[MUSIC] 
>>  If everyone would get a seat, we will start in just a few seconds.  Okay, we will call the February 4, 2025 Volusia County Council meeting to order at 9:00 AM.  We will start our meeting in just a moment with an invocation in the pledge of allegiance.  The invitation is open to any faith group in Volusia County.  If your faith group that would like to participate, please send an email to kgreen@volusia.org and she will get you set up to do this.  This morning we have the pleasure of having Pastor Tommy Clayton in Deltona area so if you would care to stand for the invocation Tommy come on down and remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance.  
>>  Lord thank you for this day that you have made.  Thank you for the opportunity to acknowledge you to stop and pause and think you for all you do, for you who you are.  Thank you for the counsel and the wisdom collectively that they represent.  As always you will give them wisdom for the decisions they want to make today and the issues they are going to face.  Give them humility Lord to remember that there are servant leaders and they represent this county.  They are going to be seeking to solve problems together and find solutions to issues that are deeply complicated and have layers of complexity.  Keep them united father.  There are 10 people in a room and 11 pennance.  Keep this group united in together to represent our county well.  Pray for their health, pray for their families, pray that you watch over them and keep them and we ask all these things in the name of Christ.  Amen.  
>>  I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.  To the republic for which it stands, one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all.  
>>  Caressed so would you call the roll please?  
>>  Jake Johansson.
>>  Here.
>>  Tony Kent.
>>  Here.
>>  Matt Reinhart.
>>  Don Dempsey.
>>  Here.
>>  Jeffrey Brower.
>>  Here.
>>  We do have a full house and a quorum.  We will begin our meeting with public participation if we have any.  When I call your name if you can come forward to the podium there is a button on the left side of the podium that makes it go up and down.  Please make sure there is a microphone near your speaking voice so we can all hear you and it is recorded.  He would just tell us where you are from and you do not need to give your full address for safety reasons but tell us where you are from so your district representative knows that you are here.  You have three minutes to talk about anything that pertains to Volusia County.  First, we have David Hall.  
>>  David Hill, Miller road.  I get the impression that it has been on the Royal Oak system and everybody thinks things are fine.  I measure it daily and the filtration system that Royal Oak having a parking lot supposed to take water in and dispose it.  All it is doing right now is taking water and it is rising.  It is rising because it is not dumping into Miller Lake through the filtration system in the parking – and I have been there.  I just want you guys to know it is not flowing over now just give it this month, it will be going over there we are.  I measure the rate and it soon will be going over.  The problem is not solved, we just put a damper.  The X filtration system is 85% full and we have had no rain.  I just want you guys to know the problem is not solved and it is still there.  The value of a property on Miller Road because this threat is still there.  People on Miller Road is going to have a difficult time selling their homes with the disclosure with Johnson versus David and the Florida Supreme Court.  We are still doomed and I would like to know what your plans are.  No one can-- communicates with us and tells us anything.  Would be nice if you bring us together as a group and say hey, guys this is what is happening.  If nothing is happening that is just fine just let us know.  I will keep you posted on the water level.  Lake Wawa is rising in the Royal Oaks the first drain in front of the we are is rising a lot quicker than Lake Wawa and we have not had any rain.  There's more flooding on the horizon.  I think and I hope you can come up with a solution to this.  Thank you.  
>>  Thank you Alec Ratner?  
>>  Daytona Beach Shores.  I like to thank Pres. Trump for sanctioning the South African government and the Congress for passing the X appropriation act which legalizes the confiscation of whiteboards and their farmland.  South African Pres.  Is a supporter of white genocide and white South African farmers.  The global why genocide must and comment diversity equity and inclusion was an and 1/9 circuit social media law involving age verification until trial.  Clearly the ninth circuit Court of Appeals for the stupid excuse called age verification violates the fourth amendment of the Constitution.  Which the sanctimonious will try to have digital troop into your home with digital IDs.  Congressman Byron Donald of Florida failed for several years to disclose the stock trades which involve $1.6 million while he was a member of the House financial services committee.  They may call that a conflict of interest.  Jeff Bauer had stood up to the citizens of this county by listening to their complaint serious flooding issues and the need to suspended development.  I think they should be Army Corps of Engineers to look at a survey for the flooding issues.  Jeffrey Brower is not brought there -- bought up by the big developers.  It is the issues of the residents of the county.  Jeffrey Brower for the governor of Florida.  Thank you.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you but no thank you.  John Nicholson?  
>>  John Nicholson Daytona Beach.  Item 8 on your consent agenda talk about redoing plumbing and the Annex on city Island.  I thought we were trying to move that?  Why are we spending a great deal of money on redoing the plumbing if we rebuild it on Beach Street?  Secondly, with DEI Trump is pushing DEI and I am asking you to look at the possibility of eliminating it from our paperwork and anything that his suggest that we are are not discrimination.  It has been 15 years and it is time we end all of that.  We don't have to keep saying that we don't discriminate.  We don't so why keep saying it.  Every time I read something, I don't see this and we do not discriminate I see that we this grenade against white men.  That's what I got in Miami 40 years ago.  We applied for a job and it was say, sorry we are not hiring white men.  We need to abide by a court order and we can't hire teachers who are white men because you will take up the space that will go to a black man.  Those kind of things are in the past.  They should be in the past and we should eliminate all of that.  Lastly, I am pushing the E zone.  So I gave me a gift of the paperwork for the E zone for Daytona Beach.  It is an entertainment zone around Main Street.  The County as a center, parking garage, a waterworks amusement part.  You are a big part in the E zone.  If I can get the city to look at that almost half of the E zone has already been done and completed.  There is interest on five of the six properties north of Main Street to work on it.  All of that would enhance the ocean center.  I think one of those is a hotel for the ocean center.  I am asking that anything that you can do to help the city and revitalize that area helps the city but it helps the county.
>>  Thank you and I concludes public participation for the opening section.  Will move to item 1 approval of the agenda as written.  Do I have a motion?  
>>  Motion to approve.
>>  Motion to approve the agenda as presented.
>>  Second chairman.  
>>  The second is by Tony Kent.  Any questions?  All in favor say, aye.
>>  Any opposed and the agenda is approved as written.  We will move to the consent agenda.  Does any council member have an item they would like to pull for a comment or for a vote?  I will pull item E just for comments.  Anything else?  
>>  D chairman?  
>>  For common or both?  
>>  Comment.
>>  Motion to approve consent agenda as?  
>>  Motion to approve by Tony Kent and second by Councilman Jake Johansson.  All in favor?  
>>  We do have a public comment.
>>  I will pull that after.  I believe it was -- I did not pull it for a vote I pulled it for comments.  
>>  We would need to take the comment before he approves the agenda.
>>  Okay.  Suzanne Scheiber?  With the E on consent agenda.  
>>  Good morning.  Suzanne Scheiber representing green revolution.  I'm thinking on item E. This is my third time speaking about specific development April one of 2022 at the PO DRC and the Council meeting on May 17, 2022.  And then today.  The loop is a national scenic highway and a saying that next state Pacific Highway.  They have no protections the most think they automatically fall under conservation but they do not.  FDOT designate scenic highways because it is a national cultural and historical.  Volusia County has a crown jewel and the Ormond trail and it is outside of Florida.  During the time of raising funds to purchase the 36 acres of land no one can imagine the phone calls, emails, and text messages flooding Fort Green Volusia.  The phone mailbox was full and still ringing and the email was wanting to defend and 60 were delivered.  The creek student who started a petition she was 17 years old he took public backlash for trying to preserve land.  Can you imagine people accusing her of not speaking out 20 years earlier.  She wasn't even born yet.  Time flies, she just applied for veterinary college last week.  Imagine a development of regional Impact where residential shows up for 20 years or longer for conservation.  Those who fought during the early years are now in their 70s and 80s and we have been at this for five years.  So why am I going down this memory lane?  This council wasn't around when the campaign happened a few years ago.  I don't know your level of knowledge of the scenic highways ordered trail.  We are the ones who are the lucky ones that only have a local treasure but a national one that comes with responsibilities.  Residents have been trying to save, preserve, and defend the loop for decades.  So here are my concerns today.  There's flooding at a development to the north, the trees and the buffer are sitting in water of the time.  water runs across the road when it rains.  The state park across the street have trees sitting in water as well.  I emailed this issue in August 2023.  So how is it going to be addressed?  There is no mention of the trail in this agenda item that was on the County resolution that has four development on June 7, 2022.  Please follow through and writing today saying the trail will be constructed from plantation Oaks to James Ormond Park.  To County staff hold the stakeholder meeting and address the issue to loop has.  The county sound the resolution supporting the scenic highway and 2006.  We share responsibility for the future and this includes the county that holds the power to shape the scenery of what the public has shown for decades.  Thank you for your time.  
>>  Thank you.  But we get that with this, we will go to item D. I pulled E for comments.  Unfortunately, I did not get the comment before Mrs. Scheiber spoke.  This is, it has been almost 4 years maybe a little bit if you weeks more than four years that we bought the acreage that she just referred to on the loop.  With the intention of building a hiking and bike trail from there all the way to Ormond.  That land was critical for that.  The Council voted for it and we are on track for that.  This particular subdivision, the water zone provides an excellent amount of buffer along the roads so that the trail continue through it.  Ultimately all the way to Ormond there will be challenges we have to get across a very wide drainage canal.  There are several chokepoints at Halifax plantation where we didn't get as much buffer that I had hoped.  At Waterstone, we did +13 acres for a park and I am very pleased with that.  The trail is moving forward and staff is committed to building that trail.  That is all I have for item E. Item D?  
>>  I have something to item E. 
>> DAVID SANTIAGO: If he could and I would like just for clarity purposes not only for the Council and maybe members of the public to see an item such as this.  We are requesting for approval if we can get the legal team, tell us what is our legislative function in a final plan?  What is the purpose of the final plan?  
>>  Senior assistant county attorney.  What is the purpose?  The purpose is to establish to allow for the conveyance of property.  Essentially what it doesn't do is it doesn't create entitlements, density and those are done during rezoning and complement stages.  If you want to buy a piece of property usually, you say I want to buy lot 56 and you look at the plot map and you pick out the light and say I want to buy that.  Reason you could do that because it is a plotted piece of land and you buy in reference to the plot.  You know what is around you and you know how many lots there are and what roads there are and the tracks are in the open space is and you know where the parts are.  It is a consumer protection development order.  Otherwise, individual homebuyers and lot owners would have or receive a meet and balance legal description would call and distances and things like that.  They would have two get a surveyor and will have to determine what their property and what they are actually buying.  The plot is just for buying and selling a property and knowing what you have bought.  Having said all that, the approval of plots is case law that says what you are looking at is the technical requirements of the plot.  What are the technical requirements?  Have they dedicated all of the tracks properly?  Does it have the appropriate dedication and approvals from all of the owners?  In the courts have said, if they have met all of that local government even though you are the approval entity, your discretion is disappears once they meet the criteria so you must approve.  It is usually on the consent and they are not your typical rezoning or special exceptions.  They are in nature and come at the end of the development process.  But the time you are faced with a plaque approval a lot of things happen.  There are road infrastructures, utilities in place, stormwater has been constructed.  So the entire subdivision except for the vertical houses is there.  In fact for this particular plat Waterstone, you can drive the roads.  You can go in there and everything is there.  The only thing that is missing is houses.  
>>  Some final plat do not require the infrastructure that is being placed at that time.  Sometimes it is a bond.
>>  One of the options and one of the things we see preempted is someone can bond the improvements.  They bond to higher levels and they have to bond at 130% of the estimated construction cost for all of the improvements.  That is the security.  In the event they walked away or something happens to County hold the bond and you go to the surety and you say the developer has violated their construction plans.  They have not finished the infrastructure and you need to come in and fix it.  
>>  Final question Mr. chair?  Before a plat comes to us on the consent agenda item, what does staff do before they put it on their agenda?  
>>  I will let Clay answer that one.  
>>  Good morning, your staff looks at for technical compliance to the land development regulations as well as doing concurrency analysis.  That is to ensure it includes roads, water, sewer, parks, schools and all of the infrastructure that we are required or have option to require under our plan.  That is initiated at the beginning.  If they used the typical process which if it is approved they go forward and do the construction.  Then you will conduct inspections throughout the construction phase and prior to scheduling it, we would venture the final improvements are in place.  And that everything is functioning and you are willing to accept it.  With the subdivision that is when roads are transferred and utilities are transferred etc. Before it hits you all final plat, we will be out there inspecting with the plans and the plans are in compliance with the code.  
>>  Thank you Mr. chair.
>>  Good questions and it is nice to go over what actually happens because it is probably not real clear to the public.  I think we have one other comment on item E DEI Inc. you just a couple comments.  I'm pleased this was pulled.  Chairman thank you for doing that.  I'm pleased we had a comment about it.  Publicly, I want to personally thank Suzanne Scheiber and true green pollution because of you were there leadership on this issue and your steadfast support in the Council that was here before Troy, Dave made a wise decision and use the public monies to purchase the property that we are going to have for a park.  Publicly and personally, I want to say thank you for your efforts on that.  I want to thank the prior counsel that made that decision.  The loop in Ormond beach is an absolute gem.  Have now found any other place like it.  It is breathtaking if you have not been through there, you need to take a drive and check it out.  I do have a question first staff that I will end with.  I appreciate the developer and you showed up because this is important to you.  Parker, I will tell you, I have been beat up a little bit in the past because I said what I am getting ready to say.  Not all developers are the bad guys or the bad girl.  When I think of developers that I think are good guys that live in our community so they are not out-of-towners, they live here.  They see the residents in the grocery stores and I know if the surf is up I am going to see you at the similar approach in Ormond beach.  We have bumped into each other in the water several times.  Because of people like you and Paul and the brothers and Maury who lives in this community who in my opinion has done great things in Ormond beach.  I am appreciative that you are willing to work with the county a few years ago and we need to continue that type of dialogue back and forth.  Because you live here, you want it to be beautiful, you all do not want to pillage the land.  Clay and or George or Suzanne two things I want to address, please.  Suzanne Scheiber brought them up.  That is the trail and determine mentioned that is on track.  I want to hear confirmation that the trail that Ms. Scheiber brought up is on track.  The second thing you may want to have Ben talk about it.  My daughter lives up there so my wife and I every week track of that way to see our grandkids and our daughter.  Sorry Gabby.  That water over the road, I want to know what the solution is and how that is getting fixed?  Two things Ms. Scheiber brought up I want to get address.  Everybody wants to talk about the trail and wants to talk about the water over the road?  
>>  Mr. Chairman and members of the counselor will start off and Ben can supplement.  On your screen is a preliminary sketch of a trail plan from the plantation Oaks Park which was referenced with echo dollars a few years ago.  The orange is the park that is dedicated as part of the final plat it is on item E of this agenda.  The blue – on the western edge of old Dixie Highway is a continuation of the trail to an existing park the James Ormond Park.  We will actually meander the trail on the orange piece Redstone part piece that trail showing hugging the road but since we own the 13 acres, we will be able to meander the trail further away from the road.  We will avoid the removal of trees to get into the northern boundary which is the end of the Halifax plantation subdivision.  From their North the trail is most likely to go within the 80 feet of the right-of-way which we have approximately 17 feet of right-of-way was dedicated by the Halifax plantation plat over time as they were recorded.  It was from the Whetstone northern boundary to Ormond Park.  There is a 50 foot buffer part of the planet Halifax plantation subdivisions.  But that is owned by the homeowners associations.  Those are not publicly owned land.  Our plan is to stay east of the buffer within the right-of-way.  You will see in pink an alternative trail loop on the east of old Dixie Highway.  We have been in discussions with the Florida parks department for several years now about potentially offering an alternative loop if you will on the east side in the park property.  They have gone through some leadership changes as part of Dunns Creek State Park.  We are working with the current leadership there to see what we can accomplish with them.  They do have a series of roads and lands on the east.  Much of which are wet because this is influence lands along the state park.  We are continuing to work on this as a potential loop.  I will note on the east side of old Dixie there's probably 8 miles or more of existing drills within that existing trails within the park.  
>>  Thank you very much for sharing that and not to give out where you live or anything.  Any support to note that you are a hop skip and a jump of the place of where you live.  I know you know how special that place is as well so thank you for that update.  The second part please.
>>  Ben Bartlett of public works.  We have a lot of areas on the loop and with a lot of roads we are constructed along time ago in low-lying areas.  The first is the stretch of Beach Street that goes underwater and influence the project.  It was included in one of the transform create six projects that is currently in the design.  It is a challenging design because were going to the state park and we are going through a wetland area so there's a lot of environmental concerns.  We are making sure whatever we propose for construction to elevate the road essentially will not harm anything in terms of environmental concerns.  We did have a situation a little further north along Dixie where we did repairs to the situation where the water was building up on the side of the road and remove the water so it is alleviated the situation.  Highbridge are difficult because they are low and there's very limited -- 
>>  Before you move up the last piece you were talking about is that fixed now?  The one north of the bridge that you were talking about?  You feel like the county that is addressed and fixed and were not want to have the water flowing for four months at a time?  
>>  Correct.  You might get water over the road but for the most part, we have observed that the water has been addressed.  The main concern is that stretch of beach Street.  It is a safety concern especially the water comes up high enough and you can see the edge of the road.  And so during title situations to close the road.  That is the main focus of our attention right now is to get that done.  It is an evacuation route it is not official but it lets people get from beach side inland and make it possible than those types of events.  We have a major resurfacing project and were going to do what we call reclamation.  There are shoulder issues and a lot if that is because of the water level.  In the next few months we have a major reclamation project coming through.  It is still going to be affected by the tides because we are limited and we are right next to the water.  And raising the road dramatically can affect overall experience.  We are going to monitor it and see how we can deal with it.  It doesn't go underwater as much of beach Street.
>>  The over timeline specifically on the issue of right north of the bridge on Beach Street that you're talking about the road is going to have to be raised?  I know you're designing but what kind of timeline?  
>>  We are confident we will get the design and permitting done within the next six months.  We will move to construction and that is where we get the funding lined up.  At the direction of the Council we are making a request to the state for a legislation appropriation as well.  
>>  Let me tag onto that for a second.  I would like to bring this up and closing comments.  If it's a lot better in here because we have all of the public here and Mrs. Scheiber is here.  I am a little concerned with your explanation thinking about the flooding on the east side of old Dixie.  We've got Heritage Oaks that are dying because they are standing in water.  I think what you just described events water from being on the road but it does conveys that water and the park across the street.  
>>  If you look at the topography of the area everything generally moves west to east prior to the development and the topography prior to the development.  You have West, East movement of flood.  Essentially there was a section where there was a low spot in the road and the water was pulling because the road was acting like a damn.  If you were to remove the infrastructure and go back 150 years ago everything wants to go from west to east.  You've heard me talk about we are in a period of higher brain and high-intensity rainstorms.  We are seeing a lot more water and movement in that area.  The natural full -- flow of water is west to east.  The topography and the maps going back 50 years.  I am not here to say that is not occurring it probably is.  It is because we are getting a lot of rain and that is the direction he wants to go and move in that location.  
>>  I don't doubt that the war goes from west to eat but we have never had standing water that is killing 150 year old oak trees.  Something different is happening in the last development that when in on how to -- Halifax and sending water across the road into the park.  I don't understand how this is going to help save the park and the oak trees?  I guess we will see.  You have multiple culverts under the road?  
>>  We installed one recently where the water was pulling on the roads.  We have other culverts in other locations.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: We are preserving the world road?  Troy are you done?  Councilman Danny Robins for item D?  
>>  Thank you chair.  Item D is a great item.  We engaged in this campaign to review the ADA and for the mobility whether they are elderly, or handicapped.  They can experience and enjoy some of the same amenities that we all do and enjoy things just as much as everyone else.  Are you able to give a quick overview?  
>>  Thank you.  One of the first county in the state to have one and there's of the park systems and state parks that have them here in our county.  The feedback we received from the community constantly, we want to be able for people who are mobility impaired to explore.  This is one way we plan to do that in the future we have a plan to do the water management District is a driving trail.  You can stay in your car and enjoy the preserve.  But this will be stationed at Lyle neon.  In order to remain we have the environmental center.  One landowner of the year for our program last year we have what can take our program to the next level?  It was the suggestion because we do such opportunity on a preserve for wounded veterans.  We have that we will take the chair up to Barboursville.  We have mobility impaired, we can take the chair to the perverse nerves as well create.
>>  If we can get out a newsletter or something we can post?  
>>  We already talked about it this morning.
>>  Thank you so much.  
>>  $10,000 of it was a success story.  
>>  Ben are you still down there?  I want to go back to D real quick.  I'm thinking about -- 
>>  Can I have a comment on what Mr. Robbins pulled up?  The eco-rover chair is $16,000 and $10,000 is a grant.  At some point not today any more information because when you Google eco-rover chair, I see some of these chairs that are unbelievable looking like a tank to other ones that are $1500.  Unlike $16,000 so my question to staff was how many of these eco- rover chairs are re-receiving and they said one.  That was 12 times more than my first car.  I need more information in future from you about that.  Thank you.  
>>  I have one more question about E. What you said is true, the water travels west to east.  When you have 150 year old oak trees, they have been through hurricanes and water and it was in the water there to die.  The storm water plan for the Halifax plantation the new subdivision should have retained their water shouldn't it?  Who approved it?  The city or the county?  
>>  Halifax plantation approved it and it is unincorporated development.  They should retain the difference between pre-and post-.  We explained predevelopment side so now the water flows off.  The attenuation but also you have to retain the volume so you can't increase the volume of the predevelopment condition.  I can tell you after Matthew we saw water over the road.  After Ian we saw water over the road.  We went looking for changes in permits or discharges are pumping that wasn't or didn't match the permitting plans.  Anything that could have been causing the flooding due to some sort of maintenance issue or something like that.  We couldn't find anything.  I walked through the woods on the east side of old Dixie and got five or six ticks.  The conclusion we came on based on everything we saw and looked at was a combination that they have gone through hurricanes.  We talked about different hurricanes and have lots of rain and combined with the elevated rain levels we have seen in the last eight – nine years we think it is the increase of water level.  You are seeing flooding on Highbridge and down by beech Street by the bridge and there's no development adjacent to those areas.  I think is a combination of those things.  It is not likely dismiss the possibility, we went in there and looked and met with HOA folks that maintain their systems.  We compared what was going on to the original permitted plans and we didn't find any smoking gun if you will that would cause additional flood.  
>>  Was responsible for determining if they are retaining the amount of water and the normal amount travel East?  
>>  During the design process when they are applying for permits from both the county and the water management districts the engineer of record who designs the system is responsible for ensuring that they meet the pre-and post-conditions.  Obviously those plans are reviewed by staff.  It is model for the storm events and constructed for those plans and that is how you ensure.  
>>  The marker designed this one?  -- Did Parker designed this one?  
>>  They are responsible for making sure it works.  
>>  He is one called in the wheel.  The engineer is responsible for designing it but there's no checks to ensure what they are doing and what we do as far as our plans and development review staff that do reviews and calculations of models.  They use on the seasonal high.  This is a great primer at the February 11 meeting with we go in depth on the storm water and everything like that.  Tadd Kasbeer is going to give an interesting overview on a lot of the stuff.  We are just scratching the surface.  
>>  Here's a good primer and honestly that is what concerns me because we keep hearing proper engineering is done to prevent the water from going.  Here we have an area with old growth Heritage Oaks that are dying and we have had a lot of rain.  That is what we hear and that is what I hear every time and then we go on to the next one and have the same issue.  I look forward to the meeting.  You are going to talk about this on the 11th?  
>>  Yes.  Tadd Kasbeer will be leading that one.
>>  Tony Kent you have a question?  
>>  I am appreciative of your efforts with that and I will tell you why my mind is a little more at ease.  Our last meeting or the one before that, we had a graph posted and it showed the rainfall with 11 inches is our max by the way.  11 inches are storm water can handle and over 11 inches it is a problem.  They showed the last 120 – 140 years and for 80 years I think there were three events and 80 years where the rain went over that.  In the past 20 years was either seven or nine events if my memory is right that has gone over the 11 inch threshold.  We have had, it is unlike what we have seen ever.  Because they have been keeping data on that.  That is only reason Chairman where I am not pounding the same drum that you are on this issue.  I do believe the amount of rain that we have had in the past 20 years has been incredible.  I wish we had the summer of 1998.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: I don't see any other questions, we will call for the vote.  The consent agenda all in favor say aye.
>>  Aye.
>>  Any opposed?  Agenda past 7/0.  It brings us to item 3 continuation of the road program.  Is Tadd Kasbeer going to do that?  
>>  Good morning Tadd Kasbeer County engineer.  I am picking up from where we left off.  We are talking about different ways to allocate money specifically earmarked from the general fund for the transportation projects.  The first aspect that we are recommending is taking a look at some of the capital local projects.  These are projects with the pledge is high and the work level would be or require a bit of time.  That is mainly levels projects.  We already have two projects in our program that were previously approved by Council.  Old Mission Road projects, we are going from Josephine Burke and relocating the road or the canal that is adjacent to it to meet safety standards.  We are adding lanes it is nothing along those lines.  We are bringing it to standards and that is what we are doing with all of these projects.  We have the trail from I-95 and we will be relocating the ditches or a section of the road.  We just bringing an area up to current safety standards.  We have other projects where we identify safety issues.  These five in particular have what I would consider pressing safety issues.  We have quite a few roads that don't have paved shoulders or adequate clear zone.  It does make sense to list the five because the need to be or considered or addressed.  LPGA have large canals and the adjacent road.  It is similar situation not quite as dire as old Mission and we can put a guardrail in those sections.  We also have other projects in old New York where we have ditches or sidewalks that we expect pedestrians.  County Road three similar to those other two I mentioned with the exception that it has narrow lanes as well.  You don't have much room so there was something that we are walking along the edge.  These are projects that we will look to to fund partially with that money.  We have safety money like gas tax and a large portion get eaten up.  We have intersections improvements and turn lanes and known safety problems.  
>>  As Tadd Kasbeer mentioned, we spoke about the funds using additional money from the general fund.  At the maintenance level I of the big maintenance cost that we incur is resurfacing.  The pie chart that you see is actually our latest information that we have from running the road analysis in 2024.  The good news is that we are improving.  As money became tight and local roads needed some love so to speak.  What you can see is our backlog.  The number of roads with the PCI repayment condition index is zero – 100.  The backlog of roads last PCI dropped from 2021 where was 11 and a half% to 4% so that is a huge improvement.  We increase the budget for 24 – 25.  But we have also seen as overall PCI if you take the average of the network that increased.  The thoroughfare PCI dropped a little bit.  We anticipate focusing moving forward on resurfacing our thoroughfare road.  Even though 2 Lane Rd.  Which is typically a local road has a certain amount of lane miles and thorough fare has more and it is more expensive to resurface.  The cost to maintain the current PCI, we anticipate it is going to go up because we're going to focus on thoroughfare roads and because inflation in general.  We want to make sure we are maintaining the PCI and we are keeping it light so the road network is up to standards so we anticipate needing additional revenue to fund and maintain our current resurfacing program to ensure it is functioning as it should.  We did a little bit of a pilot project this year using pavement preservation technique.  We picked about seven or eight roads and Ormond by the sea.  Some of them was low on the scale at some was a busy neighborhood.  Some roads were low and some were mid.  We utilize this technique which is a pavement preservation that cost 40 – 50% of what typical resurfacing cost.  It extend the life of the asphalt.  With this additional funding, we are going to look to expand this program and try to make the resurfacing dollars go further.  We are focusing on local roads where this would work.  Typically you do not see it on high traffic were there roads and things like that.  This is where it would extend the life of the pavement.  Every person who maintain the road like to show the PCI curve.  You don't want to let the roads get too far down the list and hours is a full rebuild.  This is the way to keep the roads in a good shape and extend the amount of money that your spending or extended effectiveness of the number.  In about a month or so, we're going to be doing a major rehab on the concrete on Highbridge Road.  We still need to do the east side.  We had that planned for upcoming fiscal year.  Your Main Street bridge requires a lot of maintenance coming up.  To include attachment which is the rest prohibiting painting.  We have to replace the submarine cable on both sides.  We are in the process of a mechanical rehabilitation.  The estimated total cost to be around $18.4 million.  We want to break them up in separate projects.  When I want to do it all at once.  This is a major place where you can spend a lot of the money in the next three years.  We do have our critical bridges which experienced erosion during the hurricanes.  We currently have two of these bridges in design.  We have plans to submit them because they were directly related to storms to submit them for funding but we would like to provide a match and not apply for 100% funding.  We will pay using some of this money for these projects as well.  Going forward as we moved to the budget process and identify the funding areas where we want to apply this money, we will identify budget so counsel can see which project is receiving the additional money.  You can understand what it is going towards making sure.  I am happy to answer any questions on any of the projects.  
>> MATT REINHART: Thank you for talking about the Cape seal.  With respect to users on lower travel roads, higher travel roads what is the life expectancy of a road that we resurface?  Without the Cape seal?  
>>  It depends on traffic and things like that.  Local roads you're hoping to get 25 – 30 years of resurfacing.  On thoroughfare road you're looking at 15 – 20 years may be less may be more depending on the traffic and the types of uses.  Heavy trucks plays a big part.  Think about the interstates that we are resurfacing those regularly.  It depends on speed, traffic and things like that.
>>  We have three companies that we use?  
>>  Correct.
>>  Of those three companies that we use which are all local which I love.  Have we seen their product doing better over time?  You get better about what you produce.  Many companies have been in business for a while.  I was happy to see we had the issue and they came out and fixed it.  
>>  Whenever you're doing any construction project but especially resurfacing construction we want to make sure we're using the mix in the temperature.  We do the cores and everything like that.  To say one is better than the other our goal through the inspection process with make sure they are all equally good.  
>>  I would say they are.  
>>  There not to say there are issues like you reference but that is why we have one or two period's.  We go back and check in if there was an issue like you are referencing with Massey, they made the repair.  
>>  They made a good.  One last question the Main Street bridge, I know we have talked about it over the past year.  I am certainly happy to see we are looking at doing those repairs.  I look at on the other side of the bridge, obviously we can't build a new bridge.  
>>  I wouldn't say never.
>>  It is going to prove to be difficult where the properties are located you might have to push out properties and I don't want to see that.  There are a lot of businesses on that side.  There's always an argument of how that area suffers because of seasonal and I can only imagine how it would suffer if we eliminated the bridge altogether.  I'm happy to see that.  
>>  Maintaining bridges is a Catch-22.
>>  That seems to be more difficult because it is a movable bridge.
>>  A movable portion in the middle but all of us who have been involved in maintaining bridges, when you let a bridge or when a bridge gets to a point where it is in dire need of repair that is when the federal government will step in so the state will give you money.
>>  They evaluate those as well?  
>>  Every year the movable bridges get inspected.  They inspect the movable parts.
>>  The last question, you say it has to be done in stages?  Is it safe to prolong that over a period of time to do it in stages?  The bridge told me?  
>>  We do it in stages.  A painting contract is not going to be the same guy.  There will be separate projects.  They may be concurrent but they may be -- 
>>  I am going to interject.  We are going to put $18.4 million into keeping this bridge going.  Because if you decided today that you wanted to replace that bridge, you would be looking at six – seven years before you ever start construction.  You have to think about that.  But also you're going to have to think about replacing it at a certain time.  The bridge was built in 1954 or something like that?  The parts that are in there there is only places in the country where they make the parts.  When something breaks on that bridge there's no way to get anything parts.  We will eventually have to deal -- 
>>  How long do you think for replacement?  
>>  We had discussions with FDOT and they are putting it on the bridge replacement list.  Veterans Memorial was $42 million.  This bridge is considerably longer.  It is not just the movable part.  A high-rise at this location would be difficult because the location of the channel in relation to the west side of the river.  You get the landing and things like that.  I'm not saying it is impossible, it would be difficult.  You can it's a situation you go back a removable bridge and there's all kinds of questions.  It would be very expensive and very time-consuming.  In the meantime, it is our bridge to maintain.  
>>  We have to maintain it but we have to look at the economic impact.  Thank you for clarifying.  
>>  Councilman Jake Johansson.  
>> JAKE JOHANSON: Do we know the main cause of the degradation?  Is it from heavy traffic, potholes and moisture?  
>>  Is all kinds of things.  When we do the pavement analysis, they are looking at scabbing, alligator cracking, potholes and all these kinds of things.  A good indication of the unique use would be the Bellevue extension at Claude Morris where the garbage trucks go because they're going to the waste facility.  You see a little bit of the land fill.  It is a lot of things but ultimately it comes down to the usage, the amount of tracking -- traffic on the road.  
>>  Are we adjusting what we do on will it is based on?  
>>  The construction standard is different.  
>>  We go in and re-have a road and reconstruct or add we take a look at the existing usages.  When you think of the road it is not the pavement on top.  There is the base material underneath and that has a large part to the capability.  We mentioned the factors on the road conditions.  Water is one of the biggest.  A lot of our older roads lower elevation so the base material can sit in water.  That's what creates the running problems.  It is usually a situation like that.  The vast majority of the problems has been described but water is a big part of that.  One thing I will note asphalt or concrete, they are temporary.  There is no such thing as a permanent solution.  Concrete give you a longer lifecycle but it is more expensive and rehabilitation to be tough.  On 92 between the land and Daytona the DOT have been constantly working on that for the last 15 years after a period where they did work on it for the 20 some years before that.  Once you get to the end of the flood cycle but there's no permanent solution.  The sun will break down a road segment of asphalt.  
>>  Before you go away, I wasn't going to ask about 17 or 92 that is an interesting point.  Will that ever be transferred from concrete to asphalt?  Is concrete better for that stretch?  
>>  Usually when you have high water table that is when concrete is the best.  It doesn't fluctuate as much.  As I mentioned the base material has a large effect on asphalt and minimal on concrete.  Going out and putting a lot of fill and raising the road up, I do not foresee them doing that.  Their situations are concrete is in such bad shape it doesn't make sense to replace that.  Asphalt is cheaper so they have done that in a couple of locations.  I like that it keeps you awake at night driving home late.  [LAUGHTER] 
The question I wanted to ask you and you piqued my curiosity about the lifespan of the road 20 – 30 years.  I lived on a dirt road when I moved west.  I liked it because it cut down on traffic.  Whoever you had grading at road was magical.  It was an older guy who did a great job.  But we had neighbors that complained once a week about the dirt road.  He paved it and if my memory, do you remember how long ago that was?  It has been 20 years hasn't?  
>>  It has been 20 – 25 years.  
>>  If my memory serves me correctly, I watched them pave it.  The guy graded it perfectly and it seemed like he put down gravel and asphalt on top of it.  This is not a complaint.  25 years later, it is an amazing shape.  And now instead of getting a new local cars, it is okay but we get a lot of cuts through's from heavy trucks and we don't allow electric vehicles in our neighborhood.  [LAUGHTER] 
It has done amazing.  When you're looking at paving some of our dirt roads, is that the system you would still use?  
>>  We use something different but you're welcome.  [LAUGHTER] 
At that time, we were using a new method called open great asphalt.  We did use recycle concrete for the race.  On open great asphalt and on top of that several years later, we put the normal hot mix that they use today.  I think after experimenting through the years, we came to a conclusion that the open grade was grappling issues.  If we can get the cap on it, it would fall apart too quickly.  I think they went to a thicker base and a hot mix.  They can explain that.  At the end of the day those roads worked as long as you got there with the hot mix on the top in a timely manner.
>>  Today we do a lot of the dirt road paving with the crew.  What we do so when you build a road you have basically three layers.  It is a mix of dirt and clay to provide a little bit of a subbase.  And yet the line rock and then your asphalt.  On dirt roads the dirt road has been compacted as you would not believe typically.  What we do is almost what you described.  We scraped a couple of inches off of the dirt and get down to the hardpacked dirt.  We come back with crushed concrete base and we go over the top with asphalt.  It works great on dirt roads typically because they do not see a ton of traffic.  Even after we paved it unless it turns to a cut through, you don't see a dramatic increase in paving.  They seem to hold up pretty well.  
>>  Thank you.  Any other questions at this point?  Thank you.  
>>  We will see the projects listed in the upcoming budget.  But if you have any questions or anything you wanted to add specifically on this otherwise we are good to proceed in moving forward.  
>>  Okay, what is the feeling of the Council?  You have a motion to approve the amount and the direction of which the money is being spent?  
>>  Moved to approve.
>>  Second.
>>  Councilman Jake Johansson makes a motion to approve and second by vice chair Tony Kent.  Any other questions?  I'm sorry, I got half of it right.  [LAUGHTER] 
Vice chair Matt Reinhart.  Any other questions or comments?  All in favor say aye.
>>  Aye.
>>  Any opposed?  
>>  Do you want to know that David Santiago is out of the room?  
>>  Right now it is 6/0.  That takes us to item 4 community development Block Grant disaster recovery.  Donna Butler?  
>>  Good morning Mr. chair members of Council.  Director of the office of recovery and resiliency.  Before you today are three infrastructure projects for nonprofits.  They suffered greatly during both storms.  They apply for the funding after hurricane Ian when released and they had subsequent flooding or damage following hurricane Milton.  The first in front of you is for SMA it is a small request of $371,000.  They have fixed the internal damage to their facility.  It was more severe during Milton.  This will fix potential flooding in the future by the outside to not allow the water in and also having protection on the doorways which is a huge source of water infiltration.  The pace center for girls is requesting $3 million to build a new facility.  The current facility is 208 Central avenue in Ormond Beach.  It is the historic register national historic register.  There is minimal work that can be done to the building.  They were proposing to build a new facility at Clyde Morris Boulevard to facilitate that program.  The domestic abuse counsel requesting $900,000.  They received damage from both storms.  This will work to fix that damage and mitigate against future storms.  Representatives from each of the agencies are here to answer any questions that I am not able to answer for you.  
>>  Thank you.  Questions from the Council?  
>>  Motion to approve as presented community development recovery grants.
>>  Second.  
>>  Motion to approve by Councilman Danny Robins and second by Jake Johansson.  No questions?  No comments?  All in favor say, aye.
>>  Aye.
>>  Any opposed?  Thank you very much.  Approve 7/0.  Items refer David Santiago.  It is 7/0 on the road program.  Item 5, you know what we have three people that wanted to speak.  You got voted on it and it was approved.  If you would like to -- still like to speak Sheila Jordan?  You can come and say thank you.  [LAUGHTER] 
>>  Is dancing allowed on this platform?  Good morning I'm Sheila Jordan.  Thank you all so much not just for your decision today but for your support of our organizations and girls for 30 years nearly.  I wanted to give you an opportunity to meet Gracie who is a recent pace graduate.  
>>  Hi my name is Gracie.  I am now a freshman at Daytona State College because of pace and the funding helped me.  Thank you very much.  
>>  Congratulations.  [APPLAUSE] 
>>  Are you still here?  Also from pace.  
>>  I had a chance to meet you all a couple months back.  Nothing else will be added but thank you so much.  
>>  Heather Lovejoy?  
>>  I'm also from pace center for girls and director for capital projects.  A thank you as I will be able to move forward on this project.  We are so excited to be able to move into a space where our program could be more resilient.  I want to ensure that the design includes quite a bit of design features to reduce hurricane wind impact.  And a generator and a case of long-term electrical outages.  Thank you.  
>>  Thank you.  Item number five environment and natural resource advisory committee annual report and work plan.  And the changing of the guard.  
>>  Good morning Clay Ervin and staff as well as ginger the division director for environmental management.  Part of the enabling legislation that created ENRAC required that they provide the Council with a summary of what they accomplish from the previous year as well as a pending work program for the upcoming year.  Today, we are able to have the chairman be able to present that information.  At the time the Council can accept the report and comment on the work program and we will take it from there.  
>>  Thank you Clay Ervin.  Happy new year and congratulations on being vice chair Matt Reinhart.  ENRAC is an extension of you the County Counsel and your Volusia County home rule charter responsibility to have minimum standards to protect the environment and to prevent substantial adverse effects on it.  Our role is to bring to you accommodations for updating those standards and the ordinances that would support them.  To ensure balance representation there are many professions represented on ENRAC.  Agriculture, environmental scientists, land-use law, environmental engineering, community planning, commercial real estate, architecture and marketing.  So you can imagine we do have vigorous discussions before we bring those recommendations to you.  Our major accomplishments over the past year where the finalizing of ordinances for low impact development and more and for storm water.  Both of these should be transmitted to you this month in fact next week at the Tuesday special meeting.  All of us on ENRAC have been moved by the suffering from flooding of our fellow citizens.  Low impact development and revised stormwater ordinances should help to minimize future flooding.  But we need holistic approach.  Our recommended 2025 work plan was agreed upon based in great part on what we learn from Council meetings prior to January 14 special meeting.  At that meeting you discussed the many causes of flooding.  From record rainfall to outdated stormwater ponds to the illumination of encroachment on wetlands by construction and more.  That is what we have grappled with.  A sense of great urgency to get revised ordinances to you and equally great sense of response ability to get them right.  And a recognition that there is no one silver bullet, we need multiple tools and they are all interrelated.  From nature-based solutions like wetlands to engineered solutions like stormwater basins and floodplain management among them.  Ultimately, we look to you to give us our priorities as you see them.  We will continue to do our best to address them as thoroughly as we are able.  And last but not least, I would like to recognize the very hard work that staff does to help us understand problems and potential solutions from multiple angles.  I think you got a glimpse of that on January 14.  They have been wonderful to work with and we continue to support you as best we can.  Thank you very much.  If you have any questions?  
>>  Councilman David Santiago?  
>>  In any of the time that the ENRAC committee got together was there any analysis or conversation as it pertains to low impact development?  Was there any discussion on pros and cons on this?  I am thinking it is fairly new for my understanding this concept.  Was that look that?  We are going to adopt this let's say this in 20 – 40 years from now the effects of low impact development standards may or may not be up again and did we do it right?  Did we see potential or warnings on how this could affect?  I am guessing what I'm trying to say, are we being visionary and look at examples of other low impact development that may have had challenges that we can be ahead of in our policy?  
>>  First of all and thank you for that question, it is a good one and it is a broad one.  Yes, we did have different ones.  I might mention, we have to go ordinance by ordinance.  L ID is the new one that we bring to you.  We brought you a hybrid approach in which developers would be required to adopt two out of a broad menu of techniques or tactics that they can employ.  If we did more than that their choice, they would get incentives.  Because of the time that we brought that to you which was October 2023, you are under the restrictions of SB 250 and you cannot approve that.  We have a completely voluntary approach at this time.  That is what is going to come before you next week.  Low impact development may not be right in every single situation.  It might be very right in many situations.  And that choice under the hybrid approach that choice live with the developer.  This is one tool in our toolkit.  In terms of knowing about the future none of this has a crystal ball.  Some of the stormwater ponds that are currently not functionally is not designed for the rainfall that we are having now.  Whether you accept a stricter design standard for those stormwater ponds depends greatly on whether or not you believe that the rainfall patterns on anomalous or you believe they are the new normal.  We have to look to science to give us the best guidance for that.  We know saidsea level rise is real and we know it brings the water table up and we know that means we have to change our design standards to deal with that.  There are always trade-offs and that is why in my letter to you before the January 14 meeting, I said it was very important for citizens to understand some of these trade-offs so they can be supportive of the solutions to them.  I know that is a bit of a weird answer but, we spent many hours on low impact development.  Please tell me if you would like to know more.  
>>  Thank you very much.  We are going to have the meeting and it can be vetted out more.  I appreciate it.  We got blamed for policies of the past and if it's another counsel 100 years from now that we would do the best we can.
>>  That is a good goal to aim for.  I will see you next week.  Any other questions?  Thank you.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: Any other questions for Ginger?  Do I have a motion?  
>>  Motion to accept the reports.  
>>  I have a motion to accept and second by Jake Johansson and vice chair Tony Kent.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: Vice chair Matt Reinhart?  We have one member of the public that would like to speak Jessica Dowell?  
>>  Good morning everyone for the record Jessica.  I'm currently serving as vice chair of Matt Reinhart and I'm here to speak of the citizen.  We will disclose it at the next ENRAC.  You want to focus on something that I think Melissa said very well which is ENRAC's focus on how we develop the future and the best practices and what we can build in.  Some of them a trickle down into redevelopment and some infill.  There is a large gap between what this committee can do and looking at regulations to fix existing flooding problems without additional help from this counsel.  Two and the extent I think all of our members would love to be involved in the discussion when it goes outside of what the text of the code said and how we can update that, I think we would be doing so a little bit in our individual capacities unless we thought the policy direction from counsel that you would like us to brainstorm those types of ideas.  We have a lot of passion on a group and a lot of diverse interest that I think is a fantastic group.  We are constrained by the policy direction of the enabling ordinance and the direction we get from the Council.  You're here to help any way we can and I thank you guys for all of the sport we have had so far.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you.  We have a motion and a second on the table to approve item 5 annual report and work plan.  Any questions or comments Jake Johansson?  
>> JAKE JOHANSON: I have a question or comment chairman.  She brought up a good point.  I think it is important we can address it at the next meeting.  If we had that guidance to ENRAC to take on something that they are not currently or that hasn't currently included in our direction.  I go back to her previous comment on sunshine.  If we include it then they can talk about it once a month.  Right now it is not included and they are talking about it over coffee and they are passionate about it.  They all have access to us more so because they are members of ENRAC.  I get emails from Melissa and Jessica all of the time.  So I caution as I do with most advisory committees are putting them under the umbrella of a and -- to be tactical in reporting back to us some good thoughts as individuals citizens with passion.  Those are my only comments on that.  Thank you Mr. Chairman.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you.  Any other questions?  Any comments?  All in favor of approving say aye.
>>  Aye.
>>  Any opposed?  It is approved 7/0.  It takes us to item number six.  Which is a quasi judicial hearing.  I will ask if there's any experts.  This is an appeal to the County Counsel of the development review committee condition that the number of canines house on the site cannot exceed 30 animals.  
>>  I did receive a phone call from the law enforcement officer advocating for the applicant.  
>>  So did I. 
>>  I did not receive a phone call but I got emails.  Councilman Danny Robins and vice chair Matt Reinhart got phone calls and rest of us got multiple emails.  
>>  Mr. Chairman can I get a moment?  Councilmembers I am just remembering the last time we are just we spent a lot of time.  I am just making and ask, let's not re-hash the question we asked the last time I had a debate about that.  I think staff and applicant has gone to several conversations to see what the difference is and make a decision on it.  I will leave it there.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: That works for me.  
>>  Good morning.  This item was continued from this December 3, 2024 meeting in order to allow for the business owner who is the appellant to meet with neighbors, go over the request to exceed 30 dogs on the site.  And discuss what can be done.  Just to clarify the appeal, the business owner is appealing the development review committee's approval of a site plan for this facility with a restriction that cannot be occupied by more than 30 dogs as part of the operation.  Their concern is that they have more dogs at the site then historically has been that way.  Also from a historical perspective the previous business owner who is still the property owner initiated the operation many years ago and has gone through several iterations of the special exception has gone through code issues because they have not obtained permits.  Now they are trying to close out all those issues so they can close out the site plan and close out the building permit, fix the site for the wetlands and other aspects that have been impacted.  So that their business can continue to operate.  We had communications with appellant who indicated they did send out notices to affect the property owners and no one was in attendance at the meeting.  They indicated that they are willing to amend the request from 100 dogs to $75 if that is something the council will want to entertain.  If that is the case I would allow them to speak about whether there are issues at hand and we are here and available to answers any questions that you have.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you.  With the owners like to speak first?  
>>  Thank you members of the Council.  My name is Joseph and I am an attorney.  A few of the members of the pellet team here with me who want to offer comments.  We have the business and I agree for the most part with the representations by staff.  Just to sort of set up and remind you all of the history.  The facility has been operating at its location for about 20 years or 30 years.  My client southern coast canine purchase that business in 2020.  The property only continue to run it until 2023 when the new ownership team took over day-to-day operations.  When we purchased the property, we had no idea it was the ongoing zoning issues and issues with the special session.  The owner said he would adhere to that.  We were not involved in the site plan approval process which was one of the conditions for the special exception.  We had no idea that 30 dogs limit would be imposed until we get the final approved development order back and August or September of last year.  It was not a condition that we agree to our new about.  When we purchased the facility there were days for 100 dogs and historically it was our understanding that the facility operated with 100 dogs.  Since we found out about the limit, we have done what we can to reduce the number of dogs on site.  But these are specially trained dogs.  Shelters will not take them and we can't open our doors and let the dogs run free.  As I said last time, we have been working to reduce the number of dogs on site.  It is currently averaging about 60 dogs.  If we are not successful on this appeal, we asked for some time to come into compliance.  Because we can't just open the doors to let the dogs out.  We have to find them homes and someplace to go.  But we do very much want to find a number above 30 that the Council is comfortable with and allows us to continue the operation of our business.  We have a lot of support from law enforcement.  We did hold a neighbor meeting and we invited every neighbor to the property and nobody came.  We gave email addresses and phone numbers and nobody contacted us.  On Friday, I got a new of these email sent to me that staff got a couple weeks ago.  About 15 minutes ago, I got additional emails that have come in since then.  Have not had a lot of time to go through these.  I will point out a few of these say they are fine with a number of dogs that are there now.  There appears to be a mistake in assumption that, we currently have 30 and we are asking to increase that to 100.  That is simply not the case.  Last time we talked about 75 dogs and that would be wonderful and will allow us to continue.  Unfortunately, to my disappointment staff has not had a meaningful conversation with us about a number.  I believe staff was relying on what the neighbors said.  No neighbors engaged with us directly about the number.  We have been unable to talk to anybody about a different number.  We would be happy with 75 if the Council approves that.  If there's another number, we will have to have a conversation about and have it considered.  I am going to defer to a new member zone my team to offer comments.  I would asked to reserve a few minutes and I understand there are some folks here and neighbors who want to speak on the issue.  I would respectfully request a few minutes to address any new comments or comments they have at this meeting if I may?  
>>  Good morning I don't have any comments right now.  
>>  Please use the microphone.  Let's good morning counsel Christopher with the law from I am cocounsel for the appellate.  
>>  I think I spoke to you before.  I think it was well said by our attorney.  We want to come, would like to work with our neighbors we just haven't had a chance to.  I don't know why but, they do not know me.  I think if they got to know me, they would discover that I do care and we do want to come to a resolution that works for all of us.  Thank you.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you.  Questions from counsel?  Councilman David Santiago?  
>>  We are here today and appeal correct?  Of our previous decision?  
>>  Of the development approval of the site plan with a restriction of 30 dogs.  
>> DAVID SANTIAGO: Thank you for reminding me.  In the agenda packet we have information regarding a variance.  Is that right?  Options for variance right?  Was the variance approach discussed with the applicant as an option?  
>>  Not a variance.  Basically it is this and wanted things that staff has to do is provide the Council with the different options that they have.  The first option you have is to accept information provided by the appellant indicating that the DRC did not have substantial grounds to authorize the approval of the site plan with the limitation of only 30 dogs.  And they can go forward now without any limitation per se.  Once they clean up the building permits and site plan that they are good to go.  That is if you approve their appeal.  If you denied the appeal, they still have the opportunity to apply for an amendment to the existing special exception to come forward through the public hearing process at the landing landing commission and in front of you for approval of this.  Subject to any additional information that they want to talk to us about in regards to how they can mitigate further complaints that we have received.  
>> DAVID SANTIAGO: One more question.  I remember when we dealt with dog kennel issue at the Council, I think it was a variance or special exception.  In the process that we dealt with there were certain requirements that particular property had to do with the berm or trees or distances and stuff like that.  Do we know if this property are they willing to comply?  
>>  Not 100%.  It was a facility where they were going to actually have dog shows where they do basically the outside agility and those types of things.  There were limitations on hours of operation because the residents did have neighbors come in to complain about potential noise.  They were required to do additional buffering around the property lines adjacent to single family homes.  They went through-- 
>>  Those standards or the new standards will be part of the discussion to go before the Council?  
>>  When you look at special exceptions one of the things that planning and development commission and the County Counsel can do is identify additional conditions that they feel are appropriate.  Remember what a special exception is in the zoning ordinance you have uses permitted by right.  You commented you meet the zoning regulations and meet the land development relations and you get a building permit and you go.  A special exceptions mean that this use may be appropriate in some of these areas where the zoning is but subject to certain conditions.  We have to go through this hearing process so that we are making sure it is a round peg going into a round hole.  Again as part of the special exception process staff planning development commission in the County Counsel can identify conditions that are spot site specific to address potential concerns.  
>> DAVID SANTIAGO: If we approve the appeal as they are requesting that essentially is saying, no limit?  
>>  Right now the way the application came through back in 2022 there were questions about the number of dogs.  The property owners attorney indicated 30 dogs were us the maximum.  This was converted to the staff report that was part of the special exception.  If the Council feels that was not sufficient for the special exception to have that is a limitation then there is no limitation other than what they do today.  
>> DAVID SANTIAGO: If we deny the appeal they have an option to go through the staff process and come back?  
>>  Yes, sir.
>> DAVID SANTIAGO: Thank you chair.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: I am just reading what is on the screen.  We could also approve it and allow for the facility to hold 75 dogs today?  
>>  Yes.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: Then it would have to come back?  
>>  Yes, sir.
>> CHAIR BROWER: Councilman Danny Robins.  
>> DANNY ROBINS: What do we have for to protect the residents?  The majority of the complaint have come in was speeding and noise?  
>>  It is a private road so we don't have law enforcement on that.  We do have chapter 50 the code of ordinances which pertains to the noise ordinance.  They could file a complaint on the adjacent property owners.  There are two different methods of doing that.  There is one where it is a meter is read at the property line to see if it exceeds the limits or in the code.  The other is basically unknowing noise and sound which requires the property owner to file an affidavit and we process that to the Circuit Court.  
>>  I don't know if this out of bounds evidence was left at this question.  Do we know if the appellate is able to proactively because they are here today and any noise barriers or anything additionally that have done to prepare for this ask?  My biggest concern is the residence around and I am trying to find a middle ground for this.  
>>  I am looking to address with the appeal.  If they are willing to do X, Y, and Z and we believe that is sufficient to address the noise complaints that is something that the Council can take into consideration when making their decision.  
>>  Senior assistant county attorney.  This is an appeal so essentially look at it as a do over.  You have the recommendations but you can approve the appeal, with changes or denied.  Noise complaint is because the number of dogs.  More likely you will get a noise complaint with more dogs but that is not a guarantee.  You can get a noise complaint with five dollars or 10 dogs.  We handle and treat noise complaints as they come in and prosecute them regardless of the conditions on the permit.  
>>  Do we know if there has been violations and noise complaints?  
>>  I believe there were two noise complaints.  I think those persons have moved and one may be in process right now.  That is being processed.  
>>  Have been prosecuted for those noise complaints in the past?  
>>  We are processing them.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: Councilman Jake Johansson?  
>> JAKE JOHANSON: It is interesting that we already have noise complaints.  I basically was going to complain to get somebody out there with the decimal reader.  The fact that we don't have that information here is probably something we should have asked for last time.  If this does get kicked down the road yet again, I would like someone to go out there at random times and check it.  That is the main complaints.  The other complaint at play and I know this is somewhere in the packet and I think I read this one.  Who owns the road?  
>>  It is a private road.  
>>  It is owned by who?  
>>  The property owners that are adjacent to it.  It is not a county maintained facility.
>> JAKE JOHANSON: So no one person?  It is the whole group of them including these folks?  So a couple of things bothers me.  I will just tell you the fact that these folks can't get together on a weekday or weekend and come up with a speed limit that they all agree including somebody said the law enforcement and I don't know what it means and we don't have a decibel reading on the dogs and we do have a law that states you can go over that to me that is the limit.  If you can get 500 dogs and they all fit and they are quiet and they do not encroach on the neighbors a above the DB limit.  
>>  I want to clarify there are two sections in chapter 50 that pertains to noise.  One is very specific in regards to where you have decibel levels established.  The two sections later and 50 – 478, it is loud disturbing or unnecessary is very noises.  That does not require a decibel you reader to be recognized.  It is a neighbor saying saying, my neighbor has X going on.  It is loud and annoying and I am filing an affidavit with Volusia County Sheriff's office and I want this prosecuted.  That is what we are in the process of doing right now.  Those types of complaints, we have to process those through the Circuit Court.  I just want to make sure there is clarity in regards in the complaints we have received so far are not tied to section 476 or 50 – 476, they are tied to 50 – 478.  
>> JAKE JOHANSON: I would like to hear about the dB.  I can tied to that and it makes it a lot easier for me.  And it makes it a lot easier when you give it a little latitude if it is below.  Sometimes the frogs in my retention pond upfront keep me awake.  I can't do anything about that can I?  
>> CHAIR BROWER: Can you bring up slide 635?  It is a picture of the area.  Can we get just the one on the right?  That is fine.  I am curious Clay and I don't know if you know the answer to this are the owners?  There are two things I am considering here.  One is, how long has the business been there?  Were the neighbors here or did they come in?  My other concern is what Jake is talking about that they have to be good neighbors and protect everybody from sound?  Who was here first?  
>>  We do have a code enforcement case going back since 2015.  That is when we were identified prior to is when the initial complaint was coming through.  That is when we met with the property owner to go over what was necessary to validate that type of use in that area.  That is what initiated the special exception over the timeframe.  As the appellant brought up, we have been dealing with this property owner for a considerable amount of time trying to work with him to address the structures that were brought on without permits, the impact to the site that was done without permits, and the use that requires a special exception.  We got the special exception approved twice.  Both times the property owner came in but never completed the process.  We were taking them to code enforcement board when the 2022 special exception was reapproved back then.  It was clarity they had to get into to get the special site plan and building permits addressed.  You have roughly 10 – 11 years where this has been operating where staff has been working with them to try to make it legitimate.  
>>  Looking at the houses this is a rural area but there's houses around it.  Some of them are fairly close.  I am assuming you have been longer than 11 years?  
>>  I will not be able to answer that right now.  As you can see it is an area that has been subject to residential development and does have zoning.  
>>  Can I address the question and comments?  I will start by saying 2014 – 2015 as a part of these applications all the neighbors signed off and approved this operation.  That was part of the background history when my client purchased the business.  I represent the business owner not the land owner.  I am in no way involved with the land owner and was not involved in prior applications.  I represent the business owner if you can imagine the feedback that my fact that we are here today, we had problems with the owner in terms of what we thought we were buying and will we actually brought.  In order to apply for a variance it is my understanding the county code, we need to owner authorization.  As the business owner not the property owner, we can't without the property owner authorization apply for a variance.  Our only option to bring this 30 dog limit was this appeal.  In no way are we trying to skirt the system or cheat the system.  We are really trying to bring this issue to light in the way that we feel we can so we have access.  We are trying to be good neighbors.  Prior to receiving these emails on Friday and today, the only neighbor opposition current opposition we were aware of was from Mrs. Boutin and her husband who lives adjacent to the front of our facility.  We understood they have complaints.  We emptied out the housing building closest to their home.  We put up a wall shielding the other housing areas for the dogs.  In an attempt to drops -- address the concerns there may be some issues.  We do want to work with them and we won't be good neighbors.  We want to do things to fit into the community not separate ourselves.  We understand the concerns of counsel and the concerns of neighbors and it has been pointed out regardless of how many dogs are there.  I urged the Council to think about this.  This is the quasi evidence in support is competent and substantial as was pointed out last time the 30 dog number has no basis in anything.  It was a number that was made up.  What we have is historically space for 100 dogs.  We bought a facility for 100 dogs and we are asking something between 40 – 100.  
>>  Stay right there.  I think you started off so I want to make sure I understand it.  In 2014 or 2015 all of the neighbors signed an affidavit or something saying they approved it?  Do you have evidence of that?  
>>  That was the approval of the special exception.  The property owner went around and got authorization from the adjacent property owners and they did not object to him for the special exception.
>>  It was a letter among neighbors?  
>>  Before we go much further I do need to clarify, please do not use the word variance.  Variance applies to a dimensional standard that is applicable for setbacks.  What we are talking about is pertaining to use.  We were seeking the approval of the original special exception to address the code violation that was not allowed the property owner did what many people do.  They go around to their neighbors and tell them what they are trying to do and get a letter from that neighbor and submit it as part of their application.  We see that and it happens in many situations.  So they are on record and they were a part of the official minutes when the original special exception was approved.  
>>  Thank you very much.  Councilman Danny Robins.  
>> DANNY ROBINS: What recommendations today can you make to counsel for any additional noise reduction measures that we can do?  Can we do bamboo?  Can we do something for noise reduction?  
>>  Anytime we are asked from eight technical perspective walls, fences, landscaping or things that can be done along the perimeter for the noise abatement.  This is one I would defer to what the operator would be identifying as well.  They know how they operate where they take the dogs and morning and where they put the dogs at night and the noise levels that would be expected.  We will work with them in regards to that.  We have a situation where noise or other such things are impeding on an adjacent property we look at would be identified.  
>>  If you said for instance, plant this around the perimeter for noise reduction with every something we can negotiate today?  
>>  From your staff perspective, we are 90-- not saying bamboo.  If the Council feels it is appropriate to authorize us to proceed without the 30 dog restrictions, we will request that you include in that motion that the applicant has to work with staff to come up with noise abatement proceedings that will be incorporated into the final site plan.  That way we can work with them to come up with as you were saying whatever landscaping, burning or fence combination to be appropriate in helping reduce the noise on the adjacent properties.  That is typically what we do when we go through the process.  Let me clarify the 30 dogs.  Again, was a question raised where the applicant who was the property owner indicated 30 dogs and more.  The reason why there was concern about the noise so it is correct.  There is no magic number is regards to that.  But that was a number that was sufficient to get them through the planning and land development relation to line up in front of the County Counsel.  So yes it was based on something that was proffered in addressing to noise impacts with the number of dogs on the site.  Similar situation could occur here.  If you all feel it was not necessarily a hard and fast condition of a special exception and the DRC overstepped his bounds by utilizing that number.  If you feel 75 is appropriate, I would say send it back to staff so we can work with the property owner to come up with appropriate method of mitigating the noise.  
>>  If we compromise on a number today in a few weeks or a few months or a year if this got out of hand does this body have the right to bring this back and say enough?  
>>  We have -- 
>>  And revoke approval.  I'm trying to hold some accountability.  I have to protect my people and I don't want to encumber them and disturb them anymore than possible just so people know where I'm coming from.  I need to hold them more accountable than just say in noise ordinance.
>>  We have in the past with pride councils when the situation has occurred put in a one year – two year time frame where staff come back and identify if there had been any code violations that was associated with the condition at hand.  The one that comes to mind was the Stetson golf training facility.  That is when many of the residents came up with a concern about lights and golf balls landing on their farm and the cows are eating them.  There's a lot of things going on in the requested part of the approval was a report back within a year.  There was still some concern that was extended for six months and then it was resolved after that.  I have seen that done here.  It is a situation where we will want to make sure it is tied to something that is measurable and staff can report back.  
>>  Understood thanks Clay.  
>>  The appellant would agree to those conditions.
>>  I never seen a public hearing go where the attorney is doing a rebuttal after everybody talks.  Respectfully argue as the chairman with at the end when everybody spoke of you could have a moment to come up.  I think it is kind of you chairman to allow that.  If we are going to allow him to come up and rebut everything that is said what about the residents to have cars and let them rebut everything that is said.  I think the attorney is more than capable at the end to keep notes on all of the stuff.  Going back to what Mr. Santiago said this is the second time we had this in front of us and I want to make sure it is a fair hearing but I want to make sure we do this efficiently is possibly chairman.  
>>  I think the rebuttable -- rebuttal is a part of this.  I can tell when he was speaking, you had a question or something you wanted to say.  I assumed it would be well placed after we just heard what Clay said.
>>  I hear that chairman but I heard the attorney asked for it at the end after you heard everybody speak.  I'm assuming you think he wanted to rebut because he was standing up.  There's a woman that has been standing up over here the entire time as well.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: We have about eight people that want to talk.  As soon as we talk or hear the public talk we will hear them.  
>>  I don't intend to rebut anything.  I just was going to agree to those conditions.  
>>  Thank you.  Councilman Don Dempsey for questions?  
>> DON DEMPSEY: If this was not a commercial enterprise and this was private property owner who want to have 75 dogs for his own.
>>  It would not be allowed to back.
>>  No.
>>  What is the limit?  
>>  It is five or six.  I can't remember off the top of my head but we do have a restriction on the number of dogs that can be there for the reason that we are talking about.  Then it will become a commercial.  
>>  Just merely by the number of dogs?  
>>  Yes, sir.  
>>  Okay thank you.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: That is the end of questions.  I will call the public that want to speak.  Katie?  
>>  There's many reasons this should be denied.  The first one is, why are we allowing somebody who is just leasing this land make changes to this land permanently?  That right there is simple.  I asked, do you want to stay by 75 bark there dogs barking?  We are prisoners of our own homes.  We can't open our windows because all I hear are dogs.  I even tried to hold a family event, the dogs were barking.  I had to reach out and say hey, can you please keep them quiet?  I will say, they did try to work with me.  When does it stop?  Why is this person who is leasing this land to make changes?  Back in 2015 maybe he only had five dogs back then?  Now we have 60, 80, 9100?  I don't know.  This place this variance has been going on since 2021 and nothing is being settled.  When does it stop and when does kicking the can down the road stop?  In August 2020 for the DRC meeting they had 60 days to do their site permit to make the changes to try to put berms up and is still having done it.  August 27, 2024 we are in February 2025 way pastor 60 days to make those changes.  They refuse to do it because the business owner and the property owner are fighting.  They are suing each other over this place.  Neither of them care.  Neither of them are going to spend the money to make the changes appropriate that you're stipulating that need to be changed to the can operate as commercial business on a residential road.  We have speed bumps because of the speeding this company is causing a road.  If you increase it to 100 dogs or 75 dogs, how many more vehicles are going to be doing that?  We already had neighbors move.  I can move tomorrow, I would leave because this is horrendous to live next to.  If they are going to sit there and not abide by the rules for 30 dogs why should they be allowed 31?  Since 2015 they have been not fulfilling their terms of this variance or special exemption.  The special exemption, they are refusing to do it.  We are sitting here thinking about allowing more dogs?  Why?  I don't understand it.  If I did something wrong, you will call me to the carpet and do it.  I did put up permit, that is my that I'm going to be money and fix it.  They destroyed wet -- wetlands and build buildings.  They have yet to continue to do so.  That is okay, don't worry about it everybody else can live in hell on the road.  I thank you guys for your time and I beg you to do not allow this.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you for your comments.  Next we have Deborah Bishop.  As you come down to speak if you are a neighbor if you could fit into your three minutes, did you receive the request for a neighborhood meeting or not?  Deborah, can use the microphone?  
>>  I am catty corner from the kennel.  I had a medical appointment that was more important.  I have been a resident of Volusia County since 1961.  I built my dream home on metal Lane in 2004.  Meaning, have been on the property since 2002.  At that time the kennel had maybe 15 or 12 dogs and he was a retired sheriff or getting ready to.  I knew him and everything was fine.  But the building was more and more dogs, more traffic, more handlers, more trainers, more delivery trucks, more construction trucks.  Either one day when out and stopped a patrol car from some County that had gone down the road twice so fast.  I stood out in the road and stopped him.  I said excuse me can you slow down?  He said, I was on a call.  He was from a different county.  They don't do that.  He lied to me.  He said my sheriff is right behind me and I will let you talk to him it was my sergeant The same thing from him.  This kind of stuff has to stop.  It is my home.  It is a 2 and a half acre lots and we don't need all of this.  The kennel is too big.  You can't quiet down 75 dogs or 100 dogs.  You can't.  Unless you put bark collars on them.  That has happened with getting sores on the neck and it has happened in the past.  We need help.  Your questions before you asked, if I want to build a kennel on my property would you allow 100 dogs online?  -- On mine?  Can I put it next to your house or your house?  Do you want it?  No.  We don't want it either.  I wanted a nice retirement dream home.  In a rural community away from everything and everybody.  It is going away.  Please help.  Please help us the people that live there.  I don't need the rest of the time thank you.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: Gerald Bishop?  
>>  Hi.  It is a working dog kennel buying, training and selling dog.  The school is a small part of the operation.  The students keep their dogs with them all of the time.  They don't keep them in the kennel.  Nobody gives their dogs in the kennel.  So why do they need extra kennel space?  They are kept outside in a 5 x 10 kennel.  It is on concrete slabs with metal roofs and this is the open air kennel so the dogs are exposed to the elements of the weather, surveyor hot and severe cold.  The dogs lay on concrete where they urinate and defecate.  Can you imagine 100 dogs outside in the cold on the concrete during the last three months?  How did the county let it 30 dog account become 100 dog count without the property owner obtaining any permits or permission?  Is it because the property owner was a retired Volusia County Sheriff and he sold dogs to the police departments in Volusia County and elsewhere?  Or is it because he knows people that work in the county and people in politics?  I know some of you know him.  Is the sum of the good old boy policies?  You have exposes in dogs kept in a residential area do you think the sheriff keep it in a residential area?  Residents have been putting up with the barking dogs, speeding traffic and delivery trucks going at a dead end dirt road for years.  The road needs 25 to bring it back to where I move dear 21 years ago.  The owner and the business lives in Texas.  The owner of the property move to Venetian Bay and I wonder why?  Would you like to live next to 100 dog kennel where explosive and dogs are kept?  I have seen the site plans for the property read the owner of the business nor the owner of the property are going to spend the money for the changes because they are suing each other.  The property owner will keep asking for special exemptions and variances so they can keep getting extensions to keep the business running at the expense of the residence.  It is all about the money.  I ask you please not to authorize this to be 100 dog kennel.  Thank you.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you.  Janet?  
>>  My name is Janet minds.  I live on the next road over from sudden coast canine.  A commercial kennel and it is located in the middle of a really beautiful area.  Our own homes -- our homes retirement homes and there's no trailers and no mobile homes.  We build out there 20 years ago for our retirement.  Even though I said I am on the next road over, we hear the dogs.  I can't tell you how many times we have had family reunions and friends over and we have been forced off of our back porch to go into our home because of the noise.  But not only the noise, the dirt roads are being destroyed.  We own and that is a private road.  We do own 15 feet of that road.  That is our road.  Where I live the next one over, we pay and the neighbors get together and we pay for maintenance of our road.  The heavy traffic on Sorrento to get to meta- and the children that we have, have to walk to the bus stop.  I am concerned for the safety of the children.  I am concerned for the quality of our roads.  We can't just keep upgrading it and grading it.  It needs work and we need help.  To allow more dogs is just not a good idea.  I never received a request from anyone for any kind of mediation meeting or I would've been there.  My husband and myself and our neighbors and our friends were all impacted on this.  We request your kind consideration to not approve any more dogs.  Please, we are residential and this is commercial.  Maybe he could find another area.  I am begging you and I do appreciate your time.  Thank you.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you.  Sandra?  
>>  Thank you for all of your questions today.  There were really good questions I thought in this manner.  I live on the northwest side of this property.  My property adjoins them.  A lot of your questions, have been there since 2010.  I have been there for 14 years.  I know a lot about the history and experience a lot of the history of this kennel.  This kennel, it has been allowed in the past.  There has never had the problems that I am experiencing today which has been really the smell.  It has been the smell of the dogs.  I can smell it from a house, I can smell it from my garage.  That is the biggest issue to me to date.  If they can't care for the dogs that are there today, why will we increase the number of dogs they can have in the future?  They need to show that they can handle the dogs that are there today before we increase the capacity.  That is my main concern.  I do want to address I think it is Jake Johansson question about the noise.  The dogs are nothing like frogs.  They are much larger.  The other piece that you talked about bamboo.  And adding the berms and stuff.  A lot of those buildings are close to the property line.  There's not enough room to add a berm there.  You shouldn't add bamboo because it is invasive to the area.  There needs to be another solution.  That is all I have.  Thank you.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you for your comments.  Chris?  
>>  My family and I live in the adjoining parcel to the property in question.  You have heard a lot about sound and smell and the impact on us.  All of that is not up for debate.  We lived there and we know what it is, it is an impact to our daily lives and to our quality of life.  I do not want to talk about that, I want to talk about your possibility.  When asked that you would be mindful of who you represent.  The owners of this company live in Texas.  Their clientele are buying from outside of the county and even more from outside of the state.  Some are some are outside of the state and county.  Do you want to vote to approve this and benefit folks that are from out of town and folks that serve a clientele that is from out of the town?  They do not pay taxes here or do you want to vote to benefit folks that live here, pay taxes here, voted for you, put you in the seats that you are in?  I request that you be mindful of who you represent and who votes for you.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you for your comments.  Kent Meyer?  
>>  Good morning and thank you for the opportunity to speak to you about the issue.  My name is Kent Meyer and my wife and I live at 690 Natalie Ln.  I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you today.  We are one street over from Meadow Lane and situated east of the canine training center.  The current level of parking every day but a dogs at variance times throughout the day is more than a hindrance but rather it is an obstruction to the enjoyment of normally would be an extremely peaceful setting.  The same of me when I bought my place the few minutes I was on the property to view it when it was for sale, the dogs happen not to be barking very much.  I was too deep into the contract when I was there and it was a full on slot.  And I said what did I get myself into?  That is my problem for not researching.  To approve something to increase the number of dogs that is something I can speak to that we should not be doing.  75 dogs will be an onslaught of the peace and enjoyment of our neighborhoods.  When the dogs are barking, it is extremely loud where we are located.  I cannot imagine what it is like for our neighbors on Meadow Lane.  No amount of improvement or installation of fencing etc. will take care of the significant increase in noise level.  Also, more than doubling the amount of traffic in and out of the neighborhood would be a major hindrance to our privately maintained roads.  We have experienced high level of dogs in the noise level is a major frustration.  Driving you off of your own porch back inside of your home where you can still hear them even at times inside of your house.  Another significant issue for all of us would be the devaluation of our properties.  An increase of dogs means to a decrease of private property.  If the southern coast canine want to expand, I am pro-business and they can do so but they should do it somewhere else.  Not at the expense of all of the private residential homes and neighbors in the area.  I want to ask you to strongly consider negative impact on all of the homeowners in this area if the approval is given.  To increase in the amount the number of dogs at southern coast canine.  I did get the invitation to the meeting and I had to work that day.  I'm off today that is why I'm here.  Thank you.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you for your comments.  John Nicholson?  
>>  John Nicholson Daytona Beach.  I was here the last time.  You do realize there are two different entities.  The first entity comes in and talks to the neighbors.  I have a couple of dogs that I'm going to train.  I work for the sheriff's department I want to train some dogs is that okay?  Sure, not a problem.  I don't know how many was there may B-12 – 15.  Most people would say, okay not a problem and the police department needs to dogs.  Down the lines he is asked to do certain things.  Get this exception and do this and do this and he doesn't do it.  He'll build when he shouldn't build.  He built without permits.  It goes on for 11 – 15 years.  And he doesn't do anything.  He is out of compliance and he sells not the land but the business.  They assume that all of this is kosher.  Sorry, you have to do your due diligence.  If you're going to lease know what you are leasing.  I feel sorry for them but think of all of the neighbors.  They live there.  We were here the last time someone said, the lady that was complaining moved.  Now I am hearing in other person moved.  The lady said I would move.  Why should the neighbors leave because of barking dogs?  It makes absolutely no sense.  So the gentleman that started this this small businesses not 12 – 15 order 30, they have been doing 60 knowing that they can only do 30 but they have been doing 60.  Now they're asking for an extension for time to get rid of the dogs because it has only been 15 years to get down to the 30.  I am asking you to look at it holistically.  Just because somebody did something wrong 15 years ago, you do not have to extend it.  I am asking you to deny it because of the neighbors.  I'm asking you to deny it because if somebody does something wrong, we just can't rubber stamp it.  Pay a couple of dollars for a permit, you can do something that we would never have permitted in the first place.  I am asking you, don't compound a mistake by driving all of these people away from their own homes.  Thank you.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you for your comments.  The last speaker is Walter.  
>>  Thank you for allowing me to speak.  I live at 650 Meadow Ln.  I strongly oppose this request.  With dumb as a business and have an attorney, they have the ability to do due diligence.  They put significant investment in this business so to not do what I can do in a quick Google search a few minutes to find out there's only 30 dogs allowed there, I find that unbelievable.  According to Volusia County section 72, 136 the purpose of zoning is to preserve and protect small farms limiting agricultural production and to remain consistent with the conferences a plan.  The zoning designation does not support large-scale commercial operations.  Only home businesses and hobby breeders which lie with Florida statute 559 and 955 and Volusia County ordinance 0211 38.  This is not a home business, it is a high scale commercial operation.  It was forced into a small farm residential area despite the zoning laws to prevent exactly that type of destruction.  The business brings excessive noise, high consumer traffic, semi truck deliveries, multiple employees, far beyond what is reasonable for a community.  Expanding this operation to 100 dogs will only worsen the impacts.  I want you to think if they have gotten away with 30 dogs and they already have 100 dogs, when we get 100 dogs is going to be 200 or 300 dogs.  We need to take those things into consideration.  Additionally as a resident on Meadow Lane and never received the notice.  I live right at the corner at the front of it.  Never received a notice and not one reached out by mail or phone not by a sign or anything on my door.  I strongly object to this because I do not feel it fits into the community and you have heard other people speak and say the same thing as well.  The only reason I don't think there's hundreds of people's here because there are only six – eight houses on Meadow Lane and it is the same without the streets.  If this is a community like Venetian Bay you would have 200 – 300 people waiting outside of the door.  Thank you.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: Thank you.  Councilman Tony Kent?  
>> TONY KENT: I was in a way to public comment.  After that I would love to speak.  
>> CHAIR BROWER: Before that does anybody have any more questions before we move?  Does your comment include a question?  But you would like to hear from the attorney first?  Do you want to wrap up?  
>>  I want to address a few points.  First, I will talk about the due diligence and I want to remind the Council when my client purchased the business in 2020 there was no dog limit imposed on this.  The limit was imposed about four years after we purchased the business on September 10 of 2024.  It was just this past year.  We immediately started this appeal process to get the issue before the board before you all.  Since the day we found out about the limit, we have actively been taking steps to reduce the number of dogs in good faith effort to comply.  As I said we can't just open the doors and let these animals out.  At the last hearing in December there was discussion.  We have maintained about $60 on site since then.  Pending resolution of this hearing once we get the final answer, obviously we would have to.  I want to accept-- set the record straight that we did due diligence and in no sense trying to violate any orders from the county any code provisions.  We are doing our very best to comply.  I also want to correct one point, it is not our intent with this appeal to make any changes to the site unless required as a means of noise abatement.  The owner has certain requirements with the site plan approval for the special exception to make certain changes and alterations to the property to comply with the approved plans.  But as far as what this request entails there is no additional construction, no additional building that needs to take place in order to move the limit from 30 to some higher number.  I do want to address and again it is unfortunate to hear these neighbor concerns.  We wish they had been brought to us directly to try to address before today.  I do want to assure the Council that these dogs are highly trained and specialized animals.  They are well taken care of at the facility.  This is a very nice location for these dogs.  It is not some squalid area.  This is nice facility and we frequently have federal, state and local law enforcement agencies on site.  These animals are very well taken care of.  I do want to point out that we do contribute to road upkeep on Meadow Lane.  There were speed bumps put in to try to address some of the concerns about speeding.  I understand they have been removed.  They were removed by other residents but we are actively working to maintain the road.  I will end with this that I do recognize the property owner -- I'm sorry the business owner principles do live out of state.  We employ many people on site who live here.  As a business, the business operates here and it is incorporated but operates here.  We would hope that the Council applies the code to us the same way it would anyone else living in Volusia County.  We believe we should be subject to the same standards as every other residents and every other business that operates here.  Our site manager lives on site and is there everyday with the dogs. 
 We do have some impact.  It's not just run out of Volusia County.  The decision today will affect people in Volusia County.  
>> Mr. Chairman, can I ask a question?  He just sparked it based on his commentary.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Yes.  
>> To hear him say the limit, this current 30 dog limit was imposed four years after your client purchased the business?  
>> Yes, sir.  
>> Did your client participate in the process?  
>> No, sir.  We tried, but we were not allowed to participate in that process.  People come to train.  Dogs move out.  We operated I think between 80 and 100.
>> Around that time frame it would fluctuate between 80 and 100?  
>> Yes, sir.  
>> One more question, Mr. Chair.  My staff, I think this is an important thing, for me at least I would say.  Clay, when this special exception was put in place in 2024, it was done between the property owner and the county.  Is that accurate for me to understand?
>> The last special exception was approved in 2022.  It was a public hearing.  So there was notifications posted on the property.  So the business owner would have seen the orange placard indicating the public hearing process.  The site plan is what is being appealed.  That is what was approved in 2024.  We were running into, again, compliance issues with the property owner.  The special exception was approved.  We did not see the site plan coming in.  We did not see the building permits, which were all conditions of that special exception.  And again, trying to work with the business owner and ensure some kind of compliance with the code.  We finally got the application in.  It made it through and the site plan was approved.  During that process, residents were concerned about the operation and participated in review of the site plan.  Carol McFarlane, who was your director of planning and services, indicated that the business owner and property owner were fully aware.  So the fact is that the site plan was approved.  Of the residence pointed out that in the staff report that went to the county council for the approval of the special exception in 2022 the statement was made shall be limited to 30 dogs based on concerns raised in the process with the planning and development regulation commission.  And that's the whole reason we're here.  
>> DAVID SANTIAGO:  Thank you.  Thank you, Mr. Chair.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Kent.  
>> TROY KENT:  Thank you.  Mr. Santiago's question actually answered a few questions that I had.  If you can start the clock for me.  
>> I just got a question following up on David.  
>> Real quick, I've got to clarify on what I said.  They said they can participate in the technical meeting.  That is not correct.  
>> Clay, if you can stay up there real quick.  I'm sorry.  Just a follow-up to what Mr. Santiago was talking about.  The council for the applicant said prior to the 30 dog limit there was no limit on the property.  Is that the case?  
>> I can't remember exactly what was said.  I know there was discussion in 2015 when the original special exception came through.  I don't know.  I'd have to check the record.  
>> I have it right here.  The property owner exception S15 009 variance for the property in May 2013 to allow for canine training facility for up to 40 dogs housed on the site.  
>> Okay, so there was a limit as early as 2013?  
>> 2015, yes, sir.  
>> Before that it would be a five dog limit.  
>> Yes, sir.  That was all part of the original zoning ordinance adopted in 2015.  
>> Thank you, Jake.  
>> If there is a motion to deny this appeal, how much time with a have if we didn't grant extra time for them to get the number of dogs down to 30?  
>> Again, we would work with them, but again, it would have to be a reasonable timeframe.  
>> We don't have something where there has to happen tomorrow?  
>> Again, we are working on chapter 162, which pertains to Florida statute.  Because of this appeal, everything is held in basically band pending the outcome of the appeal.  We understand there are issues that would have to be addressed based on the issues that we do have animals on site, so we would have to look at what would be 30 days.  Is that a reasonable time to have the dogs placed?  That would be part of the discussion with the applicant and if they were passed that timeframe we would then proceed forward with code enforcement.  
>> Thank you.  Chairman, if I can, we'll start with comments now.  
>> I'd like to ask one more question from Clay.  The dog limit, whatever it is, 30 or 75, is that for just for dogs that are housed overnight?  Does it affect dogs that come in during the day for training?  
>> My understanding is it is for overnight boarding because the training and operation did not necessarily have a specific limit.  The idea is kenneling of dogs because the operations were approved.  It was clearly identified as a school.  
>> Thank you.  Are both things happening?  
>> School and kenneling is happening on site.  
>> And how does that contribute to the number we are hearing of 60, 80, 100 dogs?  
>> I'll have to have an answer.  
>> Is that all housed animals or daily animals when you come up with that number?  
>> Sorry, I just want to clarify the question.  You're asking the -- we are talking about number of dogs.  Are you asking is that only for the dogs who are sleeping on site or the dogs training for the day?  
>> Correct.  I'm just wondering right now if you're doing both if there's dogs housed overnight and dogs that come and go the same day.  
>> There are dogs that come and go during the same day.  The dogs are trained with people in the classes, but there are dogs that are being housed overnight that are being trained and for sale, for example, or are just in and being trained.  I don't know if that answers.  
>> Yeah, so the dogs that come in for the day to be trained are over and above whatever the limit has been imposed, whether it's 30 if we went -- 
>> There are some that are removed that would leave during the evening if that's what you are asking.  Yes, there would be some that just come for the day and then leave.  
>> And that's in excess of whatever the total number is that your housing?  
>> When we're talking about the 16 number earlier, that includes that.  
>> That's what I was trying to find out.  Thank you.  
>> I think some of our struggle here is when we give numbers 60, 80, 100, those are numbers of all the dogs on site as I understand it.  Obviously, dogs come and go every day.  There's numbers -- I don't know if that answers your question, Mr. Chair.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  Troy, before you start, Councilman Robins, did you have a question?  
>> DANNY ROBINS:  I was going to make a motion for denial before we got into comments so we can stay on track.  
>> Chairman, my comments are going to have a motion in there as well.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  Go ahead.  
>> Thank you, chairman.  I appreciate it.  I will briefly say I think your business is a really cool thing and it obviously helps in a very niche area, and that school as well.  I am a dog lover and we have two.  We have Miss Daisy and bad boy Dougley.  They are miniature doxens.  It will get me fired up in my yard with two dogs.  Miss Daisy does everything perfectly.  But the bad boy, when I'm relaxing in my backyard next to the lounge chair, when I smell urine, it's because bad boy Dougley decided to lift his leg.  Because he's this big.  Not in the grass, but on the lawn chair leg.  To the person who talked about the smell, it hit with me with back.  The neighborhood showed up to this public meeting.  So thank you for showing up because you are public testimony is impactful.  You know, at least for me.  A neighbor mentioned her comment was this is horrendous to live next to.  Another one called it a retirement home.  I found the residence to be really nice people.  I talked about the smell a little bit.  Someone mentioned they can't care for the dogs today.  Why would you want more?  I've not been out to the side, the business that they do I would say the dogs are probably exceptionally well taken care of.  Especially at the price tag these dogs are well taken care of.  A neighbor mentioned the noise, the smell, pushing you off of your porch.  So there's a lot about this that has been wrong.  Not getting permits and not following the current rules.  And then I feel like we are being asked to support and endorse bad behavior.  So I will make a motion at this time to deny the appeal by the applicant and uphold the development committee rules commission limiting to a maximum of 30.  If you all want, if I can get a second or if you want me to put a timeline of when they want to comply with 30 dogs, I can do that as well.  Or if we get a second to vote on it, we can edit that timeline and get it to a number it is supposed to be.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you.  We have a motion on the floor to deny -- actually, just uphold development review committee and stick with the 30 minute.  That was by Troy Kent.  The second is by Councilman Robins.  Okay.  I had questions.  They were answered.  Is there any more discussion on the motion?  
>> DAVID SANTIAGO:  Yes.  Sorry, Mr. Chair.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  That's all right.  Councilman Santiago.  
>> DAVID SANTIAGO:  Think as the motion goes for a vote, I think it is a critical timeline because of the motion passes I don't know what happens for the applicant and what direction staff intends to take.  
>> And I agree with you.  No fault to Clay Irvin, no fault to have because -- we are going to work with them.  What does that mean?  To the seconder, because I'll need to support on this.  What are you comfortable with?  I was going to say 30 days, but maybe we could go longer.  
>> 60?  I would say 90 and Mr. Kent can tell you why.  We don't know what law enforcement agencies are depending on this.  This is not something they can just get rid of.  
>> I can do 90.  I can add 90 to my motion.  Seconder is okay with that?  He's okay with it.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  So the motion is uphold a $30 limit.  They have 90 days to reduce the number of dogs.  And with the 30 dogs you had nothing in your motion about noise abatement, correct?  Okay.  When we started this, I was leaning towards probably where we ended up last time with 75 dogs, noise abatement, and one year review.  I think there are some issues with the owner and the leasee.  I think the owner is that at some -- what we have is a tremendous noise problem in the neighborhood.  I would like to find a way the business can survive and the neighbors can survive.  I'm just not sure it's there.  Even with the 30 dog limit, it would be nice if we had some requirement for noise abatement, but that is not in the current motion.  So Councilman Santiago.  
>> DAVID SANTIAGO:  Thank you, chair, further discussion.  I have been on both sides of this.  I think ultimately I'll probably land on the side of going with the motion.  It's unfortunate for the business owner.  This is just my opinion.  You have -- and what he sold to.  But that's just my opinion.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you.  Any other comments from staff?  Okay.?  Or the applicant, any final comments?  All right.  Carissa, would you call the roll?  And this is the motion is to uphold the development review committee condition that the number of canines housed on the site cannot exceed 30 with a 90 day limit to reduce the number of dogs to that number.  That's what we're voting on.  
>> Mr. Johansson.  
>> JAKE JOHANSSON:  Yes.  
>> Mr. Kent.  
>> TROY KENT:  Yes.  
>>[Roll Call] 
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  Thank you.  
>> It's 11:46.  You don't think we can get through it quickly?  
>> Item 7. Item 7 will be quick.  
>> Pardon me?  
>> Item 7 will be quick.  
>> Are there people here?  Okay.  [laughter] 
>> That's a joke, right?  
>> The capital improvement?  
>> I'm just saying [Indiscernible] These guys.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  Council, what is your -- pardon me?  What is your desire?  To knock out item 7 before we take a break or take a break at 11:47?  All right.  Let's do item 7 because there's no food here.  
>> I'm going to hold you to that, Clay.  Let's see how quick it is.  
>> This is ordinance 2025-04 update to the five-year schedule of capital improvements for concurrency.  
>> Good morning.  This is mandated by the states community planning act.  It is the basis of our Conservancy management system that establishes level of service is consistent with the adopted capital improvement plan.  If there's any questions, I'd be glad to answer.  [laughter] 
>> You are right.  
>> I don't think you took long enough.  
>> Move to approve, Mr. Chair.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  We have a move to approve by Councilman Santiago and a second by vice chair Reinhart.  Any comment?  All in favor say aye say aye.  >> ALL:  Aye.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Any opposed?  That carries 6-0.  We'll get Mr. Kent's vote when he comes in.  Eight should be quick also.  Let's do item 8 ordinance 2025-07 prohibition of public camping or sleeping within county buildings or its grounds and public rights of way.Okay.  Sorry.  Go ahead.  
>> MORGAN SWANKS:  Good morning.  Morgan Swanks, assistant county attorney.  I will try to be quick.  During the 2024 legislative session, the Florida legislature adopted HB 1365 creating a new section 125.0231 Florida statute, which as of October 1 of last year prohibits counties and municipalities from authorizing or otherwise allowing any person to regularly engage in public camping or sleeping on any public property including and not limited to public and its grounds public right-of-way.  In order to enforce the statutory prohibition against unauthorized camping on public property, proposed ordinance amends the county code to comply with the statute.  It establishes a tiered penalty system for violations and creates a uniform notification process for County residents and businesses to report instances of alleged public camping.  Section 78-1 prohibition of public camping or sleeping within county buildings for on its grounds.  The ordinance also includes public camping and sleeping definition in section 94-1 related to use of county rights-of-way.  Sections find public camping or sleeping as it is set forth in the statute, which is launching or residing overnight in a temporary outdoor habitation used as a dwelling or living space.  This is used without a tent or bedding.  This is to include in a motorized vehicle overnight.  The prohibition of public camping does not apply during a declared state of emergency or on property the county has specifically designated for public camping under the statute.  Any individuals found camping or sleeping on public property without authorization will be asked to leave by code enforcement or law enforcement.  Other penalties include escalating fines and trust warnings.  The statute authorizes residents of county, owners of businesses within the county and Attorney General to file complaint against the County for allowing public camping.  Under section 78-1, the County manager will designate an email address or other electronic submission method to receive written notices for County residents and businesses.  Written submissions must include information that is sufficient for the county to take reasonable action to cure the actions including date and instance of public camping.  There were some common misconceptions we wanted to make sure we address as well.  In June of last year, Oregon versus Johnson, the Supreme Court found County and cities may enforce general public camping bans including against involuntarily housed individuals without providing alternative sheltering options without violating the eighth amendment.  While a county may designate property for public camping, there is no requirement to identify and designate a property for public camping or sleeping.  This is supported not only by grants past, but also the Florida Department of children and families, which will be certifying properties of the County does choose to designate.  Their office of homelessness frequently asked questions on their website says it is not a requirement.  There is not immediate civil liability for allegedly allowing public camping under the statute.  The county has five business days after receiving written notice of an alleged violation to take all reasonable actions within the limits of its governmental authority prior to a civil action being brought.  This is why we included a notice provision within the ordinance.  Ordinance 225-07 is presented to County Council for approval.  To comply with the state law and as one tool available in response to the needs of unhoused individuals within the county.  The intent is not to criminalize homelessness, but to seek compliance of the ordinance by providing assistance.  Are there any questions available?  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Any questions?  
>> I have a question.  The one go ahead.  
>> Want to know how this affects, during the sleeping part, during our night meetings how would this affect John Nicholson?  Are we in violation?  I want to make sure we can make an exception.  
>> The ordinance is not continuing overnight.  So once the meeting is over [Indiscernible].
>> Mr. Chair, thank Mrs. Sweeney for putting this together.  This is not intended to go any further than the state law.  There is nothing controversial intended.  We have been following what some other counties have been doing.  It allows us to get a complaint a code provision we can point to to implement to enforce state law.  Is that your statement?  
>> Yes.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you.  I think this is necessary to protect people to come downtown.  Businesses.  I am just curious, though, if there is -- I forget your description.  An unintentionally housed person on a sleeping on a bench or park.  Are they just moved alone or what happens by law enforcement?  
>> Initially there is within the ordinance the ability to ask them to move initially.  There's also other services that are provided by the county that can be offered.  The fines and warnings, those would be escalations that we would have as tools if we needed them.  But they are not the initial response.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  So they are given the opportunity to go to the bridge FirstStep or whatever other services are available.  
>> Yes.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Santiago.  
>> DAVID SANTIAGO:  I move to approve.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Motion to approve by Councilman Santiago and second by Mr. Reinhart.  Any other questions or debate?  All in favor say aye.  
>> Aye.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Any opposed?  That motion carries 7-0.  I think you were out of that room on vote.  It was 7-0?  
>> Yes, it is.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Item 9 is removed from the agenda.  I am informed that there is no reason to take a dinner break until about 12:20 because there is no dinner yet.  So.  Okay.  Let's see if we can knock out item 10.  Which is alcohol, drugs, and until health funding request to leverage $15.5 million in state funding.  
>> Good morning.  Carmen Hall, community assistance director.  This agenda item is matching funds for alcohol, drugs, and mental health program.  It's a match that allows us to draw down an additional $15.5 million from the state.  We do have a presentation if you would like us to go through the presentation.  If not, I can take any questions.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Council care to see the presentation?
>> This is similar to last year's.  Funding requested proceeding, correct?  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Correct.  
>> I don't need to see it, but I have a question.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Go ahead a few questions, Vice Chair Reinhart.  
>> VICE CHAIR REINHART:  Thank you.  I was reading through this and first of all, great program.  I've had time since last year to do a little research, so I commend you.  I just have a quick question.  It doesn't really explain it.  There was a slight increase in this year's ask as opposed to last year.  Everybody was either equal to or less.  Can he expand on that?  I'm sure there's a legitimate reason, but if anybody reads this there was an increase in that as to why.  Just full transparency.  I appreciate it.  
>> My name is Derek Collins, CEO of service mentor.  I should've asked for more even the last time, but like I said, the first time we came up for this you guys suggested that I did some more outside funding, which we were doing.  I explained to the type of stuff we did get.  The following year we did way more than that and we surpassed some additional funding that we got from you guys to equal out that match.  But we also lost $100,000 overspending, which may be provided to services, but we did not get that funding.  We cannot afford that, so we had to make some changes to ensure we can continue the program because I feel like it's too much of a need for us to just kind of like pass.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  I figured it was along those lines, but I appreciate it.  Thank you so much.  
>> We did everything we can get.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Fair enough.  
>> No problem.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Robins or Santiago, did you make a motion to approve?  Okay.  
>> Second Johansson.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  We have a motion to approve the expenditure by Councilman Santiago and the second is by Councilman Johansson.  In the other questions?  Comments?  All in favor say aye.  
>> Aye.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Any opposed?  That is approved 7-0.  Thank you.  Thank you all for coming in.  That takes us to item 11, appointments to the ECHO advisory board.  
>> You have appointments to the ECHO board next.  This agenda item does have currently two vacancies with the chair and Mr. Dempsey.  The whole board is up for reappointment of March 31.  So I figured I'd just go ahead and reappoint the whole board because we do have a number of boards coming with March 31 term expirations.  But, Mr. Chair and Mr. Dempsey, if you do want to appoint someone, just be cognizant you can appoint an individual to be from now until I think 2027.  If I did the math correct.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  I'm not going to make an appointment for that temporary time.  I think the ECHO board has already received all the proposals and they are going through them.  I think it would be a little unfair for someone to step in right now.  So I'll wait until March.  Don Dempsey.  
>> DON DEMPSEY:  Yeah, I will check Gerald Fieser.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  For temporary?  
>> DON DEMPSEY:  Temporary and -- 
>> Second.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Dempsey nominates Gerald Fieser immediately and the next cycle.  Any questions?  There's three people on the board.  Did you want to talk about Gerald or -- okay.  
>> Not about Gerald, but I had a question because I got a comment or I got a message from my appointment who said he will not be seeking to be reappointed.  So is now not the time for district 4 to put someone up?  
>> It is.  I'm just getting rid of the temporary appointments.  And he has combined his temporary with long-term, so we are going to kill two birds with one stone.  All in favor say aye of approving Gerald Fieser say aye.  
>> Aye.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Now for appointment.  Councilman Robins.  
>> DANNY ROBINS:  I would like to make a motion to appoint Gerard Pendagast for temporary and next cycle.  >> Second, Johansson.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  We have a nomination for Gerard Pendagast.  He is currently serving, so he would continue on through the 2025 cycle.  The second was by Jake Johansson.  Any questions on Gerard?  All in favor say aye.  
>> Aye.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Any opposed?  That nomination is accepted 7-0.  Okay.  Vice Chair Reinhart.  
>> VICE CHAIR REINHART:  I would like to point Patricia Draco.  She's an incumbent so she will continue through the next cycle as well.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  Any questions about Patricia?  >> Second.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Any seconds?  
>> Second.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Jake Johansson seconds.  Patricia transacting.  All those in favor say aye.  
>> Aye.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Any opposed?  She is approved 7-0.  Councilman Kent.  
>> TROY KENT:  -- Reach out and said he is no longer willing to serve.  I appreciate his time for the last two years.  I did have a conversation with my neighbor who lives directly across the street, Doug Pettit.  I think Doug would be a good voice on the ECHO board, so I'm going to put Douglas Pettit up for the district 4 position.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Does he already have the -- 
>> TROY KENT:  I'm assuming the clean hands check has gone through because she's got his name on here.  
>> I would like to let you know, Mr. Kent, that Mr. Selby would finish out his term until March 31 and that is when Mr. Pettit would take unless you -- 
>> TROY KENT:  Let him finish his term.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  Any questions about Doug Pettit?  We need a second.  
>> Second.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Bite Don Dempsey.  All in favor say aye.  
>> Aye.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  He is approved 7-0.  Jake Johansson.  >> JAKE JOHANSSON:  I would like to nominate both my incumbents.  To continue through March 2027.  
>> TROY KENT:  Second.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  Reggie Santilli and where is your other one?  Right under Reggie.  And that second was by Troy Kent.  
>> Can I ask a question?  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Sure.  
>> That's the at-large, right?  So I've got to go back to it.  At-large goes back to -- who was the other applicants?  I'm looking for it.  I can't see for some reason.  
>> Can be anybody.  
>> Oh, we can pick anybody?  Because there wasn't a second section for that.  Okay.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  All in favor say aye of Reggie Santilli and John Macaluso say aye.  
>> Aye.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Approved 7-0.  Councilman Santiago, do you have a designation?  
>> DAVID SANTIAGO:  Appoint Patricia Turco 
>> Second.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Nomination is Patricia Northy.  Second was by Troy Kent.  All in favor say aye.
>>  Aye.  
>> Aye.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Any opposed?  She is confirmed 7-0.  I am going to defer until the next meeting.  And that takes us to the last item.  Item 12, appointments to the Volusia Forever advisory board.  
>> Correct.  The same thing.  These terms are March 31, of 2025.  I'm looking for each of you to appoint somebody for the chair east and west side nominations.  >> CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  David Santiago.  
>> DAVID SANTIAGO:  Move to appoint Mr. David Sosa.  
>> Second.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  David Sosa is Santiago's appointment seconded by Troy Kent.  All in favor say aye.  
>> Aye.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Any opposed?  He is confirmed unanimously.  That takes us to Vice Chair Reinhart.  
>> VICE CHAIR REINHART:  You may not know this one.  Jessica Gall, I would like to reappoint to continue on.
>> How knowledgeable is she on the issues?  
>> VICE CHAIR REINHART:  Very.  
>> Was she willing?  
>> Second.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Second Jessica Gall is by Troy Kent.  All in favor say aye.  
>> Aye.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Any opposed?  Any opposed?  She is confirmed 7-0.  All right.  Councilman Johansson.  
>> JAKE JOHANSSON:  Yes, sir.  I would like to renominate Wanda Van Dam west side and John -- east side.  
>> Second.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Who was your second?  
>> JAKE JOHANSSON:  John -- 
>> CHAIR BROWER:  The second is John Kent.  
>> Mr. Chair, I don't see where Wanda Van Dam has reapplied.  
>> JAKE JOHANSSON:  I will double check with her and if she bails we will pick someone else.  
>> I'm still good with the second.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  So you want to go with the one today?  
>> Yes.  Just one, sir.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  All right.  All in favor say aye.  
>> Aye.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Any opposed?  We will go back to you next meeting with the appointment.  
>> Council, I will reappoint my incumbent on this committee, Suzanne Scheiber.  
>> Second, ECHO.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Kent reappoint Suzanne Scheiber's.  Second was by Jake Johanson.  All in favor say aye of missed Scheiber say aye.  
>> Aye.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Any opposed?  She is reappointed 7-0.  And Councilman Robins.  
>> DANNY ROBINS:  Is that one appointments, chair, or two?  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  It is one appointment except at-large.  
>> DANNY ROBINS:  John Gamble, please.  
>> Second.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Nominated by Councilman Robins and the second is made by Councilman Kent.  All in favor say aye.  
>> Aye.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Any opposed?  And that carries 7-0.  I will nominate Kelly Frasca for the west side and Derek Montaigne -- La Montaigne for the west side -- east side.  
>> Second.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Second by Troy Kent.  All in favor say aye.  
>> Aye.  
>> Discussion on that one, sir, please.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Sorry.  
>> That's fine.  They all went through 30 quick.  As a citizen of Port Orange, Mr. La Montaigne ran for mayor against Mr. Stiltner and there were some questions not to his legal residence, but where he lives.  I would like to have that discussion.  He resides up in Gainesville, works up in Gainesville, but maintains a legal address here.  Not that I don't want him to be in the committee, but I want to have the discussion between us to make sure that's the kind of person we want forever.  Not to say he's not passionate.  He's very passionate.  To make sure that's the intent of who we want on the forever committee.  So I just bring it up for discussion to see if we want to talk through that or let it go because he has his voting address is here in Portland, I would imagine.  
>> To my knowledge he holds a legal address in Port Orange.  He does work, go to school, and maybe has an apartment or something in Gainesville.  Is there any legal requirement he is not meeting?  
>> I'm looking up the resolution now, but I believe it's either probably has to be a resident of Volusia County.  If he's a resident of the county, he would qualify.  
>> We did as a pursuant to resolution, we did run a good standing check, which includes verifying with the supervisor of elections if he's a registered -- registered voter and he is a registered voter in District 3. 
>> So the resolution is for Elector.  
>> Okay.  It's all I had.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  That answers your question?  
>> Yeah.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Then we need to vote on Kelly Frasca and Derek La Montaigne.  All in favor say aye.  
>> Aye.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Any opposed?  Both are approved unanimously.  That leaves -- you take care of -- no, you didn't.  That was ECHO.  
>> Gerald Fieser.  
>> Second.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Gerald Fieser is nominated by Don Dempsey for Volusia Forever seconded by Kent.  All in favor say aye.  
>> Aye.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Any opposed?  He is confirmed.  So why don't we take a break here.  We will come back for public participation and closing comments.  
>> Mr. Dempsey has asked a question about his appointment and if you can just give me a couple of moments where I can address it and we come back.  I don't believe Mr. Fieser can't serve on -- Brad just told me he won't resign.  
>> Okay.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  Then 12:14.  We will be back at 12:45.  


[Break]


>> CHAIR BROWER:  Start with the public participation.  There are two.  First is Jessica Gall.  
>> JESSICA GALL:  You should have received a letter last week asking if the Council would receive a letter for consideration of the overall development plan for 44522 that was hard at the last council meeting.  I do believe that this Council considers evidence in front of it when making decisions and I also believe that all of you would be willing to look at additional information if you think that would make a difference.  Since that time we have found that the date of construction shown in the public record is incorrect.  It is shown to the property appraiser as 1996 and as a follow-up to that meeting and discussion confirmed with FPL that they have a record of turning power on pursuant to a certificate of occupancy in 1985.  So I know that records are hard to track down in that timeframe.  It is difficult to keep track, especially in the world they are converted to microfilm and not kind of organized.  I would really request that we take the time to reconsider that review.  If we are not certain that this property did not go through the proper process and that these individuals who have come to the table with clean hands and have done everything they can, if we are not certain they have done every thing the right way and are willing to do it now, before a decision that is made that will irrevocably impact their lives and the life of my -- I would ask that you reconsider.  Also attached to that letter is a declaration that would be a voluntary measure to the property owner to restrict it to say if the house is restored it can't be rebuilt until it meets the minimum acreage of the classification.  Know I only have three minutes.  The request is out there.  I only request that you take the opportunity to do this right.  I think the property owner also has a form and will speak as well.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  And Brian Vanderpool, you're the owner?  
>> BRIAN VANDERPOOL:  Sorry, I'm going to get emotional.  We bought the house and we didn't know, of course, the situation we were in, but since then, you know, we were there about a week.  Code enforcement showed up and said that we were not supposed to be there.  A week after that we found out that she was pregnant.  And it's just been **** ever since.  You know, we can't call it home.  We can't, you know, the baby has had a bath in the sink for the last year because we are not going to put a tub in.  We can't make improvements on the home.  It's just been really tough.  We are just coming up here today to meet you guys and to just, you know, so you can put a face to the name.  You know, I have spoke with FPL a couple of times in the last few days trying to get them.  They do acknowledge the power was put there April 10 of 1985.  They did see they received a certificate of occupancy in the county now sending them -- getting them an email of occupancy to show that, they do show that was received, but they don't have any proof of it.  Hopefully that can come to service.  Hopefully there's some way out of this mess because right now we don't know how to proceed.  We don't know if we just are uncertain about our future.  Hopefully we can sort something out and, you know, make this go away.  That's pretty much all I had to say.  Thank you guys for listening.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you.  To the legal staff or whoever wants to deal with this, Jessica Gall, these are closing comments.  The Council doesn't have to act on this at all.  If -- I'd like to ask the staff if they do the request is a motion to reconsider what with the next step be.  
>> Assistant county attorney.  If you reconsider, so one of you has to be the initial motion has to be done with someone on the prevailing side, that's all of you.  After that, you have two options.  You can bring it back before you and then have the, you know, here the entire thing again or optionally you can demand it back to DRC for additional findings.  Those are your two options should you reconsider the matter.  It does not have to go back to you, but you can remand it back to DRC and say hey, do additional research.  Take into account this is additional evidence.  If it shows ACO or some kind of invested right or other aspect, make your determination.  That gives the applicant the opportunity if they dislike DRC's finding to appeal and come back to you.  
>> That would be I think my advice to you that if you were inclined to reconsider, send it to your Gall, which was the original body that heard this.  If they have information they can share rather than send it back to you, it may not come back to you.  But you're not obligated to grant the motion to reconsider either. >> That's correct.  
>> We can make both motions today.  You can take motion to reconsider and motion to remand or set another Council meeting to hear the matter again.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  Councilman Santiago.  
>> DAVID SANTIAGO:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  I move that we reconsider the request and send it to DRC as a first note.  
>> JAKE JOHANSSON:  Second, Johansson.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  So we do have a motion on the table to reconsider and remanded back to DRC.  Jake Johansson, you made the second?  
>> JAKE JOHANSSON:  I did.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  Any questions?
>> JAKE JOHANSSON:  Comment.
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Jake Johansson.  
>> JAKE JOHANSSON:  A quick comment.  For the record, if this passes and goes back to DRC, I think -- I think the direction or I guess and the direction would be for me let's trying to get to yes on this.  I really would like to see us find a way to get them where they need to go so they can live there.  There's a lot of obstacles in the way, but let's try to find a way to make it work, the staff and the DRC.  Thank you.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you.  Councilman Robins?  
>> DANNY ROBINS:  Just some additional requests.  If we can just make sure we have the property tax records dating all the way back to see what they can charge or property managers -- that would weigh in my decision-making as well.  Thank you.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  We have a motion to reconsider and remand back to DRC by David Santiago second by Jake Johansson.  All those in favor say aye.  
>> Aye.  Any opposed?  Motion passes 6-1.  It's the quickest legal argument you've ever made.  That takes us to the County Manager's closing comment.  
>> Yes, sir, Mr. Chair.  I have a few items today.  First up, just a reminder that we will be doing the upcoming informational sessions for our coastal resiliency strategies.  This is part of the state's SAND program we are enjoying money putting back our restoration system.  Also have these informational sessions and outreach.  There will be several meetings, one February 25 from 5-7:00 at the ocean Center, Wednesday, February 26 at the shore beach community center and February 27 at the ballroom of the Brandon center at 105 S. Riverside Dr. We also have the Volusia County is going to have their veterans standdown March 22.  There will be free lunch, assistance with VA claims, legal assistance, employment resources, housing support, free haircuts, clothing, and food.  
>> And I add to that?  
>> Yes.  
>> My apologies.  I want to also let council no part of the program -- are doing to help promote the veterans stand down and offer even more services is providing sponsorship opportunities.  So they are just being made available.  They range from $500-$1500 with a level it in between.  If you know of any businesses or individuals who might have interest in being a sponsor for the veterans stand down later next month, Scott Olson or Brad Burble would be able to assist.  There are going to be some information going out on it, but I know Council had their own connections.  But I wanted to make that plug.  
>> All right.  On top of that, of course we have our upcoming state of the County address Tuesday, February 25 at the ocean Center.  That will be I'm sure a big highlight affair.  It always is.  Then lastly, I just wanted to -- a little bit of sadness.  To inform folks one of our former here at the county, Terry Sanders, who I had the pleasure of working with for over 30 years.  He was a 35 year employee, 35+, actually.  First was Sheriff's Department.  He was a major.  He came on, one of those guys who couldn't retire.  Took on EVAC when it was the foundation.  He's actually one of the guys that came on and later on became deputy and director of public protections.  Very well known in the community.  He and his wife, Dona Sue, did a lot for the community out in Speedway.  A very lustrous career and he passed away over the weekend.  My condolences to his family and wife, Dona Sue, and the rest of the family.  Thoughts, if you could.  Appreciate it.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Thank you.  County attorney?  
>> I have nothing at this time.  Thank you.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  Then we will go to councilmembers.  Jake Johansson, you are first today.  
>> JAKE JOHANSSON:  Yes, sir.  I would like to address council and probably the attorneys.  I think I need a clarification on how we work the consent agenda.  It might just be semantics, but we say we like to pull items, but once it's been pulled, it's removed from the consent agenda, correct?  Is that how I understand it?  Once it's been removed, it's no longer part of the consent agenda.  So then we have to vote on those even though it's pulled just for comment.  So I believe the least confusing way to do would be to ask for comments on the consent agenda and you comment before we vote on the agenda.  And then for another consent agenda, I believe if we want to pull something, then it is removed from the consent agenda and it has to be voted on separately.  The alternative would be to pull for comment and if a comment elicits a change of thought process on that, which sometimes happens, then we have the option of voting on those.  But I'm afraid if we pull it for comment and it's told, we approve consent agenda and vote on those separately kind of leaves us hanging as to what is going on on that item.  I don't know what everybody else thinks, whether it's clear for you all and not clear for me.  I don't know.  
>> Mr. Chair, like to respond.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Before you do, it doesn't sound like there's any legal obstacles either way.  Go ahead.  
>> I was under the impression that if we bring an item up for discussion, it is still part of the original vote to pass items, only the ones we say to pull for vote are removed from the general consent agenda.  
>> JAKE JOHANSSON:  I'm under the assumption that pull means it's no longer on.  
>> We are using the wrong terminology.  
>> JAKE JOHANSSON:  Everywhere else I've been, to comment on the entire consent agenda.  I don't want to pull it, but comment on E, F, and G. Got it.  Nobody wants to pull.  Motion, second, comments.  
>> I can operate either way.  I think it's just about clarity and the right choice at that time.  
>> JAKE JOHANSSON:  I would like to make a motion to not pull for comment.  Just discuss.  
>> I'm okay to second that.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Pull for comment by Jake and second by David Santiago.  Only pull items that are wanted to be voted on and just an announcement made there will be a comment.  And you want that comment to be before the vote?  Is that part of your -- 
>> JAKE JOHANSSON:  Doesn't matter to me.  Yeah.  
>> Chairman, may I?  We only want to pull something after we vote on it.  Council, would anybody like to comment on anything on the consent agenda?  If there's something we want to say about an item, boom.  Any other questions, comments?  All in favor say aye.  
>> Aye.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Any opposed?  
>> JAKE JOHANSSON:  Thank you.  That's all I have.  Oh, the East Central Florida regional planning Council diamond awards are on February 19 at the Miriam event Center.  I will be going.  I don't know if our second representative will be in attendance, but I will be there.  
>> Are you nominated for a diamond award?  
>> JAKE JOHANSSON:  Wrong guy.  No way.  But are County did put in an application this year.  Will be a surprise if we do.  That's it.  Thank you.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  Councilman Kent.  
>> TROY KENT:  I just want to publicly thank Daytona dog Beach for keeping us up-to-date with how successful they have been in the area of Ormond Beach where we have allowed them to operate and have a dog friendly section of the beach.  Finally, I just want to give a shout out to all the young adults that are hard-working and trying to do the right thing.  Personally, on behalf of my wife and myself, I just want to give a shout out to our son, Wyatt.  Keep crushing it.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Vice Chair Reinhart.  
>> VICE CHAIR REINHART:  Thank you.  I've always been a believer of praise in public.  You never want to criticize someone in public.  It's a great way to hurt someone.  That being said, I want to thank Mr. Bartlett.  We had an issue with the B19 canal.  We got a notification from some of the citizens in Pelican Bay that they were dumping their debris, which is concerning.  Here we are in the hot seat of trying to control flooding in one of the key issues is the canal system.  I am very familiar with that apartment complex.  As I expressed to you.  Those issues were handled and taken care of.  Thank you very much, Mr. Bartlett.  Also to city Commissioner Derek, we had an issue with some concerns that were voiced about some graffiti and things of that nature that were already addressed before I placed a phone call.  Thank you to the city of Daytona very much.  Also for Terry Sanders, I had the pleasure of working with Terry.  My condolences also to the family.  Dona Sue and the rest of the family.  They are in our thoughts and prayers.  Thank you.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Robins.  Councilman Santiago.  
>> DAVID SANTIAGO:  Thank you.  I'm going to play the lottery now that I've heard the numbers.  I might win.  But I do have one thing, Mr. Chair.  I want to throw a concept out to this council to see if there's a consensus for information.  An idea that many have heard of in the past.  I realize that it's not within our direct purview to make a decision on.  I wanted to throw the idea to see if we can get staff, and I'll tell you why in a second.  To do some research.  It's going to be out of state research.  To look at the effects of areas in our union that may have eliminated property taxes.  To look at if a consumption tax or other methodologies that may have been used in states, the other 49 states, to replace property taxes with a different mechanism.  I'm of the opinion that I think our property tax system is broken in Florida.  Again, I realize it's not our decision.  However, the conversation needs to start on various levels.  There have been some in the legislator that are brave enough to speak on it, too.  I think we can spark dialogue, interest on a local level and get some other counties to say let's look at this, and we may not know the effects yet.  Basically, I'm asking does the Council be willing to support just information -- 
>> Second.  
>> Third.  Do you need a third and a fourth?  
>> DAVID SANTIAGO:  Maybe we -- 
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Any time limit when the information would come back?  
>> DAVID SANTIAGO:  George, oh, we got the attorney raising his hands.  
>> We have no interest in delaying anything.  If you can give us -- 
>> But it will take some time.  
>> Yeah.  We are not looking to delay anything.  So we will get back to you as soon as we can.  Our office is working with finance.  
>> DAVID SANTIAGO:  How about this.  At the next council meeting, tell us how long you need to get the data for us and then we will decide.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  We have a motion on the floor giving legal staff, giving all staff consensus for information on replacing the property tax with consumption tax or other alternatives.  Or other alternatives that the rest of the union might have done.  Any questions or comments on that?  All in favor say aye.  
>> Aye.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Any opposed?  And the second.  Did you get the second by Troy Kent?  And the third?  
>> DAVID SANTIAGO:  That's all, Mr. Chair.  Thank you.  >> CHAIR BROWER:  Councilman Don Dempsey.  
>> DON DEMPSEY:  I wasn't going to say anything, but I like your idea.  That's a great idea.  But no, I have nothing.  Thanks, guys.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Okay.  I just have one thing.  It's really just a reminder for the public the special meeting Friday, February 11 at 4:00 p.m. here in chambers.  I would just like to ask staff, again, we talked about this I guess it was yesterday on the phone.  Just to get us the item information as soon as possible so the public is aware what we are going to discuss.  Sometimes contention that we haven't had time to adequately consider what's put before us.  
>> Mr. Chairman?  Can I add to that?  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Yes, please.  
>> You're talking about the February 11 special meeting?  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Yes.  
>> If I may ask, what process are we going to follow in that meeting for public comment or work product for us?  Did we decide that yet?  
>> It's special meeting, so you can make decisions.  You will be given, you know, subject courses LID and green stormwater initiative.  Will be asked in four direction coming out of that meeting.  
>> I think currently, correct me if I'm wrong, but in the special meeting there's not a limitation to public participation.  
>> It's not about that.  If you're going to make a decision and vote on something, you have to have public participation.  Which you can choose not to if you don't make any decision on anything.  
>> I'm going to guess what we're probably going to be doing on the 11th is listen to ideas, proposals, and sending back staff with maybe certain ideas to put an ordinance format for us to vote.  Is that accurate?  
>> No.  
>> There are three ordinances that are going on the special meeting.  One of which you can take immediate action.  The others you can vote because it is amendment process requires transmittal to the state that these are three ordinances which you can take, you can take action after receiving public comment.  There is action contemplated.  These are legislative in nature.  You don't have to take action.  You can say okay, I want these changes, come back at another meeting.  As far as public comment, because the special meeting is constrained to those items, there is no general public comment at the beginning.  There's no general public comment at the end, but anyone can talk about those three items were related when those items are brought up.  Thank you, Mr. Chair.  
>> Mr. Chair, if I can only add for the Council's anticipation.  Because of the nature of these items, and they have been both to your NRAC and PLDC, our staff presentations are little more robust than what you see on a regular agenda.  We are going to try to cover those as best we can.  I consider a special venues hearing because of the nature of the items.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  Is green stormwater and LID, is there already some discussion on the NRAC page?  
>> Yes.  There's been formal considerations by NRAC and your planning and land development committee on LID.  So that's why it put before you an ordinance format.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  So the public and each of us see that?  Can the public see that information?  
>> Yes.  It should be published early, potentially as early as tomorrow.  
>> I just wanted, Mr. Chairman, for the Council's benefit, I had already prescheduled out of town meetings.  So I'm going to be attending unless there is objection by Zoom dissipation in that special meeting.  Just wanted to make sure you are all aware.  
>> To state law still require at that meeting we had to seek approval that he can participate, meaning vote, virtually?  
>> Yes, for the special meeting.  
>> CHAIR BROWER:  All right.  That's all I have.  It is 1:16.  We just set a record.  Everybody have a good week.  
[Meeting adjourned]