding external expenses and excluding public safety from the cap collation. 
You would look at other county operations including community services parks recreation and culture growth resource management that is predominantly environmental public works that is predominantly coastal and operational support areas that are business services and facilities and finance information technology and leadership and human resources and general fund subsidies in the country is Votran and economic development 21 adopted budget is total areas of 66.7 million and 5% reduction from that total is $3.4 million and bring total down to 64.3 million. 
If we did 95% 5% reduction of FY21 we would look at getting to recommended budget in areas of 64.3 million which is $11 million reduction from what the current request has been. 
So, that is equating to 14.7% reduction. 
That is pretty much the. 

>>  So, all of council has an e-mail from me where I'm not clear which number this is that we are trying to hunt for. 
We have provided council with what staff originally put together that is departments putting things in to cut 5% for their areas. 
There might be areas where 5% can't be cut.  Another area within the group might have to cut even more and same story would aplay to 14.7% as well. 
I'm interested to guidance to which column we are trying to go at. 
Specifically, this is something we have been discussing with the chair.  We have had conversations we can't share with council because of Sunshine Laws. 
Now is time to try to share that.  

>>  You are showing the cuts of 5% cuts. 
Do you know where they come from?  
We -- we have compiled a list of staff from 3.4 million. 
It would be each area cutting 5%. 
Some of those cuts are not actually reoccurring cuts and some were capital cuts. 
If we cut reoccurring revenue lowering mileage rate, we might have to look at depends on tolerance of additional use of fund balance looking at reoccurring match to match reoccurring revenue cuts.  You are not talking capital but operating expenses and personnel.  

>>  Where is reoccurring revenue cuts?  

>>  If you made these reductions, it would make it to where right now the first thing it would do is it would alleviate the amount of fund balance that you are using and alternatively you could use cuts to reduce to a partial rollback off the recommended budget. 
That would be something that, that would be the revenue cut to offset the expenditure cut.  

>>  Then so this -- that would take us to partial rollback. 

>>  3.4 million would.  Yeah.  

>>  Then where do you -- how do you see that effecting reserves and in what years?  

>>  The -- if we made $3.4 million worth of expenditure cuts that were reoccurring cuts it wouldn't effect restashs. 
Reoccurring revenues would be offset with reoccurring expenses.  If some cuts owe it'dfied I'm sure you saw in staff reports are capital items if we do capital next year that is not reoccurring savings but doing something next year. 
If you reduce reoccurring revenues to push out capital expense if you do capital expense next year how do you pay for it?  You cut reoccurring revenues you have to use reserves. 
     Depends what cuts you do.  If you cut capital and still have to do capital, it will result in using reserves in the future. 
You won't use them now.  You are not putting them in the budget now.  

>>  What about -- I know we keep having this discussion. 
What about using ARPA funds for capital expenditures you are talking about?  

>>  The -- the same thing I was saying about if you just push a capital expenditure down the road, you cut reoccurring revenue to fund future capital expenditures.  Same theory would apply.  You can use ARPA to fund revenues this year but wouldn't have it next year to fund whatever comes up next year and there are lots of reoccurring capital needs. 

>>  Anybody else?  

>>  So, I -- I don't really want to leave here without direction. 

>>  Well, let me say. 

>>  Maybe George could take over. 

>>  Yeah.  Let me say we turn in the recommended budget.  I haven't changed my recommendation as the budget. 
When they are trying to, I think, discuss a little bit on that. 
If it is the will of the majority of the council, we will continue to look at some items that would be -- that is what he is trying to straighten out.  5% of what we asked for this year. 
That may be doable within -- well, again, what we are trying to do and keep it limited to non-public protection-type of items. 
If you go to the other one or go in anywhere and go to the other one, well, then it will be almost mathematical impossibility to get there without totally wiping out some divisions. 
So, we are -- obviously, we are not recommending that. 
And, you know, so, your only option would be to go look into the public protection area that I don't recommend right now. 
And so, again, I think I stand on the recommended budget, but we could look a little bit at the 5 pre we are asking for but in some cases I think it is kicking the can down the road.  What he is trying to say nicely is in some of the issues we just heard about, about neglect and things is a result of that type of thinking.  You know?  
Trying to push out a repair or get more life or something. 
Typically it leads to a more expensive repair down the road. 
So, again, this is coming from, you know, your professional staff that is recommending the types of things that they need to do.  

>>  A lot of the increase that you see on the first line for other -- sorry.  Second line for operational support would be in capital four facilities and for IT, actually. 
The 5% off of 75 million and current year's request is no longer 3.4 million but 3.768 million for reference.  

>>  [Indiscernible]. 

>>  So, Chair, since you asked about the 5%, I would really be interested to hear your perspective on it. 
They couldn't talk about it because of sunshine. 
I would really like to hear your perspective. 
And, to me, when I came on, I felt that there was a lot of deferred maintenance; right?  
Now we would talk about deferring the deferred. 
I certainly have the concern for personnel and for me the reality is that we came through almost a 10-year recession. 
It took us almost 5 years since then and staff still hadn't really recovered. 
Right?  
We still didn't have the staffing back to the level because they didn't let people go.  
People were just doing two or three jobs and doing whatever it took to maintain. 
I think that the bit of relief we could bring along the way, now we are talking about cutting that back. 
Right?  
So, I get it.  We would love to see a reduction somewhere. 
I would like if somebody could find it somewhere where it doesn't hurt staff and doesn't cost a bigger issue going forward. 
There is no point in saving a little bit now to pay a lot later. 
That is all I keep -- that is my main concern with this. 
So, but I would like to hear your perspective since we can talk about it now.  

>>  Well, my perspective was to ask these two men can we get here?  
They did. 
And I asked, can you get us to partial rollback?  
And still sleep at night?  
I believe that your answer was that you could.  

>>  Yes. 

>>  So, and the reason that I'm asking for that is not -- 

>>  Remember, he can. 

>>  George is in charge though. 

>>  He can sleep at night but is not the one getting called at night. 

>>  You can tell him stuff like that will make him not meet so. 

>>  But yes.  So, you know, we have looked at like we say some strategic places, but, again, I'm not -- I'm not recommending it. 
We are -- there is always something that we could look at, we will look at it. 
I will probably need a -- like he said, for instance, when he metacross the board, well, some department and division heads said I will go figure it out.  I don't know what it is.  If it is something you think is critical, I think we need to have further discussions and we will. 
So, take IT for instance. 
I mean, that is an area that falls in these categories. 
It is an area that I don't think that we should be cutting at all. 
We -- if anything, we need more of it. 
We need more technology. 
We are behind in some cases. 
So, you know, like he said, so, if that is off the table like a lot of other things and whittling down and what is left and, again, we are professionals. 
We will keep at it. 
I just want to -- I just -- especially given the fact that, like you say, there has been a lot of discussion about letting stuff go.  And really maybe people don't agree with priorities of the time, but they were done.  Cuts and stuff were made because they had to be made during that period of time for a long time. 
Now maybe people could disagree with some of that. 
I would probably disagree with some of that too. 
So, but at the end of the day, it wasn't neglect as much as it was having to make cuts that maybe didn't turn out what we thought.  So, or maybe it was worse than we thought.  That is the -- always the risk you take when you are in that situation. 
We are maintaining a huge infrastructure is something to remember.  You know, literally billions of dollars of assets for the public and they require maintenance.  Like I say, it is always a little easier to build something and finding grants and find things and they send us money for it. 
It is operational stuff that is always tough and yes -- you know, reiterated about reoccurring.  That is always the hardest part of this. 

>>  To finish my answer to you, my perspective was -- I think we have to start.  I think we have to incrementally in small ways to go through this exercise and save what we can. 
You mentioned a 10-year recession.  Everyone in the county went through that recession too.  They haven't recovered. 
George has a responsibility to the county and to protecting our resources. 
We have a responsibility to help him do that and also to help the public. 
So, I think it is a necessary exercise we go through. 
Soon as budget season is over, I think that we need to have another workshop and look at ways that we can save money and we can increase revenue. 
We have to show the public that we are -- that we have their interest at heart.  At heart and find ways to do it without costing more down the road or putting reserves in danger. 
Heather Post?  

>>  Yes.  
So, I keep hearing, you know, the suggestion of the 5%, I think it is a good suggestion for cutting -- cutting the budget and really looking into the budget. 
But, what I keep hearing is the, the response to that or thought process for that is, well, okay.  5% of every division. 
So, we have to cut personel and do this and cut here or there or cut service. 
I think that is a very wrong way to look at it. 
Again, I think we should be looking at ways to save monies and efficiencies. 
We should really be looking at things from a basic level and starting to think more outside of the box. 
So, I'm not in favor of continuing the status quo of how every division is running and tell everybody to chop off 5% this year or chop off 5% next year. 
I'm not okay with that. 
What I'm saying and what I have been proposing for -- to try to get us ahead is to really look inward at each division and see where we can make those efficiencies and step outside of the box and that status quo thinking I think has put us where we are at. 
You know, we mentioned some of the things from before, but I'm looking at we had critical and near critical infrastructure and we built a road to nowhere. 
We built Williamson at the very far end at the time. 
You know, we sunk -- we paid $400,000 to sink two free ships that Jim Daneen wanted. 
We -- you know, thank goodness we had change on council and talked about building a road from oak hill space center with a critical and near critical infrastructure. 
Those kinds of things is -- they are what needs to change. 
And until we do that, we will have the same discussion every year. 
And if the discussion from finance and I hear what you are saying.  I hear you. 
If the discussion from finance is, well, but next year costs will go up too. 
So, we will have reoccurring costs.
Basically, what you are saying is every year we have to have a increase to do that 
The response is every year that the amounts are going to go up. 
And I don't see them ever going down. 
And so if -- if we just look at it, at that level, we are not really solving a whole lot. 
We are in the same boat every year. 
So, I'm deeply asking not to just tell staff to find 5% to cut. 
I think 5% will be cut in the wrong places. 
I don't want someone just coming up with an idea of, you know, let's save money because -- you know, we -- we spent -- we wasted so much money at the airport mandating the security system for years. 
When we actually had money in the airport funds to handle that, that was an issue where we actually had the money. 
That was the status quo and how we were operating. 
There was no accountability. 
It is those kinds of things and not wasting those monies on that kind of stuff. 
We have to change how we are doing things. 
We have to -- we have to have that accountability from council to staff.  We have to start to look at things differently. 
If we continue to do the things, all of things we are doing and the way that we are doing them and just tell staff or just cut 5%, think that is a disservice to the citizens. 
Because we will end up in the same boat next year. 
And I don't think the decisions will be made for the right reasons. 
We have to look at where we are at. 
And we have to change things at a very basic level. 

>>  Regarding inflation, every government faces inflation. 
And I'm willing to bet that the majority of them are looking at some sort increase in revenues whether an increase in revenues is statutorily called a tax increase depends on the state. 
There is states where the rollback rate assumes inflation. 
Our state does not. 
We start at nothing. 
And as I put in my 10-page memo that we have all seen, it is a rate.  The state of Florida faces cost increases every year. 
They increase revenues every year to deal with cost increases. 
The level of service doesn't get any cheaper to provide. 
They keep the rate the same and they don't call it a tax increase.  

>>  The -- we have to remind we have minute rollback in the general fund 2 years ago.  Last year was a partial rollback.  Last year we rollbacked 9 other funds that were controlled. 
Again, we are very aware and we don't operate assuming there is a tax increase. 
We try to be strategic and, again, it is easier when you have 1% infreshen. 
We are up against different things and different things coming at us. 
And so -- I agree with the chair.  The public is hurting too.  There is no doubt about it. 
We are in it together. 
As I said a little while ago, but we are in one of the best places in the country to be facing that.  I think that is something to think about that we want to keep that way.  So --  

>>  Heather Post and we will give you direction you need and send you back to work.  

>>  Quick question, Ryan about CARES and ARPA funds and all of that. 

>>  Actually, I have to follow up on that after this discussion. 

>>  Okay.  So, in totality Volusia county has received or is receiving well more than $250 million; correct?  
If you can -- aviation division received money. 

>>  CARES Act and ARPA and some pots of money, some of which are restricted to those particular areas, yes. 

>>  So, in the last year, basically, $250 million for the county.  
We are also -- we also have been talking to the county attorney about the opioid settlements. 
Let me see.  Well, the numbers are not tremendously important. 
Millions of dollars expected to be coming and in yearly increments from the opioid settlements as well to the county to at least address some of the SMA funds and things like that.  
I hear someone. 

>>  On opioid funds. 

>>  You were saying it is phot true. 

>>  Yeah. 

>>  I thought someone said it.  You can't subset existing costs with the dollars has to be enhanced services from where you are now. 

>>  Right. 

>>  They are coming could be used only to enhance SMA providers and to the open issue itself doesn't help reoccurring burdens but will help us enhance service to the community. 

>>  Certainly added monies. 

>>  Yes. 

>>  We are looking at spending ARPA funds and boards those kinds of things in fact we didn't spend ARPA funds on these kinds of things we would leave ARPA funds.  You look confused.  That would leave monies. 

>>  If we. 

>>  If we didn't use ARPA funds for SMA and used opioid money from SMA that would leave ARPA. 

>>  Any proposals that could be opioid settlement there -- 

>>  It is there -- 

>>  Yes, sir. 

>>  My point is we expecting annual amounts from opioid settlement.  $250 million, the county has gotten or is receiving in a one-year timeframe from the federal government push back out into work on things.  
If there were ever a time for us to really try and step outside of the status quo role of how we have been operating and doing various things, and really working to invest that, this is it. 
I don't know how we are not doing that.  
We -- you know, we say we can't spend money on reoccurring costs about you we look at grants all the time for person el. 

>>  I never said you can't but wouldn't advise it due to long term impacts. 

>>  Right.  We as a council.  Well, actually, we as a whole.  I have heard many times forever might have been a quiet voice in the back saying it is not true or whatever but,um, this is an opportune time.  
I -- we -- what I was saying is we -- we say we can't spend reoccurring cost on pay. 
We say we -- sorry. 
We say -- you got me mixed up and you stepped in my train of thought. 

>>  I wouldn't advise you spend non-reoccuring on pay. 

>>  Don't spend ARPA funds on pay.  It is not reoccurring.  It is not repep tit monies but one time monies you will spend on pay.  We get grants all the time that are for personnel and are millions of dollars and yes absolutely federal government we will take millions of dollars and put in 3 personnel. 
After 3 years, we know we have to keep those personnel.  We do with grants repeatedly and do with safer grant a number of times over the past couple years. 
So, if we are -- if we are saying to the federal government we are okay with taking a couple million here and there and doing that why aren't we okay with taking a couple million year and there to arbor funds to do the same exact things?  
It is the same exact thing.  It is $250 million. 
I don't -- 

>>  A couple things. 

>>  Yeah. 

>>  Safer grants are in the fire fund.  We are forecasting burden of having to absorb costs and reason we are recommending not to touch mileage rate and flat fund and keep in no mileage rollback. 

>>  We will discuss the fire fund and monies we got and monies to replace public protection costs due to Covid. 
We put in 30 million; correct?  

>>  We reimbursed ourselves 30 million delvers worth of public wages and benefits into the general fund. 

>>  Yes.  Into the general fund that paid back everybody except for fire. 
No monies went into the fire fund to replenish. 

>>  To reimburse any expenses. 

>>  No monies went into fire fund to replenish fire personnel or anything costs from Covid.  Correct?  

>>  Yes. 

>>  So, if we are so worried about it is things like these that I'm talking about shifting of gears and if we are not -- it is $30 million we put in the general fund to use it across the board for lots of different things. 
We talk about oh, the fire fund is so low and, you know, there is no money in the fire fund. 
We take money out of the fire fund to use on EMS stuff and we take -- we take all personnel and different things out of the fire fund for Covid and federal government gives money to replenish it we don't we use for general fund to use on other stuff. 

>>  Did we use -- I thought Saaleries were corrections and EMS. 

>>  Reimburse salary corrections EMS and sheriff's service department. 

>>  [Indiscernible]. 

>>  Correct. 

>>  Never -- there was no money to reimburse them.  Their wages and salaries are not used they achieved especially you know. 

>>  Fire didn't lose money in Covid?  Fire personnel weren't working overtime or mantory overtime or mandates or PPE or anything?  
No fire or no per sonnel fire fund personnel saw no increase in expenditures due to Covid?  
Is this what you are telling me?  

>>  That is not what we are saying but we chose general fund to be salaries that got reimbursed more broadly available for allocation for the council Segre is that what you were saying. 

>>  Exactly that.  Whole idea of the reimbursement was based on federal treasury allowing us to make that assumption that we made with the remaining monies we had and basically using corrections to sheriff and EMS that use the up remainder of the money and the other money, you know, is part of $15 million we gave to cities. 

>>  The host. 

>>  $50 million we gave to the public and various programs. 

>>  No pun intended it hosed the fire division or fire fund that can't get any more money from it in any other area than the fund so we. 

>>  The fire department also is funded not only with the fire fund but also with the general fund money as well.  
It is not just the fire fund but fire fund and general fund. 

>>  Money that is in the Coronavirus transition fund is in the fund for broad spending because it came from general fund. 
Reimbursing fire expenses wouldn't be available for council to allocate projects recommended 800 megahertz benefitting everybody including firefighters. 

>>  Fire alerting system. 

>>  That benefits fire department all fire departments in the county.  

>>  Total of those is about 13 million?  

>>  7.5 million for fire alerting system. 

>>  All that came out of the 30 million?  

>>  Fire alerting system is currently in the forecast we presented and was adopted and forecast was adopted. 

>>  Corona wireus transition money could be used for anything.  
It would be additional money in the general fund to come up with when we finally do the alerting system.  

>>  I do -- 

>>  Did George touch on something?  I want to go to 250 million.  50 million was restricted for VO tran and airport and using VO tran now to O- of set what general fund normally does.  We were only allowed to have $5 million increased reserves instead of more is we didn't have to transfer more to VO tran now we are budgeting $5 million to VO tran that is made possible by federal grafts in 50 million of restricted monies for out of 250 million.  Other was roughly 50/50 from Coronavirus relief fund. 
96 million, 30 million is in transition fund now funding things like fire alert 800 megahertz system.  
At least 30 million I think almost touches 40 million was allocated to programs that go right back to residents business owners and small business grants and home and mortgage assistance and rent assistance. 
96 million is almost fully stunt at this point there might be a little left in there only because we haven't reconciled it when I finally reconcile bill balance left will create additional public safety wages I will recommend to council to transfer maybe 300,000 think toy Coronavirus transition fund -- majority of 96 million is gone to residents and cities and to these projects. 
107 million I have questions on as far as workshops that we had last week.  

>>  Okay.  Let's wrap this up.  We will go right back at it next meeting. 
You need direction from us.  
Tell us what you would like to take out of here. 

>>  George?  

>>  Is council interested in seeing when aa 5% reduction from what we or I submitted to you this year is that proposed budget and do we need to know is a majority of the council interested in seeing that?  

>>  Recognizing and sorry to tag on.  Recognizing what you said council member posts completely we don't want to go take 5% from everybody.  Some areas will be more than that to meet 5% target. 

>>  I need direction from a motion and a second. 

>>  I wish we had a couple other council people here to voice in on this.  I'm sure they have input they would like to have. 
Boy, ya'll have done a tremendous job and shift in the funds where they needed. 
And I have also looked through all of this.  Absolutely sensitive to tax increases in any way, shape, or form. 
You know, I'm paying them too. 
I -- I in my heart with my common sense and limb bit of accounting background I have had for 40 years in my business, I just can't feel this a 5% decrease in our general fund budget recommendations by county manager would be a wise decision as public servants we are making a big decision for all our constituents that rely on lots of the services and all of our items are increasing also with inflation. 
I just don't feel comfortable at all with looking at a 5% decrease and would like to see something. 
I certainly can't with a good conscience say that is a wise move. 

>>  I would like to clarify George talked about 5% areas that are red on the screen not the budget. 

>>  Right.  There is no harm in looking at it saying this is what we are going to do.  We look at it and see what it looks like and we have the information at hand to make a decision. 
I don't understand not even wanting to look at it.  Barb?  

>>  Could someone clarify for me that this would be in addition to a partial for full rollback that is that plus a 5% is what is being. 

>>  No. 

>>  Okay.  Okay. 

>>  No. 

>>  All right.  So, then I would ask for if you are looking at 5%, I would ask you to also look at a 3%. 

>>  Okay.  

>>  That is fair enough. 

>>  Danny?  

>>  I agree, Chair.  Thank you.  I think it is worth looking at.  Come back with something and also, too, I think we have to Collectively give more time for revenue sources here to help everybody out.  Some nuance, I don't know.  Would everyone be in agree aness to hold another workshop to get down and really dig into this one more time and then bring some sources to the table as well to help you all out and use some money we have for possibly some start-ups instead of just forking it out, forking it out and what not would council be in agreeance for a workshop 4 or 5 days look at stuff and bring stuff to the table?  

>>  It would he be appropriate when you bring us numbers to sit down and workship it out. 

>>  We have a budget hearing scheduled for September 7th. 

>>  I don't -- we definitely would have to go back and look at all 5% reductions compiled.  IT was asked to cut 5% but hearing that is probably not something you want to see. 
So, that means we have to go back and ask.  Somebody has to decide what area or maybe every other area is now 6% so IT doesn't get impacted by this. 
There might be arm E- other areas 5% is not possible.   Internal auditor's office you have internal auditor there is a decision for internal auditor that is his cut right now the extra staff person. 
Other than that, his budget is himself. 
That is not going to be an area you talked about everything council's budget talking about leadership if we don't do that. 
There is -- it is going to build up a little bit.  So, George and I love to talk about how we go forward to try to get to a target of 3.7. 

>>  3.8 million. 

>>  That represents 5% of the number.  It won't necessarily be 5% here and there or 10% there or 5% [Indiscernible]. 

>>  We got the idea.  

>>  Yeah. 

>>  We will look at 3 and 5 if I have a majority that wants to do that. 

>>  Heather, we haven't heard from you. 

>>  I'm looking at ways to cut across the board not specifically 5% and not things that are common sense.  Why on earth we would cut IT I don't know.  That is not even an option; right?  
Just in general across the board we have to look at options and would love to hear options common sense out of the box options. 

>>  It will take time to compile the list you are looking for. 

>>  Sure. 

>>  I don't know what the timing of that would be. 

>>  Looking at George. 

>>  We will put together and look at times. 
You need time to do the work.  We will talk tomorrow and come up with a game plan on timing. 
We will look at a few things too. 
I have thoughts but we will discuss based off conversation here today, I have good ideas. 
At least I think they are good. 
He might hit me.  It is okay.  I can take it. 

>>  I won't. 
If he has ideas I will take them. 

>>  There you go. 

>>  One more.  Barbara?  

>>  Yes.  I guess to me it is not really taking 3% from each one of these; right?  

>>  Right. 

>>  I'm looking at them like where is that going to come from?  
I don't want staff impacted or limited resources they have impacted. 
My question more is, is there a reserve?  
I know we talked about in economic development is there extra in there not being utilized at the time that perhaps could offset some of what we are looking for; right?  
That can then. 

>>  Yes. 

>>  Bring back. 

>>  Answer is yes. 

>>  Right. 

>>  We will talk about that. 

>>  Right.  Maybe bring something else down. 

>>  Taking down good ideas. 

>>  You know?  
So, I'm just saying, is there other ways of offsetting it is not about impacting these departments in that way for a hard hit.  I don't see it there.  So -- thank you. 

>>  Thank you. 

>>  Can I get a motion then to have Ryan and George get together and come back with these numbers to show us we can discuss?  
Is that clear enough?  

>>  So moved. 

>>  There is.  Is. 

>>  Find ways to save money. 

>>  Nevermind. 

>>  Come back to us with a list we can check off or cross off or add to. 

>>  Right.  We will give it either that way or a couple maybe options that are packages and we will look at that. 

>>  Who made the motion?  

>>  I'm -- all right. 

>>  I made the motion. 

>>  Ha ha. 

>>  Motion by Post and second by Wheeler.  All in favor, say aye.  Any opposed?  

>>  I want to hear what John has to say. 

>>  I'm not done yet.  

>>  I need to talk about ARPA things. 
At the workshop, there was a couple projects where I'm not sure.  I will put that way and flip in the order that I'm not sure about them on the previous thing that was out and one I took the most notes on and went back and quoted you directly on some of these things and seems to me there might be a certain direction on the mental health allocation of 1.5 million. 
Is there any desire to increase that or you okay leaving it with managers that recommended?  

>>  Increase. 

>>  I thought we discussed an increase in that?  

>>  I thought I heard it too. 

>>  Yeah. 

>>  I wasn't sure. 

>>  I believe that you said 1.5 was based on previous spending. 
If it was based on previous and know greater need over the past 18 months.  So, to me, increasing would be -- 

>>  Okay. 

>>  Uh-huh. 

>>  What is the mental illness caveat though?  
I know we discussed this. 

>>  I wanted to. 

>>  I want to be sure we are sure where that money is going. 
Not just 1.5 or more for mental illness. 

>>  Previously we discussed it being an allocation and went back looking at video and Butler talking about doing aNova. 
We can go back and if given an allocation we can put request out to the public.  We have received proposals from SMA and Halifax health and one voice from Volusia. 
We don't know if there is other things out there.  Maybe that is it.  I don't know.  We can go through pro es with allocation or pick and choose subjects that have been submitted.  That is Rachel looking to clarify; right?  

>>  I want to clarify with phot just blanket spending 1.5 total on mental illness. 

>>  We will talk about which would be managers recommended on. 

>>  Right.  They can come back. 

>>  On certain projects that have been submitted so far. 

>>  All right. 

>>  All right.  The library social worker program I'm not chair if -- and it -- Mrs. Girtman commented she was in support expanding areas in this area and expanding Website and Chair Bower had concerns about program one about ongoing expenses and quote question mark for me.  I have a yes?  No?  And a question mark. 

>>  Still a yes for me. 

>>  Still a no on a rib site for me.  

>>  I'm with barb.  

>>  I'm with barb.  

>>  It would be a no for me.  You got the majority. 
It is not a vote today anyway.  I can count.  

>>  You count very well. 

>>  Yeah.  
Wait.  There is more.  There is a few more. 

>>  What is amount on that, 480,000?  We have 1/2 of a million?  

>>  Yes. 

>>  Thank you.  Mrs. Postyou were talking very clear about community outreach and all that you mentioned an additional veteran service officer. 
Were you looking to put this in that funned or looking at like that with be something you would want to see in the general fund.  It is phot in the recommended budget this year but in future consideration or trying to fund out of ARPA. 

>>  Resource person would be a good start and we are in need of CBOs but could look at doing it in last budget.  

>>  The last one, I think.  Yeah.  The last one. 
Councilmember Wheeler, I want to confirm you mentioned funding Williamson Boulevard meaning out of the monies or Arpa?  
In general, if I haven't heard -- there is no vote today.  I will put it together based off things that were clarified and had no opposition that were added.  Anything that added opposition I asked here.  That is it and I will be able to get it out to you to see where we are at. 

>>  Okay.

>>  Thank you. 

>>  Thank you.  

>>  Okay.  That brings us to -- 

>>  He is still here.  

>>  That brings us to public participation.  John Nicholson.  He will do what?  

>>  Other people that waited can they talk first?  
It is a joke.  John N., two quick things.  One, food truck, Billy.  You want to cut it off at midnight I walk early on Friday nights I have them packed through the gills which is an option and No. 2 public comments coming to meetings flee 5 or 4 years generally if you get 6 people from public comments it is a lot I'm only one here because of short-term rental did we go through massive amount.  It is not something you need to have an hour for. 
It rarely ever happens and two I would like you to manipulate agenda and put lawyers first thing after lunch. 
You don't have to sit here during the day. 
Only pay for an hour.  All right?  
Lastly, you are going to get $7 million more this year than last year. 
You only have to make up $22 million. 
How much are you going to have after you take $22 million from $7 million to have a tax rebate.  I'm having a hard time with that I used to do old math and difficult to take 22 million from 7 million.  7 million profit and spending 22 million to 13 million year and 3 million there or whatever that is your dilemma. 
I have here Sun rail.  I don't know a figure what -- I believe we have to come out with something for Sun rail.  I thought it was a million bucks but don't know. 
Secondly, what is the cost of that $15 we are putting a dollar an hour. 
What is the cost going to be as an increase. 
Echo and Volusia forever is new to taxes. 
What will it be.  Inflation I think was 6%. 
If our budget is $200 million it is only $12,000,022 million is coming out to 40-ish million dollars or so.  That is not chump change.  Jeff wanted to cut in lunches that is nothing covering $40 million.  It is nothing. 
We have to let public know this is real money and real dilemma. 
Ash was happy he did rollback year after year 7 years rollback.  Carre Smith cut.  We didn't have cop cars to put cops on road it was that bad. 
We increased taxes by 27%. 
Only 27%. 
If you don't think it is a shock what you are going through is nothing compared to what we went there you.  What we thought we were doing was good. 
Lastly, chip was good to us during inflation 2008 or 2010 he worked hard and cut back and don't leave him out of the budget. 
Ask him if he can do 1%.  He is 80% of budget of general fund 1% is nothing.  Thank you. 

>>  Thank you.  Mr. County manager?  

>>  I have said enough today.  Thank you.  Actually, I know it was long.  Thank you for honestly a lot of very good discussion.  Very helpful.  This is what has to happen. 
I appreciate it.  We are in this together.  Thank you.  
County attorney?  

>>  Yes, sir.  Update on redistricting process.  Fortunately, it appears that still we won't have the complete data until latest as September 30th that we have been did send e-mail last week trying to coordinate with school district on joint meetings. 
We cleared dates with your assistance. 
But, we did get a response while we were in the meeting today from the school district's staff. 
They would be free and you don't have to write this down. 
I wanted to give an idea that, that month of October will be critical and tray to move quickly and trying to plan to make sure council has enough time to act. 
You might not need all dates we are setting aside. 
Could be quicker of a process. 
School district confirmed they would be available October eleventh 18th and 2 eighth and only request was they didn't want to meet in these chambers on the dais. 
We did 10 years ago use this court house conference room there.  We don't have all of the technology there.  We could have accommodated it.  Other request if we met we can do it at 5:00 p.m. 
So, if that is acceptable to council, I will continue to keep you updated. 
We are trying to make as many dates in octavailable to hopefully get through this process quickly. 
Unless I hear objections, it is okay.  The other is we would like to -- just authority to advertise amendment to historic preservation evidence and historic preserve reviewed it if that is acceptable with council with a motion we will proceed and bring it back to you. 

>>  Thank you. 

>>  Okay.  Any objection?  

>>  I will make a motion.  That what you are looking for?  

>>  Yeah. 

>>  What it is, we will advertise in the paper. 

>>  Yeah. 

>>  Motion by Post, second by Wheeler.  All in favor say aye. 

>>  Aye. 

>>  Any opposed?  There you go.  

>>  Thank you, Mr. Chair. 
Councilwoman Post. 

>>  I have a couple small things. 
I wanted to point out that I didn't pull the item today from the consent agenda. 
I wanted to mention that the LPGA and 95 study is in the works and happening. 
So, that is very good news. 
There you go, John. 
So, that is -- that is moving like we have been saying. 
And the bridge there cannot happen until all that happens. 
So, there is movement there. 
I just wanted to point that out that, that is happening. 
I didn't want to overlook that. 
Is Paulo still here?  

>>  Yes.  He is just in the staff room.  I can get him. 

>>  Okay.  

>>  You don't have to get him.  I just wanted -- there he is. 
So, I wanted to say, Paulo. 
Paulo has had an opportunity today several times to speak to us. 
And he is always very, very thorough in his research and responses. 
I wanted to say thank you.  You are doing an excellent job. 
The last thing was -- 

>>  Pay increase. 

>>  I had someone reach out.  They were trying to pull up the charter on the -- on our county Website. 
There is two separate homepages on the county Website for the charter and three internal links that is out of date. 
The most recent update on there for our charter is 2002 and amendment 10 has been changes. 
If we can make sure two separate home pages and internal links for update for charter there is people looking at it.  I would appreciate it. 

>>  What we can do to clarify ordinances are on muni code as well as charter and that document is constantly updated as you make changes and we can make sure the link is to that so there is no inconsistency.  

>>  Okay.  I think that is it for today.  

>>  Danny?  

>>  I will save the list, but just wanted to let everybody know that I'm looking at some new models or model to further expand our inmate work program in hopes of some budget cuts or tax relief that we can pass on to folks. 
It is sometimes I think worth looking at that we can bring back at another time. 

>>  Billy Wheeler?  

>>  I have nothing. 

>>  I thought you would say that.  Barb Girtman?  

>>  Something really easy.  Strive to thrive public safety connection this Friday Ken lake oaks from 5:30 to 7. 
It is where we are doing community connection with the City of deland police and sheriff's department and black clergy alliance and, of course, the spring hill association. 
So, it is just trying to get that messaging and relationship building throughout the community. 
There will be several events and different months at different locations to try to, again, enhance relationships. 
     This Saturday is the Mayor's backpack giveaway and health fair at Earl ground park from 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. 
So, let the kids come get their backpacks. 
     I'm sure they can get vaccinated if they are eligible. 
Thank you.  That is it.  

>>  I just have one quick thing mostly to the county attorney. 
I think it was 2 months ago that I asked about a study on impact fees and you told me that, that process had been started and that we had some approved consultants already to pick from. 
The next month you said that we were going to V- to go outside and look at other consultants. 
Then here comes Clay and then last meeting I asked how that was going and was told it hadn't started yet.  I'm wondering where we are this month. 

>>  Well, just first -- I will step in here.  It is a -- it is out on the street right now. 
It had to go out.  Scope had to be rewritten. 
You know, I think we were originally going to use what they call continuing contract but with something that is as important as this, we felt that it had to go out. 
It is in the street right now. 
So, we should be getting responses back.  If clay wants to add anything to that, that is where it is at. 

>>  Goal to have it in front of you first meeting for octaward of the contract. 

>>  How long does it take to get responses back typically.  Is there a time limit what you sent out?  

>>  Sent out to elaborate issues George brought up we didn't have anyone specifically delineated in continuing services contract for impact fees for the nature that include both our road and our park and fire impact fees. 
So, we were looking at trying to do an RFP. 
To do that, you have to have a set amount and not certain about set amount that had to be budgeted for that. 
We realize this we also need to have them for continuing services to meet accounting requirements to assist with future amendments so we decided to go ahead and do a continuing services call for submittal or call for responses that has been issued and will be receiving it and review committee will go over responses and identify the basically the group of continuing contractors and award that first task that would be updating those three impact fees such that the contract would be in front of you by October 5th. 
We have a specific timeframe Pam W. Has put together we are fast tracking to the maximum extent possible. 

>>  In October what will we see or hear about?  Just who was selected?  

>>  Who will be getting contract to do the work. 

>>  How long will the contract work take. 

>>  Typically 6 to 9 months to complete all of the work. 

>>  Wow.  Okay.  Thank you. 

>>  Please understand this is coming in, in advance. 
This work wasn't scheduled for this fiscal year but next fiscal year and trying to get in as quickly as possible to be awarded at the very beginning. 
What you are seeing is that it is going to meet our deadline that was established that is every 4 years for the transportation that is approved in December 2018 and goal is to have it approved and sounds like prior to that deadline. 

>>  Okay.  Thank you.  With that, I will take a motion to adjourn. 
Motion by Wheeler and second by everybody else and by Girtman.  All in favor, say aye. 
Any opposed, please remain silent