##VIDEO ID:zEzPSWFKWwQ## e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e okay all right welcome back to our uh to our um Commission meeting uh we are now at uh public hearing 14 preset final fiscal year 2024 2025 budget public hearing Stephanie merley and Mr don Donaldson will be doing the presentation you have any remarks or I'll go I'll I'll let uh Miss merley uh open it up but this is our final public hearing uh once uh you adopt the budget um this will go into effect o October 1st and we appreciate all the hard work that the staff and uh the board here put into to getting the budget to this point thank you so good evening commissioner Stephanie merley director of OMB here to present to you your fiscal year 2025 final budget public hearing um so as part of the truth and millage process the board is statutorily required to hold a final public hearing on the tenative budget and millage rates between September 20th and October 8th of the July 1 certification of taxable values provided by the property appraiser so we are on our last step for the trim process so fy2 tentative budget the purpose the millage rates um proposed today have been advertised via the trim notices that the property owners received as a result of the budget Workshop which was held on July 22nd of this year and subsequently in the stort news on Friday's um stort news in the for the notice of proposed tax increase the board is required to adopt a tenative budget via approval of resolutions for each taxing Authority's rate in corresponding budgets the substantive issue to be discussed shall shall be the percentage increase in the millage over the roll back rate and the specific purposes for which adorm revenues are being increased so the roll back rate as part of the trim process the adoption of the budget requires the contemplation of the roll back rate which is the millage rate that would generate the same amount as the prior Year's Ador tax revenues less any allowances for new construction in additions to the valuation pursuant the trim guidelines the county is permitted to have a mill rate cap of a total of 10 ms for the countywide taxing Authority and as well as 10 mills for the cumulative Municipal Services taxing units or mstu and the proposed rates for fiscal year 2025 are all within the maximum allowable per Florida State statutes the following are the milit rates that were tentatively AB appr approved with the budget workshops in tentatively adopted at the first public hearing two weeks ago each specific millage rate roll back rate and corresponding increase or decrease over the rolled back rate will be recited with each resolution adoption the total new Ador generated if the millage remained constant would have equated to just under 28 million the County's actual Ador need based on the budgeted expenditure is amounted to 26.1 million which resulted in a reduction of the total millage rate from last fiscal year the ad form impacts are noted in our budget driver section and the corresponding um budget drivers that we've discussed um at the workshops and the previous public hearing for the fy2 proposed millage rates overall the County's millage rate decreased by 3 66% for the countywide taxing Authority and 1.11 7% for unincorporated Martin County with a total combined combined millage rate reduction of 624 per. fy2 24 to fy2 budget summary the following is a summary highlighting the changes from FY 24 to 25 the County's taxable increased overall by 10.04% yet the overall budget increased only 5.6% this budget includes only one addition additional position for the BCC which was the cyber security manager for information technology and 12 positions cumulatively for all of the Constitutional officers finally the total millage rate reflects a reduction from 10.05 to4 to 9.98 N7 so for your fy2 final budget hearing requirements as part of the hearing requirement the board must adopt resolutions for final budget adoption the resolu Solutions are not required to be read in full but must State the taxing Authority the rolled back rate the percentage increase or decrease over the roll back rate and the millage to be levied for fy2 the board must also call for public comment to comply with the public hearing requirements and this would be an appropriate time to do so okay did you say do we have any I don't have any public comment form so do you have any public comment seeing none excellent so the next step would be to read our resolutions first the mate resolutions and then the the budget totals you're welcome are you ready MH ready are was waiting for you to say yes let's go okay uh move uh item a taxing Authority Board of County Commissioners countywide roll back rate 61603 percentage of increase over the roll back rate um uh 6.77 final millage rate to be set at 6577 6 second motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all in favor I all opposed motion carries unanimously Item B taxing Authority Board of County Commissioners countywide fund total [Music] 287,213 7 second motion by commissioner uh Smith second by commissioner herd all in favor motion carries unanimously oops how did that get hang on a second sorry move item C taxing Authority District 1 uh mstu roll back rate 0.660 increase a percentage of increase over the roll back rate 8.18 final millage to be set at 0714 second commission motion by commissioner Smith second by commissioner herd all in favor motion carries unanimously move item D taxing Authority District 1 mstu 372 fund total fund total $372,000 99 second motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all favor all opposed motion carries unanimous move item e taxing Authority District 2 mstu roll back rate 828 percentage of increase over the roll back rate a reduction of 1.69 final millage rate to be set at 0814 second motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all in favor I motion carries unanimously move item F taxing Authority District 2 mstu 215,000 even fund total second motion by commissioner Smith second by commissioner herd all in favor I motion carries unanimously move item G taxing Authority District 3 mstu roll back rate 0377 percentage of increase over the roll back rate 7.16 final millage rate to be set at 0.404 motion by commissioner Smith second and by commissioner herd all in favor I motion carries unanimously move item H taxing Authority District 3 mstu fund total $234,500 all in favor all right motion carries unanimously move item I taxing Authority District 4 mstu roll back rate 0527 percentage of increase over the roll back rate a reduction of uh 1.33 uh final millage rate to be set at 0520 second motion by commissioner Smith second and by commissioner herd all in favor I motion carries unanimously Mo item J taxing Authority District 4 mstu fund total $2 14,390 second motion by commissioner Smith second and by commissioner herd all in favor uh motion carries unanimously move item K taxing Authority District 5 mstu roll back rate 0754 percentage of increase over the roll back rate of reduction at 2.52 final millage rate to be set at 07 735 motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all in favor I motion carries unanimously move item Ling Authority District 5 Ms to you fund total 370,000 even second motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all in favor motion carries unanimously move item M taxing Authority special district a d61 Hutchinson Island mstu roll back rate to be set at81 4 percentage of increase over the roll back rate a reduction of 0.50 final millage rate to be1 1805 motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all in favor motion carries unanimously move item n is Nancy taxing Authority special district a61 Hutchinson Island mstu fund total $392,000 second motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all in favor motion carries n move item o taxing Authority fire rescue mstu un Incorporated roll back rate 2.50 71 percentage of increase over the roll back rate 6.41 final millage rate to be set at 2.66 77 second motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all in favor I motion carries unanimously move item p is and Peter taxing Authority fire rescue mstu unincorporated 76 m75 , 742 second motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all in favor I I motion carries unanimously item Q taxing Authority countywide mstu unincorporated storm water and road maintenance roll back rate 0. 5572 percentage of increase over the roll back rate 4.95 final millage rate to be set at 0. 5848 second motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all in favor all opposed motion carries unanimously move item R is in Robert uh taxing Authority countywide mstu unincorporated storm water and road maintenance fund total 13 m468 1110 motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all in favor I motion carries unanimously move item s's in Sam taxing Authority mstu Parks and Recreation roll back rate 01520 percentage of increase over the roll back rate 5.0 final millage rate to be res set at1 1596 second motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all in favor motion carries unanimously item T is in Tom taxing Authority mstu Parks and Recreation fund total 4, 36,960 second motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all in favor motion carries carries unanimously item U uh non-t taxing fund General unincorporated fund fund total 7,4 8,494 second motion by commissioner Smith second and by commissioner herd all in favor motion carries unanimously move item Vias and Victor non-t taxing fund building and permitting fund total 10,782 th000 even second motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all in favor motion carries unanimously move item W non- taxing fund impact fees fund total $ 5,258 79 second motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all in favor motion carries unanimously move item X non-t taxing fund special Revenue fund total 29,6 11,524 second motion by commissioner Smith second and by commissioner herd all in favor I motion carries an move item move item Y is in yellow grants non-t taxing fund fund total 682,000 $371 second motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all in favor I motion carries unanimously move item Zas and zebra non- taxing fund other Debt Service fund total 8,326 th844c 385 motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all in favor I motion carries unanimously move item Double B non taxing fund utilities Enterprise fund total 113 M3 [Music] $839,900 12 second motion by commissioner Smith second and by commissioner herd all in favor I motion carries unanimously item Double D non taxing fund Airport Enterprise fund total $2,714 second motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all in favor I motion carries unanimously move item double e Golf Course Enterprise non- taxing fund fund total $3,458 49 motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all in favor I motion carries unanimously move item double F non- taxing fund internal service funds fund total 4,637 n92 motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all in favor I Mo um motion passes unanimously move item double G non- taxing fund trust fund total $880,000 second motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all in favor I uh motion carries unanimously lastly move double item Double H non-t taxing fund community redevelopment area trust 8,716 126 second motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner herd all in favor motion carries unanimously very good with that that was your last step of the budget process I just want to thank um the board for all of your support and direction this year um County Administration the county attorney's office for providing their their constant support all the department directors and their staff for working with us and and lastly my OMB staff of 11 um I appreciate this was my first go as director and I really appreciate everything that you guys did you did a terrific job thank you that's all I got for you it's over it's over all right and with that we are adjourned --------- ##VIDEO ID:kCxunt7Buws## e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e [Music] all right welcome back to our board of County Commissioners meeting we are on now public hearing number nine legislative public hearing to consider transmitt of comprehensive plan Amendment 23-10 Martin Commerce Park LLC a future land use map Amendment Miss love lady take it away good afternoon Samantha love lady growth management this is an application for to transfer to transmit comprehensive plan plan Amendment 23-10 Martin Commerce Park LLC I want to make note for the record that this was advertised in the newspaper on September 6 2024 okay this is a request by Martin Commerce LLC Commerce Park LLC it's a pro pro future L you open it all the way up please sure I know sometimes when you're watching at home it's hard to see it thank you kind of threw it off there we go so it's a proposed future land use map amendment to change 167 Acres from Agricultural and agricultural ranchette to Industrial the project is located um on Martin Highway in I95 this is the existing future land use map showing the Agricultural and Agra and Chet future land use designations and this is the proposed future land use um with the industrial L use sh this is um related to the CPA 2309 to create an exception for water and sewer services and to create a free standing urban service District in section 2.1 of the staff report two of the four criteria for future land use map Amendments have been met in section 2.2 urban sprawl eight out of the 13 criteria have been met in section 2.2.1 proliferation of sprawl four out of eight criteria have been met and with that I will take questions any questions for St okay applicant again for the record Morris Kady um senior partner with ledone Associates here on behalf of the applicant um and I'm in agreement with staff recommendation don't really have to go through a presentation but I do want to mention something about Urban spraw because I know some of the the applicants have brought that up but you know back in the 80s the the classic case of urban sprawl was Stuart West at one unit per two acres it's it's the classic example of urban spraw which usually includes a residential component you know it's I went and on April I submitted a very detailed response to the urban sprawl criteria from the March staff report and um and and provided a lot more data and Analysis and and what this project does is it minimizes the urban sprawl created by uh Stuart West because it provides services and potential employment you know that together with 7js that together with the with Pineland Prairie that brings Urban Services closer to Stuart West is that's how you combat urban sprawl and that's what we're doing with this step we're making urban sprawl less intense by providing services and employment near Stuart West and and Palm City farms for that there's a lot of other residences out there besides Stuart West and and so it it creates a better plan for that area because we're working from something that existed prior to the conf a plan with when you're dealing with Stuart West so and in 95 wasn't there you know it made sense to have this land agricultural but a lot has changed since 1982 when when this land was classified for agricultural use and and the the the extension of 95 and and the uh extension of water and sewer services are the primary components that make sense now to to create uh what we're doing today so with that I'd be glad to answer any questions on urban sprawl or okay thank you okay no questions for the applicant we have one um speaker form Donna calibri once again thank you for the opportunity my name is Donna calibri um eight out of 13 criteria for urban sprawl four out of eight I don't know what the magic number is but it doesn't feel to me that we have met enough criteria and I would also like to make a statement that I don't believe that anybody in Stuart West moved out to Stuart West looking for a job across the street we moved out there to be in that trative land in that in that Urban rural setting um continue on where I came from earlier I respectfully request that this agenda item be move to a time when the new board has been seated uh I'm going to go back to my Aral comments we are not blind to the fact that growth is here growth is coming we would like it to be thoughtful and we would like infrastructure in place Martin Highway cannot handle the traffic now we know that and if we're attracting local businesses to the um to the Commerce Park they're going to go back into town they're not going to all go on I95 so I request that the board work with the communities to put pressure on the state to get some work done on that road okay we need to widen that road it's coming I know development's coming but if we just sit back and wait for fdot to do it it's not going to happen so I implore you guys to lean on the state for that uh next item I talked about procuring Martingale Commons uh that's a 30 acre tract I know what it's owned for it's owned for um Expressway interchange okay Expressway interchange we have that means we're going to have a hotel gas stations really upsets the character of the area we already have that kind of um development at the exit on caner Highway we have it on um State Road 70 we have it at Gatlin and when bies comes we'll have it at intreo road we don't need to have that kind of um development on every exit on 995 so think about being creative buying that land putting a firehouse and maybe asking the sheriff he need if he needs a substation out west think about that that gives safety and protection for the community the residents as well as the business owners that are coming to the area um based on something Miss herd said earlier um I I just hope that when're when we have these freestanding urban service districts we're not doing a build it and they will come okay in the 80s and 90s we did that with strip malls build it and they will come and now we have all kinds of vacant uh storefronts so maybe we need a whole bunch more dollar stores and vape stores but I don't think so I don't want to go that rout and one point that was brought up earlier I just like to let everybody know that the homes in Stuart West that are being built now are2 and $3 million homes so we are people that are committed to the community and we are taxpayers so uh ask you guys to please give some thought to what I brought up and we do Ma ma'am your time is up thank you support that was sent to you your time is up thank you hey do we have any other public comment seeing none back to the board commissioner herd yeah this this uh location is far far far from the primary urban service boundary far far far from the secondary it's leapfrogging over undeveloped Agland it's completely surrounded by a Agland nothing nothing but Agland this is so inappropriate uh the comprehensive plan in 2.1 has four criteria for a future land use Amendment past changes in land use designations in the general area make the proposed use logical and consistent with these uses and adequate public facilities are available doesn't meet that one growth in the area in terms of development of vacant land Redevelopment and the availability of Public Services has altered the character of the area such that the proposed request is now reasonable and consistent with area land use characteristics doesn't meet that one the proposed change would correct what would otherwise appear to be an inappropriately designed inappropriately assigned land use designation it does not mean that one and the last one the proposed change would fulfill a public service that need that enhances the health safety or general welfare of County residents it doesn't meet any of their requirements to u to am amend the future land use map none of them therefore is not eligible for a recommendation of approval furthermore the comprehensive plan defines urban sprawl I won't read those criteria there are 13 of them it meets every one of them it's a classic definition of urban sprawl 2.21 of the compreh ensive plan is about the proliferation of urban sprawl once again meets all those the the 2.3 land use compatibility the industrial future land use designation is not compatible with the agricultural Parcels to the north south east and west then it's not eligible for a comprehensive plan Amendment time after time our staff has cited to to us the reasons why we should not amend the future land use map and yet here we are in March 4 March 5th of 2024 the engineering department said there wasn't sufficient capacity on the roads what happened to that and finally public comment was prolific and uniform in its opposition to this does that mean you're not going to support it I'm not going to support it you will regret if you do too I have a crystal ball and I know what the future holds for some K I don't have a crystal ball but I have a great memory of the last time my colleague had a crystal ball in this exact area didn't work out well for the county um obviously people will have a difference of opinion I do rely on our professional staff and I know that in March there was a different report and that the applicant it is perfectly acceptable uh appropriate for an applicant to receive a a report and a response from our staff and then address those concerns which I think they spent several months doing um I get the concept exep that it's it's further away from town but it's also a uh exit and entrance to Interstate 95 so it makes it appropriate for the average um citizen to think like is this an appropriate place for it I believe that it is I think that the overall benefits to Martin County at large are there in terms of tax base job opportunities uh ability to create economic development but I also believe that there are several very strong uh benefits for the people that are right there the woman that speaks the public speaker about you know expanding that roadway there is much less of an opportunity uh with our Consultants review of the need for a fire station in that General vicinity of of course the Stuart West Cobblestone residents want it need it and residents further in that area want it need it but this will help uh facilitate it and I know that they have not negotiated to say that they would definitely do it but I feel confident that that will be part of a negotiation uh that will bring a station there in the next couple of years much sooner than it could potentially have come on its own organically I also believe that there would be no interest in the Florida Department of Transportation creating a uh traffic signal there for up to a million dollars and I know that based on my uh assistance with residents further east on the same road that have been desperately trying to get that and uh canopy Creek a beautiful neighborhood is their entrance is directly across the street from a mulch and N Nursery where um landscaping and agricultural trucks pull in and out all day long so they really want a traffic signal and fot has told them repeatedly no and this applicant is saying yeah I will put that in as a benefit the concerns in my opinion for the residents of Stuart West and Cobblestone uh more so than what this applicant is looking to do today would be the potential of a church on your front doorstep and that's just my opinion everyone has one and um and that will work itself out and then of course the uh Highway oriented property across directly across the street on the road is a concern this particular part of the project I think as I said earlier is appropriate and I will be supporting it you be motion again I will motion to accept staff's recommendation now just one miss love lady you heard my colleague say that she doesn't believe that any of the criteria have been met you and your colleagues have reviewed this extensively and have professional experience uh and years of experience practical experience in this do you feel that uh the report you put forward is accurate and appropriate I will stand by my work and so will the whole department correct and all the others that reviewed it yes sir thank you so much okay I will also second it we have a motion by commissioner campy okay we have a motion by commissioner campy seconded by commissioner heatherington all in favor I all opposed opposed motion carries four to one with commissioner herd dissenting okay thank you public hearing number 10 legislative public hearing to consider transmittal of CPA 24-23 three LS Golf Club a text Amendment Mr Duan good afternoon uh my name is Clyde douan for the record comprehensive planning administrator this is a proposed text Amendment to the compreh to chapter four of the comprehensive growth management plan it is not site specific so it will be applicable anywhere the rural lifestyle future land use designation exists and I will go to the proposed oh I wanted to note the LPA voted 31 to approve this on September 12 uh 1796 it's a very small amount of text that's proposed for change why is it not there ah and there it is uh golf Cottages are currently permitted in the rural lifestyle future lenus designation you're allowed to have a maximum of 54 golf cottages and uh the text currently says that you have a maximum of six bedrooms per golf cottage for a total of 324 bedrooms uh the applicant has proposed to change this text maintaining the maximum of 54 golf cottages and maintaining the maximum of 324 bedrooms same as it is currently allowed the the change that they're proposing is to allow the each Cottage to have between two and 12 bedrooms instead of a maximum six on each Cottage they're also proposing to put a cap on the golf Cottages to be maximum of two stories in height uh we have reviewed this and we found that it has no uh practical implication in terms of public facilities provision or impacts to surrounding properties um this would be occurring inside a minimum 1,000 acre piece of property so it's highly unlikely that the design of golf Cottages is going to have an impact on any of the surrounding properties and so uh staff recommends approval of this proposed text change this is the second of three public hearings um the LPA had the first public hearing this is a request to send transmit this to the state agencies and the Department of Commerce for review it'll come back to you for an adoption staff recommends approval okay and the applicant does anybody have any questions for Staff first nope applicant he good afternoon um for the record Morris crady senior partner with ledone Associates here on behalf of Three Lakes Golf Club l LC and and and um you know just to give you some understanding uh um we have been very successful at Three Lakes or they have been very successful with memberships and what we're finding out is that there's a need for a variety of golf Cottages you know from two bedrooms up to 12 bedrooms there is one corporate member that wants to have a corporate retreat at the site so so this does not increase the footprint of of the of the buildings in fact it has the poti poal of decreasing the footprint you can do uh uh uh 54 Cottages with six bedrooms this allows you to do just 27 uh Cottages with 12 up to 12 bedrooms with no more than two stories so uh there is actually could be in some cases a reduction in the footprint um but in our case again we're we're looking to provide the needs or to respond to the needs of the membership and and that equates to uh multiple bedrooms as long as we don't exceed the maximum allowable under the current policy so with that I'll be glad to answer any other questions any questions for the applicant Mr Camp don't I waved and you looked I know I hesitated just people can't live in these Cottages they can only be for temporary use correct correct they're owned by the golf club entirely y okay okay okay with that do we have any public comment saying none back to the board commissioner herd yeah as I've said every one of these hearings where the use of of uh rural lifestyle is expanded it seems Limitless to me and this is proving uh my presumption that it's Limitless what this what we will add on to this ridiculous uh future land use and this going to 12 bedrooms for a guest Cottage that doesn't count is rubber stamping vulgar conspicuous consumption and I am not going to be supporting this this is absurd Mr putting 12 12-bedroom guest Cottages in Western Martin County five miles away from from the primary urban service boundary that is an urban sprawl yikes without rule lifestyle we'd be having the same conversation would we not golf Cottages are permitted in the agricultural future land use designation as an accessory to a golf course which is a permitted use in the zoning code and it has the same six-bedroom maximum has no limitation has no limitation no limitation oh no limitation on the number of cottages or bedrooms that's interesting okay commissioner Smith uh we did ask for public comment right we did I would move st's recommendation second okay we have a motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner campy all in favor I all opposed opposed motion carries 4 to one commissioner herd dissenting moving on now to public hearing number 13 public hearing to consider the adoption of an ordinance amending chapter 21 article 8 swimming pools spas and hot tubs General ordinances Martin County code regarding safety barriers and boy did I get an aall from couple of folks on this one but go for it good afternoon commissioner Sebastian Browski uh county attorney's office as you saw this is an amendment to um uh our ordinance regarding barriers around swimming pools hot tubs and Spas it's to include language specifically capable of those two words uh as the current ordinance stands these bodies of water have to contain at least 24 in of water um it was written with the presumption that any pool would have more than 24 in of water any Spa however uh residents have been known to uh drain these bodies of water to below 24 in and then remove the barriers around them as we all know it doesn't require much water to present a drowning risk so we are asking to include include those two words uh that would then require the barriers to be up um and thereby um presenting uh a greater safety um to our residents so I'm going to go first go ahead you have the chair so there's a state law that so my constituent asked why are we writing an ordinance that is covered by state law um we are able to um we are able to do so uh chairman we are able to duplication okay well that's fine and then two is there's other means of protecting it that's recognized by the state um as in these industrial strength uh pool covers that you can have 30 people standing on and all that that's not recognized as a in our proposed ordinance it's it's not enumerated from what I saw in this section of the ordinance but uh this section does uh state approved barriers if that is an approved barrier according to State this this calls for barriers that are 48 in tall but as uh now as you mentioned they do have these covers that cover everything if that's considered an approved barrier then that is an approved barrier okay it will continue to be okay so you can do that as well it's just that we're talking about the the amount of water in the body or okay I think I get it light could you try again old light could you explain it from the beginning you you kind of lost us at the 20 so people drain their pool down to have less than 24 in in it and then they take their barriers out so somebody could Lally fall in the pool and drown so that's why you're riding it would pop your pool out of the ground well it yes and but if it's dry enough then I the pool would stay in the ground and we all know that 16 in 18 in whatever of water is 6 in is enough bucket of water correct so and this was a way to skirt around the ordinance by lowering it be below that 24 in so our code enforcement officers were having a little bit of an issue as to this little gray area so this is just kind of to clarify it yeah commissioner Smith still looks perplexed so I'm going to turn his light off and let him talk okay so let's say somebody does that yes sir skimmer won't work the Jets are probably at about 24 in they won't work no I the pools basically uh is drained commissioner I mean this is just the rain water that's collecting under it or or maybe it's not completely drained um it's there's I I don't think the pumps are running at at anything below 24 in so why would someone do it to not have to have the barriers around there but that's kind of my point if you're using the pool functionally right correct you drain it below 24 in so you can get around having a barrier up mhm it doesn't work the pool doesn't work correct but a child could still fall into I understand that part yes sir but I I I'm are there 100 people doing this are there two I mean it seems this will be one of those things that'll be a headline in Tallahassee and they'll preempt us on this I just I'm I'm just trying to understand it it happens uh enough to where our code enforcement officers are having an issue with it and have asked for this they must be really busy Commissioners I think it happens more when somebody is abandoning the use of their pool um they're not maintaining their property this is one of the elements that their neighbors are perhaps complaining about it's a hazard had yet it is not a hazard if they keep a minimum amount of water on it probably bleeding mosquitoes and other things and they're just trying to get the the pool to be not a hazard to somebody's kid fall running into their backyard falling into an abandoned pool and having a means to enforce that there's some sort of protection to keep somebody from falling in to this whatever depth pool with a minimum amount of water so that was the I believe that's the sole purpose of this is so that we can at least you just said yes okay if it's abandoned pools right who is going to put up the fence we are the county abandoned meaning there may be a property owner that's living there they just don't care about their pool anymore and they're and they've taken their and their yard is accessible to the neighborhood and everybody else and we're trying to keep it keeping that's all sorry no I I just I'm I'm just thinking the logic of how you enforce something like this I have a pool fence around my pool I have a three and a halfy old I fully get it I I the concept I understand 100% the person who is doing the code enforcement problem that the neighborhood doesn't like we're not going to put a fence up and if we enforcement what enforcement do we have to force them to put up a fence at that point it's fines commission which we may never collect until 20 years expires and then we get to this whole thing we talked about a month and a half ago with what should be the value of a code enforcement 10% of the penalty or the property Val I just I get why you're trying to do it I just don't know how you enforce it that's the problem maybe uh um Miss Woods will put put some clarity to it I when you asked has this happened I'm here to tell you it has um it hasn't been in the past year but a few years ago I know there were at least at least one maybe two oven battles between two neighbors and the one neighbor didn't want to have his fence up and so he drained the pool down and kept the fence down and the other neighbor had grandchildren just as one of the Commissioners just prescribed and there was an issue of safety but they were able to get around it if they said that they you know that they didn't have water in it so it's it was I believe that it bore out of those kind of situations where folks just don't want to put their fences up and I will tell you that when I was actively dealing with code enforcement there are folks that if they get a visit from the code enforcement officer that's enough and they'll put the fence up I not with someone who completely do want to comply but more piece about it they're incredibly expensive right now I'm sorry they're incredibly expensive right now and you can only get black now you can't get white anymore not that that matters I'm just sharing with you having done this recently I just I'm sure it'll pass I just I'm trying to understand that's one case and the logic behind changing a code for one case that I'm just I I wasn't saying it was one case I was just saying I have been familiar with a case and maybe um I don't know if Mr dh's in the building I'm not voting against anything that's Public Safety so you got my vote but anyway go ahead commissioner campy I was going to say similar um can you tell us you mentioned it briefly this came up based on you you started this whole process based on like how how did you hear about that this was necessary from our code enforcement and correct yes our Code Enforcement Officers so they came forward and said we're having an issue can you address it you did the research yes came up with this language yes and uh you know I do know that 75% of give or take most drownings of children happen in someone else's yard they don't normally drown in their own pools they drown in a Neighbor's Pool and sadly in Palm City we've had a couple cases gentleman worked at Publix his son drowned while his wife was visiting friends in a Neighbor's Pool so if this is and look I'm not in favor of you know uh creating undo um bureaucracy and and rules but this is about child safety that you heard real ex life experience from our staff that's responsible for doing this and you're our attorney that crafted this language and it's about children's safety I make a motion to accept staff's recommendation second commissioner Hetherington need to even ask so if the pool is drained down completely and underlaid no water then you don't have to have the fence or yes as it's written if there would be no water um that well you would still need the fence because it's capable of containing more than 24 in of water you would still need the fence if there was no water in it well you know what anything capable of holding more than 24 in like it has to be a swimming pool a spa or a hot tub one of those three I just I think it needs work too I it it just seems very hard to enforce and do we have the manpower to enforce it and they've got so much on their plate I haven't heard any they're the ones to ask for it though commissioner Smith I'm I'm I'm trying to think if I should even bring up this example cu we shouldn't then years and years ago you weren't here you might have been too long ago uh we passed a cat leash law oh this is not dissimilar to me how do you enforce a cat leash law you don't other than if your cat's neighbor is climbing into the back of your convertible top which is what the example was which is why we changed that rule and it was peeing in the guys convertible top which is why we put a cat leash law in place good luck enforcing it not you code enforcement all right sorry did you make a motion did somebody second it m oh look at there okay we have a motion by commissioner campy SEC campy seconded by commissioner herd all in favor I all opposed oppos motion carries 3 to2 heatherington and Smith dissenting you didn't think you were getting a split vote on that wow not this morning Comm thank you 24% 24 Ines okay next up Department quasi judicial number one that where we're going here request for approval for the Third Amendment to the Reserve at Park Trace plan unit development zoning agreement including a revised Master fi master final site plan and amended Reserve preserve area management plan Mr Brian Elum afternoon oh commissioner Smith do you have any um qu if I do they're filed uh if any they've been filed I don't know if I have any but if I do they've been filed I don't have any and I filed that I don't know if I have any but if I do they've been filed okay um everybody want to stand and be testify Raise Your Right hands do you swear or affirm the evidence you're about to give will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth there any interveners no interveners no interveners has all the proper paperwork been turned in a copy of my work history in the agenda item turn in is exhibit one perfect I think we're good all right carry on all right thank you chairman Commissioners for the record Brian elen principal planner with the growth Management Department this is a request by lucdo and Associates on behalf of Dr Horton Incorporated for approval of the third amendment to The Preserve at Park Trace PUD zoning agreement including a revised master final site plan this proposed amendment is for an internal Road connection extension to connect to and serve as the main access to the adjacent Phase 2 of theode Royale PUD and an amended pamp included as a request for a certificate of public facilities exemption Mick V the subject site is located at 2320 Southeast Cove Road generally at the Southwest intersection of Southeast Cove Road and Southeast Willoughby Boulevard and Stewart the primary access for the site is located on the south side of Southeast Co Road at the Willoughby Boulevard intersection via the street named Southeast Park Trace Drive The Preserve at Park Trace PUD was approved September 28th 2021 for 114 single family homes and Associated infrastructure on approximately 97 Acres with a gross density of 1.2 units per acre by way of the Second Amendment approved November 21st 2023 two units uh the total units was reduced by two from 114 to 112 to accommodate the addition of common recreational amenities and the extension of a private road or Stout to provide legal access and utilities to phase two of The Cove Royale planned unit development the Traffic Division of Public Works Department determined this application satisfies the adequate public facility standard it is exempt as it is a development a development alteration or an exp mantion that does not create additional impact on the roadway Network subject property has the estate density two units per acre future land use designation and a planned unit development zoning agreement this amendment proposes the revision to the master final site plan and preserve are management plan to allow construction of a connector Road named Southeast Royal preserve way to the phase 2 area of the adjacent Cove Royale PUD the white dash line is the boundary line between the two different puds you can see that uh there's Phase 1 Cove Royale PUD which has been approved and under construction and in this area right here is where the connection is to be made the applicant made a request to amend the approved pamp for minor alterations of wetland and Wetland buffer preserve areas for the purpose of constructing an access road through this project that will connect to phase two of The Cove Royale project as part of this proposal an environmental waiver application was approved by the growth management director allowing 04 Acres or 1,800 Square ft of wetland impacts and 03 Acres of secondary Wetland impacts for the construction of the road this additional Wetland impact for access to phase 2 of Cove Royale has been demonstrated by the applicant to be minimal and will be offset by the original mitigation area that includes the creation of 1.94 Acres of marsh Wetlands by converting highly degraded maluca Uplands near the entrance of the community this Wetland creation was permitted with the approval of the original PUD and provided a surplus of mitigation at the time for the main access road to the project not so here's a slide showing where the where the Wetland creation uh is occurring which is up near the main entrance for The Preserve at Park Trace absolutely and this is a closeup of uh the Connector Road for The Preserve at Park Trace it's just this section right here it goes through the Wetland preserve and Wetland and Wetland buffer preserve uh the stub out was already approved in in uh the Second Amendment I also wanted to mention though that uh in the construction on the preserv IT Park Trace uh for the right of way through that area um they're going to use um retaining walls um the use of the retaining walls limits the RightWay width to 50 ft maximum and reduces the impacts through the Wetland and preserve areas significantly from conventional roadways with slope shoulders review of this application by the local planning agency is not requ ir ired and development staff have reviewed and found the DR Horton Incorporated application to comply with all applicable regulations and the comprehensive growth management plan as detailed in the staff report staff recommends approval of this application we move that the board receive and file the agenda item and all its attachments including the staff report is exhibit one and move the board approve the third amendment to The Preserve Park Trace PUD zoning agreement including the revised master final site plan and amended pamp that concludes the presentation be happy to answer any questions have any questions for staff seeing none Mr Kady good afternoon again for the record Morris Cady senior partner with lone Associates and this is one of those rare cases where I I've had two clients and in two separate Builders uh work together to improve the environment by eliminating the road in Cove Royal Al Phase 2 that was going to BCT in a large Wetland area so by working together and uh uh DR Horton providing access Through The Preserve at Park Trace we we limit that impact to 1,800 square feet versus what would have been a couple acres and that couple acres that would have been impacted is now going to be restored um to Wetlands on the co Royale project so coov Royale is paying for all that work and amending their pamp to accomplish that and you'll see that in the next agenda item is Cove Royale but the Reserve at Park Trace is cooperating providing them phase two access through their project and also allowing them to access the common facilities uh recreational facilities at The Preserve at Park treace so they'll be kind of divested from covero L PUD because of the access Improvement that understanding I'll be glad to answer any questions any questions for the applicant seeing none do we have any any um public comment seeing none back to the board commissioner Smith Mo sta recommendation second okay we have a motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner heatherington all in favor I all opposed motion carries unanimously next up Department quazi judicial number two request approval of the third amendment to coov Royale planned unit development zoning agreement c165 d007 including a revised master and phasing plan Phase 2 final site plan and amended preserve area management plan Mr Elum oh we need to stand and be sworn in again Raise Your Right hands do you swear or affirm the evidence you're about to give will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth do we have any Mr Smith I do they're filed if any they've been filed any that have been filed I don't have any they've been filed if any they've been filed okay any interveners no interveners um all the appropriate paperwork in the right place copy of the agenda item in my work history been tuned in and we're there take it away thank you uh chairman commissioners for the record Brian elen principal planner with the growth Management Department uh this is a request by lcio and Associates on behalf of KH coov Royale LLC for a third amendment to The coov Royale planned unit development zoning agreement including a revised Master phasing plan and revised Phase 2 final site plan the proposed amendment will remove the previously proposed pave Road on an existing man-made burn which connected Phase 1 to phase 2 alternative access is proposed to phase two through the private roads within the adjacent Preserve at Park Trace PUD included as a request for a certificate of public facilities reservation the subject site is located on the south side of Southeast Cove Road East of Southeast Grace Lane approximately 0.14 miles west of Southeast alt Avenue in Stewart The Cove Royale PUD was approved on March 26 2019 and is a two-phase project originally approved for 118 single family homes on approximately 97 Acres with a gross density of 1.22 units per acre phase one consisting of 83 single family homes and Associated infrastructure was platted on June 18th and completed post approval on September 16th it's 20124 construction of phase one is ongoing Phase 2 is approved for 37 single family homes this proposal will remove three single family lots from Phase 2 to accommodate the construction of the proposed access from the preserv IT Park Trace PUD and reduce Phase 2 Lots from 37 to 34 and as previously stated in the last agenda item the Traffic Division of Public Works Department determine this application satisfies the adequate public facility standards it is exempt as it is a development a development alteration or expansion that does not create additional impact on the roadway Network subject property has a state density two units per acre future land use designation and PUD zoning the applicate is requesting removal of the approved access from the West between Phase 1 and phase two over an existing man-made berm and the construction of an alternative vehicular and pedestrian AIS from the East that will connect Phase 2 of The Cove Royale PUD through the private roads within the adjacent preserv at Park Trace PUD the request for the alter alternative access requires an amendment to The Preserve area management plan for minor alterations of wetland and Wetland buffer preserve areas as part of this proposal an environmental waiver application was also reviewed and approved by the growth management director allowing 02 Acres of direct Wetland impacts and 02 Acres of secondary Wetland impacts for the construction of the road the purple dash line here shows the property boundaries between the two puds also visible here you can see where the existing burm is that will be removed it's a across the entire Phase 2 area of uh Cove Royale the following table compares the proposed impacts and mitigation using the Wetland rapid assessment procedure or wrap with a W which is a rating index developed by the south Florida management water district to assist the regulatory evaluation of mitigation site the removal of the man-made BM that has bisected the marsh Wetland and the creation of the wetlands in the areas the burm is removed as well as the proposed construction of the alternative access using retaining walls to limit the rideway to 50 ft maximum have more than adequately satisfied the mitigation requirements necessary for the approval of the waiver reconnecting the two Wetlands will improve the Wetland hydrology by making this Marsh sloth that continues South into the state park ho again the amended pamp adds the mitigation areas into The Preserve areas for this subdivision south of both of these properties is I think it's the Atlantic Atlantic Ridge State Park uh review of this application by the local planning agency is not required and development review staff have found the KH Cove Royale LC application to compl comply with all applicable regulations and the comprehensive growth management plan as detailed in the staff report staff recommends approval of this application move the board receive and file the agenda item and all of its attachments including the staff report is exhibit one move that the board approved the third amendment to The Cove Royale PUD zoning agreement including a revised master and phasing plan and amended pamp and move the board approve a resolution to approve the coov Royale PUD Phase 2 final cyle plan that concludes that presentation I'll answer any questions if you have any any questions for staff see none applicant again for the record Morris Cady senior partner with the cedon associates I want to thank Brian for very detailed and Well Done uh report that shows the improvements that we're making and this is this is Coulter homes part of the agreement and uh together uh you know it creates a tremendous environmental benefit and with that we we uh we be glad to answer any question questions any questions for the applicant seeing none any um public comment seeing none commissioner Smith recommendation second okay we have a motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner heatherington all in favor I all opposed motion carries unanimously okay thank you Department quasi judicial number three plat request approval for log lhe head Estates project loggerhead Estates l0 86- 02 Mr elim you're up again and so we need to stand and be sworn in Raise Your Right hands do you swear or affirm the evidence you're about to give will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth no interveners we have any um um what you call it expart expart I do but if I do they're file um I don't believe I do either and if any of they been filed I don't think so either but if I do they've been filed I don't have any I don't have any and they've been filed okay with that um would you please turn in the proper paperwork to the proper person thank you chairman and with that take it away copy of my work history and the agenda item has been turned in as exhibit one this is a request by Cree Consulting Incorporated on behalf of The Metalist Building Group LLC for approval of the loggerhead Estates plat the plat is consistent with the loggerhead Estates revised final site plan for a 23 lot residential development in an existing Church included with this application is a request for a certificate of public facilities exemption the loggerhead estate's final site plan was approved on July 14th 201 23 as a result of the review of the plat application minor technical adjustments were required to the previously approved final site plan for the loggerhead estate's project to ensure consistency with the plat in accordance with article 10 of the Martin County Land Development regulations just want to call attention to one minor technical change which is that the project name was formerly known as loggerhead Estates 2 and it is now known as loggerhead Estates project location Pro site is located at 1360 Southwest 34th Terrace generally on the south side of Southwest 34th Street approximately. 13 miles west of Southwest map Road in Palm City here's a the four page plat review of this application is not required by the local planning agency and development review staff have found the application to comply with all applicable regulations of the comprehensive growth management plan is detailed in the staff report staff recommends approval of the plat and we move the board receive and file the agenda item and its attachments including the staff report is exhibit one and move the board approv the loggerhead estate's plat and the contract for construction of required improvements in infrastructure that completes the presentation any questions for staff Mr Cree for the record I am not Morris Kady and a senior partner of L associ so uh good good afternoon Rick Cree Cree Consulting um essentially just here is a formality to you know record the platter get the plat approved by the commission we support staff's approval I know it's been a long meeting so the sake of brevity I'll avoid you know any further discussion so thank you very much for your kind attention half a day compared to the city of Steward yeah yeah exactly commissioner Smith Hing no did we ask public no not yet oh do we have public we don't have did I ask public didn't oh is there any public comment sorry seeing none commissioner Smith second okay we have a motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner campy all in favor I all opposed motion carries unanimously thank you very much have a great day okay department number one nine items office and man management and budget it require board approval thank you Stephanie merley this is this is a old one good afternoon Commissioners um Stephanie merley here um to give you this week's om item so the first item is a permission to apply for the FY 2425 Florida Department of Environmental Protection legislative appropriation grant for Martin County's Bessie Creek retrofit project um this is a requested Grant Award of $500,000 for the replacement of four roadway drainage Crossings the proposed Bessie Creek Culvert capacity project will increase capacity reduce erosion and reduce flooding in the Bessie Creek Watershed and there is no cash match required on this the next item is a permission to apply for the Florida Department of State Division of library and Information Services State annual state aid grant for libraries um the library department is requesting to apply for $ 76,2 70 for managing and coordinating Free Library services to Martin County residents and there is no cash match required on that item number three is a permission to accept the Federal Emergency Management agency or FEMA assistance to Firefighters grant for fire prevention and safety um our fire rescue fire prevention division is requesting um to accept $3,961 n0 um to launch a new project called safe which is smoke alarms for everyone um there is a cash match required of $1,548 that is provided from the fire preventions operational budget item number four is a permission to accept the FEMA um assistance to Firefighters grant for Staffing for adequate fire and emergency response or the safer Grant this is a grant Award of 5,897 538 over a three-year period to hire 18 additional firefighter paramedic positions to support fire rescue operations and maintain the high level of service requirements outlined in our growth management plan um there is no Grant match requirement um we will have to initially provide $100,000 in the first year for personal protective equipment with which is available in the capital Improvement plan and the fire rescue Chief is here to do a little presentation on that a little a little good afternoon Commissioners uh Chad Shuli fire chief Martin County fire rescue if you recall earlier this year we came to the board to request permission to apply for the FEMA safer Grant safer stands for Staffing for adequate fire and emergency response the grant is designed for Department to get to the National Standard for proper Staffing and response to emergency scenes and FEMA covers this cost at 100% for a three-year term so we're excited to announce that we have been awarded the FEMA safe grant for 18 additional firefighters and that's a total savings to the taxpayers of $5.89 million and we are here today to request permission to accept what I'd like to do though is talk about a little bit of the history of the Staffing shortage of what brought us here today to even talk about the FEMA safer Grant if you recall back in 2022 we came before the board and we gave reports about the increase of demand for the 911 services from the community it was such an increase of demand that we had to put additional trucks on the road to meet the demand to maintain the same level of service that we have today unfortunately we did not have the Personnel to staff those trucks so they were subsidized with 100% overtime so the problem that we had at that time was the fact that we had unsustainable overtime and we were trending roughly 3.8 million and we were doing something called mandatory overtime as well meaning if I had an employee that works a typical 24-hour shift and if I could not bring them any kind of relief the next day I would have to force them to stay an additional 24 hours which means they worked a consecutive 48 hours without going home so that was something that was we couldn't sustain for any longer so we came to the board and we requested permission to apply in 2022 for the FEMA safer Grant of 40 additional firefighters unfortunately later that year we came to the board and we were not awarded that Grant however we still had an unsustainable overtime rate and we still had a stressed labor force because of mandated overtime so we made a request for an immediate hire of 20 additional firefighters you were able to grant us that request we're able to get them on the street and we had a significant reduction with the stress on the labor force and we had a significant reduction in the overtime as well so this next slide I want to slow it down just a little bit f23 overtime was 3.8 million FY 24 after we brought the 20 on board trained them and got them to the street we've reduced our overtime to $748,000 that was a savings of $3.1 million in one year of overtime but the question is this You' reduced your overtime but you hired 20 people over here there's a cost of that so let's talk about it the 20 fulltime employees that we brought on cost $1.9 million so let's break it down I'm going to start with FY 23 overtime was 3.8 and FY 24 the 20 employees cost plus the overtime that happened that year came out to 2.6 my total reduction in savings is $1.17 million in one year to the taxpayers so it's an important slide I just wanted to mention because that was very impactful of the fiscal responsibility that the decisions that have been made with this board and our organization so next what I want to talk about is what's the benefits of safer what's it do for the organization and what's it do for the community so first what I want to talk about is the increase of firefighters on scene with less apparatus what does that mean if I take a standard house fire structure fire and if you're in the uh neighborhood and unfortunately your neighbor is going through that you would look down the street and you would see fire apparatus lined up all the way down the street and the question is why so many fire trucks to put out one house fire and the response has always been the same it's not that I need all the fire trucks I need the people on the fire trucks to put out the house house fire National Standard I have to assemble 17 firefighters on scene of a typical residential structure fire within 8 minutes of time and that's a standard that we're maintaining here but that's why it takes so many trucks however if we're able to accept this safer Grant I'm able to accomplish the same goals and objectives with the same amount of personnel with less apparatus meaning less emergency vehicles driving on the Road less congestion in these communities but let me move on to the next the single unit response for less serious calls if we talk about 911 about 85 to 88% of what we have coming in through 911 is medical if I staff our rescues which some refer to as an ambulance if I staff them properly these lower level medical calls I can handle with one single unit response over 90% of the time so what's that mean to the community well what means I can take these engines and these ladder trucks I can keep them available in zone so they are designed to respond to calls that that they were built for such as motor vehicle collisions structure fires train collisions and then hazardous material calls that's what these trucks are designed to do not Chase medical calls every day all day and then lastly I'm able to reduce the mandatory overtime because we have the adequate Staffing so in the next slide I want to talk about pursuing funding opportunities this is something that we're very proud of if I just take you back 16 years just 16 years and if I talk about the funding opportunities that we've been aggressively pursuing in 16 years of time we have been able to achieve $17 million in grant funding that $17 million we took off the backs of the taxpayers and I'm going to give credit where credit is due this is because of Matt Rush this is because of his intestinal fortitude and his attention to DET his attention to detail the application processes with these grants are so meticulous if you have one error you're completely washed out of the system but Matt because he is so meticulous with his approach has accomplished to receive $17 million over 16 years so that's a huge accomplishment for Matt right thank you stand up that loves it when I talking all right so in close hold on a minute his wife and kids love that meticulous attitude you know it's so weird like what you just said about that whole thing he builds his stone walls exactly the same like it like so there's a a theme Here of his there's some math invol with that he's meticulous but so in closing I just want to cap with why we're here we are here today requesting requesting permission to accept the FEMA safer grant for 18 fire Fighters at a total value of $5.89 million of it savings to the community and it's funded by FEMA for three years at a 100% And if you have any questions i' be more than happy to take them any questions good work yep commissioner Smith do you want us Stephanie are you g to do these all together or do you want this one se you can do this we can do it all however you like wait [Music] thank you guys okay thank you very much for your time thank you thank you that seems rather anticlimactic he was looking for he was looking for an emotion that's why I said Stan could don't go away Mr Donaldson is that your it is I had one additional item that I'd asked to be includ if you're going to take them all you you're not done let's separate sry yeah so they separate four and the rest of would you like to vote on the last one the last one safer last the safer Grant yeah I I'd like to separate that okay that's what we thought so make a motion I've got a couple more yeah but we're going to take this one now okay this was item four correct five five five four four four okay um I would move approval of the uh request to accept the safe for Grant uh of item four second okay we have a motion by commissioner Smith seconded by commissioner heatherington all in favor I all opposed opposed motion carries four to one with commissioner herd dissenting now you can we'll bundle the rest is that okay sure yeah item number five is a permission to accept the contract between Senior Resource Association and um the Martin County Board of County Commissioners to provide the 10% local match to the Transportation disadvantage trip and Equipment Grant this is an annual grant that we um we have with the Senior Resource Association it's to supply the local match funds of 10% in the amount of $ 9,474 total which is budgeted in the mo operating budget item number six is another permission to accept the contract between Senior Resource Association and to provide the 10% local match for their other um Grant the transportation disadvantage Innovative service or ISD development Grant um this is for the amount of $3 38,6 37 to supp to supply the local match for that and this is also budgeted within the no's operating budget item number seven is a budget resolution to accept funds received from the Florida Department of Emergency Management or fdem for hurricanes Ian and hurricane Nicole beach erosion um back in 2023 we were notified that we would be eligible to receive some FEMA funding from FEMA um through fdm for Hurricane related beach erosion expenses um because of hurricanes Ian and Nicole and throughout this fiscal fiscal year the county has receded these funds in the amount of $855,000 for um Nicole um no cash matches required because it is covered by the state's legislator sb4 waiver agreement the next item is a budget resolution to allocate the private contribution from the Sailfish Point POA for the Bata Beach Sailfish Point M maintenance project um the POA has provided the county $2,655 for their portion of the 2024 bataa Beach uh maintenance project in 2025 Batha Beach project monitoring and the last item on my agenda is just mosquito controls requesting the execution of their annual certified budget for arthropod control um every year there's an annual submission of mosquito controls budget to the state Florida Department of Agriculture and consumer services and they require receipt of this certified budget and we are just requesting that the board authorize the chair to execute this budget to the state and then Mr Donaldson has yeah some good news another item I don't know this is good news it is good news actually but it's it's not uh it doesn't come for free unfortunately and that is the uh Martin County Sheriff's office has entered into a settlement agreement on a previous inite medical provider armor uh to settle a matter regarding the catastrophic inmate medical bills um staff is uh and so this there's been an ongoing lawsuit between the the armor which we had discharged the sheriff had um Miss woods and I had assisted the sheriff's department and when they were going through that um uh it is I believe uh clearly in the uh Public's interest to settle this uh case uh it was uh uh in the order of millions of dollars of where this started um and uh they there is a um the settlement of 200,000 um and staff is requesting a budget transfer from healthc Care Medical fund reserves which is for Indigent care which is also used for inmate medical so we have that in that fund there so that would be for this um so it would not impact your other budgetary items or your general fund Reserve so we're recommending that you approve the the transfer of $200,000 uh from healthc Care Medical fund reserves to remit to the Sheriff's Office for the settlement cost commissioner Smith include that in your motion I I will if so Stephanie that would be item 10 10 m so I would uh move that we add item 10 to um Stephanie's Department one right um agenda item and that is to uh move 200,000 correct Dawn yes from the which account Healthcare medical fund reserves thank you and approval of the remainder of that agenda item less item four which we already voted on perfect second okay motion by commissioner Smith second and by commissioner heatherington all in favor I all opposed motion carries unanimously so we have reached the end of our agenda except for our 505 preset which is we have oh no scared me um except for public hearing number 14 which is our fiscal year budget uh hearing which is at 50:5 so you have an option Miss um calab would you like to wait till :5 or would you like to do 505 public comment now all right come on frequent flyer today well you know Don calib is for the record and because I ran out of time I'm not sure that all my comments were captured so I'm going to say what I was finishing up with on the last time um in the package we got today this I got a copy of the letter from the uh guardians of Martin County addressed to Mr Schilling and it talks about there was an agreement to complete a study of the Western lands I don't know what that means so I'm really not commenting but asking what did that mean what were we expecting to get why did it not happen so that I understand what this organization wants to do to see if I want to give them my support so I'm not sure what the county agreed to do as far as completing a study of the Western lands if you could help me I'd like some clarification on that myself so continue your your three minutes aren up so I'm done oh that's it yeah so I guess I have to go to Mr braa to find out no no we're going to find out right now oh okay good thank you we've been been talking about this and talking about this and where are we at with our western land study well in our conversation with you all we we did the growth management uh worked on just reviewing our existing studies as opposed to embarking on a brand new uh public uh relation where are we with all that so um staff will bring back to you a a status but we've had some presentations on different reports on where we're at but I'll have Mr sh come and and and give you an update on that we don't have the so we'll have an agenda item on that in the future yes what we're talking about so I have all of your information and I will make sure that somebody uh makes you aware of that when that actually happens hopefully it happens before I exit stage left so um I think Virginia is that her name Virginia she's waving her card up there oh oh name Virginia I forgot lever lever she do didn't our transportation disadvantage Department went in Statewide award yes I did AR you going to make a mo that's what I thought you were going to say No No Deal one in the whole state out of 40 different groups very hurtful while she's making her way up to the front um I did get word um and I forgot in this morning's uh commissioner comments keep coming um our train station AT&T is finally off strike our train station is actually Hope Sound no yes oh that's right the Hope Sound train station is uh scheduled to be moved October Sunday October 6th they will commence uh operations out uh west of hopes sown at 400 a.m. they should be into the US1 area by fiveish so um they promis me it's going to happen but uh there is a lot of moving Parts with this it's been postponed a number of different times but um anyway hopefully that is that's going to happen so with that said ma'am could you state your name and did you turn in a thing she did okay yes I did my name is lever Williams and I'm sorry for being late but the question is was this the last meeting to talk about the disadvantage whether or not the county would be granting funding for that or how where would I go to find that information now we're going to let Mr Donaldson answer that question uh yes so the the board at the uh um uh during our budget public hearing uh approved an increase in the Transportation disadvantaged uh that there was a request for um uh I think it was approximately 400,000 the board granted um a grant of uh of half of that uh with a uh request to revisit it in February and fund balance to see if the remaining remaining for could be done so there is partial funding of the program and we are working with our provider on how we can uh uh provide the their their funding from from now to February and then when we have a meeting in February to talk with the board we could possibly fund the same amount for the rest of the year okay and then so can I ask one more question that goes with that does the company that that that handles the transportation now they're preparing to prepare for next year's budget to see if the state will provide us the grant of the 400,000 or that has to wait or I'm I'm a little so we can talk about after this so not waste the commissioner's time but the the short answer is that yes the there is a goal to continue to restore the funding back to where it was at uh in the past to um continue the service at the same level thank you but that Grant amount expir yes we consumed the third year of that funding which is why we had to we had to add additional funding for half of the year to get us to where we are today right so they they yes so we're get getting into uh the goal is to get the state to restore the funding but there may be a grant cycle or two that we need to go through um as the competition in that area was strong and advocating more funding from the state is part of our goal with that said do we what do we do um we have one other item that we asked you I'm sorry since uh the at the end of the day you would ask for what happened with the city of Stewart regarding um um bright line Mr sto is here to um to at least tell you where the state is at and then um then perhaps we can adjourn until uh 505 for the um uh scheduled um final tax hearing good afternoon Mr Chair George stokus assistant C Min here with Martin County um to briefly paraphrase what what my recollection of what happened with bright line with the city of Stewart last night was the city of Stewart uh did give direction to city man manager mortell uh to work at a renegotiating a new deal with the county and bright line um there was concerns from some of their Commissioners as to relates to the number of times bright line will stop at the station there were some numbers thrown out such as $15 million uh there was no comment as to whether that number was too high or was it too low there was comments from the commission the city commission uh at least one said that they felt they did not want to cap the number of uh of dollars committed but asked Mike mortell to get back uh excuse me manager mortell to get back with County staff I have reached out to um Mr mortell um waiting to hear back from him I know that meeting went until about midnight last night as well as I am I have had conversations with brightline um but I also have not had a chance to meet with all of you individually to discuss what the your direction from the previous meeting um but I do have plans to meet with bright line based on what the city of Stewart has done and conversations with the city of Stewart has done at the beginning of O probably at this point at the beginning of October I'm more than happy to answer any questions or comments regarding this but that's basically where we are at that's good that's progress commissioner Smith so what I've heard from individuals that are involved in this is that um time is running out relative to us or whoever doing the negotiating this um and so um I guess I I guess we keep waiting to hear some clarity from the city as to what would the city accept or not accept or what is the deal what what deal um and at some point um and I had said this at the last meeting I we we I think are going to have to make a decision from Martin County not um waiting for something to happen because I from everybody I have heard from I I don't hear that anybody's getting any clarity as to really what's being asked for and and I don't know how that fits with what our original agreement was and and so on so um anyway I just my sense time is Getting Thinner Mr Donaldson so my uh what my suggestion is is that what staff will continue to do is that um your staff will work with the city manager and his staff to negotiate with bright line and continue to discuss with you individually and then collectively at uh uh at board meetings uh to try to um come together with agreement uh it's certainly our um um uh goal or and I think requirement is the city of Steward is a was our partner in this proposal and we're looking for them to continue to be a necessary partner to to um to secure an agreement so I think we will meet with the continue to work with the city manager and um and collectively uh try to negotiate uh a proposal with bright line and um hope we'll be able to bring something back to you that um a majority of both boards would approve Comm Smith and and somehow Don are are you going to glean from us how how long it will go on because I I I I do not I do not hear anything necessarily saying that we're close to an agreement we've reached an agreement we have an agreement and and if we're predicating the future of the station on an agreement between the city and us and bright line is messaging everybody that they're running out on time I I think we're we're we're we we we County still have an opportunity to um facilitate the agreement that we originally had in our settlement agreement as I understand it Miss Wood's right I mean that's I I just wanted to make it clear lots of people say lots of things these days we still have the 2018 settlement agreement and bright line still has an obligation to build a station somewhere on the Treasure Coast a year almost a year has gone by so they've got four years so to the extent that's the time that's running out but bright line doesn't I mean other than a self imposed deadline there's four years they've got four years times ticking for them to comply with the settlement agreement so from a timing standpoint at some point someone has to say yes or no we're going correct dire correct but it's on bright line I mean we're going to go to them obviously as Don said to try to to try to come to a resolution but that doesn't relieve bright line of their obligation we'll do our best commissioner herd yeah I um I'm still confident that we can negotiate an agreement with the city and with uh bright line because I think it needs to be a a three-legged stool um but also I'm mindful that there are two new Commissioners who have never held public office before and who are rightly concerned about voting to represent the city of Stewart's residents and I'm willing to give them a little time to get their a sense of of uh you know how government how local government works we all were in this position at one time and and uh it's it's not an enviable pos position to be in the first vote that you make as soon as you're elected is to spend 30 million bucks or not so I'm I'm willing to get to give them some some cushion um so that they can feel confident and comfortable that they're making the right decision my first meeting was to settle the bright line lawsuit so yeah I kind of I know the feeling yeah it's hard yeah yeah yeah so anyway um okay so I think we're going to um pause our meeting till 5:05 yes and um we'll see you at 5:05