*Captioners standing by 
 
(Music plays) 
 
SPEAKER: 
Welcome to the Volusia County Council meeting. The meeting will begin in two minutes. 
 
(Music plays) 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
If everyone wants to find their seat, we will get started here shortly. 
 
(Multiple speakers) 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Loud and proud today. OK. OK! It is 9:01 AM and we will call the June 4, 2024 Volusia County Council meeting to order. We will start as always, with an invocation first and then we will go right into the Pledge of Allegiance. If you are interested in having your faith group participate in an invocation, please just send an email to KGreen@volusia.org. This is Karissa down here on your right and she will get you set up to do that. This morning, we have Angelo Parra of the Central Florida Freethought Community, if you would like to stand with me for the invocation, you may. 
 
ANGELO PARRA: 
Good morning and thank you Chairman Brower and councilmembers. County a manager and administration and staff for this opportunity. As a resident of Victoria Park and DeLand it's a true honor to be here today representing the central Florida free thought community. John Quincy Adams our six President said, "if your actions inspire others to do more, learn more, dream more and become more, you are a leader. We are grateful to you our leaders, for the long hours and often unappreciated time, and personal sacrifice that comes with your tireless commitments to your constituents. 
 
As you serve our community we ask you embrace the spirit of reason and (indiscernible) with the willingness to listen and build bridges of understanding. Embracing our differences as strengths, that enrich the community. In your stewardship of Volusia, we ask as you safeguard our county today that you also remain aware of our responsibility to generations to come. 
 
May the mutual love of friends and family in our collective hopes and dreams inspire you. It is through your generous commitment of time, creativity and love of Voluisa County that you make a better and brighter future for all of us. (Static) I close with a quote from Winston Churchill, "you make a living by what you get, you make a life by what you give." Thank you. 
 
ALL: 
(Pledge of Allegiance) 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Karissa will you call the roll please. 
 
KARISSA GREEN: 
Mr Robins? Mr Santiago, Mr Dempsey, Mr Johansson, Mr Kent, Mr Reinhart, Mr Brower. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
We have a quorum and Don Dempsey's here as we speak. Any public participation requests? When I call your name, if you come down to the podium, it rises and falls so you can have the microphone near you and we need that so everyone can hear you because this is recorded. You will have three minutes to speak to us about anything that affects the county. There will be a time clock above my head and on your monitor that will track your time. 
 
First, we have Kent Cooper. 
 
KENT COOPER: 
Thank you ladies and gentlemen, I would like to speak to the commissioner because it seems that you need to be from a normal person point of view as I say it, I've been dealing with Will Roberts tax office here. I can't get anything done with him. They have a new policy where if you don't get in by 4 o'clock they don't do your work, title work or anything. I called, I live on the other end of Seville, which none of you have probably been there before. There's no public transport so you have to borrow a car to come out. I was told rudely on Friday by the lady I the name of Stephanie Jackson that they refused to do any work after 4 o'clock. They are trying to finish up. I think we need to have those hours stretched out. I've been trying to get a hold of Mr Roberts for two and half weeks and he's either been gone or someone else is on the phone. Not been able to catch him or get him yesterday. 
 
Also, I had some work done and one of the ladies stamped the title on a death certificate sale and I can't take that title anywhere in the state of Florida it stamped with Voluisa County on this location. I'm stuck spending my money here where I could of got it done other place especially Crescent city which I'm a whole lot closer to. It's Butler County. I think the county needs to have an outside quorum or commissioned party to look into all these problems especially that in the zoning here. Zonings and other atrocious mass we have got up there in northern Seville. The lawn Springs. Anything like that up there, it's ramshackle and you get different answers at different days. I had to ask Mr Bob Foster to handle an eviction case going on since last year. I was in the office with the hearing on the gentleman who had the property and he tried to buy or get a building permit and unfortunately that, has spawned into $100,000 out of my pocket just to fight the zoning here. And they still don't have an answer and we are in front of a judge. Still don't have an answer. I have to move my business out of Voluisa County because I am on a no zoning for the County. 
 
Unfortunately, my business and 17 employees are moving away from Voluisa County because of this. I think the County commissioners need to kind of rein in some of these offices and their policies. It's just gone way beyond the normality. I drove 40 minutes to come down and have a title done and have been told 4:02 PM, I cannot have it done even though the office was open to 4:30 PM and accepting other work. So you know, that's the main reason I'm here today Mr Roberts is a voted in elected official. And no one is raining him in. He's nowhere to be found. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Thank you. Elizabeth (unknown name). 
 
SPEAKER: 
Good morning. Thank you for this three minutes. My name is Elizabeth Pompey and I live in District 2 at 1891 Halifax Drive. I came here last month about the motocross track and thank you very much for listening to us and moving it from that original site. 
 
I'm here because I understand you're looking at another site just 2 miles away from where this last one was which would still cause the same issues of flooding and anything else all of us came and spoke about. 
 
I have – I had to type this out and I missed where I'm at. There's other areas I understand you have to look at, 92 to me sounds like the best because there's no one around there to be affected by the way we will be affected anywhere on Tomoka Farms Road. The biggest issue is the flooding. 
 
I was told, there would be studies with retention ponds and all the stuff that goes into allowing such a thing but it doesn't work. Town West is the perfect example, they put their studies in, they took out the wetlands that backup to my road mind you. And put the retention ponds in and every time there's a hard rain, we have flooding. 
 
So those studies in the retention ponds don't work especially when you take out wetlands. So, I don't know what's on the property north of the landfill, but I believe it will still cause us the same issues. So don't waste any more of our tax dollars money looking at a place that isn't appropriate. 92 is my opinion but you guys know better as far as the land. 
 
I brought a copy of the Tomoka Farms village local plan because I talked to a few other people and no one knew what it was. I sent a copy to everyone so you are aware of what was put in place in 2009 for our community to protect agriculture. There are generations of people that live out there that have done farming and this is how this got put into place. 
 
Just look over it so you are aware when making decisions that do affect our area. I would ask that as you guys move forward I know we have to have development, our state has been inundated. Look at it at low impact. You don't have to take out every tree that's on a piece of property because it developer wants to put a retention pond in. 
 
As I was getting prepared for today I looked up what was on the agenda was a bit concerned by seeing how you want to spend three and half million dollars to put paved shoulders into Turnbull Bay. That money would be used, we have flooding everywhere all over the county. DeLand I heard you guys talk about in my area, and I'm sure there's many areas. Those are the only places I'm aware of. 
 
Let's be smart with our tax dollars. Thank you. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Thank you. Chelsea Pasternak? And helper. 
 
SPEAKER: 
And Hunter. Alright. Good morning everyone my name is Chelsea Pasternak the Volusia County resident residing on Halifax Drive. I was unable to make the last two meetings because of my work and children's schedule but I did learn you unanimously voted against the motocross track, the previously proposed location options Road and 415. Thank you for that. But I did want to come as previously stated and talk about other proposed locations especially the one north of the dump. As well know the water still flows south. I purposely came here to share concerns regarding the track, flooding issues and ask questions. Most did not respond but I want to thank Mr Roberts and Mr Kent for golgi my email. In my correspondence I shared along with many others I know are not against recreational activities for residents and visitors for a motocross track but I am against a county funded run track because I don't think government should be doing business for itself or do I feel a public-private partnership is appropriate either. As far as the use of echo funds on Volusia.org when reading up on the use of these funds, states that Volusia echo program seeks to enhance the quality of life of Volusia County residents by working to achieve goals over a broad geographic base. I'm interested in what percentage of your constituents do you see utilizing this track? 
 
You're all talking for profit and for tourism. It doesn't seem to line up with the intent of this program. It's an expensive and specialized sport or hobby as far as quality of life, what does affect quality of life is flooding of people's homes. 
 
I have two neighbors that I know are still displaced on Halifax Drive and that hurricane was almost 2 years ago. 
 
One of my elderly neighbors wasn't able to have her work fixed and has lost her insurance and is in jeopardy of losing her home. That is quality of life. I'm having difficulty understanding why building a track is a priority when flooding is a huge concern especially with hurricane season very quickly approaching. The NOAA, National Weather Service forecast said 85% chance of above normal hurricane activity for 2024. 17 to 25 total name stories of these 8 to 13, our forecast to become hurricanes may jurkat hire. I want to know evolution is doing to alleviate any hurricane concerns beyond regular maintenance or undersized ditch and for structure. I know you sent a flooding trifold in the mail to us twice, and the main thing that it mentions there or the first thing is to protect wetlands. I want to know if Voluisa County is doing their job and that our county and elected officials are doing what they can and are prepared. Is this County prepared for the possible tumultuous storm season? Ahead of us? And people's homes flooding? Or are we interested in where to place a motocross track and profit generated. Thank you. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Thank you, John Pasternak?  
 
SPEAKER: 
Hello, I am not as prepared as my wife. I am basically just here to say, this motor cross track issue close to my home is what got me frustrated because we have had some playing concerns in the neighbourhood. To my knowledge, I would like to know if you guys are aware there was a study done in 2009 that we spend taxpayer money on to get the results of. The study was geared towards what we could do to improve water quality for this particular area and reduce flooding people in their homes? 
 
At that time approximately $1 million could have been spent for these five things and people would have gone from a level of service of their homes being flooded, to not being flooded. To roads not being overtaken by water in these times of heavy rain. 
 
Since that time, that work has never been done. It feels like we totally forgot about that study. What I really cannot believe is here we are. Let's do something in the neighbourhood and a motocross track. Now we are talking there will be a little bit closer or whatever. To me it does not seem like it is a priority. Like my wife mentioned, what does the E and Eco mean? 
 
No one is even concerned. The study was done how could we improve water quality and keep people from flooding? To me I think these funds could be spent on something, maybe you can have a joint purpose water retention area that is also the water quality issue from a study was from a lot of these stormwater infrastructures being undersize and other maintained and poorly designed. 
 
We totally forgot that. We ordered a bunch of cities for a bunch of places. Are we going to follow up on the study and actually do the work that needs to be done? If there is ECHO money to spend? E is for environmental. Our people going to have fun and recreate when they cannot get in their home or repair their home? Probably living with mould for years like some of our neighbours. 
 
It is an issue we do need some attention for. I do not think we should be worrying about recreation. To me it is a cherry on top for an area where people's homes are still flooded. There is a lady down the street who broke her ankle during these heavy rains and no one could respond to help her. Why don't we spend some money on EMS having the ability to help people in these heavy waters? 
 
I have more to say, you will probably see me again here. Thanks for what you have done but we need more for our area. Thank you. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Daytona Beach chief police Dick Carrion. 
 
SPEAKER: 
Good morning distinguished members of the dais, I am the chief of police for the city of Daytona Beach. I am also a 20 year resident of Volusia County. I am here to address the disparaging remarks and false statements that were made during the May 21 County Council meeting. 
 
I understand that as elected officials we all have our rights to our personal opinions. But we do not have a right to is creating our own facts. To start from the top, it was stated from the diets that we are a special event city with no special events. I find that interesting, because I am forced to mandate my officers to work the special events. Each year from January through August. My cops would beg to differ. 
 
Staffing is an issue. We cannot hire cops, it always has been that way and it will continue to be that way. Also interesting because currently. Thing for my department is 244. I am currently sitting at 236 which means I only have eight vacancies. Something I'm very proud of and I would hardly call that a staffing crisis. 
 
The city is overrun with homelessness, homeless individuals, drunks and prostitutes. That right there is probably the biggest insult of the law. While we do have some issues in the city of Daytona Beach, it is hardly the crime-ridden Armageddon that was described from this dais. These issues that exist in Daytona Beach exist in almost every major city throughout this country. 
 
Homelessness is a nationwide problem that we cannot arrest our way out of. I am extremely proud of the hard-working men and women of the Daytona Police Department that are out there on a daily basis, doing their part to make Daytona Beach a safer place to live, work and play. I am also extremely proud of our city officials who recognize this problem, which is why they took the lead on the homeless shelter foundation. The homeless shelter board. 
 
For any elected official who wore this uniform and is collecting a pension from the city of Daytona Beach, to take that opportunity to drive the city through the mud for political gain is disgraceful and a direct insult to the men and women who accept the challenge of serving this extremely busy city and rapidly growing city on a daily basis. 
 
I find it comical that as elected officials only real claim to fame is the service to Daytona Beach and he sits on the status and pretends to be the resident expert on all things public safety and law enforcement related. For any city official who feels uncomfortable driving through the city of Daytona Beach without their police, I would simply say you could do us all a favour and stay out of the city limits of Daytona Beach if that is going to be her attitude. 
 
Your comments were shameful and embarrassing and you should be grateful I only have three minutes. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Thank you chief. 
 
(Applause) 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
John Nicholson? 
 
JOHN NICHOLSON: 
I wasn't going to mention this, until (Name) brought it up. I was a little offended but I understand where he's coming from. We have not done enough, we could always do more. With the idea that we do not have any special events anymore. That is true basically on beachside. The city of Daytona Beach does have nine, what I call major events. 
 
When you have an an event of 200 or 2000 people that is a special event. Our events are hundreds of thousand people. I called the major events. Because they are major. They are disruptive. I live on Bayside, I get all of them. Because the hotels are on Bayside. I mentioned it before. 12,000 hotels in Halifax area. That is a lot of hotels. We are still a tourist area. 
 
I am asking you, yes both of them are correct. But you really have to watch what you were going to say which is what I really wanted to speak to originally. As you know, the President was convicted. For many of us it was a political conviction. It is a slippery slope when politicians talk outside of certain realms. 
 
When you look at, maybe I am relatively ignorant, but I cannot find out what he was convicted of? It is not against the law, for what they call hush money. Those nondisclosure are acceptable everywhere. Was he convicted of that? What was the convicted of actually they are talking about putting him in jail? Nobody has ever been put in jail for a clerical error. 
 
This really is a slippery slope. Where do we go? 
 
I am a Democrat, I have been since I voted. But nobody asked me if I wanted to turn my Democratic Party into a socialist party. You've heard about projection, what are the Democratic Party projecting on the Democratic Party versus what is projecting on the Republican Party? 
 
I never knew for 40 years what the party was of any of you guys, elected officials. This year everybody knows and it has been made an issue. I do not care if you are Republican or Democrat. I am asking you to step back whenever you make a decision, and do not make them on party lines. The more we get entrenched in a partyline, the worse we are. The Republican Party unfortunately is divided two years ago. It has to heal. Thank you. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Chris if you would, just let the record reflect that district 1 Councilman Don Dempsey is (indiscernible) 
 
(LAUGHTER) 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Thank you for all of the participants, we appreciate hearing from the public. It takes us to item number one, approval of the agenda. Do I have a motion or any questions about the agenda? 
 
SPEAKER: 
Motion approved. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Jake Johansson makes a motion to approve and the second was by Troy Kent. All in favour say 'aye'? Any opposed/the agenda is approved six to 0. 
 
Does anyone have a item from the consent agenda they want to comment on or pull for a vote? 
 
SPEAKER: 
I would like item W. 
 
TROY KENT: 
I would like to make a consent. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Troy Kent makes a move to approve the entire agenda. Is there a second? 
 
Second by Councilman Santiago. Why don't we vote on that and come back to item W for comment? Is there any other comments? All in favour of approving the consent agenda please say I? 
 
And opposed? 
 
The agenda is approved 6 to 0. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I wanted to voice more, staff did the work they required. Both voice more of a disappointment of any concern how governments buying land from each other. This is for a wastewater improvement in that area that serves a public purpose for all, including the school board. We are buying this property for the public's purposes. We are buying a property from the school board for $65,000 to do enhancement for the public. I am just not a fan. If it is public purpose that can be established for the good of all, I voted for it but I think we need to set the tone very differently and have conversations as we progress as a county and our other governing bodies. That we should work together rather and not just shift taxpayer dollars from area to area. I am not happy about it and I hope we can change the trend with us leading the charge, and others participating. I get it, it has to happen that way but I am not a fan of why we have to buy… That will serve all in the area including the school. Thank you Mr. Chairman. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Councilman Johansson? 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
In policy I concur with that. At the end of the day, it is our tax dollar being used to spend on schools. It is a dollar bill leaving my pocket, it goes to the school. It is a dollar bill that goes to the County, it is a dollar bill that goes to the city or the hospital district. 
 
The problem we have is some of our funds are restricted right? We saw earlier in year the school board asked us for $450,000. It is not us, it is the taxpayer. It is the same damn dollar so why can't we figure it out and be more efficient? 
 
I would like to get there, that is probably something we can work on in the next couple of years. But I know in some cases it cannot just happen and that is unfortunate. At the end of the day it probably cost the taxpayer more money to shift that money around and make stuff happen. If we can instead of saying no, if we can get together and have staff work it out. I do not want to call, if I was home I would call it a drug deal. A deal to make things work. I am all about making that happen. Thank you for bringing it up.  
 
TROY KENT: 
Councilman Santiago I want to echo and say thank you for bringing that comment up. This is the same school board/district to after seven of us told them you have a larger budget than we do, you are coming to us to ask us to pay the bills and are now attacking me and our attorney Mr Dyer instead of reaching out an olive branch and saying, maybe we can work together. Instead they went personal and their claims were wildly outrageous, inaccurate and inappropriate. So that's what I saw whenever we told them, this is your bill, you should pay your bill. Just like we are going to pay our bill. 
 
I will remind everyone, I asked this to Recktenwald at that meeting, how much does the school district give us for all of our security and all the courthouses across Voluisa County and the answer was zero. I asked why and he said because "it's not their response ability." And then I asked Mr Dyer, whose sole response ability is it per state statute to provide security in the school system?" And Mr Dyer accurately said, it's the school districts responsibility. I hear exactly what you are saying, we do need to have a better working relationship. But not because the attack came at me, because I told them a word they did not like which was, "no". 
 
If the attack had come to any of you, I feel if the attack was against you or the Chair or any of us, then it was an attack on all of us. So, I just bring that up to refresh everyone's memory about where they went last November. Thank you. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Thank you. This is a policy decision, I'm glad you two are here. I don't know what you could say at this point, you will make it work. Because we approved it. It's needed, you have heard the opinion of I think it's probably the majority opinion of the Council. The way the funding is, it is less than ideal. We are also hearing that right now about security guards, the entire counsel is being attacked, there was a horrible accident for crossing guards at a school. 
 
We are being blamed for not hiring enough crossing guards and I believe that is a function of the Sheriff's Department, the school board and the committee that makes those decisions. I think we would also report that and we want safety for the schools and clean water as well and we need to work better with the school board. Thank you for coming up. That takes us to item number three. Discussion and direction on towing fees. 
 
Jeaniene Jennings. Thank you.  
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
Just talking about the direction of where to go with towing rates. We started working on this probably the first time we had a request from Mr Dempsey almost 6 months ago, began pulling rates and looking out at what everybody had. I understand the rates may have changed since pulling the numbers and we have to reevaluate some of those. Since that time, we have met with the Sheriff's Department several times. Actually with Sheriff (unknown name) who was at one of the meetings. 
 
And discuss the direction we want to go with at least not consensual towing. Because the ordinance talks about (indiscernible) towing and nonconsensual towing. On nonconsensual, even if we made changes to it, we would not make any changes to their contract because they are in the middle of a nonconsensual towing contract now until 2025 when the contract expires. 
 
The second one is looking at what we have provided thus far as the rates we had at that time. The decision was made amongst the groups to recommend an average. We would not go to the highest rate, or lowest, we would look at an average that would not have the greatest impact on people who are having their vehicles towed. 
 
I guess I need to figure out how to get to the next slide. These are the averages based on each classification of vehicle and the recommended. As I mentioned, we know that as even today, a lot of the numbers are still changing. But at the time that we were looking at this, these were the rates we were able to pull. Like I said, we are looking at an average. This averages out to be a 22% increase across the board on our rates. 
 
And puts us right in the middle. We are not the highest, Flagler is probably 60% higher than we are right now. But we would not be the lowest either. So, all we are looking for today is some direction of where you would like us to go as far as rates. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Thank you. Councilman Santiago? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I have questions, maybe one. Can you… 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
I will try. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I would like for my purposes and any others, a simple breakdown of non-consequential towing and trespassed towing and give me scenarios on how that plays? Who is the person, use me as an example? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
Trespassed towing would be that you go to the elusive grape and you park in the parking lot behind that has no parking and has a tow truck and it says no trespass and you park there and they called to have you towed. That would be a trespass. Or you go to a restaurant and park somewhere you are not supposed go that has a tow company that can pick up your car. That's a trespass tow. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
That's a private contract and the property owner… Union MECHA nonconsensual is when you involve law enforcement like a DUI or car accident or something that requires law enforcement that would be a nonconsensual tow. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Are ordinances regulate the fee that can be assessed to those individuals in those trespass (Away from mic). 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
There's no revenue to us everything is a (indiscernible). 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
(Away from mic) someone give me the history of why that fee or the approval of the fee was put in place? (Static) I know that's a surprise. 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
I will turn that to legal. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
What's the public intent of allowing a county to adopt ordinances to control those fees (Static)? 
 
SPEAKER: 
The intent is to ensure there's a reasonable fair rate in the market is governed so doesn't get exorbitant. I don't know that for a fact (Away from mic) but regulation to the industry. (Static) 
 
SPEAKER: 
The statute puts the county commissions in that role. (Static) 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
A follow-up question. (Quietly/whispering) Sheriff's office one what is that? Nonconsensual 20 is under contract rules? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
They have a contract in place and when a tow company has bid on nonconsensual towing, they are using the nonconsensual rates that are private, they can't go above it, they can go below it but not above it when they are bidding. There's other things not in here that they also can bid on when they make the evaluation. At this point, they do not want to change that contract until it comes up for – either being renewed but they will kill it at the end of 2025 and rebid with any new rates we put out. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
What you mean they will kill it? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
It ends, the first three year term of the contract ends in 2025. It has optional renewals. They will put it back out to bid at the end of the first three year term. The sheriff's department is. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
The nonconsensual tow rate is kept at 375 currently? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
It's 125 for the (indiscernible) depends on the vehicle. Nonconsensual and trespass towing rates are the same. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
How do we go about obtaining rates for other (Quietly/whispering) Towns? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
Robert made a lot of phone calls and we pulled it off their websites and ordinances but like I said, even Flagler, since we did Flagler the first time we know through public participation that Flagler change there is and we were able before it was published call them and get the Flagler. But I think since then some other entities might have made some changes. We just don't know which ones they are at this time. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
(Quietly/whispering) Another question in my head, who monitors compliance? To our ordinance connect to have an area where constituents can complain? In other words, if we do that, what information do we have to share about the experience? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
I will tell you the legislature this year, has passed a lot of rules now of what we have to put out on our website and who do you call and who do you contact? What are your rights as far as towing? We are creating a webpage. But as far as nonconsensual, it's the sheriff's department who will do spot checks and monitor the invoices to make sure things are right. But they have administrative duty for nonconsensual toe. For trespassing toe, nobody. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
We don't have data. 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
I know the Sheriff's Department told me they have 1450 nonconsensual toes a year. I cannot tell you what the trespass to would be. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Thank you Mr Chair I will wait for the public and I will make comments. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Good questions and discussion. Let's keep that questions right now and I have a list of almost all of us want to speak. This is just for questioning. I think your questions kind of reflect the uneasiness that perhaps the Council feels. I don't know if we will see it because it feels like we are getting involved in telling private business what they can charge. I think the remarks that the attorney made, (Static) gives it, I will stop because this is all questions. I will say it later. 
 
Councilman Dempsey? 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
Could you tell me the last time Volusia changed their existing rates? Or updated them? 2002? 
 
SPEAKER: 
(Away from mic) 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
It's been 22 years… It looks like that's the far right – far left column in the red? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
Far left is what Voluisa County is that, far right is the recommended. The one next to it is what we had at that time as the averages. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
The far left and read where the rates established 22 years ago, correct? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
Correct. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
It seems consistent with a lot of Lake County, Seminole County, St. John's, Orange, do we know when they updated or set their rates? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
I think, what I'm hearing is everybody is looking at it right now. There may be some that have just recently that have not made it into (indiscernible) code that have changed. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
Is it fair to say that as far as we know, the comparable rates you put up here, Lake County, Seminole County, St. John's, Orange, Brevard County, could be rates at 20 years ago as well? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
I couldn't say that definitively. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
The only rate we are looking at that we know is recently been adjusted is Flagler? And it's fair to say the last 20 years insurance has gone up exponentially for these companies, gas prices are going up as well as labor cost and God knows what else. Expenses they incur. OK, have you checked into Marion County? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
No. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
I believe Marion County just had a recent adjustment. Palatka… Have you checked with them to see what the new rates are? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
We stick in the area we typically do around this area. At one point we looked at Miami and were told, don't look at Miami and stick to the area around here so we tried to stick to the immediate area but we could do any of that. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
Flagler was done in the last year? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
Recently. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
Why isn't staff recommending that we go along with Flagler? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
When… We will do whatever you want to do. I'm just telling you we also met with the sheriff because the nonconsensual really except for the trespass, nonconsensual is managed through the Sheriff's Department. When the sheriff looked at this he was really trying to make it not such a – more gradual and not such a drastic impact on towing. But I can tell you they have been very clear and whatever you want to do, they will comply with. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Councilman Johansson? 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Thank you. Councilmember Dempsey, we spend every year going to roll back, keeping the taxes down this is the first thing that does not get touched. 22 years go by and now we have to double in price and no one wants to do that either. 
 
This is kind of an indicator of what gradual increases can benefit (indiscernible) from the we are not doing that. Janine, trespass tow is negotiated between carpet business partner for them? 
 
JENNINGS: 
I would assume so. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
I am looking at the book I was given but it appears to be the same as what you gave. Right now, our rate by and large mimics the private rate? 25 for class A? 
 
JENNINGS: 
we set the maximum rate for trespass tow, our towing ordinance. They still have to. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Back to the question. Why do we do that? So people do not get fleeced?  
 
SPEAKER: 
remember people lose possession of their vehicle. These are sometimes people who have a hard time making it as it is. They have to pay to get their vehicle back, the storage, the mileage. When you look at these rates it is just a starting point on other factors that come into play, size of the vehicle etc.. 
 
That is why the state makes sure that there is some sort of regulation. It is a maximum. It is not necessarily what people are paying, (indiscernible) as much as can be charged. And in our case it is a competitive bit late in there. In terms of terms I've seen some of the emails discussed about when they have to show up and what they have to do. That is contractual in terms of what they have agreed to do to be on a certain list whether it is us, Ministry of transportation. They have agreed to those terms and pricing. 
 
That is why the Sheriff would like to maintain this contract because it is in place until 2025. Those rates were set, those conditions were set. They have been on it. That is what we would do with contractors of all the things we do. You have that, but within that you have this overarching ordinance that says you cannot go above this particular mile. 
 
SPEAKER: 
Whether it's on private property or the Sheriff is subject to the rates established by this counsel. They actually went a step further this past legislative session and we will bring an ordinance back to you in the next meeting. Your staff now has to, the Council has to establish a process to investigate the claim by people who think the rates are (indiscernible). We had to have a process to enforce that. 
 
The state has definitely put county commissions in a role and - a leadership role on this issue, I can only imagine the policy reason why is because it is the nature of it is involuntary and the risks involved- 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
I would say trespass tows are voluntary. If I get into an accident it is nonvoluntary. If I choose to park in a trespass area that is voluntary. 
 
MICHAEL DYER: 
It is not something you're doing on your own initiative. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
That is all I have. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
I will keep up with that line of questioning. George, you are probably the best to answer these first couple of questions. You said, these were - let me stick with the contract first. Who writes the contract? Is it the County or a negotiation with the tow truck operators? 
 
GEORGE RECKTENWALD: 
In all of our cases when we do work with vendors, we read the contract depending on the area we are and whether it is construction or IT are the various areas. We can help and experts in writing contracts. But we write the contracts. 
 
In some cases a bit goes out with an outline of the contract and then we negotiate terms within that, if they are successful (indiscernible). 
 
Basically we write the contract, they agree to it. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
You also mention this was a pass-through? Are we billing and do we get reimbursed or do a lot of time - do sometimes the person who got towed not pay? 
 
JENNINGS: 
my understanding from the police department as they pay the county back an administrative fee back to the Sheriff's Department for managing the contract, but the rest of it they do not get invoices. They have the opportunity to check invoices and audit when necessary. But if my car was in an accident and it was towed, that Bill would come to me it would not go to the Sheriff's Department. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Do you have any idea if they are paid? And if they are not paid are we responsible? 
 
JENNINGS: 
As far as I know there has not been a situation. May have been involved in a dispute of payment. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
George, you mentioned some of the other requirements, time requirements if they go to a highway accident or whatever? Those requirements are negotiated with the tow truck operators? 
 
GEORGE RECKTENWALD: 
They are set forth in the contract, typically these things evolve over the years and experience, if you are an officer you do not want to be waiting out there to long so I am sure there is some sort of time requirement where they have to get there. But again you have a bar contract, you may have the cities, the Department of Transportation. All of these other agencies also have contracts. But again, we are talking also here an overarching ordinance, not individual contracts. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Ok. 
 
JENNINGS: 
I just got a message from the Sheriff's Department. If they do not pay their invoice the cars kept. That is why we do not get involved. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
That is a pretty good motivator. 
 
GEORG RECKTENWALD: 
I think that is one of the reasons as well, it is a pretty tough bar. At the end of the day, why it is regulated by the state (indiscernible). 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
That kind of goes to attorney Brown's comment as well. This keeps it, it gives us a responsibility of trying to make sure the public is not fleeced 
 
SPEAKER: 
If they choose not to set the maximum rights than the statute that is not an effective yet (indiscernible) they default to the Florida Highway Patrol's tow rates. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Has also been 22 years since these contracts have been negotiated? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
No, not for the sheriff's department. It is usually a five year contract and they're looking to go into your three in 2025 where they can go out to bid or renew and they're going to go out to bid. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
What about contracts they have directly with the County? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
the only contract we have for towing is for the fleet department and that is completely separate from this. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
The public will have time to speak when the Council is done. 
 
When I look at this list, there are all kinds of fees. There is a general towing fee and 20 other fees. Do you have any idea how many of those fees are added on? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
No. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Maybe they will be able to speak that? Vice chair Kent?  
 
TROY KENT: 
thank you for putting this information together. Mr. Johansson touched on a piece which hits a nerve with me. 22 years goes by and everyone knows I am for small incremental increases. We have had these small businesses come and talk to us for months and they have been screaming for help. One thing I love about small business is, many of them are generational. 
 
They have been from one grandparents, to parents and children are running them and I like that. My question is this, does the County and the chairman like I said he was going with this. I do not know if I heard it clearly. Does the County get a piece of the pie? 
 

I'm sorry I'm not going to do the chairman's job. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Please refrain. It is not going to help your case.  
 
TROY KENT: 
Does the County get a piece of the pie with all these rates? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
The one that has a nonconsensual towing contract with the Sheriff. There is a line item that comes back to the Sheriff's office for every tow. The sheriff department gets at $100 of that. I could be wrong, this is their contract. But I would say, what I know that comes back. Other than that I am not aware of any of the trespass tow money that comes back. 
 
TROY KENT: 
I appreciate the honesty and maybe when one of the providers come up with their time to speak they will answer that question and staff can confirm or deny, I am not sure. What is interesting as well, looking at Volusia County's rates of being on the low end and I look at (Name) Lake on the high end. I am appreciative that you gave us some comparisons to look at. But, counsel I want to of course here from the rest of you and your thoughts and of course from the small business owners. To hear why they think we should go as high as we possibly are looking at. Thanks. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Councilman Santiago? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I'm going to ask and if you do not know it is alright. Do you know what the cost of a AAA membership is? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
I have no idea. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I pay cash. 
 
AAA tows people in case they get stuck in demand destination of a service area. Do you know what AAA pays the towing companies? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
I have no idea. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I am done. Hopefully I will find out. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Thank you. No more questions so we will have debate. Counsel would you like to hear from the public first? Let's do that. 
 
I will call you in the order that they were given to me. Helen Taylor? 
 
HELEN TAYLOR: 
Good morning my name is Helen Taylor and I am the owner of (Name) in Daytona Beach. Let me address the AAA question. The answer is AAA negotiates with the tow companies the rate they pay them. I am not a AAA provider, I have been in the past. I do not do it because they were paying the $23 for a five-mile tow. It is negotiable, there are other companies that will get more like 35. Which is not much when you were talking about fuel and insurance and cost of the truck. AAA makes it in volume and it is great for the consumer. I cannot complain, I might be wrong. Hundred and 50-ish dollars for the plus membership. But for the tow company it stinks. That is why most of us do not do AAA. Please give us a raise increase, as you are aware 22 years. My husband said anyone can get a tow truck but it's a lot to hold onto. With the cost of insurance going up, and the employment and fuel, we had a big fuel increase a while back. 
 
I was paying years ago, two dollars a gallon. I'm up to five dollars a gallon now. For diesel. OK? I don't think it's unreasonable for us to ask for us to increase it to the Flagler rates. Flagler is our sister county and I think that's what we should get. I'm from Daytona for 65 years with a woman owned business but had to tighten my belt because of the rates. The rates we are asking for are the nonconsensual toes, not the county because that's a contract and same with the city. F HP is not a contract. We apply and are accepted because of guidelines. And they do not set the rates, they are based on the County rates. The maximum County rates. So if I have a company in Voluisa County and I get approved for FHP they go to County rates and say the max you can charges this amount. They say if I charge more they will kick me off. That's the only way they regulate. The nonconsensual tow, sorry trespassing towing is a different story altogether. We are only asking for nonconsensual toes. FHP has a right to clear that road and that's why they are picky about who they allow onto their agenda. 
 
They inspect us once a year, require certain equipment and drivers… Am I up? Sorry. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Three minutes flies. Mark McNamara? Councilman Santiago? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Is there someone, I don't know how the Councilman and Chairman feel about this but is there someone within their group we can designate the expert we can ask questions to from the private industry? I don't want to ask the same question of every person I don't know if they have an assigned person and if they do… That way we can ask question from the private sector to one person. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
I will have them go last. Mark? 
 
SPEAKER: 
Good morning, Mark McNamara representing Daytona wrecker formally (unknown name) Glenn Ritchie. We have proudly been serving the community 39 years and I'm a resident of the County for 57 years. We are addressing the towing rates and the numbers you have gotten are wrong. 
 
I believe we are being misunderstood about the towing rates between trespass towing and law enforcement towing which is nonconsensual. 
 
So, law enforcement is pretty much FHP for the Highway Patrol. The sheriff does have a contract but the contract is just for the sheriff and with one company. That is not what we are here for. 
 
I would like to try to clear up this misunderstanding. Trespass towing, is a towing requested by an owner of a business or property for a vehicle that has been abandoned or not permitted to be on that property. These tows can be performed with a basic tow truck and driver, minimal insurance, no light requirement, no set hours and 99% of those cars, vehicles, are paid and picked up. Whereas law-enforcement towing which is nonconsensual for Highway Patrol, approximately 63% of vehicles are picked up. 37 are left behind and never paid for. 
 
We have specific equipment that we are required and trucks, extremely expensive insurance, such as workman compensation, cargo, liability, garage keeper etc. 
 
Large storage impounds and requirements that mandate us to have at least 250 vehicles spots. 
 
We also have to have security 24, lights/cameras/fencing, stuff like that. Emergency readiness 24/7, 365 days a year including four hurricanes, flooding, holidays, with train drivers and commercial drivers license. Hopefully this explains the difference between trespass and law enforcement. 
 
We are not seeking an increase for trespass towing. It can stay where it's at. We are asking for an alignment with the rates established by Flagler County for law enforcement towing which is FHP giving its proximity and similar population to our county. Any questions? 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
We will hold those until the end. Thank you. Amanda Balboa? 
 
 
SPEAKER: 
Thank you for hearing us out today. To provide some clarity we are not asking… 
 
SPEAKER: 
If you could pull the microphone down. 
 
SPEAKER: 
I want to provide clarity we are not asking for trespass towing and that's why was asking to speak in conjunction with Ms Janine. We are not asking about trespass towing and not talking about the individual contract with the sheriff's department is much as I like (indiscernible) there's no reason to get them involved and that's not what we are asking about. So there is misinformation or slight confusion. 
 
We are pleased to see we were on the agenda for the rate change and appreciate your time in that. We have been unable to secure a meeting to speak with you guys about this and I feel a lot of these misconceptions probably could've been hammered out quicker. 
 
Unfortunately, some of the rates are inaccurate as Ms Jeaniene stated maybe they have changed since, to the counties are not correct. It also did not include Putnam County our five neighboring counties, Brevard, Seminole etc. for that it would weigh the average vary greatly especially seeing that Putnam is one of the highest in the area. Those numbers are inaccurate based on that alone and I don't think you should pass that so the numbers are wrong and inaccurate. I don't need to tell you guys everything has increased. 
 
Labor rates have increased. Trucks are through the roof. It's just been a very long time and I apologize I've gotten off focus because I wanted to answer those questions. 
 
Anyway our proposed structure rate is unacceptable it's not accurate or fair. If there's anything you can do to help we appreciate it, if you have questions I'm happy to answer. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
We will hold questions until – for Glenn at the end. John Rogers? 
 
SPEAKER: 
Chairman, commissioners thank you. Staff, thank you. I know it takes a lot to put this package together. You guys dealt with the insurance after the hurricanes, we have been dealing with it for 10 years. Four and $500,000 a year to ensure a fleet. 24/7, 365 days a year, on I-4 right now we are 95 Volusia… (Away from mic) we have to respond with a truck called the rotator which is over $1 million in a 50 ton which is $700,000. About the cost of your fire engines. The only thing is, we only have 5 to 7 years to pay for them not like a house, you get a 30 year mortgage we have seven years to pay for a $1 million piece of equipment. 
 
We have to staff it, be ready 24/7… When the roads are shut down, and you guys are in traffic you don't want to be in traffic, you cost commoners a lot of money. Our job is to get there. The manager is right, we have a contract with the sheriff and has nothing to do with what we are talking about. However, we are talking about the DOT and FHP, and requirements they have and you guys said it, he's 100% right if you guys didn't set it, public might get fleeced. You have to put the board together to investigate overcharging. Some counties are using code enforcement. 
 
That's your next meeting. We are here because we desperately need an increase and we are asking this board, the policy makers to adopt the Flagler County rate. Flagler County did sit down with the towers, Putnam County did as well and the staff not the board members, they went down line item by line item and hashed it out and came to that price. 
 
We are asking you... We didn't ask to go line item by line item, we tried, you guys heard me, we asked for meeting, we tried. Flagler did an Putnam did. Putnam is higher than Flagler. We ask the policy Board to adopt the Flagler County rate, thank you. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
John Nicholson? 
 
SPEAKER: 
John Nicholson Daytona Beach side. I don't have a dog in the fight… 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Can't hear you. 
 
SPEAKER: 
I don't have a dog in the fight (Quietly/whispering) But it's something that is come up before and will come up again. I think they have answered the question whether the contract or not… They are bound by a contract and can get a raise but they are not bound by a contract and can get a raise. If that is solved and they can get a raise they should get a raise because in the past, you have not only this group and other groups, 20 years, 17 years, 15 years, those are too long. 
 
We are not accustomed to the inflation we have had the last 2 to 3 years. It's unusual. But it does happen. They got caught in it. And we have to rectify it. They should not lose their businesses or want for anything because inflation came and crippled them. 
 
If they can get a raise, we should give it to them to make them whole. What I'm asking you and the reason I'm up here is to head home again the fact that we should not allow anything to go 10/15/20/30 years without review. 
 
I have convinced one person, Mr Kent, that it should be done on a regular basis. Every year or two is too often. It's very time-consuming on the staff. But we should have every contract listed on a hard drive, and then when it comes to five years, it pops up. Let's take a look at it. 
 
Because we lost the halfpenny sales tax because we went 17 years without increasing the tax. We needed that halfpenny sales tax for infrastructure and we lost it. I'm asking to go through everything that we have in our documents, and anything over five years let's take a look at, you may not want to change it. But at least look at it and make sure that nothing goes too long because every year, they are losing money. If we don't update it. So I'm asking you to ask staff to look at what we have in contracts, and to update all of them and none of them should be more than five years at that rate. Thank you. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
The last speaker before he comes up, Glenn, you can start walking this way. The Councilman Santiago has asked, could we ask questions? That's a change of our rules. I'm not opposed to it, but I want to ask the council if anyone is opposed to that? We have a rule that we don't ask questions to speakers because of time. Although the County staff often deals with issues in the back of the room after they are done. Anyone opposed to it? 
 
TROY KENT: 
I'm not opposed to it but I actually like the idea, I just don't want this to become a part of our roles. I want to publicly say it that I'm OK with it now but it doesn't mean I will be OK with it if it happens again. I think it's appropriate. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I want to add on a case-by-case basis, we consider it. (Away from mic) it's warranted and saves us time and gives – I'm thinking about it almost like a land use issue so give the applicant – not an applicant but… 
 
SPEAKER: 
MrChair want to avoid some confusion on it. Your staff, Ms Jennings walked us through a survey of rates with your neighboring counties. We are waiting for the government to sign to see if you will sign it it takes effect July 1 that requires us, the county staff subject to whatever you decide, have a process for investigating complaints for towers that are not charging the right rate. Part of the law Mr Brown mentioned is adding language that if you don't set a maximum rate you default to basically FHP rate.  
 
MICHAEL DYER: 
You have a list of rates with a variety of fees. Everyone will see variation in them but, two terms you see a lot which you cannot see on the sheet, the nonconsensual two and the trespass two. That does not distinguish between the Sheriff directed towing versus a private property owner. The Sheriff rate though he has a process for selecting towers, the Sheriff will be subject to a maximum rate. 
 
He has contracts that have to expire to have rights that are identical to your current months. Eventually, they expire in 2025? August 2025. Whatever you do on rates will then apply to the Sheriff's office if they are agreeable understand that whatever you decide today they would also be subject to. 
 
Everyone is subject to it in Volusia County, except for on the state highways. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Glenn, if you would stick to the three minutes to begin with and we will have some questions. 
 
SPEAKER: 
I am Glenn Landau, (indiscernible) Daytona Beach. I would like to answer some of the questions and confusion the Council has. First you have to understand these fees only cover Florida Highway Patrol and trespass telling. Most have… Volusia County Sheriff is the same way. They did their contract, the tower that pays the most back to the agency has exclusive rights. Back in the day it was called the franchise fee. I am not sure what term they use today to skirt around Florida statute 125047, the red tab in your book. 
 
There agreements are not affected unless they amend those agreements or rebid them. The misrepresentation on the spreadsheet, which is in your yellow tab, Seminole County is incorrect, St. John's is going up for an increase, (indiscernible) is incorrect in orange county as it incorrect. They were updated in 2000 2003. 
 
The Seminole and Orange dropped along with a bunch of other ones. The cost of living increase (indiscernible) in the last 22 years is 58.6%. Your orange and purple tabs in your book. We are being offered 12% on our class A, 90% of our work is class A work. 
 
We all know trespass telling is the black I've been industry. If District 2 was here he could come in. The numbers you got from the sheriff are low because those are the road companies that are not turning them in. Mark spoke about trespass telling. Most of the complaint come from trespass towing. They are unregulated companies, they do not care. They do not own their properties. They can run across that bridge and grabbed two or three cars in the time I can do one law-enforcement car. 
 
They do not have the freedom, we do not have the freedom they do to work when we want. Our officers have to be staffed, they are on call 24 hours a da seven days a week. Whether it is a holiday, a flood our sunshine we have to respond. Our sister counties, Putnam, Lake, Seminole and Brevard. They should have been used and every one of their rates are higher. That is why we ask, adopt them but as far as trespass telling freeze it. Do not increase it, you are giving them a license to steal. To make a more stringent. They need to be locked down to no increases. You can see Seminole County did it. All those little red tabs in your book that were provided to you, that are the laws we have to follow. 
 
These 44 pages here are what our laws are going to change to July 1. Thank you for your time. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Councilman San Diego? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Thank you Glenn for taking the questions. (indiscernible) expertise and thank you John for being here I have a lot of respect for you. As I go through these questions, it is a part of balance. We have a role to play here to make sure (indiscernible) for constituents and making sure they are not being gouged. I am not accusing you. 
 
I think there is some confusion at least on my part. 
 
This scenario that John explained a few minutes ago when he gets back on the highway, it is blocked. What category is that from? 
 
SPEAKER: 
That's under your nonconsensual rate which a Highway Patrol. Most of our cities and counties have their own agreements and contracts. They will not be affected unless they adopt these rates. But Highway Patrol is our main concern. They rotate and use different companies. We have to close the roads. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
The County rate does not apply to that? 
 
SPEAKER: 
They apply to the Florida Highway P 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
You are asking us to not touch the trust side of it? Not the County rate? 
 
SPEAKER: 
Yes. 
 
SPEAKER: 
Those people are going to get paid. They go over the bridge, they grab these cars and hold them hostage from the people. If you increase that rate for them 
it is a win. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Sheriffs office pulls me over and the deputies decides this car is getting towed. If we change this rate today when that rate affect that? 
 
SPEAKER: 
If they amend the contract, which usually has a clause they can amend it annually with the same increase. If it is a 20% increase, they can ask for another 20% increase. Any of the cities that are under contract, they are not automatically (indiscernible) 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I am with you on the contract side but the rate would apply right? 
 
SPEAKER: 
To a contract… The Florida statute 125047 says they cannot accept the money (indiscernible) 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
You are talking about the Sheriff's office? 
 
SPEAKER: 
All cities. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
In essence, in July as we heard, July 2025 that contract is up for renewal. 
 
SPEAKER: 
Depending on how they renew it. They could go back in rotation like they used to we do not know. 
 
DAVE ZINSNER: 
I think I heard the Sheriff's office receives some money back from you? Can you give us some insight? 
 
SPEAKER: 
The towing companies that do the work for the Sheriff Department three companies are doing it and they pay back, I do not know what the numbers. I heard 100 $130 I do not know what the exact numbers are. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
For every time the Sheriff's Deputy calls a towing company to tOW the Sheriff's office gets $117?? 
 
(indiscernible) from what I understand 
 
I will ask that question separately. I will get clarification from our staff. 
 
If they get hundred and $17 (indiscernible) 
 
SPEAKER: 
That is what it is now. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Now I am even more confused. 
 
SPEAKER: 
I agree. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Please let Glenn answer. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
The cap is 125 and you have to give the Sheriff's office hundred and 17? 
 
SPEAKER: 
Correct. Most of the laws you see here with red tabs I was involved. That is one of the reasons why we did Florida statute… Volusia County is probably the only county out of 67 counties that, I will use the term, extortion fee against the towing companies. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
If I could get staff up Mr. Chair? 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Which one? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Can you bring some clarification to this 117 they are saying they pay back? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
it is an administrative fee. I understand most of the tolling bills they are getting that have a lot of other things added. It is not hundred $25 bill typically for nonconsensual towing that the Sheriff is doing. It could run up to five or six, $700. For the toe. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
For the owner of the vehicle I assumed there were other fees. There was a statement made as well that money reverts back to the county from the Sheriff's office? 
 
JEANIENEJEANIENE JENNINGS: 
... If it goes into the Sheriff's account… As far as I know. Goes 
 
SPEAKER: 
The Sheriff… It goes right back to the Sheriff. We see those numbers and Ryan will come and talk about it. We have a lot of history, they get re-budgeted right back to the Sheriff. 
 
MICHAEL DYER: 
The amount of money the sheriff receives from the towing company is pursuant to statute all fees for service the share charges, whether it is the city of Daytona, all of those services are related back to the county. We have those revenues budgeted in the sheriffs fund as a revenue source to offset how much his budget is. We preplan how much towing fees will be for funding the sheriffs budget. 
 
The money does bounce around but ultimately it is used by the sheriffs office. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I think I have something else. I know I threw in the question about AAA, and knew the rate was going to be a low. Go to the microphone please. 
 
SPEAKER: 
AAA is a whole different ballgame. Those rates what they are paying the tower are considerably higher than what Helen said. A lot of these issues could be resolved if we set down with staff like we did in 98 and 2002. There are a lot of changes and the biggest confusion again is the difference between trespass towing and nonconsensual. (indiscernible) ordinances even through legislature. We did not break them apart, now we all have the opportunity to break them apart. If you go back and review some of these, Seminole County our sister city has two different rates. Trespass telling is considerably less. No mileage, no nothing. 
 
It is flat rate, you do not even give them the gate keys. If they are out there grabbing those cars. We'll do it, we have to. But it is the black eye of our industry. We do not make that our goals. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I get it. Let me put in one more question. If I get called for - the Sheriff office goes to tow my vehicle, I do not know if you have a contract with the Sheriff's office. Based on your knowledge, what would that cost be to me, on average, for that vehicle to stay there one day? You pick up my vehicle into the land and it goes to your yard for one day. What is that cost? 
 
SPEAKER: 
Depending on your miles you have 125. The mileage, if it is over the mileage. And one day storage. That basically, ... Storage goes by calendar days so it came in on Tuesday and you picked it up on Wednesday. You have to day storage if it is over so many hours. $25, $20 a day. You would have... For some reason I know through my office and contracts most of them are 189.25. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
No other fees? 
 
SPEAKER: 
The thought you would have. Towing and storage. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I know that is a very basic scenario, but approximately hundred and $75, hundred and 17 of that goes back to the Sheriff's office? 
 
SPEAKER: 
I've been complaining about that for years. That is why the legislative made a statue that is not being followed in Volusia County. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
If that 117 wasn't there the consumer would pay 50 bucks? 
 
SPEAKER: 
They would've paid whatever the county rate would've been. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Assuming (indiscernible) was honest in the business. 
 
SPEAKER: 
… 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I know I am diving deep but I would like to get this fundamental understanding for me and what is happening to the consumer. If that 117 wasn't there, essentially the remaining amount. You get 50 bucks approximately under that scenario. And you do it every day they call you? If they called you every day and said 50 bucks, would you continue to do it? 
 
SPEAKER: 
I stopped doing sheriffs telling. I stopped bidding. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
What people are doing it? 
 
SPEAKER: 
Now with motorhomes and boats we are paying to disposal we are paying the city to do their work.  
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I'm not denying cost has gone up but I'm trying to balance your needs and protecting consumers. 
 
SPEAKER: 
I've done it for 47 years and fully understand how confused staff had to be to work on this because I had to call some of the counties and operators in the counties and say how does your rate work because it does make sense? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Thank you. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Councilman Johansson do you have a question for Glenn? 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
For Jeaniene. I'm now a little upset that I didn't do more Flagler research but what was the impetus for Flagler moving forward? Do know? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
I don't. But I would like to clarify, the line item that is paid to the sheriff, it is a line item. They can put in – they can bid what they want. Those prices as you have heard, they are different. And I think we have one that's even $25 back. That is the price that bidders put into bid. It's a multiple award. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
That's going down to my next question. This nonconsensual, that is a contracted item? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
The Sheriff's nonconsensual, the first thing I said is nonconsensual, is law enforcement. It could be the Highway Patrol but that is – those prices on nonconsensual, or what we put into our solicitation and we live by the Sheriff's office. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
So, the companies that are here today, entered in a contract three years ago, and in agreed-upon price that we are talking about renegotiating now? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
They entered into a contract that had the nonconsensual, they can only bid that nonconsensual set prices. Anything optional in there they asked for including the money they bid to pay back to the sheriff gets included in their total contract. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
I got that and that is the argument right now? That we want to raise the rate that they contracted 2 to 3 years ago? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
Correct. But they wanted for the whole, they want to change the ordinance so they can also apply those same rates to Florida Highway Patrol and any other law enforcement agency. It sounds like it's Florida Highway Patrol relies on our ordinance to set their rates. But we also rely on our own rates and our bid process. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Stay there, County attorney? The current Florida statute, if we can't come up with a plan, it will fall back to the Florida Highway Patrol rates and the Highway Patrol rates are dependent on us right now? 
 
SPEAKER: 
There is… I think that's an accurate summation but House Bill 179 is up in the (indiscernible) area… Subsection D4 to statue it… (Quietly/whispering) 166 which is applicable municipalities it says – it will say once the government signs it, the county municipality establishes maximum rates as established in paragraph C which is what you are talking about here. This maximum rate on the website and best resolution for complaints regarding fees… Areas were no maximum rates as described impaired... Under statue it 321 (Quietly/whispering) (Away from mic). I heard the gentleman said today that FHP defaults to the published rates currently and as I read the statute I presume if FHP is in process of establishing new rates. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Got it. My concern right now and I know enough about contracts to be dangerous (Static) that we are capable of doing contracts that have CPI increases in them if we need them and this may or may not have been done here. 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
This was one of the earlier contracts so it doesn't have an out clause and doesn't have a change clause in it. That is why needs to die before we can do anything with it. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
OK. It was done three years ago? It wasn't renewed it was initiated? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
A brand-new bid. Correct. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
And that contract didn't have any stipulation that said if inflation goes down and things get much better and insurance goes down, not that it ever will, that the rates would go down accordingly? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
My understanding, they may – if I had to guess they will put it in but they didn't have a price determination language like our standard contracts have. Standard contracts of the county have an option or unusual costs and also using a CPR PPI to increase or decrease pricing. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
That didn't occur in this contract? And there's two more years left in this contract? 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
One year. 25. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
I'm curious to know if Flagler was renegotiating and that's what brought them to the table? I want to know the motivation and it may be advocating by the vendors as well. But I will look into that a little bit. If you find anything, let me know. Thank you. 
 
GEORGE RECKTENWALD: 
Along that line occurs to me, with this law coming into play and the fact that the default rate would be the state rate, if you don't have a maximum rate, and the fact that every county around seems to be right now, changing that rate, tells me that the industry, I want to make sure that counties had a maximum rate set. Otherwise, it would go to the state default rate and that can be an average of the entire state. I don't know… The Turnpike rate right now is our rate. $125. 
 
So I think that's not a coincidence, every single County seems to be facing this right now. And I'm pretty sure it's being driven so that to make sure County has an acceptable maximum rate versus default rate for the state. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Thank you. Councilman Santiago? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I want to make a motion Mr Chair and my motion, is because I think there are still unanswered questions for me. I think today's hearing has brought more confusion. And specifically because the only rate we are being asked to change is the other rate. 
 
JEANIENE JENNINGS: 
Nonconsensual. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I'm concerned with information I don't have any other data from the Sheriff's office. They said they would accept whatever we did but I don't know if they accept what I'm thinking about proposing because I'm looking for the concern and I'm very concerned with some of the pieces I heard. 
 
And I don't want to be upset with it because I don't have the other side of the information and why we charge administrative fees. There may be a valid reason. 
 
Also with the fact that the state law that comes into effect in July, I'm also encouraged now to propose – I move that we table this item until second meeting in August. The reason for that date is it gives the state law time to be enacted and allows the state to come up with some rulemaking possibly within that window that would give us more guidance. 
 
I don't want to displace the fact that you have a legitimate concern but I'm not – I don't have enough information to fight for you, fight for the public, there is still more information for me. If I go to a vote today I am a NO because I don't have enough and I'm just one vote. 
 
In my opinion, we owe it to get more data learning what we learned today with how these fees are being assessed. Yes everything is gone up but they have gone up for the consumers as well. The person paying for the towing, their life expenses have gone up as well so we have to be careful that these people remain in business, they are charging a legitimate fee and our consumers are being watched for and making sure that fees within those fees, are not attacks. I have a personal opinion that I've had for years that any time government collects money, I don't care what you title it, if it goes to the government, its a tax. 
 
I don't care what other names you have on it. We have to watch for those at any time. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
The motion on the floors to table this until the second meeting in August. Is there a second? If there is no second, that motion… 
 
TROY KENT: 
I want to hear from the other people because I think Mr Santiago brings up a valid point. I'm pleased we are having the conversation, because there will possibly be movement here. But I guess procedurally, if you want a second now or it will die, I will second it. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
OK. Vice Chair Kent makes the second for the purpose of discussion. Councilman Robins? 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
Our towing folks, we hear you loud and clear. It's a mature approach that Mr Santiago has proposed and it will give us an opportunity to look at things holistically, and look at all sides of this. Sometimes slow is fast and there will be a chance for the state to do what they are trying to do but also to give us the opportunity to look at this instead of one-sided, no sided. I want everyone to be as happy as possible and I think it's the best way to put it so David I support you. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
It's been 22 years I disagree with you guys. I believe we should recommend the Flagler rates because these guys haven't had an adjustment for 22 years. Again, I believe in free enterprise and (Quietly/whispering) This laissez-faire economy I don't think we should be telling these guys what they should be capped at. None of this appears to be punitive or extortion or anything like that I don't think they are unfair and they aren't even doubling their rate. I think every thing is doubled in the last 22 years. Real estate has doubled, gas, everything is doubled. (Away from mic) over the last 22 years. They aren't even asking to double their rates and to make them wait anything longer would be unfair. (Static) (Away from mic) think about the typical scenario, you have a car wreck and we are not capping with the emergency room doctors to charge the patients when they come in, we are not capping with the ambulance crew to charge for the ambulance ride to the hospital, why do we What these guys will get for towing the cars away? 
 
Nothing here seems exorbitant, it's just I believe the intent of this whole law is to keep people from getting fleeced and I don't see any evidence of any fleecing through these prices. I think, I disagree I think we should vote today and recommend we vote for the Flagler rates. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
I'm not sure if we are keeping up with the list but… OK, Councilman Robins? 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
Don, I agree with you. In terms of the rates, that very well may be the direction I go. But also, I don't want to go into this thing half cocked with not – there may be a little more of this to get me over that line because I do believe that I don't think they should also be absorbing the burden of inflationary spending coming from other places. We are all feeling it, I just think we can do this 100% the right way and I think we can get there, maybe close, that's where I'm at. But I would like to see the additional information and weigh it all out. But I get what you're saying but we need to look at it more.  
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I think what is has a first for me, my questioning says $175 tow in the most simple standard, $117 of that goes to the government. That muddies the water for me to say what is going on here? Is the system broken? Is a legitimate fee that the Sheriff's office should charge? I do not know. That is why it cannot make a decision and will vote known today. We need answers. 
 
What protections or things can we change to ensure that we heard $25? It seems like it is one-sided, a wild West as to how that fee is assessed. I do not know. Let us get information and make that decision. That is why I proposed to table it. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Councilman Dempsey? 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
I agree with you about the government should not be taking a cut of this. It creates a disincentive with a DUI case as opposed to having it towed. I would always encourage them, the family member to take the car. But now I find out there is a a fiscal incentive for the sheriff to hack the car towed potentially. I am gathering that but still I do not think it is fair for these guys to wait any longer to get what is probably five or 10 years past due. Inflation has been running amok the last couple of years so I think they needed sooner than later. 
 
We can probably pass it and look into that later on, about cutting the County share out and amending it as far as adopting low rates now. It would be better to do it now. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Thank you. David on the one hand I think it makes a lot of sense. This is confusing, we heard a lot of things that we really had not had time to consider. But Don, I think I am leaning your way. 
 
One of the things I see is that this is not really a free market system. All of these nonconsensual tows. Does not supply and demand. They do not have any say. Maybe they broke the law and parked in the wrong place. We are being asked to be the cap people from being fleeced and yet these companies are mandated to go and tow at a rate that we approve which is not part of the free market system. 
 
It is confusing. If you do not agree with it, we are getting ready to take a vote. We can vote this down and you could make another motion to approve. But right now the motion on the floor is to table until the second meeting in August. 
 
For me, I think that is too long. We could do in July, but the motion is second meeting in August. 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
Chair, can we ask Councilman San Diego to be amicable and can we get this back sooner than the second meeting in August? We already hashed out the meat and potatoes of this. If we need more information, can we get it for the next meeting and it will give him a piece of comfort instead of dragging this thing out? 
 
GEORGE RECKTENWALD: 
Not the next meeting. I would say the earliest I could do would be, we only have one meeting in July. I would say maybe the first meeting in August would be the best I could do. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
If I could? That also gives time for the state law to be enacted and see what the results of that word during that time period as well. I picked the last meeting in August because I knew we would have the first meeting in July. 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
I am supporting everybody here, I just want to make sure. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
To meetings, three meetings to wait. I know you waited 22 years. Three meetings to get it right is not a lot to ask for. 
 
I will amend the date (indiscernible) 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
As the second year of the motion I'm alright with that. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
The motion on the floor right now is the first meeting of August to bring this back. 
 
I would, I am going to call for the vote. I will say this, I think it would be a good idea if this passes and it is going to August, I hope that the tow truck drivers will reach out to counsel. And you have to ask us individually- 
 
GEORG RECKTENWALD: 
Also using that time from here to August will give us time to meet- 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
That is where I was going 
 
GEORGE RECKTENWALD: 
I would like to ask that maybe they come up with a small committee of three or four. I do not have to meet with the entire industry. If they could do that, we can use that time to meet with them. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Could I at guidance to that? 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Councilman Santiago? 
 
GEORGE RECKTENWALD: 
We work hand-in-hand with the Sheriff's office. There is a body of work that is the Sheriff, but this is much larger than the Sheriff. It is not all on his shoulders either. But we will meet with the industry and that will give us that time. The good news is I think we have direction to know we will be updating them. They should take a little comfort in that. 
 
Now it is just what numbers we will look at and use. We will also update and go back because it is a changing environment. We will update those numbers for the various counties and make sure we have what we are supposed to have. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
If our legal department can get an answer to Glenn's comment, I think the term they used to use franchise fees. He thinks there is a legal issue there as to how that fee is being assessed as well. I would like to get a legal analysis on that. 
 
GEORGE RECKTENWALD: 
We will meet with them and discuss and come back 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
The motion on the floor now is to table to the first meeting in August and between now and then staff will meet with you. You can meet with any council member if you request a meeting. 
 
Carissa would you call the role please? 
 
KRISTEN GREEN: 
Mr. Robbins? 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
No. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Let me restate the motion clearly, for all of us. The motion on the table is that we table this until the first meeting in August.  
 
KARISSA GREEN: 
Mr. San Diego? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
No. 
 
(Rollcall) 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
The motion passes five to 1. 
 
We will see you in August. 
 
Thank you all. 
 
That brings us to item 5 resolution 2024 rezoning from agriculture A1- 
 
KARISSA GREEN: 
You actually skipped over item 4 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
I did. Maybe I need - item 4 alcohol… 
 
SPEAKER: 
The presentation as part of the packet but if it is the councils pleasure I could offer some introductory comments unless there is a motion to approve. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Are there any questions? Is there a motion? David Santiago moves to approve. 
 
SPEAKER: 
Staff recommendation is C, using some funds that would result in 500,000 in general fund savings. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Moved to prove with staff recommendations. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Item C. 
 
SPEAKER: 
One item of clarification if I may? You selected one of the agencies and the agenda item to receive the ARPA funds. I would ask if you give staff leeway there in terms of determining which agencies use the funds because there is additional reporting. Rather than a selecting Halifax, give us the opportunity to negotiate within these? 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Would you like to amend your motion? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Yes. I amend my motion to include staff guidance to issue the funds accordingly as stated by Mr. Brett. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Is there a second to the motion? 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
I have a question. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Councilman Johansson makes second you said you had a question? 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
With that stipulation for the ARPA funds, at the end of the day everybody gets the same amount that option C shows correct? 
 
SPEAKER: 
That is correct. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Any other questions? Any comment on the motion? Which is to allow the staff guidance to negotiate? We do have questions. Questions or comments? 
 
SPEAKER: 
I had a healthy conversation with Doctor (Name) in depth about this. My comfort level was put at so much ease because of his competency and his professionalism. And I just wanted to publicly state that. He is a great driver at the helm for things like this. Doctor (Name) thank you. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Michael Dyer? Was that a pocket dial? Any other comments? Questions? 
 
Will you call the role? 
 
KARISSA GREEN: 
(Rollcall) 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Motion is approved unanimously six to 0. That brings us to item 5, rezoning prime agricultural. 
 
Director Irwin? 
 
SPEAKER: 
Today coming from you as a request for rezoning of the property owner, this is coming to you from recommendation of both staff.. Land development… Currently resulted in letter A1. This is consistent with the future land use map, the main issue is that the property owner seems to divide the property into two separate parcels, has been identified that that is feasible with the zoning but there are weapons on site which do not count toward the density requirements any applicant is aware of those issues and wants to proceed forward with the zoning. This is coming forward to the recommendation both approved by our staff and PLDRC. We are available if there are any questions. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Quick question, they are not making this change to develop with 12 houses? They want to add another house for a family member? 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Second Johansson. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
We have a motion to approve by vice chair Kent, seconded by Councilman Johansson. Any other questions or comments? 
 
TROY KENT: 
I am not an expert in land use and planning but Clay Irvin is. It carries a lot of weight with me when I read the report Clay, and see that you and your staff have gone through this with a fine tooth comb and you are all recommending approval. 
 
SPEAKER: 
Thank you. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
All in favour say I? Any opposed? Motion carries six to 0. Now we have a series of resolutions and we will start with item 6, resolution awarding nonexclusive waste collection and disposal franchises to Anderson rentals.  
 
SPEAKER: 
This is a noninclusive commercial waste hauling agreement with Anderson Rentals, we estimate annual fee revenue of $1800. (Away from mic). 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
OK. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Moved to approve. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Moved to approve by Councilman Johansson. 
 
TROY KENT: 
Second, Kent. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Second by Vice-Chair Kent. Questions? If it Santiago the stop 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
German a comment, I will wait for them to stop 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Are there any aggressions? Comments David Santiago. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I want to thank staff were proposing again as a nonexclusive. I think last year did the same thing. I certainly wish our cities would follow that methodology. And as part of educating the public as to how this process works, I want to see what happens in other government entities that do not do nonexclusive, they pay the government national monies to have disagreement. And what that does is it raises the cost of your trash, particularly in the commercial sector is what happens. 
 
You will see where, a scenario, you will get the container or have to get a container for your commercial or any other area. That fee in some cases, 3 to 4 times more than it is in the private sector for you to get if they did not have disagreement. 
 
In other words we are doing it right. We are letting the free market work its way, and I'm happy that it's this way. Thank you Mr Chair. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
You're welcome. Any comments? Questions? All in favor of the resolution say Aye. Any opposed? Item 6 passes unanimously 6-0 which means us to item 7, also noninclusive commercial solid waste collection. And disposal franchise to Hubbard Construction company. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Moved to approve, Johansson. 
 
TROY KENT: 
Second. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
(Laughs) this motion is made to approve by Councilman Johansson, and the second was by Vice-Chair Kent. And apparently they don't have any questions for you. Any comments? Michael Dyer. 
 
MICHAEL DYER: 
I have to apologize Mr Chair, apparently I keep hitting the button inadvertently. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Actually I see Russ doing it when you aren't looking. 
 
(Laughter) 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
It's your birthday right? 
 
MICHAEL DYER: 
Yeah, sorry about that. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Questions, comments, all in favor of this noninclusive commercial solid waste collection say Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries 6:0, brings us to item 8, next nonexclusive commercial solid waste collection and disposal franchise to JJ's Waste and Recycling. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Moved to approve. 
 
TROY KENT: 
Second. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
No one wants to hear from you on this one. 
 
Motion to approve by Jake Johansson. Second by Vice-Chair Kent. Questions? Comments? 
 
All in favor say Aye. Any opposed? And that resolution also passes unanimously, 6:0. 
 
Bringing us to item 9, amendment number one to agreement number WG002 with the Florida Department of environ with the protection and budget resolution appropriating grant funds with a revenue of $12,750,000. 
 
SPEAKER: 
Correct, this is an amendment Simmler to the one we had last meeting. DP is granting us an additional 12 million+ dollars for our Southeast regional wastewater reclamation facility which is down in Oak Hill. It serves Oak Hill and portions of Edgewater. This doubles the amount of grant money we have earmarked for this project, just on the $12 million we dissipate design be collated the summer. Substantial completion of the construction in the winter of 2026. 
 
Recommend approval of this amendment, and happy to answer any questions. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Are there any questions for Director Bartlett? Is there a motion? 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Motion to approve. 
 
SPEAKER: 
Second. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Motion to approve by Councilman Johansson, second by Councilman Robins. Comments? Questions? All in favor say Aye. Any opposed? And the motion is approved for the revenue of $12.7 million item 9. 
 
Which brings us to item 10. 
 
GEORGE RECKTENWALD: 
Mr Chair, for item 10 I was just informed this morning, or we were informed by the apartment of transportation this is a lap agreement. So there is federal funding involved. They inadvertently missed a step in the review. So out of an abundance of caution, I would ask that we move this item and will place it back on a later meeting, hopefully the next one. But I will just say a later meeting pending the successful review of the department for habitation post 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
OK, can I get a motion to table this to an undetermined date but soon? 
 
TROY KENT: 
I will make that motion. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Second. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Motion by Vice-Chair Kent, seconded by Councilman Johansson to table it until we have all the information to bring it back. 
 
All in favor say Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries 6:0. 
 
Item 11, (Unknown Term) was a 5 Year Capital Projects Plan. Oh, Aaron. 
 
GEORGE RECKTENWALD: 
Aaron is the guy who has to put up with everybody bringing the stuff to him. So let him do the presentation of the stop we do have division and department heads available for questioning. Go ahead. 
 
AARON VAN KLEECK: 
Alright, just a fairly quick presentation, most of the slides are here for your information purposes on the public. We are here to answer any cushions you have. 
 
Just to note on the process outline. This plan is reviewed and updated annually each year. Years two through five starter on all the spec sheets that were attached to this item are there for financial planning purposes. The funding is appropriated until is included in the budget were brought forward to you guys in a budget resolution.tools are truly a plan B go back and update every year depending on change in direction or what have you. 
 
Some statistics for you to review. Some facilities maintenance statistics. Your next a terrific types of projects, and then just a little funding request by project type. The capital basement project, small capital and capital improvement gives you a total, and then the funding on identified projects. The start over there on the far right. 
 
Tells you what capital replacement projects are. Tells you what small capital and capital improvements are. We've been over this plenty of times before. 
 
In the capital improvement funding not identified. Presenting the projects with funding not identified was part of the internal audit record edition we have been following. Currently we have $945 million worth of projects were funding has not been identified. The majority of those projects are for roads. There will be a separate presentation on road program brought at a later date. 
 
And then important to note, our capital program is mostly "Pay-as-you-go". We don't take our debt for our capital program unless it is in an enterprise fund. Where the SunRail, we took our debt for SunRail in the general fund, that's the only debt we have. 
 
And we do continually seek grants was a return live funding sources to fund our product whenever possible. 
 
And these are the highlighted large projects that we wanted to get in front of you for a little bit of direction. In addition to any quotients that you might have on projects that are on the list, we have the judicial court complex that would require debt to fund a project of this size. The sheriff administration complex which was a new request from the sheriff's office. 
 
And in the southeast area land fill construction. This one is a large number. He will be taking out debt for this project. It's in the Enterprise Fund, the landfill fund. 
 
And then Pfc. Emery Bennett Park Expansion Phase 1. That was part of the (Unknown Term) study, and look is at a more detailed presentation on the road project will be brought back to counsel on a separate presentation. 
 
And like I said we are available for any questions you may have. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Just a quick question so that it's clear to the public. I know I am getting emails, probably the rest of the Council, about the funding for the motorcross. People asking me when to do a vote for that. 
 
We didn't vote for it, we will vote for it when we get all the information for stop this is on here because you to make a job of trying to plan for money. It's based on the figure Dempsey suggested after hearing about 10 million. It's less. 
 
So anyway the public knows. This is just good planning, but it will come back to the Council. 
 
AARON VAN KLEECK: 
To that point we have it in the budget for planning. A project of that size would come to counsel later for contract anyway. Even if you approve a budget without money in there, the contract is still coming back at a later date. It's not just a one-time shop. 
 
GEORGE RECKTENWALD: 
The idea is we are now in really the... I don't want to see the final, but really intense state of our budget preparation. 
 
So these are the capital parts that we grouped and picked a time today to put them all together. In some years that did not occur, but I think with recognitions from our auditor and discussions with the Council, it was important that we had pulled these out and just talked about them separately. 
 
Direction is to go forth, and then they will be put into the budget numbers. You are going to see, is it at the next meeting? Will be the five-year forecast which is really putting in the presumptive budget along with what we think is going to happen over the next five years because we don't budget in a vacuum. A lot of these projects of course will occur over multiple years. 
 
So we are building that now. And then with that five-year forecast. And then we come back, and of course going to set the tone and get your budget proposal in July. And that gives us August to chew on it and September to vote on it. 
 
So all those out there listening know exactly what the process is. So anything today, they shouldn't be alarmed or anything. This is a discussion as to come "Do you want to see it coming up in the budget or not?" 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Thank you for the clarification. Councilman Robins. 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
Thanks chair, real quick. For the motocross track. That estimate number there, that's general fund? 
 
AARON VAN KLEECK: 
We have three and half million for the total estimate, half as general fund and half is ECHO. 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
Counsel, I don't know how you will feel. I don't know if general fund is appropriate, especially with what we are doing within other areas. 
 
I would be more amicable or leaning to play point of like a direct expenditure from ECHO, which is in our wheelhouse and not kind of taking it from general fund. Which we hear growth doesn't pay for itself, was because we are spending the money in other areas except are probably more of where it should be going to stop that's just my opinion. So... 
 
Council would you be amicable to take that general fund number off the table and focus on ECHO, or is this the right time to do that? 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Brad Burbaugh, you are in the house? 
 
GEORGE RECKTENWALD: 
Certainly, now is definitely the time. If you want to discuss how you pay for something. That's definitely the case. 
 
Again, we are putting together, and remember, the budget in total. I think what these guys have done is try to make some assumptions here for the purposes of the discussion. Yes it's fine too if you want to direct us to pay for it, or release budget for it, excuse me. One particular area, we can do that. 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
Thanks County Manager. 
 
I would be willing to make that motion if need be to be very target specific. Even if... We may not vote for this thing. I mean we get thrown something, I don't know. I would like to see a very target specific for the money. Be used for ECHO. We have money there. Let us use it. And not keep bobbing the general fund if possible. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
OK. I think you are right. As far as making a motion on that. I think you could make a motion that we do not spend general fund. That is paid for by ECHO. And again, this is for planning. You're not voting to do it yet. You are just floating to move it, TIVOLI send the message, no general fund spending. 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
Chair I will make the motion going forward that if we do decide to go forward with the facility, we are really specific when it comes to funding. That it comes from the ECHO fund only. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Do we have a second on that motion for discussion?  
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I will second for discussion purposes and I have a note for the sponsor if I may, Mr Chair. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
You have a question for the sponsor? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Of the amendment. My second is, we can keep talking, where have a problem is I think this is just the planning document. Right? And I would hate to do a motion that specifically says we cannot do something. Right? 
 
Can we amend that to just say that at this point as part of the planning, we would like to consider taking that out of ECHO? And then we will deal with it when the time comes. 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
I agree, but Chair is OK… 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Yes, this is a necessary discussion I think. 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
I agree, David, we are in the planning but here we are taking money or projecting money to be taken out and I can the motion to take the 1.7 million and put it toward stormwater or roads. I made a proposal earlier that we start our road, guaranteed road program every year. 
 
Or you know, something of that nature to help out in that area. But I just think, there taxing these folks in all directions. We are taxing them on ECHO which everyone agreed to, or 70- somewhat percent. And there is a pile in there to be used and we have been pretty good with that. 
 
I think the money is there. If we can agree that we can maybe free that have or apply somewhere else where it may be better needed, I would like to go that route. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Mr Chairman? I am OK with that. I want to take it out of ECHO also, I was just trying to be preemptive when we do make the decision for or against and how we are going to fund it, and depending on how we decide on that date to fund it, if it comes out that we are going to maybe fund it partially ECHO and partially general, not suggesting anyone way but if that discussion does go down that path, I want to be open to consider that I'm not say "you voted to not do that." 
 
Which is OK. I can support that here now because I believe in the philosophy that everything is permanent until you change it. You're doing this, and we can change it later. 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
Let me hear from Mr Kent and Mr Johansson and Don and I will pull it if we just decide… 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I just want to put it out there that we can change it later. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
We have a motion on the floor, but we will let the other councilmembers speak. Vice chair Kent? 
 
TROY KENT: 
Thank you, chairman. Do not put my name down. I put it up because I want to talk with some of the things but since I'm in the rotation I want to address that. I wish you would not have changed your mind on that because we are today, and I think, let me just stop for a moment. 
 
I think we can get there. I have not thrown out the idea that there could be a public/private partnership. And we can make this happen, and I like Don's numbers a lot more than I like staffs numbers. Even though Don has not voted for one thing I want to do but I'm still going to try to help and support him (Laughs). 
 
But, we heard from a woman this morning and the thing that stuck out with you what she said, you know, "ECHO, first thing is environmental." 
 
(Laughs) It just makes me think, why are we going to pigeonhole ourselves just with that? I like where you're going with that. You know? It does not mean we cannot change our mind down the road. With any of it, but right now it kind of locks us into it. 
 
I am a no on that because of being constrained with it. If you can get Mr Robbins to change it, then I might be able to support it, or if I can get him to change it, so we are not just pigeonholed into only using, looking at ECHO for that. I'm not sure, but there could be people who are extremely passionate about ECHO who are screaming right now on their personal devices going, you know, "explain how that is an ECHO project!" 
 
I like having good answers. I don't know that I have a good one for that so I am out on that, if we are just going to constrain it to ECHO. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Councilman Johansson? 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
So, a few things. The E in ECHO is environment, but I think the O is outdoors. Don it is not proposing an indoor motocross facility. 
 
So, I know people on their personal devices are going to say "hey, how about trails?" But I think it is important that we look at that in its totality. I am not a big fan of using general funding dollars for this, as some had pointed out. 
 
But there are other options. By saying, just using ECHO I think we constrain ourselves to just using it even if it is in theory, the thought is out there. If we say "let's take it out of the CIP in the planning stage right now" the general fund dollars, that will make us make the hard decision when it comes time to vote. Whether we use those general fund dollars, and put it back in and go "OK, guys, let's suck it up." 
 
Or member, budgeting is, these guys are building the budget to: A) figure out how much we're going to tax people. And B) kind of have a plan for them to execute. 
 
OK, they have a five-year plan, counsel told us we are going to build a new courthouse, we are going to renovate a courthouse or whatever the case may be. 
 
So, let's proceed with that thought process, or they didn't want anything to do with that. Right now, we're kind of thinking motocross is in our future somewhere. We don't know how to spend it, but I'm with Councilman Robins. 
 
I'm not too keen on spending general fund dollars on it yet. So to take it out, we send a message. We don't want to spend general fund dollars on it. Nothing is permanent. We might have to, but right now we do not want to plan in our five-year plan to spend government dollars on it. 
 
Therefore, we will not think about considering taxing people for it in the short term. Now, if ECHO's fat in a year or two and we have to write that check, maybe we use it. If it is not, maybe we do not have to. 
 
So, and that is not to say there is some other state grant that comes out, you know, what of the motocross lobby goes to the state and says "we are going to give you a couple billion dollars for motocross. There is more money that is available." Just do not limit to ECHO. Just take the general fun piece out in my opinion. Thank you. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Councilman Dempsey. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
I agree with Troy. I think we should just leave it open for all avenues because we don't even know what option, we have three potential options of how this is even going to be operated (indiscernible) public/private partnership or county run. 
 
If it is county run I would expect more money to go in it. It might be tied into a greater facility, it might be tied into let's say the Fairgrounds which might be part of a bigger complex eye might be more tied into this than just the motocross facility. It could be tied into other facilities (Laughs). 
 
So, I don't want to just pigeonhole it right now, that will come over to the three and half million we have spent so far on pickle ball come from? Is that from just solely ECHO for some general funds as well? 
 
GEORGE RECKTENWALD: 
I think it was a partnership with the city of (unknown name) and they had a private donor, and then ECHO. It was none of our general fund was in the big project. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
Recently we had some skateboard parks, we had, did that all just come from ECHO? 
 
GEORGE RECKTENWALD: 
Brad? 
 
BRADLEY BURBAUGH: 
Yes. All of the pickle ball courts, I will clarify, 2.9 of 3.5 was awarded through ECHO right there was a match from our partners. Picked toner was a public/private partnership, 5 million was sunk into that from private industry or private donor to establish the pickle ball court or we've had community meetings and it was asked. 
 
We used park impact fees and ECHO as well so no general fund dollars went into the pickle ball. The second question, the skateboard parks, that was again ECHO projects with match, the municipal partners have brought to the table. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
Is there any realistic expectation that this will require us to use general fund money? 
 
BRADLEY BURBAUGH: 
That is a policy decision for these individuals. I was a we have significant resources with ECHO. You will see that next meeting in the five year forecast. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
OK, I'm not one to spend $10 million, like I said consistently throughout this whole thing, the 3.5 I think should get it done. I'm just wondering: is there going to be enough, is the 3.5 available solely through ECHO? 
 
BRADLEY BURBAUGH: 
Yes, there is significant resources with ECHO. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
Is there anything that would be involved in the motocross facility that ECHO wouldn't cover? Like the access roads or utilities or anything like that? 
 
BRADLEY BURBAUGH: 
Typically, we are looking at the entire project. So what the cost to get the project done to provide the service to our citizens at the end of the day. 
 
So typically, those things are included as part of a larger project that the citizens will have public access to. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
OK, thank you. I still don't want to constrain ourselves to one. I kind of want to leave it open until we have a better idea of which option we are going to go with. And even if we have a site found in all that. 
 
But I'm definitely in favor of taking anything from ECHO. I think it's clearly an outdoor, recreational activity. So I think that fits squarely within the ECHO boundaries. I don't know if we should define ourselves to that. 
 
GEORGE RECKTENWALD: 
As we sit on the previous item when Ben Bartlett was up, we started out with the idea on the water treatment plant, which water treatment plant, funded fully from the revenues of our utility. 
 
Then we went out and got grants on top of that. You know, that is what I would envision here. I agree, you don't want to constrain, I mean we can say, look... Wouldn't that be our priority? To put general fund money. 
 
We could start off with the idea, it would be all ECHO, that I can tell you the staff are trained grant killers. They go out and they're going to constantly look for grants and that is what they do. There is a grant available for motorsports at the state level, they will go after that as well. So our idea would be if you guys want to go and we can get a number, budgetary number, we will go out and find funding sources with the general fund being the last resort if we have to. 
 
No degree, we should look at all the other options, and the partnership opportunities as we had discussed previously for this. So again, it was just a planning number. And one way to get there, but if you do not like having that number associated, for right now we can plug it in there with, you know, either the full amount, or the 3.5 from ECHO. We have plenty of money to do that. 
 
And work towards finding other sources to hone that number down. That would be fine. Or, we could put, as we talked about, funding to be determined on some of the other projects like we have. 
 
So, it's not, again, it's just a planning document. We hear you loud and clear already, that you prefer not to have general fund money used. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
OK, Troy are you up here…? OK, vice chair can't. 
 
TROY KENT: 
I am not here for this. I spoke about this, I had to highlight a project that wanted to speak about. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
OK, let's finish this first. Councilman Robbins. 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
If you don't mind me asking, how much do we have to date and what is our spending schedule so far? What is in the hopper? 
 
SPEAKER: 
The team has to look it up but I believe that the start of last fiscal year that was 15 million in unallocated fund balance. 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
And what is the project for the next tax cycle? 
 
SPEAKER: 
That will come Ater but it is generating over 11 million now, 10 million last year so 10.2 heavily. 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
So we will have 26 million total? 
 
SPEAKER: 
Not including any grant cycle funding, yes, that is what we have in the ECHO account. There will be projects, for example this counsel has elected to have another cycle this year. So I know three projects that are coming in that cycle, so we will also spend down some of those reserves. 
 
But we will still have probably over 10 million, is my best estimate. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
OK, before you go, how much is the Deberry project? Is that coming back up? 
 
SPEAKER: 
It has not come in the door but I believe they are coming back. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
And that was... 
 
SPEAKER: 
2.5. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
OK. No other projects on the books that you know of yet? 
 
SPEAKER: 
No, I've spoken to one of the grant writers who is a prolific grant writer of ECHO for our program. And I know that she is working on three alone herself. Not sure, there might be others that come in the door as well. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
OK. Thank you. Councilman Robins, you have something else you want to say. But please clarify for us all that your motion is just to say no general fund, period? 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
So this is what I'm going to do. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
OK. 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
I will go ahead and pull that off the table and retract my motion. I just want to be clear, Council. I'm sure you received the message where I'm at. Right? 
 
I think we are all probably there, and I think we just want to have that as a safeguard. But I think we have money flowing in. I think in years past. I think we don't use a lot of it. I thing we have to tax these folks for it at a maximum millage rate. There's more to ECHO than just the environmental, and I think this would be a very fitting project for the Outdoor Recreation Program. And I would prefer, like I said just you know why Matt, ECHO number one combined with the grants. Last option to consider general fund, because we have much greater priorities I think we can use it for. 
 
TROY KENT: 
That I can get behind and happily seconded. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
He is withdrawing the motion completely. 
 
TROY KENT: 
You weren't making a motion on that? 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
He withdrew his motion. 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
I was letting everyone know how I'm going to be voting in the future. 
 
TROY KENT: 
OK. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Just a planning document. So they've heard loud and clear. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
We going to vote? 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Not for that. We are going to vote... 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Have a following question. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
We have several questions, but you have a question on this? OK, Councilman Johansson. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
So in the CIP Aaron, we have $1,750,000 in next year's budget, and that his general fund money? Because we haven't said yes to ECHO funds yet. 
 
AARON VAN KLEECK: 
We did, 1.7 million in the general fund plan. It's one-time money. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
I got that. So this is a presentation, we are going to vote on the budget, part of the budget will be the CIP, that will be in there, and we will tax our taxpayers for that 1.75 million. 
 
AARON VAN KLEECK: 
Based on the direction today we will pull it out of general fund. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
You were going to pull it out anyhow? 
 
AARON VAN KLEECK: 
I think that was the consensus here, do not plan for it in the general fund. And if we end up having to use general fund dollars we will pull it from either. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Thank you for clarifying for me. 
 
TROY KENT: 
Can we get clarification on that? Just from the Council sitting up here. I know Councilman Dempsey and I were leaning one way. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Right now in their five-year plan it shows half of it coming from ECHO, half of it coming from general fund. They are taking our conversation to say no general fund. We didn't felt on that, but... Go ahead, Director. 
 
SPEAKER: 
I would say we are taking the conversation to say for the purposes of this plan to move the money. Now what the future is. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Right, it can change. And that we will vote on. You're not clear? 
 
TROY KENT: 
I'm not just because I think I needed to hear from you where you were on it. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
I agree, I don't think I want to see any of it coming from general fund. 
 
TROY KENT: 
Thank you, not trying to shut you down, but I hear you. I get it. So majority is... That's where you are. That's fine. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
You had several other things he wanted to discuss? Then we had... 
 
TROY KENT: 
I did. I wanted to publicly talk about two of the highlighted large projects. One being the sheriff administration complex, the $30 million. 
 
I had a wonderful opportunity through Sheriff Chitwood to do a ride along with chief Deputy Henderson probably six weeks ago, eight weeks ago. And we went to a couple of the substations. And we were able to have a conversation about consolidation. Working smarter not harder. 
 
So I am appreciative of that. 
 
I just want to maybe have a quick little conversation with staff about that complex, and then we have a couple people to just walked in. Chief Judge (Unknown Name) is here. Judge Perkins is here. 
 
I had a really positive in-depth conversation with Chief Judge Casey the other day. And this is a huge number. But she reminded me that this has been a conversation that previous councils have talked about for 9+ years. And unless we make it a priority and put something in a five-year plan, and start having real conversations about this, it's going to be another nine years. 
 
And I am hoping Judge that you were going to speak and talk to us, because you shared some information to me about projections. And space you don't have. And that's very problematic, not just for me but I think the entire county of Volusia. If we don't have enough rooms for the directors being protected. 
 
You have my ear on that. And I would like for the Council to... Be I will after hearing what you say. Talk about directing staff in a couple months to possibly come back so we can get a little more in depth about the real possibility about putting this into a five-year plan. Thank you. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Councilman Johansson. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
It was very delightful to see Chief Judge come. If you recall a couple weeks ago, she said it's our building and we should do what we think is best for it. I thought, damn, maybe we'll put that to use when we talk about the new building. Some glad you were here to give us your opinion on buildings. 
 
It's a big project. Both the Sheriff's and the courthouses, as... George, you were out but Suzanne and I chatted about it last week. 
 
These are big projects. We talked about pay-as-you-go. This is one of them that we didn't sock away funds for. But could you imagine if we had that much money in our reserves waiting to build a county courthouse? People would (Indiscernible) if there was that much money sitting around, giving us interest for our value for a dollar. 
 
So this is a big project. And I am glad it's happening on my watch. I hope we can get it across the finish line. Give the court what they need, and not delay it for another 20 years. 
 
So eight Councils from now, "no one did anything for 40 years and now it is going to cost $1 billion to take care of." 
 
I would like for this conversation with the Sheriff and with the court to be a collaborative one so that we get it right. So that it's flexible, expandable and can meet the needs of our future somehow. Maybe portables like the school does work, I don't know. Probably not. So I look forward to your conversation. Thank you. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Councilman Santiago. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Thank you Mr. Chairman. I also agree with the majority of comments that were made. I think we need to take it seriously. I know we put in (Indiscernible) funding to be determined. But I think we have to have conversations this budget cycle and start setting aside some real money in this budget cycle to come up with a plan, and when to execute. 
 
I know in the past, I think if my memory is right, legislature has played a part in some court houses funding. Depending on how creative we can get, we may be in a unique opportunity for this next couple years to see if we can get some really seed money, then that's a tough one even in the legislator, they like to have shovel ready stuff. 
 
I am of the opinion we need to set aside money this year, some real money this year, to start having that conversation in planning. Thank you, Mr Chair. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Thank you. All that the judges speak. I will tell you that a year ago I went and toured the courthouse with Judge Perkins. And met many of the other judges. 
 
That conversation has not died ever since then. Deputy County manager, the County Manager Ryan Ossowski and I talk about Frito-Lay. And there are plans. And probably the other council members have discussed them too. But there are options, other options coming up that I think you will hear in the near future. 
 
Here definitely not forgotten. Especially security issues out there. We talk about those quite a bit. 
 
So that, Councilman Dempsey. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
This is to nice for me to even be talking about this insight deal with these guys, like I said they grade my papers every day. 
 
Are we... I just want... We are just talking about setting aside the conversation right? Are we going to earmark money through our budget for this courthouse project? 
 
Talking about it is great. I would love to have in-depth conversation and hear everything from the judges, everything we have to do. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
I think we're talking about... I will let County Manager... They will bring something forward shortly in the County Council meeting to discuss this. 
 
SUZANNE KONCHAN: 
May I? 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Please. 
 
SUZANNE KONCHAN: 
Mr Dempsey, members of the Council. Based on the conversation you've already had at the Deus, I think what our attempt will be is to propose some funds for this coming fiscal year as part of this first year plan as well as out here's within the five-year planning horizon. Primarily and with respect to the design issues. 
 
I have shared with the Chief Judge, and with many councilmembers, that part of our exercise that we believe should be accomplished as an assessment of the City Island courthouse. I think when it was originally started for discussion, approximately nine years ago. There was an assumption that that building was in disrepair or poor structural condition. 
 
In fact that is not our belief today. We have strong facility management assessment of that building, and we would like the opportunity to see if there are ways to improve the security components of that building and have it still serve some of the needs of the court administration and courtroom purposes. 
 
In addition, we believe there will be a need for an addition of courtrooms and the Foxman center, as well as other office needs in that area. We would like to be able to do some design work of adequate nature to provide you a possible phased approach that will meet the needs of the courts in the near term, as well as the long-term. 
 
It is my belief, and I will defer to our CFO. But ultimately construction is going to be such of a significant number that debt of some sort would be the most likely method to go to construction. That will require many conversations before this Council to make those decisions. 
 
But with your agreement, we would like to include in the coming budget and in the five-year forecast, options for at least getting us through this design effort. So that we have a project that can be determined, agreed upon with the courts, and move forward to construction. 
 
 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
Do we have a location picked out yet? 
 
SUZANNE KONCHAN: 
City Island has a location, but any additions would be contemplated at the Foxman Center campus where we have had assessments done for both courtroom editions as well as office building and parking accommodations. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
Do we have any idea what will happen to the DeLand Courthouse? 
 
SUZANNE KONCHAN: 
It remains in play and is a vital component of the overall needs of courtroom spaces. So we are talking about a continued East-West County court system where you retain the DeLand facilities which were built about 22 years ago. And couple met them with the existing courtrooms with additions on the east side. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
I'm a little concerned about your marking everything and setting everything up for her to be on the east side. I believe the statute requires that the clerk's office has to be in the county seat. 
 
SUZANNE KONCHAN: 
That would remain. We are talking about modifying or relocating any of the Deland facilities. A major part of the court facilities exist here in Deland, along with the clerk's offices, and they would certainly be a critical piece of this puzzle. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
I guess I just don't understand what would happen, with your definition of setting aside means. Are we carving out $280 million out of our five year budget? Or just engaging in conversation houses possibly... 
 
GEORGE RECKTENWALD: 
No, this is a plan. And we are talking about putting in the plans the money for more additional design work. But certainly not... Dempsey mac design has to be based on a location. Addressing the location is definitely going to be on the east side.  
 
GEORGE RECKTENWALD: 
We are talking about how to increase the space that the courts need. And what we have tried to do is look at all of our assets, and the city Island asset, as Suzanne said before, was kind of pushed aside nine years ago. 
 
Begin, we've upgraded our game as far as our facilities team. Especially given the prices of construction which has exploded. I think we have to take a look at the assets that we have, and can we modify or expand or do anything with those? 
 
And in addition to the asset we have at Foxman, we also have additional property almost adjacent to it. There is a street in between that we have our 250 N. Beech Street. So we have land, and the ability to expand Foxman. 
 
And then we also, like we say, can take a look at what we have on the island, and can it be made more secure? And they can also use that as an asset as well. And I will say, even in the Deland area, I think there is discussion of adding courtrooms eventually to that facility as well. 
 
Is on a large piece of property, and there is ability for expansion into land if it is needed as well. And I think the judges are working with us, they are here today, and where their needs are, what the projections are. 
 
And we need to be able to spend more money, though, and initial design work so we can complete spatial analysis, and then some physical look at those buildings to see what could be added and how we would do it. 
 
And again, that phased approach would come back, with what we say or here's what we can do, and ask for more permission to continue with design. Full design. 
 
The size you are talking about, that would not be a small design. That would be a large, probably one of our largest design projects we've ever done. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
OK. I'm just concerned that there might be a shift of the county seat, effectively shifting Dolan from the county seat over to (indiscernible). 
 
GEORGE RECKTENWALD: 
I do not see that at all in this particular case. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
You will have about of it. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
OK (Laughs). 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I put my name up and then took it down and then, when he made the comment, I want to echo your sentiment on that. That is something I'm going to have on my radar as well. And I think that is important to make sure it is a very balanced approach with how our constituents participate and what they have to do to participate in the legal process. I'm with you. 
 
And they don't grade my papers. I probably would get an F like I did in school, anyway. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
OK, let's hear from the judges that have come today. We will start with seventh circuit Judge, Terry Perkins. 
 
TERRY PERKINS: 
I am Judge Perkins. Thank you. I'm going to take you back a little bit. It was my privilege to come before this body in 2015, and I came before as I was the existing chief judge at that time. 
 
And I was here to inform you that we are out of space. The notices, count the desks, we are out of space. County staff was able to obtain a grant that allowed us to retain an architect and other services in order to evaluate the then existing buildings and courtrooms and all that that we had available to us. 
 
And in 2017, after about two years worth of meetings and appearances back here, they rendered a report to us that basically said: you are better off consolidating on the east side, your court facilities. 
 
The same way that we did on the west side, and pretty much for the same reasons. But there is a lot of efficiencies, a lot of safety issues that can be better addressed in a unified facility, as opposed to having them scattered hither and beyond. 
 
I was not prepared to speak to this, but let me just speak briefly to the concern with regard to the Deland courthouse, because I have now served in both of the courthouses that we are talking about. I've been in the Annex, I've been in the justice center, and I started, actually, my judicial career here in Deland. 
 
The future for Deland, again, just as we were out of space in 2015, we are out of space now. If Deland is one of my favorite courthouses because it is our incubator, that is where we have our senior judges, not those that have retired which I will be doing shortly, but those that are more experienced and that is also where we start a number of our junior or new judges in that regard. 
And it has been that way ever since I have been a judge for the last 15 years. So it is a used facility. We need that capability. 
I would never envision discontinuing or reducing the size were courtroom use of that building in any respect. I would not come before you to propose that. And even if I did, we could never make it work. 
 
I mean, unless you were building some huge thing on the east side, we could never make that work. No, the realities of that are that one of the fastest growing areas, of course, is Deltona. So I do not see-- 
 
(Bell rings) 
 
TERRY PERKINS: 
the use of that. My out of town? 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Judge Perkins, we change the rules once today. I would like to allow, how much time do you need? Another minute or two? 
 
TERRY PERKINS: 
Two minutes? 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Any issues? Go. 
 
TERRY PERKINS: 
I would expect that at some point we come back before you, and at some point in the future asked to address the growth from Deltona and just on the Westside generally. It is growing. Florida is growing. Judge Case will talk more about that. Anyway, after the two-year study, 2017 we came back with a recommendation that it would be a unified facility. 
 
 I came back before this body we had a unanimous vote that we wanted to move forward on that, we are starting to allocate some funds to look deeper at how we would design it, where we would locate it, was at one building, two buildings or whatever. 
 
And that is kind of where we have been. We have had COVID since then, we've had a lot of other things, but that is where we have been. We were out of space then, we are out of space now. Our ask today is simply to put it back on the five-year capital projects plan. And this is a huge ask. I understand that completely. 
 
But before we would ask you to be spending any money of that type, you are going to want answers to certain questions, like can we use the courthouse annex? That is where I grew up as a lawyer. I love that building! Unfortunately, you cannot use it as a secure court room anymore. 
 
You just cannot. It was developed in a different time. We want to look at that. That will cost some money to look at. What do we do with the justice center? How much will that cost? That will cost the money to look at that so before we ask you to start making some decisions, we are going to ask you to spend a little bit of money so we can evaluate these options and provide that to you. 
 
So, I want to tell you when I came back before you in, not you, but in 2017 and it was a unanimous decision that we needed to move forward, the estimate, correct me if I'm wrong, but the estimate was between hundred and one $20 million for the consolidated facility. It is twice that now. 
 
For five years from now, it will be twice that. So now is the time to look at it. That is all I have. Thank you, it's good to see you. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Thank you. Chief Judge (unknown name). 
 
SPEAKER: 
Right in the middle. Thank you. Thank you for having me, and I want to talk first about, you know, the court system is a cornerstone of Law & Order, right? That is kind of all we have left now. I feel like. 
 
And it is really important. And our courtrooms in the annex are not secure. They are not. And anybody that tells you they are, they are not telling you the truth. And it's not the judges. 
 
It is not the judges. I'm the most secure person in the courthouse because I have a bailiff next to me. I have a video here. That I want to show you about walking inmates through the courthouse. This is a guy who just slid his wife's throat, killed the mother of his children and is walking down the corridor (away from mic). There are children in the hallways. There are people on the hallways. 
 
The courthouse annex does not have secure transport for any of these people. The video that I want to show you, let's see if it's going to play now... Is actually a live video that you see somebody being walks down, their people, litigants going to other courtrooms, court staff, and he lunges at a reporter. 
 
OK? The only reason we have not had an issue is because the Sheriff's office has done such a great job. They are shackled, they come down the stairs, if you have inmates, and they go through the front of the courtroom, wherever courtroom they are going. First, second, third floor, wherever they are, there is no backdoors and no elevators. 
 
So they are shackled, coming down the stairs, especially if they are violent. It is not the judge's safety that I'm concerned about, it's the public safety that I'm concerned about. So that is the issue. 
 
The courthouse staff, the doors open into the JAs offices, anybody walks in and out of their move always been concerned. Family law, as Councilman Dempsey can tell you, that is the most volatile substance area you can have in the law. You think it is criminal, it is not. 
 
We have had instances where we have had people fighting in the hallway right next to people waiting to go into court somewhere else. And you will not see it unless you are there every day and you are seeing this happen. 
 
So the Annex is not secure anymore. OK? It has not been for a long time. But the big thing everybody seems to really hook on, I'm out of room. I just got a study, they do it every they say five years but it ends up being eight or nine because of the cost, the circuit I'm told I need five more circuit judges. I need a Volusia County court judge and a St. John's County Court judge. 
 
I've got room up there. I've got no room here. No room. So, my ask of you is to really put our money where our mouth is and get something done. I leave it up to you. You guys do the study. What you want to do. 
 
But the Annex is not a viable courthouse anymore. For criminal, for family, it is not secure the way it is now. So I'm asking you to put the courthouse project in the five years capital (indiscernible) workplan. I'm asking you to direct your staff to retain an architectural firm with the proper experience. 
 
Just toured the Jacksonville courthouse, you guys should do that. It is the most secure building I've ever seen. An architectural firm with the proper experience and credentials to work with the county to develop a plan, so we can get going on this. 
 
And what you all decide, you know, that is your business. I want to be part of the conversation, and I want you to hear from us and our concerns. But I'm here to tell you, we need to do what we should've done nine years ago and get this on the planning board. So thank you very much.  
 
TROY KENT: 
Judge, will you wait for questions? 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Before I go to the last speaker, or all three questions for the judges? 
 
TROY KENT: 
Mine are. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
We will have Vice-Chair Kent then Don Dempsey. I think they have questions for you. 
 
TROY KENT: 
So I, just briefly I have a tour of the Annex, I'm a huge fan. You showed me your office and I don't know if there is a better view. 
 
But you mentioned that your not concerned about the Judge's safety because you have a be left. But I want you to talk a little bit about, because when we were outside I asked some specific things about, "Hold on, where do you park?" Anyone could be waiting around the hedges. Not trying to fear Monger, because I people for that. I'm not doing that. 
 
What I don't want to do is play Monday morning quarterback, and something horrific happened to a judge. And it could be solved by having a couple of deputies has escort you to your vehicles and be waiting for you when you arrive in the morning so stop and think we could solve it. 
 
You didn't touch on that and I think it is an important piece. 
 
SPEAKER: 
I will touch on that. I guess if you little defensive because I don't want people to think we are asking for that, because we are afraid for our security. There is a problem of judges security coming in and out of the courthouse. 
 
The bailiffs leave at 4 o'clock, all deputy staff leaves at 4 o'clock. There was not a deputy on scene after 4 o'clock. 
 
So especially when I was in civil, I was there six, 630 every night walking to my car at the Annex by myself in the dark, with my gun in my purse and my hand on my gun. 
 
We had, there is a judge and I will not name the person. I am sure she would share it. But had a stalker, someone she was ruling against and family law waiting outside in the... Where we park in the Annex. If you choose to park in the market area (Laughs). Waiting for her. 
 
She would have to call security to get rid of the person before she came up. 
 
Another person came out of her car, and it was a few minutes after of armed robbery had occurred there that night. Because it's at night, we worked late sometimes. 
 
So the in and out. The way the Annex is. We have an east entrance whereas the employees, the judges can come in. But I am on the third floor. The only way to get to the third floor is there's a stairwell or public elevator where everyone goes. 
 
When you have just ruled against somebody in family law and taken their kids away, they are not happy. So you don't want to go up and that public elevator all the time. I took someone's kids away, and dependency, and McDonald's, I'm getting confronted about it. You never know where you will be confronted. 
 
So Beco up the stairway, three flights of stairs and they are very steep, I don't know if you got to traverse them when you were there. Where the inmates come down. Most of the time we look up to make sure the inmates are coming down. But you never know, you get stuck in there, have to go to the side the inmates are coming out. 
 
So we tried to work around, but no. It is not secure for us either. But I am talking about in the courthouse when we are going to our courtroom, and our chambers, we have a bailiff assigned to us. The public does not. The people waiting to hear from us, the kids independently sitting there because they have just been taken from their homes, waiting to see where they are going. They do not. 
 
TROY KENT: 
Thank you for that. And I will just and with this, and that is: 
 
And I mentioned it, I'm a fan of the location. I think it served its purpose when it was built. 
 
That being said, I think, and I have not heard you say no. If family law was not there, if criminal law was not there, and we had a plan for the judges safely to get in and out. We could come up with, staff could help come up with a plan to still make the location work and look at other options as far as the justice center, etc. Thank you. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Thank you. Councilman Dempsey. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
(Laughs). You look at today Judge, have you lost weight? Have you been working out (Laughs). 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Does he do this at court? 
 
(Laughter) 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
I talked to Judge Perkins a couple of times actually. And I share your sentiment about City Island. My wife as you know is a judge, and she served over there on City Island for I believe was a couple years before Judge Kelly was nice enough to swap with her and let her come back to Deland. 
 
But in 34 years in practice of law, 33. I have witnessed the inmate issue where the hallways are crowded. And you have inmates being escorted, linked up even sometimes, and right past the civilians in the hallways which are kind of narrow. So there is an issue there, I totally agree with you. 
 
But, as I think Judge Burke is pointed out, he knows I'm a tightwad. I draw a beat up rusted out pickup truck, I don't like to spend money where we do not have to. I personally think all county employees should be driving the same rust bucket I drive, but that's another subject. 
 
I guess my point is... I have been thinking about this. What would be the issue with moving the public defender's office and the state attorney's office, because they take up half of that available space for courtrooms in the Foxman Center. 
 
Because I think we all agree we have good security, we have a sound board... 
 
SPEAKER: 
Yes but not great. For instance Foxman Centers the risen issue with prisoner transport in between the courtrooms, and having juveniles, we don't have a space. I have to clear the courthouse of any inmates when I have a juvenile come. 
 
In addition if we have anybody in a wheelchair, they have to come. There's no elevator. They have to come through the front, where the public is. 
 
We had somebody that had some sort of condition in court the other day, and inmate passed out or whatever. Got in a wheelchair. They are pushing him out the front doors, so that he jumps out of the wheelchair. I mean they got him, but... What I'm saying is... 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
This is in the Foxman center? 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Judge, can you pull the microphones? 
 
SPEAKER: 
I'm so sorry. 
 
There issues at the Foxman center. Two courtrooms, 2 and 4 are useless. We do not use them. The small ones that have maybe one or two benches. I can't have an arraignment there, I can't have pretrial there. 
 
Because what happens, when you keep all the public outcome of the defendants and their family, the lawyers then have to go out and talk to them. So I get nothing done here. You know what happens in a big courtroom. 
 
The lawyers are talking – the private lawyers are talking to the assistant state attorneys. When the case isn't up they are working it out. So they get called next. 
 
You can't do anything in those two courtrooms, except what I've done is assign somebody that already has a jury picked. So we have six or seven juror people. Essentially nonhostile trial. You know, a low level trial. Because there's no room for anybody. Were security. And that's what I use those courtrooms for. Other than that they stay empty. Completely useless. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
I agree. 
 
So... 
 
SPEAKER: 
If you revamped it could it work? That's what I... I want somebody that is experienced. Somebody that is experienced in courthouse building and assessing. I don't even know the words. 
 
I want somebody who knows what they are doing to look at what we have and what we need. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
I will tell you guys, because I've been at the Annex last week. I was at City Island last week. I mean everything she is saying is true. Something needs to be done with it. In my opinion. 
 
Isn't the Supreme Court coming out with something about Zoom, requiring courts to use Zoom more so than they have been? 
 
SPEAKER: 
Yes, but there was an obstacle to that. You will understand this because you did criminal defense. Zoom is never going to get my case resolved. Right? You have to have the defendant there, I have to have the defense attorney, at have to have the prosecutor those not just like doing off-site first appearances where there is a state attorney time, a public defender assigned. They don't have any skin in the game. That's not getting resolved in a Zoom first appearance somewhere. I need those people in front of me to resolve cases. 
 
I have 50% resolved cases at my arraignment. Docket. Because Chip and I talked about this, he was talking about maybe not to transport people. I said, "Listen, we can do it for other placements but not arraignments." 
 
So Zoom is coming in, but the defendants have a right to be present in person. And they don't have to do Zoom. Usually it's the lawyers that won't use Zoom. 
 
And dependency, when we are taking someone's rights away, they have a right to be there. Even if they have committed first-degree murder. They have a right to be present when we are taking circuits away. 
 
So Zoom is good for civil, but I can see that and an assessment where we talk about civil not needing so courtroom spaces much, except for trials. Because the hearings can mostly be done by Zoom. And I don't know family, I would think the same, you don't need courtrooms for family necessary. For the trials. 
 
So that's an aspect that has changed in nine years, the Zoom. But it is not as sweeping as far as not having anybody in the courthouse is. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
I guess the reason for this discussion is hopefully you guys are picking up where I'm coming from. There is a need, I mean there are more churches coming, populations grown. I know you guys are short of courtrooms. 
 
But I hate... What I don't want to see happen Judge is have basically all the judicial system, I don't know if your remember 30 years ago, the big fight, East versus West. 
 
SPEAKER: 
I don't want that, and we are not looking for that. Love DeLand. Everyone fights to be over in DeLand (Laughs). We love DeLand, we want DeLand. We want what the land has on the east side for our east side cases. 
 
So we want to secure courthouse that functions well, and the room to grow. Just like DeLand did. I am not looking to take it. We couldn't do it. Physically we couldn't take everybody. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
When Judge Perkins was saying 2015 when they talked about a unified courthouse. 
 
SPEAKER: 
Sorry to interrupt, unified from the East side. The Annex. We have court going on at the sunshine Mall. Traffic court at the sunshine Mall. That's what he's talking about. He's not talking about unified West and East. 
 
A long time ago, before they built the DeLand Courthouse I think it was. They talked about putting a courthouse by the jail those top 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
right, I think it was the branch jail those not we don't like branches or annexes. Everything is supposed to be in the county seat. 
 
SPEAKER: 
Both cities, the land, Daytona, nobody likes that. The land wanted downtown courthouse, good for business is down there. Daytona wants their downtown courthouse. 
 
And as you know sometimes lawyers just practice on one side with the other. You go both sides, but a lot of lawyers just practice... They live on the west side, just to cases on the west side, they don't travel to the East side. 
 
I am not looking or advocating at all to merge into one check at the courthouse. 
 
What I would like him I don't know if it's economically feasible, I would like to have one courthouse in the east side Daytona just encompassing what is over and Daytona now. Giving me some more room to add some judges. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
As far as the courts filings, divorce cases filed on the west side, stays on the west side. Criminal action happens on the west side, stays on the website. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Mr. Chairman? I think we're getting a little off topic with where court cases are filed in relation to the CIP and buildings. If we can get back on task please. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
I think you were on task. This is a hopeful conversation. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
The study that you were asking stuff to do is relating to just consolidating the whole east side court system. And leaving the website alone full stop 
 
SPEAKER: 
Yes, absolutely. I am sorry for the misunderstanding. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
I think when Judge Perkins said unified it scared me a little bit. Taking we were losing herbicide system. 
 
SPEAKER: 
The lawyers like the division, it works well for the litigants, the public. If you live in Deltona, you don't want to drive to Daytona. But if I live in is attrition I don't have enough judges, and where's the space? I don't get much edges because I don't have much space. I have to send them all north, then we are in trouble. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
That clarifies a lot from you, thank you Judge. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
We have one more councilman and one more member of the public. But I want to give you some hope, because the staff is already there. With what you are asking for, and I think you were going to hear it in a soon coming meeting that we will approve money for a competent architect experienced with security to evaluate our system. 
 
We know that it's an issue. I know... I'm not going to continue. I just wanted to let you know that. That you've already been heard and they are already discussing it and planning. Evaluating architects. 
 
SPEAKER: 
OK, thank you. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Thank you. David Santiago. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I just want to make a comment. Bring us to a boat but first I want to thank the Chief Judge for being here and Judge Perkins, nice to see you. I think the last time we met our good friend David Hood was with us. 
 
Has been a while, so thank you for being here. I just want to acknowledge that Judge (unknown name) took me for a tour, and it's interesting to hear the different things, but you don't know until you really see it. 
 
And he did good. I think we started in the Annex, and I'm sure he's very calculated what he did, so he did a good job. 
 
SPEAKER: 
He is a smart man! 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
That we got to go to the other locations. And it was not perfect, I noticed that. But it was a very distinct difference in the safety. 
 
So we walked through all of those, and the stairs going down and I've seen it. And if I had something going on there had to be in that court my family or something and I had to see what alleged criminal has to come through with my family, it's not a good scenario. I will just say this: you have been heard. 
 
At least me and several of my councilmembers are committed to putting money in this budget so we get a good study. I know there has been studies in the past that haven't really looked at what the true needs are. I think you have support here, at least I think the majority. Especially me. So thank you. 
 
I moved to approve the CIP as presented. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
We have one more member of the public. Karen Clark, you have exactly 3 minutes, no more. OK, come and take a minute. Thank you, Judge. 
 
KAREN CLARK: 
Karen Clark, I live in Glenwood. I was around with Diane (unknown name) when the original courthouse was in its infancy, before it was even done. She went to a lot of meetings and the clerk of the court needs to know how much space they need for the files. 
 
She told them X amount of thousands and thousands of square footage because she rented buildings, County rented buildings all over Volusia to store these records because they did not have a facility. 
 
Well, come along this white elephant that they made. The people that were involved, and everyone is smart, city commission, the architects, everybody that had a say "yes, this is a good design." 
 
They didn't look at, it was raw footage was presented to them. You have a raw footage building, wall-to-wall, ceiling to basement, no stairs, no walls, no bathroom, nothing. 
 
And that is how that originally started, and it was not until after it was built that Diane (unknown name) actually had to have more buildings to rent for the files for the court system. 
 
So, you can have all of this done and your experienced person looking into design and everything for the courts, look, make sure it's not raw footage. That's it. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Thank you. David Santiago, you wanted to make a motion? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Thank you. Before I make that motion, if I wanted to propose that this motion, money set aside in the plan for a study as was described, what number should that be? 
 
SPEAKER: 
To our facilities director for that number. Or construction engineer. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Or the County manager. 
 
SPEAKER: 
Tad and Jim can give you some ideas but I think we should come back because I think as a team we want to get together. I want to make sure the numbers were put in the first year of the budget meets our needs and then plan for the formal design and engineering phase. 
 
SPEAKER: 
I would echo that. Rather than set aside a number, I think the direction would be to figure out a plan and we will bring that back and work on it in the five-year forecast. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Not in 22 years? 
 
SPEAKER: 
The next meeting. The next meeting is the five-year forecast. We just need that amount of time. 
 
As long as we have direction to put something in it, it might be better than just to say that, and then we will update you in the next meeting with what that is in the forecast versus trying to put these guys too much on the spot. As I can see right now, the smoke coming out of their ears. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
 
Thank you, George. Mr Chairman, I approve the CIP plan as presented with stuff coming back in the next meeting with an amendment to include recommended amounts for the study for the court system. 
 
SPEAKER: 
Second. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Motion to approve with the understanding that the next meeting, the court system will be evaluated. The motion is from David Santiago with the second from vice chair Kent. 
 
Jake Johansson, your name is still up. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Yes sir. I have a question just for clarity. Mr Santiago said "as presented." What I thought I was hearing was, this is the Daytona court mass complex, master plan or maybe a master plan for all complexes, I don't know. 
 
But I currently show fiscal year 24/25 and 26 as 0. CIP has presented means there is no money in there. Is that correct? Or is it under a different line item? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I think my motion was also to propose an amendment to this. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
The CIP is presented. I just want to make sure. 
 
SPEAKER: 
We have listed as a project in the cold for funding to be to be identified. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Way down at the bottom. I concur with that. 
 
SPEAKER: 
We are looking to move some of that to set aside funding to address what is been discussed here today. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
As long as that is what the motion and the second is, I'm good with that. 
 
SPEAKER: 
While we are clarifying, as mentioned before based on consensus, the other modification would be to move the motocross track from general fund to ECHO. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Thank you. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Councilman Dempsey. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
I'm not going to be here for that one. Is there any chance we could move it to (indiscernible)? I will just have to trust you. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Can you Zoom in? That's OK. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
The courts have Zoom, which is fine so if you are in a courthouse, maybe they can let you use it. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
OK. Motion on the floor by David Santiago, second by Troy Kent. Don your name is still up. OK, I thought maybe you thought of... To approve the CPI with the understanding we are bringing the court system back with a proposal from County staff at the next meeting. 
 
TROY KENT: 
Chairman? 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Vice chair can't. 
 
TROY KENT: 
Thank you. Use it, don't use it but if I knew I was going to a meeting or something I wanted to participate with them I would write out what I want to say, I would send it to the County manager with instructions to read into the public record at that time. I'm trying to help you with your voice. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
He doesn't know what they're going to propose yet, though. 
 
TROY KENT: 
Don already knows what he's going to say, though. He doesn't know the proposal, but I think I know what he wants to say. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
All in favor say "aye." Any opposed? Item 11 passes 6:0. Thank you for coming in. 
 
Let me check with staff here. That's what I'm waiting to hear from. OK. 
 
This is probably a good time to take a break, because the next one, next item could take some time as well. It is 12:24. We will break until 1pm. 
 
(Break)  
 
SPEAKER: 
Welcome to the Volusia County Council Meeting. The meeting will begin in 10 minutes. 
 
SPEAKER: 
Welcome to the Volusia County Council Meeting. The meeting will begin in five minutes. 
 
SPEAKER: 
Welcome to the Volusia County Council Meeting. The meeting will begin in two minutes.  
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
OK, we will resume June 4, 2024 Volusia County meeting at 1:03 PM, starting with item 12. Discussion and direction on the use of body cameras by enforcement officers. Director Clay Ervin? 
 
CLAY ERVIN: 
Good afternoon, County Counsel identified that they felt it was in staff's best interest to research the ability for law enforcement officers to utilize body cameras so when you see police officers and sheriffs carrying out. 
 
County Attorney's office took that and research to make sure we were consistent under state law. One of the things that was discovered was first and foremost, how law enforcement officers and code enforcement officers are not treated the same by Florida statutes. 
 
Specifically chapter 943 of Florida statutes for mandatory two-party consent for nonlaw enforcement activities. Therefore, code enforcement officers who are not law enforcement officers are not granted the exemption that law enforcement officers are entitled to. 
 
The issue comes into what occurs if a code enforcement officer inadvertently does not follow the proper procedures for two-party consent. At this point, research has shown that they could be subject to a third-degree felony as well as being personally liable, if there was a lawsuit to come out of it. 
 
Your County staff is here to go through these different options. And so, what we are trying to do at this point is follow your direction because we agree that the body worn cameras do provide code enforcement officers with a valuable tool. 
 
We agree with that 100%. At the same point, we want to make sure we are able to operate within the confines of what state law allows without putting more officers at personal risk as well. 
 
So, we are looking at what options are available in the operation. Mainly cost issues, we don't have final numbers yet. The records that are required to be maintained for code enforcement is tied to five years after the compliance is found. 
 
Some of your code enforcement cases can go on for many, many years. So, we would have to pay for additional storage of that video and audio recordings. So, we are, again, facing the situation now and the differences in how code enforcement and law enforcement is treated is creating some concerns from a staff perspective. 
 
We believe there are three basic options. Right now, you could direct staff to, as part of our legislative efforts, next legislative session, seek to have this change so nonlaw enforcement officers so code enforcement or (Indiscernible) officers, could be tied to the exemptions currently allowed to law enforcement officers. 
 
If that occurs, we can enforce this at that point in time. We do a combination where you direct us to do that and also tell us to do the research and come up with necessary policies and operational requirements and the code enforcement officers are told how they are to proceed if a property owner or person they are calling upon says no, you cannot record me. 
 
They have to cease and follow these procedures to ensure compliance within two-party consent. We can also, at that same point in time, do the legislative delegation request to have the rules change. Right now, we are here to gather direction from you as to how you want us to proceed. 
 
I know Mike and Sabrina and Ross have gone through this with a fine tooth comb so they can answer your questions about the statutory requirements. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Thank you, Clay. Questions from counsel? Councilman Santiago? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Lots of questions. Thank you. Clay, do we know if there has been an attempt to include code enforcement officers under that exemption? 
 
CLAY ERVIN: 
I am not aware of this but Sabrina? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I know it is illegal question, sorry. 
 
SPEAKER: 
The exemption came about in 2016 when the statute was actually put in place. Since 2016, we are not aware of any extension of that exemption to any types of individuals who are not code enforcement. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I move that we table this item indefinitely. There is too much risk for us and for our employees to do this until the state law is changed. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
OK, Mr. Santiago moves that we table this indefinitely. Is there a second? 
 
TROY KENT: 
I will second for discussion. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Vice chair Troy Kent makes a second on the motion to table indefinitely. Questions or Councilman Robins? 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
Discussion with Councilman Santiago. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Yes. 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
David, I think there is a way, I think there is a way to get here. We have risk in everything that we do. In my tenure here, I have seen these dozers out in the landfill, there is risk there in operating. 
 
Liability responsibility for employees for Fender vendors which were trained on equipment, no difference than that and on the beach, they have training. What to do, what to look out for. There is liability in everything that we do. 
 
I think what this comes down to is an equalizer. When I say that, a measure to protect both and empower the public and empower our staff and empower the process as opposed to putting in the law that keeps everything kosher, in my opinion. And above board. 
 
If this isn't strengthening liberty with the people, I don't know what is. That is just, you know? You know... I don't like being under the thumb of government and not having a say. This can be treated and Don can attest to this, no different that a consensual encounter on the street. 
 
"We can stop at any time, I don't have to answer your question, I don't need to be in your pocket." Under certain guidelines. "I am not going to sign that." Go back to what you're doing before. Get off the property. 
 
There is a process for this. What this does is, I think, it just empowers the people a little bit more. It may make things a little bit harder during that process for the government, absolutely, that is the point. Let's not forget about that. That is the point. 
 
I would like to see us come back with policy to see this and try it out. It can be as simple as a piece of paper that you keep in your pocket. Absolutely. In other instances, but, I think it is a good policy and we can also put it as a legislative request. 
 
Say no one picks up the ball on the state level, guess what, we have something good, in my opinion on this level. I think we know what is best for Volusia but I would like to hear what a couple others have to say. I have always liked this idea. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Can I respond? 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Yes, but you may have multiple responses after. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I agree with you, I had support for it in the past and the principal. The main reason was for exactly what you said. Where I changed my opinion after meeting with staff and getting the analysis and deep diving, the legislature found it necessary to create this protection and exemption for law enforcement that protects them. I would not want to be a code enforcement officer without protection. 
 
They make a mistake and did not get content, they are liable, if I am correct, by a misdemeanor or a felony? Can somebody confirm for me? Personally liable. 
 
SPEAKER: 
3rd° felony. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
If they make a mistake and don't get content and start recording, they are liable for a third-degree felony? 
 
SPEAKER: 
Plus civil action. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Who in their right mind would want to be a code enforcement officer? We need to protect their actions and fight for them, people make human mistakes. I cannot put that burden on the officers. 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
But the same, David, I was getting out earlier, if there is negligent sound, has got to be some level of responsibility to any of our operators. I don't like bringing up bad things but we had somebody ran over at the landfill by a dozer. If there wasn't some negligence, accident happen, things do happen. 
 
But I don't think it is something, what do we do? Shut everybody down? You know. I don't, there is risk with everything that we do. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I understand the reason why and I will finish with this, Mr. chair. I understand but the risks to the employee, to the county, they are just too much to rise to the level to surpass the small amount of complaints I think we have gotten from code enforcement interactions. 
 
We have some, people are he said, she said and that is why I like the idea. But it is so small, do I want to rise to the idea of putting these people in harm's way by jail time and financial risk? I am not there until we get protections. 
 
I am sorry, I cannot pass it. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
OK, let's go, let's see if anybody else has a question. This is good debate but does anybody have a question for staff first? Don Dempsey? 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
Is this under the wiretapping statute you are referring to? 
 
SPEAKER: 
It is, 934. It is 934, the wiretapping statute that you cannot intercept or record a conversation. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
I don't think they need to get permission, they just need to know they are being recorded. 
 
SPEAKER: 
It is a legal test, it is two-part. You need an expectation of privacy subjectively and then a legal expectation. It is around. There is a case if you're in your private home, having a private conversation, obviously that would violate it. 
 
If you're in public and don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy, you would not violate that law. However, if you're in public and let's say, for instance, in the family law context – you and I are exchanging the child and it is a private conversation and I am surreptitiously recording you. 
 
You had an expectation of privacy because the two of us were at the car and not in public. But if we were on the street trying to buy drugs from a drug dealer, we may have an expectation that our conversation with the drug dealer is private but there is case law that says it is not reasonable for us to have expectation of privacy when committing a crime. 
 
There are cases on this particular statute that start from having a reasonable expectation of privacy so you are fine but society is not going to recognize your reasonable affectation when you're committing a crime, you're not. There is a spectrum. you would have to do that analysis. 
 
SPEAKER: 
Of easy when you go into somebody's house in your recording, obviously there's an acceptation of privacy in your home. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
But if you are in a commercial business and you are doing a code enforcement inspection, we had a shed person, you're walking around – then that would necessarily – especially if the person knew they were being recorded. 
 
SPEAKER: 
Well, there's a case commercial – a location, so I have an expectation of privacy in a commercial setting, if I believe that my conversation it still private, so that particular one was I believe they were models in a dressing room. And they were being recorded, and they didn't know it in the case. So even if you are in a commercial place, I can solve an expectation of privacy, it's just that you have to do that to part analysis. Is it reasonable and does this recognize that reasonableness. It's on a location-based analysis. It's not that simple. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
All right, I'm sorry I didn't get a chance to talk to you about this before the first time here. 
 
SPEAKER: 
It's okay. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
Okay. The only thing I'm singing about – I'm not in favor of body worn camps in general, because it's a lot of maintenance and stuff. But I would like – I do understand why we need protection and I guess the question is, who we are trying to protect, are we trying to object the citizens, or the employee, the code enforcement officer from a wrongful allegation? 
 
I'm in favor, if we could do this, I would be in favor of just having it to where all code enforcement interactions can be recorded by the citizen, and is admissible in court, all phone calls to the county between code enforcement and the citizen could be recorded by the citizen. Put the onus on the citizen. To record these conversations and say will the code enforcement officer cussed me out, he told me I could do this, not your thing I can't. While you have to have a recording of that. Put the burden on them. Because there is a lot of burden trying to store all of the stuffer five years. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Can you respond to that, is that an option? Is there a legal conflict with the citizen recordings? 
 
SPEAKER: 
Well if the citizen advises that they are recording, no because in the citizen's advice. It would have to be a policy decision. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Is the citizen liable if he doesn't ask for permission? 
 
SPEAKER: 
's or if I may, the wire statute of applies to the public I would argue no, any citizen could say you might if I could record you officer, they could say yes that's fine. There is also I think a recent fifth DCA case that just came out but talked about basically it was about a law enforcement officer, an individual kept calling in the sheriff's capacity, said that these were like nuisance complaints, complaining about trespassing. And the individual ended up recording the conversation with the sheriff's deputy and later submitted that as evidence. They haven't told Deputy they were doing that. So the court came out and said when you're on duty, you're on duty. Your premise should be you are being recorded, so it wasn't actually deemed a violation of the privacy act because the officer was operating in their duty capacity at the time. So I think you could already – you know the citizen could already record somebody as a permission, do it right now. But I don't think it requires a policy from the county. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Do we have a policy for that, I see videos of social media every day of police being recorded. You're saying that's illegal? 
 
SPEAKER: 
There is a United States Supreme Court case that you have a First Amendment right to actually video officers in the public doing their public duty. So that is a difference a prim court case, the first amendment rights case. And that would be actually doing his job in the public. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
That would not be the same for the code enforcement officer, or an animal control officer? 
 
SPEAKER: 
They go into private areas, that's again, it becomes – the test again is not where you are, it's the expectations of the parties that are involved. 
 
So animal control, goes into people's homes a lot, they go into your backyard, where the animals are, there is higher expectations of privacy in those private areas, code enforcement could do the same. They have – they go to your front door, to make an encounter with you. You have and expectation these officers often go out from the public into the private area. They are going to have to make that determination before they record anyone. Does this person have an expectation of privacy, of privacy on your own front porch, and is there expectation of reason. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Did you want to add to that Michael Dyer? 
 
SPEAKER: 
No, she did fine. 
 
SPEAKER: 
I can just save this operationally from our code enforcement officers, every time they step onto private property they expect to be recorded, because nowadays with the amount of cameras and surveillance, it's easily accessible from Best Buy or whatever electronic store. There is already an understanding that they will be recorded by the property. When we are conducting an inspection, and I can tell you the majority of the time our officers will sit there and say fine, you want to record me? The main reason is we don't see it necessarily anything at that point being done that would be detrimental to our operations because we have trained them on how to carry out the inspections. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Last question from me, do you have an idea of - I know this is part of the investigation and what you would bring back, but do you have an idea of how you would get consent. Councilman Robbins mentioned a card, it seems that it could be that simple? Tell me legally. 
 
SPEAKER: 
The best way to get the consent would be with a written waiver, a form that the person would have to sign and fill out. The problem is the distinction would be with law enforcement who has the exemption, the secondary policy goes the second they step out of the vehicle, everything is recorded. 
 
Our officers could record until they actually had some sort of written consent. Because they couldn't record the consents because they are already recording without consent. So that would be the stuff that they would have to take. It would have to be operationally different between law enforcement. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
I will hold rest. Councilman Johansson did you have questions? 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Yes sir. Yes. I guess my question may have already been answered. The discussion was about a reasonable expectation of privacy, and I think Clay pointed out that there's Ring cameras, and everybody assumes they are being recorded when they go into a private business. But I would think when a public official in any capacity enters a private home, that you, you as a public official don't have any - it's not private. When you are entering into someone else's home, you are actually encroaching. 
 
That's how these folks get away with it in their cars by the police officers. But there's no reason why expectation I wouldn't think. So as a code enforcement officer, or a building inspector, which will be the next step, the second we step on someone else's privacy to inspect we lose our expertise to privacy I would think. 
 
And for that matter, everybody should think there's never an execution of privacy anymore except for when you are in your own home. So what I need to know is, and maybe this question goes better to Danny, is well first of all. Clay, how - what drives this item? Have we had a lot of problems with he said, she said? Or physical or verbal altercations with code enforcement? 
 
CLAY ERVIN: 
There have been over the last two years I've been aware of there have been situations where property are indicating trespass or harassment. Is it more than 10% of our total code enforcement case? But there are situations where we have had as I said, a property owner complained to a councilmember that a code enforcement officer came on their property without permission. Without a code enforcement officer has been harassing them. And so, again I would say that's probably less than 10%. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
At some would say anything a code enforcement officer does is harassment right? You are not there to make people happy and give them a lollipop. 
 
CLAY ERVIN: 
I want to reiterate, our staff wants to have any kind of support. And I will give you a real world example. All of our code enforcement officers have a GPS tracking on their vehicles. Where they are, how fast they are going because there have been allegations about some of our code enforcement officer speeding. We've been able to go back and verify that data, that that complaint was incorrect. So we are in a mode where we want to have this tool available, but at the same point in time, my staff is concerned with the intricacies of some of the legal aspects of this that could they be subject personally to a lawsuit or third degree felony? That is the main concern I've heard from our staff members. If counsel goes ahead and says DeWitt. We are going to follow what your instructions are. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
And Sabrina, if our code enforcement officers chose not to use them, or refuse to use them for fear of legal action, they would just be disciplined if that's what we chose to do. There is no legal ramifications of not using them, right? 
 
SPEAKER: 
If I understand your question, there is no legal ramifications of not. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Right, that applies to – going down the rabbit hole, that applies for law enforcement as well? If they don't, that is a administrative issue. 
 
SPEAKER: 
One thing for law enforcement, the mode for them to use it they have to have a written policy and procedure, so there would be implications in their written policy procedure. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
That's it for questions. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Before I go to him, Mr. Santiago, Deputy, Russ Brown? 
 
SPEAKER: 
The reason this item is on the agenda, counsel directed staff to bring it back. That's answer the question. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Councilman Santiago?  
 
DAVID SANTIAGO:  
 
question for you, I forgot your name I apologize. Tell the Council about this law enforcement exemption, what is it? 
 
SPEAKER: 
There's actually a statute for the use of body worn cameras. It's a 943. It sets forth all the sorts of things they have to do to actually use body worn camera in their daily activities. In that there is a simple sentence that says their use shall be exempt from 934, right? It is probably one of the simplest pieces of legislation I have ever seen. So it just says that they are complete only exempt. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
 
Do you know why they ask that? 
 
SPEAKER: 
It basically says that they do not have to ask for consent when they are using the equipment. That's essentially all it says in the legislation. It exempts them from every issue under wiretapping. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Under that scenario, the felony, they are subjected to how much time in prison? 
 
SPEAKER: 
3rd° felony so up to five years in prison or, I am Rusty on my find, probably a 5000 or $1000 fine. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
So I am a code enforcement officer, I go to someone's house and this policy is enacted. I pressed my button and start recording and I forgot to get the consent to sign. If they want to press charges on me, there are different parameters. I can go to jail for up to three years? 
 
SPEAKER: 
Five years. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Up to five years because I forgot to get the consent? 
 
SPEAKER: 
But as Mr. Dempsey told you, you would need a really bad scoresheet, you would probably go to probation. 
 
SPEAKER: 
Look what they are doing to the president. I love the idea, there is just a bridge too far for me to cross to put our employees in that liability, I struggle with that. I wish I could have simply give me an answer that solves the for me but I can't do it. Thank you. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Councilman Robins? 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
Thank you chair. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Do you still have questions? 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
Yes, I have a question. Sabrina? Sorry. If, as it stands right now, if a code enforcement officer does not follow policy of the county – say they are supposed to go to the front door. Say they go the back door, say they go in a house, say they do something outside the scope of their duty. 
 
Can they personally be held liable for their actions or negligence when it comes to following policy? 
 
SPEAKER: 
So, every person has free will. If I'm a code enforcement officer and I go to someone's home and I actually insult you intentionally, I can be personally liable because I went outside of my scope as an employee, outside of my duty. Yes, code enforcement officer could be personally liable if they did an intentional act outside the scope of their employment. If they stay inside the scope of their employment, they would still be protected is doing their job or have the same protections as the county and it would be the same as if the County, all of us, did that action. 
 
So what you described in the initial question was fourth amendment, search and seizure. Whether or not I have permission to go where I go and do what I did. Typically if you violate someone's fourth amendment, there is not a call of action against far, it is just evidence. 
 
Circle back to this, if you violate 934 with a wiretap, it has the same automatic suppression of evidence at all levels. 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
And it carries jail time on top of the suppression of evidence? 
 
SPEAKER: 
Yes, 934 has a lot of penalties in it. It is, Florida has a very strong privacy act. Suppression of evidence included in it specifically. It has a civil component and a criminal component. 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
What scenarios right now could our people face the same in terms of... liability, jail time? Are there any instances you can think of as an attorney and one of our people, code enforcement could experience the same ramifications as it stands right now that if they were wearing a... 
 
SPEAKER: 
Right now, the only one I can think of is if you go outside the scope of your employment and do an intentional act. 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
Which could be anything? 
 
SPEAKER: 
The most likely is battery or assault, like I personally assaulted you. 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
Hypothetically, could code enforcement go do something outside of the scope and say oh, I forgot I wasn't supposed to go in the house. OK? Whatever, you know, can they still be held to... 
 
SPEAKER: 
As far as a trespass. And again, let's – this is intentional outside of their employment, it is still a trespass. If I trespass, I am not supposed to trespass on my job so that is outside of my job. 
 
SPEAKER: 
I think what is different here, I agree with everything Sabrina said, it is your choice. If you do move forward, there are some things we would have to prepare in training. It is that this would be a job requirement, we are putting this on our employees. So yes, you can do something stupid outside their employment and there could be consequences for that. 
 
But here, they would be doing their job and could make a mistake. It is interesting when you look at it. Not every state is the same. Florida has some pretty strict privacy laws and in some other states, this would not be a discussion at all. 
 
I think part of it is this is an example, technology has just gotten, has grown around the law at this point. You know? If you did, if this was something important, regardless of whether the implement now or not, there may be some other jurisdictions I would be interested in having the statute changed to expand it. This is so much more available than it used to be. And there is still an expense to it but I am sure the longer it is around, the cheaper it gets. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Thank you. 
 
SPEAKER: 
Counsel, I think there is no doubt that it has a purpose and the protections it would add, nobody has questions about that. I think it has helped out our law enforcement across the country and everything as Mr. Dyer because technology is the way it is. 
 
But I think it is appropriate, Dave, that at this time I would agree with you. I would be more inclined to, even though I would like to do it at a local level, and at the minimum, if we can all agree to maybe put it as a legislative priority, I would be amicable to that because I do not sense, you know. 
 
I would still like to see if our state laws, how they feel about it. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Thank you. The reason that I was for this and remain for it is for protection of both our employees and the public. Now I learn not just for code enforcement employees but for animal control employees. The reason is, if somebody goes into your house, if you didn't get a permit for your business to build something, they would be angry, may be and they could elevate it to violence. But when you start taking somebody's dog or their horse, people tend to get, tend to get a little more violent. I think it is good protection for our own employees and I think it is good protection for the public because we, at least I do too often. People don't trust government anymore. 
 
They said this and I said this... this removes the doubt and gives proof of exactly what was said. For me, I think the fact that there is a possibility that an employee could be charged, I think that is a good motivator right there as part of the training. 
 
I do not see it as an insurmountable problem to train people when they turned on, they give a card and ask for their permission. Have them sign it. If they don't sign it, they don't turn on the camera. The homeowner or the business owner can record it, it has been said. 
 
So, it offers our employees protection, it offers the public protection. I think both of those things are really important. I would like to pursue it locally and through state legislature. 
 
But I will, if the Council is more comfortable with going to the state first, I think, I hope that what we end up here with is that staff will continue the process. A big question for me is going to be cost. How much does it cost to store all of this? Can you put it on a hard drive? Can you put it on a memory stick? 
 
Does it have to go in a secure place that anybody can get into? So we need to look at cost and exactly how it is carried out. Vice chair Troy Kent? 
 
TROY KENT: 
Thank you, chairman. I don't like it for all the reasons that Councilman Santiago clearly pointed out. This is problematic. Unless we get permission, a roadmap, a roadway from state legislature, I am out on this. Mr. Clay Ervin, quick question for you. 
 
And you can keep my time going, I am going to be done in 30 seconds, probably. You said in eight years there were five instances, a handful of instances? I will not hold you to that. Was it multiple employees or maybe one employee, off the top of your head? 
 
CLAY ERVIN: 
Several. 
 
TROY KENT: 
OK. But a handful over eight years? Can't remember who said it, and may have been Council member Jake Johansson who said people aren't too happy to see code enforcement show up. There is truth in that as well. 
 
I was just wondering if we had a superego beaver, Rambo style enforcement officer who just rub people the wrong way and we are doing all of this because we need to have a sitdown healthy conversation with an employee and say hey, you know, your tactics are not conducive to what we are trying to accomplish here. 
 
That was all, thank you. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Councilman Johansson? 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Point of clarification as we are wrapping up here. I think Councilman Santiago, had a motion to table this? Is that correct? But it seems like we are going towards recommending option one to talk to our legislature about this and amending state loss I just want to see if we want to make a motion to provide option one is one of the options. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
His motion was to table with no time, certainly. No option, certainly. Danny and I just made clear what we feel but David sent Iago, it is your motion. If not I think we need the necessary legislations to protect this. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Table at? So when does it never come back? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Anytime. Table doesn't kill it, it just comes back at any time. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Just to clarify again, this is discussion which we have had and direction of options? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I can just change it to option one. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Just so I am clear, option one is what we will ask for? Might take a year, may take two? 
 
CLAY ERVIN: 
What we are hearing loud and clear from the Council as we will be working with our legislative lobbyists to see if we can get the exemption granted to code enforcement and animal control officers. 
 
If that action is taken, we will follow up by bringing forward process and programs to implement body cameras. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I would say engage Florida counsel of counties and cities because I can see that morningness is an issue. 
 
CLAY ERVIN: 
And the Florida Association of code enforcement. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Can you restate your motion then? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
In the interest of keeping it clean, is option one, direct staff to exercise legislative actions to provide the necessary protections and engage our partners and government to get more from the legislature. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
And the second er is fine with that? Before I call for the vote, we had one member of the public who wanted to speak on this item, Karen Clark. But you still only have three minutes.  
 
SPEAKER: 
Hello again everybody. One of the things that I thought was funny at the end was when a person is getting the code enforcement officer or animal control officer, do you really think they are going to complain to their superior thinking that there may be retribution and on the road? So that might be a low line complaint for code enforcement officer. So anyway I don't see why it would be bad to me, it would actually help the staff, the person going in, it protects them, because we know it's he said/she said, or whatever combination it is. And it would save money in the end I believe because there wouldn't be any lawsuits. 
 
You don't have to hire a super attorney if they said this and I said that, it's on camera. I think for the person getting the citation, it protects them to. It really does. Because you have it in writing. And how much space and how much does it have to cost that you can put it in a terabyte and stick in your pocket? That made no sense. In any way. 
 
It would also be able to put a harness on the officer, the code enforcement person, or the animal control person, on doing what the county wants them to do and say, and their actions exude not hostility. Maybe that's something they have to look at two. It on the camera, you can't be the bully. I know (Laughs). 
 
But anyway, please look into having the campus. The way the technology is nowadays, it's extremely inexpensive to have these cameras, I mean I have a whole house camera'd up because of people that came over. Neighbors that now got taken out. 
 
But just stick with it and I'm sure it'll go down. Especially the animal control people. I know some of the things they have to go through when they go in there doing the right thing for the animal part. On their side as well it would protect them. I'm sorry, the dog mauled them. Anyway, I'm sorry. I'm done. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Thank you. I'm not seeing any other comments, Karissa, would you call the role, the motion to direct staff to pursue step one? 
 
SPEAKER: 
Mr. Robins, Mr. Dempsey, Mr. Kent? Mr. Brower? 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Yes. Item 13, selection of chair, and vice chair of the value adjustment board, due to recent Florida Department of revenue guidance and any counsel member may nominate. Currently we have Matt Reinhart and David Santiago on the board. Would there be a nomination for a chair? 
 
SPEAKER: 
I would like to nominate Matt Reinhart. 
 
SPEAKER: 
I second that. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Mr. Councilman Johansson nominates Matt Reinhart. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
By the way Jake, I like Matt. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
And then ift would somebody would like to nominate David Santiago for vice chair? 
 
TROY KENT: 
I will nominate David Santiago for vice chairman. 
  
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Do I hear a second? 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
Second Johansson. 
  
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Is there a second on Matt Reinhart's nomination by Jake Johansson? Okay, all right. Any other discussion? All in favor of Matt Reinhart and his chair David Santiago as a vice chair say aye. Motion opposed? Motion carried 6 to 0. 
 
An alternate member - and we have option Jake is on that. He would... he could be nominated, and we can also nominate someone from staff like the deputy County manager, Suzanne (Unknown Name). What is your pleasure? Jake Johansson? 
  
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Yes sir, although I don't think it's a good idea to nominate myself. I would like to nominate Suzanne as the alternates. She has been very involved in the merger, and I think it would be good to have her for some planning integrity. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
So you are nominating as the second on that? 
 
SPEAKER: 
I will nominate Jake Johansson as the career source member. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Is there a second on Suzanne first? David Santiago makes a second. And you have nominated – try Kent has nominated Jake. Is there a second on that? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I second. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
David makes a second on that as well. Comments? All in favor say aye? Any opposed? Congratulations. 
 
 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
By the way Chairman, that was the worst rate I have ever made in my life. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Hats off to you. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Thank you. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Item 15 the at-large appointment to the Halifax area advertising authority. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
I would like to nominate Sandra burn. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Is there second to Sandra? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
A second. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Second by David Santiago. Jake, your name is still up, did you have a comment about her? 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
No sir. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
All in favor say aye? Any opposed? Sandra is nominated and approved. 
 
Do we have any public participation?  
 
 
 
SPEAKER: 
Mr. Nicholson. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Is just one? John Nicholson. 
 
STUDENT: 
John Nicholson, I know there's a crowd out there, you can't tell. People want to speak. With two guards summing that popped up earlier today, police chief came with a valid reason right, nobody likes to be told that your area is not perfect. As I said, I was embarrassed, when Danny made that comment. But the truth hurts. And I'm sure you all have heard the phrase dirt tona. Every time I hear it I cringe. I hate the comment, arrive on vacation, leave on probation. 
 
I have heard that for years. We have problems in Daytona Beach. I bring it to you all because we have problems with the county. For 20 years, the relationship between the County and the city was not the greatest. In the past, we have never really been that close. And to me, and I don't think anybody really objects to the idea by saying that you know the economic engine. We are the tourist center of the county. We are the advanced center of the county. These are just facts. All right? What we as a city do with these facts it's something different. And I know you are not supposed to be involved with our city. But you should be. All right? If you ask – I forgot her name right now. She does the board statistics on the value of tourism. Evelyn fine. If you were to have her here to explain to you how much money is generated, how many people employed. How much it lowers the taxes for all of the cities around us. I had a meeting with Echo. And it's true. 
 
We donate basically or have donated almost $90 million that will lose forever and we didn't get a dime back. We lose $100 million a year on sales tax. These devastate our city. And you guys have to realize that you all play an intricate part of the puzzle to what we do. And if you allow the things that are going on in Daytona Beach – I know what I talked about the Republican Party, guys, you guys are in control now. If you guys don't stick together. We are not going to go anywhere. 
 
So you have the power to move not only the county. At the cities as well. On where you put things, the LPGA extension. All right? You have no idea – I showed Troy Kent the number of properties, there is 20 properties in out LPGA being developed. It is just massive. I'm asking you to be very involved and can I go on one more second? Or is it just zapped? I apologize to Danny for what happens. But the truth is the truth. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
County manager, George (Unknown Name). 
 
SPEAKER: 
I would like to out a couple things. One, burn ban I've been asked by several folks if we were intending on doing an account on burn ban. We are approaching an index of 500, that's typically where we do that. And part of the County already is in that range. So, I will be talking with the Fire Chief, and unless we get some get some sort substantial rain. I see us implementing some type of open burn ban later in the week. The other thing – brought up a little bit the timing of the ISP ramp. 
 
I'm going have Ben Bartlett come up, as we have set previously in this project. This was time to be part of the Department of Transportation on ISP itself. The idea was that we would be doing work while they were doing work. And trying to minimize any kind of issue. And the work is expected to last nearly a year. So there's no way to do the work and not somehow get into the beach season. And we did wait and we were fortunate to get past our busiest, typically our busiest holiday around the beaches. Memorial day. 
 
So we are past that market, and with a little luck we could get done around Easter, before Easter. Next spring. But then, anything to add? I think there is – a little bit about what it means as far as working on the ramp and what will be closed. 
 
 
SPEAKER: 
You know, there is no good time to do a construction park of this nature. When it impacts businesses. The timing, the DOT project and improving the I speak word or, we are – our construction zones overlap, and we are replacing underground utilities, we are releasing the ramps. And so we need to time this construction with air, so that we are not (indiscernible) with the stuff it down and vice versa. The other side of that is, as Mr. (Unknown Name) said, we wait until after Memorial Day to close the ramp. We've been in touch with businesses on the north side of the rental of property owners know this was coming. There is the hotel condo on the south side, we were going to be maintaining vehicular access. And making sure the condo has access from their facility either from the ramp or from a 1A. 
 
Our goal is to take advantage of the fact that we can do work on the beach during the turtle season the summer. You run the risk of delaying it, and then getting into next turtle season, and not getting that approved so we are taking advantage of that now. 
 
And our goal is to get traffic opened back up prior to Easter, which is really when the beach season – so we are only impacting significantly one of the beach seasons. So we are going to be out there making sure that the pedestrian access is safe and available. And that the businesses can be accessed that way, and we are going to be working with those folks as best as we can. We are going to say on the contract to make sure we stay on schedule.  
 
SPEAKER: 
I had a comment about water that flows to the north, does not flow south because the waters of the Tomoko member going a different direction. We've heard that said several times and that is all I really have. 
 
SPEAKER: 
Thank you, County attorney Michael Dyer? 
 
SPEAKER: 
Just one item. It has come to my attention that we have had a growing number of vacancies in the historic preservation work as of this week. It has grown to 4. It is unusual in that has nine members so we have taken a look to see what other cities and counties have and it does not need to be that big. Monroe County, for example, is five and Highlands County is seven. 
 
One thing I want to suggest if it is agreeable to counsel was ordinances on the action for a few other boards. A discussion that we had was whether this was the appropriate time to produce the side of the historic preservation board. That would not cause any member to lose her seat. 
 
It may be a little easier to fill. It is hard to keep that many people. So if it is agreeable to you, I can bring back an agenda item with a provision. 
 
SPEAKER: 
As for me. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Emotion as advice chair? 
 
SPEAKER: 
Yes, and make that emotion going from 9 to 5. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Jake, was that you with a second? Councilman Santiago makes second. I mean, Johansson. I am not even going there. Alright, thank you for the motion, it gives County attorney all the tools he needs. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries 6-0. 
 
OK, that brings us to County Counsel closing comments. First up today is Councilman Robins. 
 
DANNY ROBINS: 
Thanks, chair. Guys, I would like to quickly publicly address some comments that were obviously aimed towards me earlier in the meeting. I just want to first and foremost say that I have known the chief for probably 20 years. 
 
I respect him tremendously. Obviously this took on a life of its own. I just want to clear up some loose ends here. At no point did I disparage the great work of the men and women of the Daytona Police Department. 
 
In fact, I have been the biggest cheerleader and will continue to do so for our law enforcement community and our first responders countywide. Again, at no point did I represent or portray any officer or municipality in a disparaging manner. 
 
Because, despairingly is being defined as little worth and I know firsthand that the Daytona Beach police officers do an incredible job day in and day out. At no point did I say or portrayed to be an expert on these events, client or staffing. I only stated my observations. My comments must be put into inaccurate context which was driving and the light in Daytona Beach that affects our businesses, tourism and economic development that was brought forward by our constituents. 
 
This was not self initiated by me. If gain is defined by bringing up other valid points, and folks, I am guilty. If pointing out the obvious from my real life experiences both past and present and laying it on the table to improve our community, then once again, Danny Robins is guilty. 
 
I respect the chief for coming into address his point of view and I would like to encourage respectful dialogue. Where I disagree with him is the unnecessary, unnecessary baseless attack on my integrity both as a person and a police officer. Disparaging the career where I serve with honors, where I sacrificed my body for my community. That I continually pay for every day I get out of bed. 
 
I stand by my comments, as they were true to my experiences and I will never apologize or be silenced for telling me truth now or ever. I will also never be a person to back down from a conflict but in this case, I think it is within the community's best interest to keep an eye on the ball. 
 
The first step to addressing any problem is realizing that there is one. In my opinion, we should be using this to our advantage to get more for our cops and community because they need it terribly. Ted the city of Daytona Beach and the chief, this will blow over, I still love you guys and respect you. I love our cops and I will continue to work towards improving our community. 
 
The district store is open. It will remain open. All my resources are always available to you guys. Thank you. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Councilman Santiago? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Thank you chairman. I have a few items. I want to see if the Council is OK giving additional guidance or parameters to our staff when it comes to the upcoming workshop? 
 
We will be discussing the land development code and things like that. I wanted to see if you all would be OK allowing them to expand and looking to methodologies or policies that we can change in the county to help folks with this insurance crisis that we are having in our country and our state. 
 
It is really bad. The coastline, county and the cost of homeowners insurance is certainly affecting the homeowners back in place. In some cases, it is preventing people from even obtaining insurance. 
 
Yet, the meeting that we have, we can expand on that, I am open to that. Yeah. But I think there may be policies that come to land development and construction that we can adopt. In some cases, potentially offset. We talked about affordable housing and how to get government out of the way to reduce the private market. Right? 
 
Looking at this policy. I want to say there is consensus to direct staff to look at what is happening out there and what we can potentially do here to mitigate rising cost of insurance. I know they are doing some things, is there support for that? 
 
I like to ask is there objection to that? I like to reverse that, no objection to that? 
 
SPEAKER: 
I may have objection, I want to ask staff. It seems the workshop we already have is going to take some time. Is this possible to combine these two? With that give them justice? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
That is possible, I don't object to that. 
 
SPEAKER: 
We have a pretty good amount on our plate but this is a good issue. Let's take a look at that and if we can include it or make it a Segway to look out further, we can do that. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
I think it is important enough that it could have its own workshop. I don't want to have a meeting for the sake of a meeting but that is important. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Thank you Mr. Chairman. 
 
SPEAKER: 
Off the top of my head, from what I caution a little bit about is we can build things to withstand almost anything. That would make it easier to ensure. I don't know if that is what we want to afford so that is something to think about and something going out in the industry. 
 
So this is a state issue, probably a southern United States issue. Fingers and toes and prayers that the predictions of this season are off. So yeah, we will take a look at that. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
The reason Mr. chair and colleagues that I brought it up on the land development side of things is there are certain things that I think this counsel will support they give relief on the land development side they reduce the cost of building a home. 
 
The is setbacks or size requirement, the various things we put in their dictate how people build homes. That could potentially purely for some of the things and we live in Florida with hurricane weather. That is why I started tying those things together. I would love to see SBA pioneer in the state of Florida to find ways to get creative and help give some people relief with good policy. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Before we move on, I think two of your colleagues wanted to speak about that. Jake Johansson? 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Yes, and that has already been said but I was going to suggest that I have no problem having another workshop on this. I think it took a lot of conversation about this and what I don't want to do is have us look at the clock and shortchange all of the stuff that we have to do in the current, so we can get to this. 
 
That probably demands an equal amount of time once we do the research. And so, I have always supported having a few workshops a year anyhow. This needs to be a second one, by golly, let's do it. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I am comfortable with what has been said and I think staff gets it. If there is a consensus to have one soon, we will have one as soon as is appropriate, whenever the timing works. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
We will let the free market work itself out, this is no different than the debacle in the 80s. Anytime the government thinks they can fix something, they create another problem and I don't think any of us are economic geniuses. 
 
To sit here and say that we can somehow fix the insurance problem in Volusia County is, to me, high in the sky. We need to let this workout. If people will lose their homes and have foreclosures, if people are going to have insurance, insurance companies are going to be in trouble. It always works itself out if we just let things play itself out. So, I don't want to spend too much time. 
 
I guess we can look into it but I am really against the government ever coming in and trying to regulate or control the free market. You have to let things play itself out and work itself out, that is all. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Don, I see where you're coming from and there are parts of it I agree with. This could potentially have the effect of minimizing government control depending on the way the conversation goes. I am not suggesting more regulation or not, in any case, or a middle ground. 
 
Part of what drives the cost on not only construction but also insurance is government policies, they play a part in it because it drives the market. The purpose of the conversation is to see what trends or how we can potentially be innovative, that is the only reason. It could mean getting rid of stuff. 
 
I would be more open to it. Your dialogue would certainly attribute to being aware if government gets in the way. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
If we can talk about getting rid of government at this workshop, I am all in favor. If we can talk about impact fees or cutting them down, they are astronomic in this county. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Sounds like you want to have this meeting. 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
In that vein, I support you. Thank you. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Did you have more? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Yes, thank you Mr. chair. My colleagues, if there is no objection, I would also like to see staff at the next council meeting to bring forward to us an update on potential, potential... the charter amendment process. As we are leading into this national election, I wanted to get some guidance and dialogue and engage with staff to look at if there is any potential for us to do charter amendments, with the deadlines would be. 
 
Maybe having short conversation or in-depth conversation on things that we may or may not want to consider putting on this upcoming election ballot. Not proposing anyone specific by the staff, if counsel agrees and staff can give us a history of what has been discussed over the last few councils, then open that dialogue potentially for councilmembers to engage. 
 
If there is no objection, Mr. chair, I would like to see that come forward.  
 
SPEAKER: 
I have a question for staff, it's too late for this year isn't it? 
 
SPEAKER: 
It's growing very tight, the charter, every 10 years you have a charter review process, so come May, is the time that the Charter allows counsel to speak for the process. You can also initiate as a counsel, Edmund min Seger charter. There is now state advertising we could do. Basically if you want to do some thing on the ballot, you would need to adopt the ballot language I would say beginning of August. 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
The sales tax has to be done by 15th of July? 
 
SPEAKER: 
It varies. 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Maybe it would be easier if I asked this way, can we make the deadline and if we wanted to? 
 
SPEAKER: 
Yes, it depends on what you want to consider. I'm joking to Mike, I love you. I'm sorry Jake, I jumped in. I apologize too. 
 
I did a little bit of preliminary research, I'm not suggesting any one of if we have ideas, and we want to take action on it, we are within the window and South can make it happen. So that's the intent. I move to direct staff to bring forward guidelines, timelines, and historicals of let's say the last two charter amendments that have been proposed or discussed for review and discussion. Next meeting. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
You said the last two amendments? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Last two charter amendment proposals and discussions. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Not a specific amendment, but the process? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
Give us a historical perspective of what is been discussed by the next meeting. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
That is the motion on the floor, is there a second? Second by Councilman Robbins, questions? Comments? 
 
Jake Johansson? 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Yes sir, I claim not to be a politician, but here I am. 
 
**Audio lost** 
 
It's important I think, it's something we can chat about, but it was never a number one priority. And to make staff jump through a bunch of hoops to get it done by late July and early August, to get on the ballot, if we change something, is something I would rather not deal with either. I don't want this to occupy my life and our lives while we are trying to fix the coast and talk about things that we tabled last week, and the budget. And add this to it in addition to two workshops we haven't yet attended. So those are my thoughts and that's vital be a no for me. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Councilman Santiago? 
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I respect your perspective. Every charter amendment is every year. Otherwise it would be a charter amendment because they have to vote on it. I'm not advocating for anything specific. If there's any of my colleagues that have ideas that you want to talk about or look at what happened in the past, if we had that time engaged, and want to have a conversation, we certainly can, if not, nothing moves forward. But at least have a historical perspective, we are within the window I don't think - I don't know if anything would be proposed. That's the purpose. I think our staff is very capable. 
 
Unless you feel they are not. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
We have that is a motion, and a second. Rather than call the role, I just went to ask if it's hard to tell, then we can called role, but all in favor of the motion to bring back at this information at the next meeting? Any opposed? OK so it's five to one.  
 
DAVID SANTIAGO: 
I just wanted to make more of a statement. Danny I appreciate your comments, it took a lot of courage to come back and share your thoughts. You took the criticism well too, so I have a lot of respect for you. That being said, the comments that the public stared, I feel like Daytona's success is the county's success.  
 
It's important that that dialogue and that relationship flourishes. It is probably strange, it has been strange for a long time, and it should be. Amongst any of the cities right? We are going to have tension from time to time, and policy differences and we move forward. But again, I will say Daytona success is Volusia County success. So I would encourage myself, and all of my colleagues here, how do we build that bridge to ensure there can be a long term partnership not only with Daytona but others within our boundaries to ensure, especially economic and safety and all those things successes are appropriate. Some more of a statement to my colleagues. In a statement to the city of Daytona, let's engage us all. And let's have some good dialogue. And help make the relationship great again.  
 
That's it Mr. chair. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Councilman Dempsey? 
 
DON DEMPSEY: 
Jake Johansson? 
 
JAKE JOHANSSON: 
Two quick - I guess public service announcements. We do a lot of research, and use of few things on the CIP that got discussed today, a few numbers got chatted about. But I want the public to realize that when staff is doing research and paperwork is flying around, when we are grinding the sausage, that's exactly what's happening. And that doesn't necessarily mean that we are going to buy it, cook it, and eat it. So, don't think that when we are in the planning stages of things, in particular recently the motorcross, it doesn't mean that we're going to execute those plans. I think people get wrapped up pretty quick on things like the train's left the station.  
 
Know that you have access your elected officials. And that we listen to what you have to say, but we don't want to get involved early on in some cases when we are looking at options. And personally, I like to hear all options, even ones that staff discounted and throughout and didn't bring to us. And those get discussed at our weekly meetings. Also, something that Don pointed out that I sometimes fail to absorb, but the government doesn't exist to solve all of our problems. 
 
As a matter of fact, I have said many times much to the chagrin of staff sometimes is that if you want something to be done efficiently and effectively, and without a little – a lot of government regulation, don't give it to governments. The private sector can handle a lot with a lot more agility than we can just by virtue of what we have to do to spend a dollar.  
 
It has nothing to do with step for government employees at the federal states. Or local level. So, don't rely on us on stuff that we could probably do together as a community, I was very critical of our boards. Not because I didn't think all of the community boards that we have are not worth it, it's just that once they become community boards, their hands are tied, they can't talk. They can't collaborate. They can't do anything outside of that meeting that has anything to do with what they are passionate about. So, as soon as we get them together, and get their names on a list, the only time they can talk about the thing that they are passionate about is in their meetings. Otherwise, it's a sunshine violation. So, my goal is to get people to work out issues outside of governments before you come to us. I know it's tough to do in this day and age. But things like that get done a lot quicker. And you would be surprised how quick your taxes get lowered when people take care of the issues or concerns and their great ideas on their own. Grassroots driven. Think about that as we move forward. And I will do everything I can to help people take care of that outside of governments. That's all I have, thank you very much chairman. 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
Thank you vice chair Kent. 
 
TROY KENT: 
Do we have a date to when the off beach parking new rate structure for non-Volusia residents and the pay structure for non-Volusia residents to get on the beach will become back to us? 
 
SPEAKER: 
I think we are scheduled for August. We received our proposals from companies. So that is being in review right now. So, that's on track for August. 
 
SPEAKER: 
We have received the solicitation request for both contracts. They will be – selection committees will be meeting to select the recommended vendors, and initially, we were looking to bring it to you in August. And we are actually trying to get this wrapped up and bring the meeting in July. 
 
TROY KENT: 
Sounds good, thank you very much. My final comment is just to the sweetest woman I know, my mother. I love you. And, there's a lot of people praying for you. Thanks for listening online mom. 
 
 
JEFFREY S BROWER: 
The kind of changes everything. Thanks for saying that. I don't know what's going on, but shall be in my prayers. Mothers are incredible.  
 
I just had a couple things. I want to start with what happened with chief, and what happened with what Danny said. I don't want to pile on.  
 
The public has spoken to it, I do want to say that... you are. I'm not surprised that Joe Kari and his officers might've taken it personally, you did never mention them. 
 
But it was very very strong and I don't ever remember a time that a councilmember took one of our cities to task like that. I would hope that we would be more careful in how we speak about the cities within the county. I actually – took it more to hard with the (indiscernible) board. And he sent a note to Lori Campbell Baker, because she is working around the clock trying to bring people to Daytona Beach, the rest of the county.  
 
I want you to know Annie, that she responded acknowledging that she received it, but she had no comment on it. It was just – I wanted to let her know that as far as I could tell, this board has a lot of support, for the board, for advertising to bring people in, and I don't think it was helpful for that. On a good note, I see several people from emergency management here. We had a pretty serious fire, I think 900 acres – I started getting calls late at night about you know, O'Steen is pretty rural. I called Mark Swanson at night. 
 
Then I heard from Jim Judge. Then I heard from the Deputy County manager. I bring this up, because there was several private individuals and O'Steen who were offering their property for people to board their horses, any large animal, even dogs. People were really concerned. As the pastor is burning.  
 
One of the members of this particular page said what surprised us the most was the County had no plan of what to do in a fire like that. I want the public to know that not only was there a plan, but it was in place by the time I called them. 
 
I asked about specific large plots of land where we could take animals, they were already on it, they already had permission from some of them. So we do have a plan, we hope we never have to use it but there is a plan for those kinds of fires. 
 
Chief, I want you to know that your guys are really impressive. It was a dangerous, dangerous fire. I don't think we lost any structures. Did we lose any animals? Did we lose any people? Did you lose any firefighters? Thank God. 
 
Injuries? To the fire? Good. Am I right it was over 900 acres? Come on out, because this is important. Everybody, everybody wants to be a firefighter and this is why. 
 
SPEAKER: 
This fire started several days prior and it was stopped, it was contained at 95, 97%. Then they had a little breakout over the weekend of 250 acres. The total was 905. 
 
The weather did not help out that much as well, we had 17-20 mile an hour winds. It was actually 200 yards at a time but they did good work to keep it contained. Currently right now it is 95% contained. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
It was impressive, I saw one note from a woman who said she was watching the fire come across her pasture and I asked her, was she able to secure her animals? She did. Trailers there, animal control offered trailers for large animals. Everybody, including the residents there. 
 
This is an amazing place. The residents really come together when there is an emergency. So, we did have a plan. The plan was in place and it worked and we save lives and property. 
 
SPEAKER: 
Saturday night, all the residents new plans were in place and I think everybody down there when they came through. The road was closed and they were getting information firsthand from the cruise and forestry on site, there is definitely a plan in place. 
 
JEFFREY S. BROWER: 
Thank you. Vice chair Troy Kent, you asked me about funding for motorcross. I was actually going to talk about it. I answered your question and said I am not in favor of using general fund money for that. 
 
I really, at this point, and unsure of the echo because I want to hear from the echo committee. Want to hear what they're feeling is and they want to hear from our own staff members, Doctor (Name). 
 
My hope, my desire was that it brought some pretty impressive people in here that do this already. I hoped we would end up with a private operator, private land when the county sells or may be better with what the Speedway has. 
 
The Speedway could be involved because it goes directly to them. I want to push that just a step further and I ask Doctor (Name) about this. I wanted to know, do we have land currently where we can ride? There is, like, 32 miles where people can ride ATVs but not necessarily dirt bikes, motorcycles. 
 
You were talking about a competitive thing. I want a place to go in Volusia County to ride and I do not want to go to (Name) or (Name). I have asked Doctor (Name) to let us know sort of where we may have areas in Volusia County just for pleasure writing, not the amazing things that your son is doing necessarily but where families go. 
 
It is also a family sport. Riding in the woods. For my family, it is horses. For yours, is dirt bikes and I think we need both. I am hoping to hear that information. I don't want to ride on a paved road if I am monitored by, I want sand and mud. 
 
Which I am probably not going to do anyway! I had four sons who did and maybe five daughters. Tomorrow, Wednesday, I am going to be on the Indian River Lagoon, releasing 2 million clams out of a drone. 
 
It is such an amazing thing to me that you take that old technology of a clam that helps clean water and a new technology of a drone where the clam, his name is Mike Nemec and he has a lot of leases up and down the lagoon, a tremendous restaurant in Saint Augustine. 
 
It would take half a day or all day to release that many sea clams. We are going to do it in a matter of minutes. One of the reasons that he is doing it there, I am not going to give the exact location because we don't want any accidents. But, it is because the water quality is not improving. 
 
In Volusia County's southern section of the lagoon, we are not where we want to be that clams and oysters greatly help with that. So it is an amazing thing. I am hoping that the press will pick up on it. It is such an impressive project. 
 
There are other people, Kelly McGee is involved in it which is excellent. So, that is all I had. America, blessed God. We always ask God to bless us and he had so I think it is time we think about what that means to each of us. We participate 
 
In the political realm and personal realm. So, thank you all, counsel, for a really good series of debates today. We are ending at 2:38 PM, which may be a record. 
 
(End of Meeting)