The most discussions centered on the I2 zoning regulations, which determine the permissible uses for future properties applying for this zoning designation. With the existing zoning language considered too broad and potentially problematic, council members debated amendments to provide clearer guidelines and mitigate future issues. A critical aspect of this discussion was the potential impact on property rights and the concept of Equitable Estoppel, where decisions could legally bind the county if property owners relied on them to their detriment.

The council members discussed whether properties with applications in process should be exempt from a modified ordinance or grandfathered in, to avoid legal challenges. Opinions were divided, with some council members advocating for case-by-case consideration and others cautioning against the financial and legal risks of exemptions. The current I2 zoning, established in 2006, was scrutinized for its continued appropriateness, with concerns about the potential effects on neighborhoods and the need to balance safety and property rights.

Adding to the zoning discourse, the council questioned whether certain uses should be permitted by right or through special exceptions, such as personal versus commercial motocross tracks. The discussion extended to the designation of 60 land uses to be permitted by right, stirring concerns about the impact on neighboring properties and the need to ensure fair governance. The debate touched on practical issues like noise levels for commercial Motocross facilities and the implications for agricultural or construction sites regarding mobile fuel dispensing vehicles.

The council also considered the process for special exceptions, exploring the possibility of applying specific criteria to determine permissible uses without the need for public hearings. Zoning classifications were analyzed, with council members seeking clarification on the protections for residents in cluster and zero lot line subdivisions.

Further, the meeting addressed the proposal to move 12 uses to conditional status, including backyard chickens and fertilizer sales, and requested additional discussion on regulations for nightclubs, airports, boat docks, campgrounds, and other potentially disruptive or environmentally impactful operations. The council emphasized the importance of balancing commercial activities with the protection of residential areas and the environment.

The discussion of affordable housing centered on the potential removal of impact fees for ADUs, with council members expressing strong support for this initiative to foster affordable housing options. However, there was debate about the legality of such elimination under state statute. Infill development as a means to counteract urban sprawl was also a key topic, with the council considering criteria to encourage such development and potential motivations for property owners to annex into nearby cities.