Glynn County Board of Commissioners - Regular Meeting

Mr. Pittman also served his country as a member of the United States Air Force before continuing a life of service within his local community. And whereas through years of dedicated service, Mr. Pittman rose through the ranks of local law enforcement and ultimately served as chief of the Glynn County Police Department from June 2002 until his retirement in December 2003. And whereas throughout his career, Chief Pittman contributed to the safety and well-being of Glynn County and provided leadership to the law enforcement officers entrusted with protecting its citizens. And whereas Chief Pittman's decade of service, decades of service, reflect the important role of those who dedicate their careers to protecting others and strengthening the communities they call home. And whereas August 20, 2026 marks the 83rd birthday of William Robert Bob Pittman and provides a fitting occasion for the citizens of Glynn County to recognize and express appreciation for his many years of service to our country and our community. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed that the Glynn County Board of Commissioners hereby honors William Robert Bob Pittman and expresses its sincere gratitude for his decades of dedicated service and his many contributions to Glynn County, and be it further proclaimed that the glen county board of commissioners hereby recognizes august 20 2026 as william robert pitman day i set my hand today in witness of this chairman so thank you mr pitman And if someone could bring Mr. Pittman through the gate right here, and if our police officers who are here, if they would come forward. And I want to also introduce Mike Bitzkoff. who contacted me about three weeks ago and said that Mr. Pittman is under his care, and that today is his birthday, and asked if it was possible to have this proclamation done. And as befitting as it is, with the help of Chief Sykes, we were able to put this together tonight. And Mr. Pittman, through great effort, was able to join us in person. So we recognize you tonight, sir.

We would be honored if you'd have a few words for us.

I would give a few words for us. Can we give him a microphone?

I don't have a rehearsed speech because I never spoke with a prepared speech. I always spoke from the heart. I spoke what was on my mind. And I did it to the honor of all Glynn County citizens, which have all supported me and through my career. And like I say, I started out an airplane mechanic. and wound up being a chief of police. It took a while. I didn't think I'd ever make it, but I did. I tried the best I could to please everybody and to make everybody happy and come together. Amen. This is a great community. I love all the people in Glen County. I started to leave one time. I said, no, I can't leave. I've grown attached to these people. And I love it. And they show nothing but respect and care for me. And I can't let that go unsaid. God bless all of you. And thank you for coming.

do indeed grow deep in glen county and uh so we're we're privileged that you were able to be with us tonight officers if you would come forward let me present this to you sir and uh and i think i think you may have seen the poster outside and chief syke helped us get a photograph of you from the time but this is a another copy of the poster where the glen county board of commission is signing So we're so honored that we had the opportunity to recognize you tonight. Thank you so much. All right. I'm going to let somebody else go.

We appreciate you, sir. I'm very appreciative that the people came to see, say goodbye to me more or less. I won't be chief again. It was kind of a stressful job, but I thought I did a pretty decent job. I try to be decent to everybody, and you know they have that old cliche, you write somebody a ticket and you made an enemy. You give somebody a warning for Sometimes they'll help you. They will support you. And I've lived like that. It's kind of like the golden rule. And I stand by it. I treat everybody as well as I would treat myself. There you go. I love all of you for coming. Thank you. Thank you so much.

Would you take, this is Mike, and he's the one that started this and made this possible this evening. And I just wanted to say thank you for your effort as we move forward for a photo shoot with Mike. So we'll remember your name. All right. Everybody good?

All right. Counting down. Two. All right.

Thank you.

Aren't you glad you came? All right. Mr. Fox Chairman. Mr. Chairman. And I will say, those of you who came for this presentation, you are perfectly welcome to ease on out at this time. We're going to have a lot of fun later. You might not want to miss it, but you're welcome to stay or you can leave.

Mr. Chairman, I move to add item 15.5 to the published consent agenda to authorize the district attorney to reallocate $4,571 in budgeted salary from one vacant assistant district attorney position to another assistant district attorney position. to facilitate the hiring of an experienced attorney at a salary above the amount currently budgeted for that position. No increase to the total of Glynn County budget for the district attorney's office. I have a motion by Commissioner Hrafowski.

Do I hear a second? Second. I have a second to add item 15.5 to our published consent agenda. Any other discussion? All in favor, please raise your right hand. That is unanimous.

Mr. Chairman, I wish to approve the Consent Agenda for General Business with the exception of any item that Commissioner wishes to pull. Second.

I have a motion by Commissioner Hrafalski and a second by Commissioner Booker to approve the Consent Agenda General Business with the addition of 15.5 to that consent. Any discussion? All in favor, please raise your right hand. And that is unanimous.

Mr. Chairman, I wish to approve the Consent Agenda for Finance Committee with the exception of any item a commissioner wishes to pull.

Second. I have a motion by Commissioner Hrafalski and a second by Commissioner Booker to approve the Consent Agenda for Finance. Any discussion?

All in favor, please raise your right hand.

And that is unanimous. All right, y'all see how fast we moved through the first 33 items. We only have a few more.

Let's try to move it that fast.

All right. Our next two items on our public hearing this evening is to... We have a few amendments that we need to do, and then we have the millage rate that we need to receive. I think because of the number of you that are here for item number 35, that we will hear that first, and then we'll go back to 34. Any issue with that, Mr. Attorney? All right. So don't let me forget through before we get through with this. Item number 35, receive citizen comments regarding the proposed replacement of Chapter 234 of the Code of Ordinances, Glynn County, Georgia, relating to animal control. Ms. Alston?

Before I start, I would like to introduce our vet, Dr. Burke, if you don't mind stepping up here. Dr. Burke started last Monday, so she's not familiar with the ordinance changes as I won't, but we wanted to just introduce her to everyone. And we are very happy to have her with us.

Welcome aboard. And what took you so long to get here?

Thank you. I'm very happy to be here.

Thank you. We're very happy to have you.

OK, I did not present a presentation tonight because I did so at a special called meeting a couple weeks ago. And I'm sure most everybody has either seen that or read the new ordinances. Just to go over some of the key points, some of the hot items, the tethering ordinance. As you know, I'm asking for a trolley system for tethering. 35% of the state of Georgia has went to trolley system only, including Wayne County, which is just at Georgia, just down the road. It is better for the health of the dog. We get embedded collars all the time. We get dogs that have chains wrapped around their neck all the time where it has cut into them, causing the county medical bills for these animals. Also, it's better for the animal. It is found in studies that an animal with a single point tethering They have more anxiety. They're more apt to bite someone because they only have a circular pattern they can go in. Dogs like to pace back and forth, which a trolley system allows. You can look up different studies. There is multiple reasons. That's just a couple. They are very affordable, which is why a lot of counties have went to them. You can get them on Amazon for $20. And we have the volunteer group. We've spoke to them about raising funds or people sponsoring for people in the community that can't afford them. And for getting volunteers together that could install them for some of the people that are disabled or elderly and just unable to install them their self. So we're looking at ways to help the community members that might not be able to afford these things. As far as the licensing ordinance is another that I have heard some comments about that different questions. We are not looking to have any fees for the licensing when it is not going to be an immediate either. It is whenever your animal is vaccinated next time, you would bring your rabies, either bring it, mail it, or email it to us. You do not have to physically come out to Glynn County Animal Control if you do not want to. You do not have to display the license tag if you have the rabies tag. If you have the license tag, you don't have to have the rabies tag. We can pull up one by the other as long as you have one of the tags on the animal. So no fees involved. It can be done online. It's just a way of us having, we have a lot of people in the community. The owners go to the hospital or incarcerated or in a car wreck. Some reason we end up with this dog that we don't know any medical history on. We don't know if they've been vaccinated. We don't know if they have medical health problems. We get bite reports. This would allow us to have this information on hand and not have to track down an owner, spend time, and possibly never find out. If we get a report of a bite and we can't verify proof of rabies, most doctors are going to tell their patient to get rabies vaccines, which is very expensive, and a series of shots. So this would allow us, hopefully in the future, once it gets In effect, because this is going to be a slow process, some people get a three-year vaccine and they may not need to register or license it with us for three years. So once we get everybody in the system, this would allow us to simply check to see if it's coronal rabies without someone having to go through unnecessary shots and vaccinations. Those are the primary... Big items that I have heard some feedback on, on people that either love them or hate them. If anybody has any questions about any of the other ordinances, I'll be happy to answer any questions.

All right. Thank you, Ms. Alston. Commissioners, anything before we open the public hearing? All right. This is a public hearing. Public hearings will be held at 30 minutes for each opposing side, with five minutes allocated to each individual speaker. Comments are to be limited to relevant information regarding your position and should avoid being repetitious. And if your group might have a spokesperson, please allow that individual to present your group's position in the time allocated. And as always, your cooperation is greatly appreciated. So anyone who wants to come forward and speak against the ordinances as they're being presented, please come forward. State your name for the record, please, to speak against the ordinance.

Good evening, commissioners, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Austin, thank you for what you do and for taking this on. doing your best to keep our animals safe, and more importantly, keeping us safe from animals that shouldn't be roaming the street. I'm not opposed to everything that is in this ordinance at all. I just have some concerns. I'm also, I didn't mention that when I came up here, I'm also the district three commissioner-elect, so I'll be up here with you guys in January. We just need you to come around. Dane Hutchison. Thank you. Also, I am a hunter, and I have had several of my what will be future constituents reach out to me with some concerns about this ordinance as it pertains to working dogs. And one of the main things is the tags that are going to be required on the collars. I would consider that an occupational hazard for a working dog. whether that dog is a hunter or a working dog on a farm. We don't have any row crops in Lane County, but we do have some livestock. And some of the folks who own livestock, they do have dogs. These dogs are either guardian dogs or herding dogs. And they're going over fences, under fences, just like the hunting dogs who can get entangled in briars. these working dogs can do the same thing in a fence. The best case scenario when that happens is that that dog pulls the collar off of itself and frees itself from whatever it's hung on. When that happens, you have what was likely a well-marked dog with no identification attached to him now. So I'd like for you to take that into consideration. Also, one thing that has been brought to my attention is A lot of the people who are using dogs to hunt with, and they are residents of Glynn County, they have to have this tag on their dog. There are thousands of acres of timberland in Glynn County that are leased by hunting clubs from Florida. Those dogs are mixed in with our dogs at different points in time. And they don't have to have these tags. They don't have to abide by the same rules that we do. So I feel like it kind of puts our citizens at a disadvantage to have to do this when other people that we allow to come in here don't have to do it. I'll just throw this in there. If that dog is used for hunting deer, The state requires that animal to have a collar on it already with a name, with a phone number, and also with a permit number associated with the piece of property that they are being hunted on. So there should be ample identification on the dog's normal collar. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Hustleton.

Anyone else to speak against? Please come forward.

State your name for the record, please.

I have to have my glasses. I'm Shelly Bidlinski. It's B-Y-D-L-I-N-S-K-I. And I am the founding member of No Kill Glen County and president at this time. There are several concerns, and I sent you an email, so I'll just read the email so everyone in here knows my concerns. I am not against most of the ordinances. I just feel like we need to get together and tweak some of the points in here because we've got some areas that are either black or white and don't allow for any gray. And that part is, let me thank you for serving. We have helped to bring an abundance of changes to our animal welfare system since 2013. Literally thousands of dogs and cats have been saved, and Glynn County Animal Services totally revamped. We take pride in the work we've done to implement change. None of this has been easy. A lot of blood, sweat, tears, determination, effort, and money has been invested. And it's been a while since I've stood at this podium to speak to you, so that should also speak volumes that a lot of good things have occurred. Along the way, though, we lost our advisory board, Glynn County Animal Services Animal Advisory Board. That should not have occurred. That was about 10 years ago. That group was to oversee changes and updates and work on animal ordinances. While we can agree on many of the updates, it would have been nice to have some input along the way. I've spent 13 years in this field walking the streets of Glynn County. People know me as Miss Shelley when I'm out in the public. One of my biggest concerns is the tethering ordinance. I am not opposed to the tethering ordinance. I need to make that very clear. I feel like that as the way it's written, it will cause more harm than good. you can either, it's either black or white. As it is, you can either buy and install a pulley system, or you risk being fined or having your dog impounded, which could lead to euthanasia. That's it. If you're going to put your dog outside, you must buy one of these, have it installed, and that's the bottom line. You can't tie your dog to your lawn chair at the beach. You can't put your dog out on a stake in the yard for an hour after work. So I just want to clarify that none of us wants a dog to live on a chain. Many pet owners... who do not have a fence tie or tether their dog for a few hours while they work in the yard or prepare dinner. Most tethering ordinances allow a time of two to four hours to a single stationary point. This ordinance prohibits stationary points. Even a ground stake would not be allowed the way this ordinance is written. There is no gray. Let's think about and consider our population. Not only will those who cannot afford a pulley and installation be fined, they must also have their dogs spayed or neutered. Why are we only targeting this population? Every pet should be spayed or neutered. We have done a tremendous amount of work. I thank everyone in this room who has contributed to what we have seen happen over the past 13 years. We have gone from a 62% euthanasia rate at Glynn County Animal Services to the last time I did the data, it was around 6%. We've gone up a little bit in the past couple years. We need to understand that people in substandard housing or poverty love their pets as much or more than wealthy people. Love and the desire to care for a pet cannot be affixed to a price tag. Please deny the tethering as written and reconsider when amended as a life-saving measure rather than a deterrent to pet ownership. Secondly, let's look at the pet licensing process. And I think we talked about that a little bit before we did. Yes.

I'm sorry. You've hid your five minutes unless someone else wants to give up time. All right.

OK. I just have about one minute left. So honestly, I think we should have all come to the same table. along with the staff of Glynn County Animal Services, to discuss the concerns and to work towards solutions before being presented for approval in front of you. It's not too late to take a step back and revisit with input and feedback from the community. Thanks.

Thank you, Ms. Shelly. All right, anyone else who wants to speak against? Come forward. State your name for the record, please.

Yes. My name is Donna Maxwell. And a lot of things in the ordinance are good. However, I am against the licensing part of the ordinance. I appreciate the fact that it is a no-cost licensing. But it adds another step for people to have to take when they have pets. I realize that responsible pet owners are going to have their pets vaccinated. They're going to take care of their pets. They're going to follow the ordinances. But you have a whole lot of people who either aren't able to get to places to do things or they don't have the money to have their pets vaccinated or spayed and neutered. Glynn County needs to focus some of its money on either free or very low cost spay and neuter clinics. There are some that are less than going to vets, but Glynn County needs to focus on that and have something that is available and good for especially the communities where people don't always have transportation to be able to get their vets someplace. Also, I have a suggestion that when a rabies shot is given, then a microchip should be put into the dog. That would prevent the problem of them having to wear a tag all the time. They would automatically be identified at any place, which there are many around Glynn County, that can read the microchip. So that would solve the problem of identifying the dog. I know there's a problem with people when the dog is rehomed. Sometimes people don't update the chip, but at least there would be... a chain of custody of the dog so you could trace back who owned the dog. But if everybody knows that you're supposed to have the rabies, and if there was a low-cost way to get the rabies shot, many more people would get it. If a microchip is put in at the very same time that the rabies shot is given, then that would solve a lot of the problems that animal control has with finding owners of the dogs. I would appreciate... consideration of that suggestion. And I think that it would also make it easier for people to adopt pets if they didn't have to jump through so many hoops with the licensing and the other stuff that's in the regulations. So thank you very much.

Thank you, Ms. Maxwell.

Anyone else to speak against? Please come forward, state your name for the record.

My name is Linda Gayness, and I have a... Say that one more time and speak closer to the mic. Yes, my name is Linda Gayness, and I have a 14-year-old dog that I adopted two years ago from Glynn County Animal Control. I like the seniors. And my dog is put out on a tie-out chain. Not a chain, but one of the screws in the ground daily. He's probably on there now because my son is at home. He is never on that thing when we're not at home, ever. It's just because I don't have a fenced yard. So my concern is that if a police officer or one of my neighbors or some random person was driving by and saw him sitting in the yard, they could assume, they could say, well, he needs to be on a tether, when in fact he's a very well-managed dog. And so that's my concern, is that it's, and I think, I've seen dogs tied up on things that are this long, and it's horrible. It's absolutely horrible. But it does, it is, as she said, a black and white area. So thank you.

All right. Thank you, Ms. Gass. Anyone else to speak against? All right. Not going to linger. We'll close that portion of the public hearing and go to anyone who wishes to speak in favor of this ordinance. Please come forward. State your name for the record, please. And you'll have five minutes.

Good evening. My name is Stephanie Schaefer. On January 6, 2022, I spoke here at the Board of Commission's meeting about the county's humane tethering ordinance. I was convinced that once I explained what the ordinance actually allowed, it would be updated shortly thereafter, namely that it allows people to tie a dog to a tree on a six-foot leash and leave it there for its entire life. in any weather conditions, no matter whether the dog is two days old or 20 years old, whether or not it is spayed or neutered, or in good health. And it doesn't actually define what adequate food, water, or shelter mean. So dirty water, food crawling with ants, and a cardboard box as shelter all suffice. I provided three sample ordinances from other Georgia counties to the commissioners at that time. One was a tethering ban, one was a single point tethering ban, and one was an unattended tethering ban. I truly believe that providing all that would be enough to prompt change. And yet here we are, four and a half years later, with that same ordinance still on the books. But tonight, we are finally on the cusp of change, not just the tethering ordinance, but to all of the animal welfare ordinances in Glynn County. And that is a monumental thing. The current updated tethering ordinance moves us from allowing single-point tethering to requiring a trolley system for tethering. Do I love this ordinance? No. But it far exceeds what is currently on the books, and it moves Glynn County in the direction of accepted animal welfare standards across the country. Anyone in favor of leaving the current tethering ordinance as is either doesn't understand the horrific life it allows for the dogs in Glen County or has no heart. And for those stepping up in opposition of updating the ordinance so that Mrs. Jones can tie her dog Fluffy in the front yard while she gardens, shame on you. This isn't about that, and you know it. There are millions of dog owners in the country who don't have a yard at all and function perfectly fine. The hard truth is that not every human should own a dog, especially if they can't properly care for it or follow the laws. This law was not created out of thin air for Glynn County. There are hundreds of trolley system tethering ordinances on the books around the country. There are also many places that ban tethering altogether. Our current tethering ordinance is inhumane. Let's stop working so hard to keep it on the books. After the tethering ordinance wasn't updated in 2022, I started a petition to see exactly how this community felt about the issue. I have with me tonight the signature pages representing more than 3,300 local signatures from residents who want better protection for animals in Glynn County. To everyone who stopped to talk with us, listen to us, and sign that petition, thank you. I also want to thank Lori Austin, the Director of Glynn County Animal Services, for listening to my concerns about tethering from day one and for working over the years with me, the Commissioners, and the County Attorney to get us to where we are tonight. And thank you to the Board of Commissioners for moving this updated ordinance forward. I want to give a special thank you to Commissioner Bob Duncan, who sat down with me in June of 24 after we held a community action meeting about tethering. He listened to my concerns and then continued working behind the scenes to help us get here. So where exactly are we? We are on the brink of positive and necessary change for the animals of this community. Laws establish the bare minimum of what is acceptable. They're written for the lowest common denominator, not necessarily for the people in this room who already provide excellent care. We need laws that reflect the basic worth and dignity of the animals living in Glynn County. And if anyone questions why we need to do more, you don't have to look very far back. Just three days ago, our shelter was over capacity again. We had to rally every resource we had to keep dogs from being euthanized. I spent my entire day on that effort, hours and hours, and I know of at least 15 other people who did exactly the same thing. That's what this community has become. There is an army of volunteers working day and night to make things better for animals here. From the moment we wake up until we finally call it quits, that is the mission, every day. No salary, no days off, just a burning desire to give these animals what they deserve, love, dignity, and a chance at a forever home. But even doing all that still leaves us with a full county shelter on a pretty regular basis. How is that possible? Because we can't rescue or volunteer our way out of the problems here. We need better ordinances that get to the root of the problems, like unaltered stray dogs with zero identification roaming the streets and having litters of puppies. So when I think about the dogs who are still living their entire lives tied to trees on short leashes with little or no veterinary care, no enrichment, no socialization, and no real opportunity to experience the joy that a dog should experience, I have to ask, what kind of life is that? And more importantly, what does it say about us if we're willing to accept that as good enough?

Mr. Chancellor, you've had your five minutes. Thank you. Does anyone wish to? OK. Go ahead.

I have to ask, what kind of life is that? And more importantly, what does it say about us if we're willing to accept that as good enough? Change isn't easy. But we're talking about living beings who suffer every single day. It's our responsibility to make things better when we have the opportunity to do so. And tonight, we have that opportunity. I support this ordinance. The nonprofit I founded in 2024, Grateful Cats, Canines, Allies, and Supporters, is in favor of this ordinance. And we stand ready to help responsible, loving dog owners who need help implementing the changes the law will require. Is it everything I want? No. But it is movement. It is progress. And I would much rather make meaningful, positive changes now than continue another four and a half years under an ordinance that allows animals to suffer in ways we know are unacceptable. We've waited long enough. Enough is enough. Let's get it done. Thank you.

Anyone else who wishes to speak in favor, please come forward. State your name for the record. And folks, we're not going to continue this outburst. We're hearing things in a civil manner. And if you can't be civil, please dismiss yourself. Go ahead, young man.

Hi. My name is Charlie.

Charlie. Your last name. Charlie Cross. I don't want to make you nervous.

My name is Charlie Cross. I'm 11 years old. Some of y'all may know me as the community pet reporter here in Glynn County. Over the past two years, I've spent a lot of time at our animal shelter and with the people who work and volunteer to help animals in our county. I met a lot of dogs and cats. I've learned that many of them end up there because people didn't take responsibility for them. I'm here tonight because I think these changes are important, not just for the animals we have in our shelter today, but for the future of Glynn County. My generation is going to grow up here, and I want to grow in a community where people are treated with kindness and respect, a community where people take responsibility for their animals, and where pets are treated like members of family. We can't change what's already happened to some of these animals, but we can make things better for the ones that come after us. Please support these changes and make Glen County a better place for animals. Thank you.

Thank you, Charlotte. Well put, young man. All right, anyone else to speak in favor?

I'm Scott Henley. I've been a dog trainer. This October will be 10 years. I own the Canine Corner on St. Simons Island. I opened that up in November of 2020. I know quite a few faces back here. a lot of support in this room. I'm here tonight to show my support for this ordinance for many reasons. I've been doing this for a long time. I've worked with thousands of dogs, and I've worked with thousands of people. And one thing I've learned is there are a lot of people in this world that love dogs, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're good with them. To the other point, there's probably people out there that hate dogs. They'd probably be great dog owners. To see where we're at with the tethering law, it shocks me a little bit. Because I think what happens in this world is there's out of sight, out of mind. I think a lot of people don't really realize what happens. For the people behind me, they see the horror stories of what happens when we neglect dogs, isolate them, under-socialize them, and not structure them. And then I have to deal with the aftermath of the behavioral issues You know from fear reactivity under socialization to straight-up aggression And from what everything I've seen, you know, I think most people here understand reasonable tethering you know, there are a lot of perfectly fine scenarios where having a dog temporary tethered is not a inhumane. It's actually sometimes beneficial depending on what you're doing. But a long-term solution of a dog's life living on a six-foot lead is not a life for a dog. And over time, I see that that causes so many issues in the dog's life. The fact that we don't think about that dogs have a natural response to fight or flight, and if they're stuck on a lead and they can't flee, there's a high chance that they might choose to fight. This whole thing, outside of me being a dog trainer, is also personal to me. When I was four years old, I got bit in the face by a bull mastiff, and he ripped off this whole side of my face. It was a dog tethered to a chain all day. I watched the dad of that house yell at him, beat him. He was scared of the world, and I went up to him and I was four, wanted him to like me, and I tried to pet him, and he jumped up and bit me in the face, and here we are today. So I understand what tethering dogs does long term. I don't understand how we could ever think that that's reasonable. And also, you know, the other things we haven't talked about in the ordinance, the spay and neutering, the menacing dogs, giving animal control more power to handle nuisance dogs that are potential threats, to have preventative measures opposed to dealing with the aftermath of a kid getting bit by a tethered dog. I'm full support of that. And yeah, I lost my train of thought, but that's all I wanted to say for now. So thank you.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Haynes. Anyone else who wishes to speak in favor, please come forward. State your name for the record, please.

Hi. My name is Amy Buchan. This is my second time coming for local county things. We appreciate your time. I did take the time to print. out the whole petition today, ordinance, and talk about it with coworkers. And the one thing that we kept bringing back up was accountability, right? We have accountability in schools, jobs, et cetera. To just touch just a hair on what this gentleman just said. People need to be held accountable for their dogs, whether they're good dogs or bad dogs, good behaviors, bad behaviors. That's what that petition's asking. Be responsible for your animals. If you can't, there's a consequence. It's going to cost you once, twice, three times. Then you don't deserve that animal. Well, would we do the same thing with a drunk driver? Accountability. Somebody has to be killed once, twice, three times before we take their license. So some of the details, the tethering is huge. That's a big part they've been working on for years. But there are other great, strong parts in there that hold just as much merit. So in addition to the behaviors of the dogs that have been abused, that we as a community try to work together to bring them to new homes so they can learn new lessons. There also has to be accountability to those who do not play by the rules. These are the same people sometimes who steal from the stores. Nothing happens. The same people who run through the stoplights all the time. Nothing happens. Well, here's a chance to try to make people more accountable for their belongings and their property. Just like if we didn't pay our taxes, you might not have your home. Don't want to pay the ordinances on your dog or do the basic training or the basic shots and inoculations, then you don't have the right to that animal anymore, especially if we have to keep taking care of them for them. I can't send my kid to daycare and expect it to be free. I can't expect to send my kid to school and let him get him in trouble all the time. And there are not many consequences. So I just want you to look at it from that point of view, please. Thank you.

All right. Anyone else to speak in favor? State your name for the record, please.

My name is Vicki Green, G-R-E-E-N-E. I moved here to Glen County over 20 years ago. I would say at least 15 of that I've been coming to various meetings about getting proper treatment of the animals in this county. We have come a long way, but still we are here again. We need spay-neuter programs. They have them in other counties. If dogs are picked up off the street, they should be spayed or neutered. If they're not, if they want the dog back and they have to pay a fine, and the fine is a lot higher if they don't agree to let them spay and neuter the dog. My other response is to the gentleman that came up that it plans to be a county commissioner. He was talking about the hunting dogs. There is no excuse for those dogs to not be microchipped. If they can't wear a collar or a tag, then they should be required to have these animals microchipped so they could be identified as well. What happens is at the end of hunting season, ask anyone in animal control how many dogs turned up turn up dumped because they're no longer useful as a hunting dog. So using the excuse of the dog being a hunting dog is no excuse for not taking care of your animals. They need to be spayed and neutered. They need to be microchipped. Same thing with backyard breeders. We don't have enough controls for these people that have oops litters all the time and then expect everybody else to take responsibility. That is why it is so important, if you want all of these things to work, the first thing is to make people, like they said, accountable for getting their dogs spayed or neutered, and microchipped. There are plenty of microchip available where the rescue groups will do it for a small fee or even for free. So there is no excuse that they can't afford it.

All right. Anyone else? Can you speak in favor? Anyone else to speak in favor? All right. We will close the public hearing. Commissioners, we're back to you.

Comments? Mr. Chairman, yeah, I have some comments. This is one of the first public hearings, and I'm glad we had this tonight, but I couldn't really determine the folks that were for it or against it were all speaking the same language. There was parts of this ordinance that they didn't like, and there was parts of the ordinance that they do like. And with that being said, there are good pet owners, and then there are not good pet owners. And I can see that everyone here is a good, responsible pet owner. Not all dogs or animals are pets, as Mr. Hutchison explained. Some dogs are working dogs. Some dogs are hunting dogs. They're not sleeping in the bed with their owners at night, or they're not in the backyard or playing with their kids and things such as that. But when we pass an ordinance such as what's been presented tonight, that ordinance will be a law in glen county and it will apply and it has consequences i feel that as a commissioner that there is some tweaking that needs to be done with this ordinance uh... because some of the folks that are here that were in favor of it they have problems with some of the things in this ordinance and then there were people that were speaking against it that like some of the things in the ordinance but they were speaking on on the other side of that fence but there was problems that they were having with it as well So with that being said, everybody here has a different love for an animal. I know that I do. Some of them are like family members, and then some of them are for their children to have companions, and some of them for a purpose. whether it's a support animal or a hunting animal or things such as that. One lady spoke about they all need to be spayed and neutered. Well, I disagree with that part of it. For people that want to breed their animals or want to have longevity with that particular breed, they don't want their animals spayed or neutered. They want to breed their animals, and I respect that. So I see problems with this ordinance as it is presented on the surface. We had a work session a while back over at the Harold Pate building where our director of animal control came before us with this ordinance. But I saw no one there speaking in favor or adding or contributing to what they thought should or should not be part of the ordinance or what should not be in the ordinance. I see y'all here tonight, but I didn't see y'all here when we were having the work session. And it was advertised. But with all those things that I've just said being said, what I would like to see is that we could defer this and we could tweak this and we could find out some of the things that need to be removed from it and some of the things that we need to keep in it. Because once we approve it, and if we approve it tonight, it is what it is. And there's some things in there that y'all don't like. And there's some things that you do like. But if we approve it tonight, the things that you don't like are going to be in there. And y'all are not going to be happy. So with that being said, I would like to see if we would be able to defer this until another meeting so that we can work out some of these tweaks. And maybe we could even have another work session and that y'all could come and contribute your comments and your thoughts. And you can do it in writing. You can do it online. We have a website of the things that y'all do like and things that you don't like. And we could look at those and study those. That's what we're here for. So that's my comment. Okay. And I don't know if any other commissioner has anything else to comment before I would make a motion.

Well, we'll take up the motion in item number 36.

Okay.

All right.

All right.

Any other comments? Go ahead.

I'll have to offer this. We've had good input tonight. I think it's very good to have citizen input. It's been a long road to get even to this point to queue this up. This ordinance as proposed, based on comments from several of you, I've written quite a bit of notes from each speaker, is not the panacea of what everyone wants. No ordinance is. But this one is better than the one that's on the books now. I will submit to you, for those who have some heartburn with it, that there are relatively minor changes that can be made. If we choose to pass this ordinance tonight, uh... we we've had some discussions it wouldn't go into effect for at least a month or more in that period of time we could make those minor adjustments examples are uh... for the working dogs and hunting dogs i happen to be a hunter I also have a working dog. My son has a working dog. I can appreciate what Commissioner Leck offered. Dane Hutchinson provided to us about the issues. And I had a conversation yesterday with him. It is a working hazard for a dog to have to wear tags because they can get hung up, whether they're a cattle dog, a sheep dog, or a hunting dog. So that's an easy adjustment that can be made. In terms of spade and neutering, I think that's going to take a longer discussion. That won't make the next ordinance. in my view without a lot of discussion. The other is in terms of single-point tethering, we have that now, but it is not adequate at all for an animal to be tethered on a six-foot tether. The proposal, while it doesn't meet what some of you want, we can get there, but the proposed ordinance is far better than the ones that are on the book now. I'm imploring my peers here on the Commission to consider this, that we could pass this, and then we could update it very quickly in the next few meetings. Thank you, Chairman.

All right. Commissioner, any other comment?

Yeah, Mr. Chairman, just a couple of comments. You know, listen to everyone. There was no one that really come out and said, even on the side that supports it, you know, it's not perfect. And we know we're not going to get perfect, but what we need is perfect for Glynn County. And the two issues I heard the most was the hunting, the licensing, and the tethering. I have three rescues, two cats and a dog. And the neighbor has a dog as well. And we've got two tethering setups. One's a trolley system. And one is this screw in the ground. and he's got a 60 foot runner. And we just use that for our one dog, hook him up inside, let him run around. He's got a good perimeter there. We don't leave him out there in the heat. It's basically go out and potty and come back in. He's an inside dog. The other dog is on a tether that we are talking about tonight. And at least once a week, I have to go and free that dog up. And it's on a tether that runs from here to that back wall because it's run off a palm tree and it's run off an oak tree. And the oak tree has a bunch of little scrub oaks around it. And he gets in a bad way. Now, does that mean we could take that trolley and put it probably appropriately somewhere else in the yard? Yeah. But for the setup that we have, the trolley doesn't work, but the screw in the ground does. Why I'm saying all that is that there is a... We've been working on this, Shelly and others that I've known and was introduced to six years ago. And I want to stop right here. I want to thank each and every one that volunteers at animal services daily. The dogs and cats that y'all saved over the years is probably mind-blowing. Shelly, you probably have a number. Stephanie, y'all would know. Y'all's hard work, you don't get paid for it. But back to my point is, I'm leaning toward what Commissioner Totson said. And to Commissioner Duncan, Let's get what's best for Glynn County, not what's best for Brantley, Wayne County, Atkinson County. Let's work on what's best for Glynn County. We're all not going to feel good about it when we walk away, but we're going to say, hey, it's a lot darn better than what we got. And if we can defer this tonight, let staff look at it a little bit more. We've heard y'all tonight. We've heard a lot of good ideas, a lot of good suggestions. And I believe we would be, as a board, let's defer this thing. Let's discuss it some more. Let's dig down into it. We just got the finished product of this a couple of weeks ago. It's been a work in progress, back and forth. And staff has done a tremendous job getting us to this point. And I thank Lori and her staff for getting us to this point. But I think we honestly need to look at deferring this. And let's take a look at a couple of issues that was brought up. Let's get it right, what's best fit for Glynn County. 95, 96, 97% of the Glynn Countians are like y'all. They're great dog and cat owners. It's that damn 3% out here that screw it up for everybody. Let's be honest. You know, every one of y'all in here, if y'all were the only ones that owned dogs and cats in Glynn County, we wouldn't need an ordinance. It'd take care of itself. But we always have to take care of that small percentage that just does not care. And that's a darn shame. And I hate it for the dogs and cats. I mean, trust me. I put my German Shepherd in the trunk of my car for 10 minutes. I unlock it. He'll be happy to see me. I put my wife in the back of that car for 10 minutes. She's going to come out of there with a gun. That's how much a dog and a cat will love you.

I don't know, Commissioner Clark, if I would have said that right out loud.

Anyway, you got my point. I'm a little rough around the edges, but I appreciate it, Mr. Chairman.

I want to make a comment, too. First of all, and Lori, after she came to the shelter, we had a lot better outcome than we had prior to that. I think most everybody will agree. And thank God we got a vet. We have been trying to do that for the five and a half years I've been on the commission. And thank you, young lady. You just don't know. But I've heard everything that was said. There's some hard lines. There's some soft lines. And I think maybe the hunting dogs can be chipped. You know, but I think Shelly's right. We need to come together and work this thing through where it works for, it's not going to work for everybody. And like Commissioner Clark said, there's people that don't care. They go adopt a dog, they turn it loose, and you know, it's... I got bit by a dog when I was probably six years old, and it was my fault. I got down in his face, and he didn't want me there. It didn't kill me, but it made me respect him. So I think I'm kind of in agreement with the others, but I just want to thank Lori and the shelter. I'm good.

All right. And because we had the public hearing on this item first, I think I'm going to stay out of order and take on item number 36 next, and then we'll back up to 34. and that if we vote to defer this, that we put a time limit on that deferment. That we also ask you guys to participate with us as we work this through. That's what I would like to see. And I would like, Miss Lori, if it's possible for the people that spoke tonight or others that might want to be part of a small, small workforce that can help. Too many in the room, you get nowhere. But four or five in the room, along with staff, I think we can tweak out some of these differences. That's my personal opinion.

Yeah, I'm wondering, how long do you think you need? Please, please. I know how much work's been put into this, Lori.

So I don't want to negate what anybody does for the community. I know Kilglen County has done tremendous for us. I sent them an email in June of 2025 asking for their input on the Chatham County ordinances that I based these off of. I sent an email to our volunteer group, same thing. I used the feedback I got and did tweak some of the ordinances. And as far as the tag ordinance goes, there is currently an ordinance that says if your animal's off your property, it's required to have an identification tag on it. The only difference is my ordinance says it has to have either a rabies or license because we can pull up the identification by the number. So there's not a big change in some of the ordinances we have now. We don't. enforce too much the identification tag, but there is an ordinance currently that says an animal has to have a tag on their collar if they're off the owner's property. So I just wanted to bring up those couple of things that I have heard tonight that

And I hear you.

And address that.

As far as the tagging goes, could that tag be a plate that's attached to the collar? It could.

And actually, we're working on logistics on the licensing tag. Somebody sent me a picture of one that requires two grommets, so it would be attached to the collar. I haven't looked at pricing on them yet, because this has just happened within the last couple of days.

This is the kind of tweaking, not... Starting over, this is the kind of tweaking that I think we could add that language to clarify some of the misconceptions, some of the misunderstandings. And Lori, again, let me add to what they said. When I came on the commission, animal services was probably the most frequent call that we got. And it's almost zero now for the vast majority. And that's a testament to what you have done, your staff has done for the animal services, for the new facility, for the volunteers that come. You just can't say enough about from where we've come. Yes, we still have a ways to go, but we will get there. Thank you, Lori. We're going to take up item number 36, consider adoption of an amendment to the Code of Ordinances, Glynn County, Georgia, to replace Chapter 2 through 4, titled Domestic Animals, with a new Chapter 2 through 4, entitled Animal Control and for Other Purposes. So, commissioners, entertain motion.

I entertain a motion that we defer this. I don't have a particular date and time because I want to give Director Robson time to be able to have some communication from these folks. And you don't have to come down to Animal Control to do that in person. We have a website. You can voice your ideas or your suggestions on the website and this public record.

And Commissioner Tosseson.

I didn't mean to get out of that.

I don't have a right to amend your motion, but for the people that think we will kick it down the road forever, I would love to put a time constraint, 30 days or something like that.

I would want to give her more time than that. Please, please, folks.

I would like to give her 45 days.

I'd like to give her 45 days. Second meeting in September. which will be about a month.

Right now, Commissioner Tosteson has the floor, except for my interruption.

The second meeting would be a month from now, basically. I would like to give it two more weeks after that. I would like to move it to the first meeting in October.

If you'll put that in the form of your motion.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion that we defer this to the first meeting in October, which would give y'all time to put some thought into this. Y'all be able to read the ordinance as it stands, and I know that most of you have, and then be able to contribute your suggestions or your ideas

to the to the website so that therefore uh... uh... i'm sorry i got out there again but uh... uh... please forgive me but uh... to the to the uh... first meeting in october second have a motion by commissioner tossison second by commissioner clark to defer item number thirty six our animal services code of ordinance change to the first meeting in october any other discussion

Yes, I want to make a point that we have had public comments tonight, so we won't be having another public comment at that point because we did it tonight. We will just be bringing it up as the ordinance changes or the tweaking so that we can just vote on it.

And that would make it imperative that those of you who wish to make comments and help tweak, it's incumbent upon you to have that input before October 1st. Commissioner Duncan, I believe you were about to speak.

Thank you, Chairman. I take an opposite view to that. No disrespect to my peers, but I think we can pass the ordinance as proposed and make the tweaks before October 1st to include the input that we've had tonight. And that would eliminate a bad ordinance that we currently have on the books. That's my view. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, we do have a motion and a second. Yes.

Any other discussion? All in favor of deferring until first meeting in October, please raise your right hand. That is six in favor, those against. One against. All right.

Mr. Chairman, I'd offer a motion for reconsideration, please.

Do I have a second? Mr. Dutton, that failed to get a second.

Thank you.

All right. We're about to finish, but those of you who were here for the animal ordinance only, if you wish to dismiss yourself, thank you for coming tonight. Thank you for the tone in which you spoke. And if you could exit quickly so that we can finish up.

Thank you.

Have a good evening.

All right. We will get back at it. Having gone to school 100 years, I couldn't go one through 36 in order. So we are back to number 34.

This is a public hearing to receive comments on the 2026-27 military. We have Ms. Munson with us, and supporting documentation was updated for a correct minor error on August 19th. So, Ms. Munson, we'll turn it over to you for a quick summary, and then we'll open the public hearing.

All right. Good evening. This is the second public hearing on the adoption of the 2026 millage rate. My name is Tamara Munson. I'm the chief financial administrative officer for Glynn County. After tonight, we have one more public hearing on the adoption of the millage rate, which will happen on August 27th at 2 p.m. in the Pate Building in room 224. Okay.

Got a bad battery?

Maybe. Okay. I think I might be able to use the mouse here.

I think I can.

Okay. All right. This is an overview of our annual budget cycle and millage rate cycle. I'm not going to go through all of this. This presentation is online, so anyone that's interested in reading all the details, It is available. But the point of this slide, why this matters, is that we adopt our budget in June before the property tax digest is delivered. So all of the property tax revenue in the adopted budget is an estimate based on preliminary digest numbers that come from the tax commissioner. So the state requires that the millage rate is adopted at this time of the year. which does not align with our fiscal year, so we have to adopt our budget first. What is being proposed is that we hold the general fund millage rate at 3.864 mils, which is the same rate as the last three years. Since 2021, we have reduced our millage rate by 20.5%. We do have a calculated rollback rate, which I'll explain a little bit more on another slide of what that means, but of 3.623 mils, which is 0.241 mils below our proposed rate. Currently, with our adopted budget and keeping the millage rate the same at 3.864 mils, we are projected to be short in our general fund by approximately $238,000. The Georgia Truth in Taxation Law does require that we advertise a property tax increase when we are not adopting the rollback rate. This slide is just a slide for citizens on how they can calculate a millage rate and how they can take their home's fair market value and determine what they're paying based on a millage rate. Our proposed 2026 millage rates by tax district. So 3.864 is the general fund, which is what the public hearing is about today. And then the other rates are distributed in special service districts depending on what services those districts receive. Our 2027 budget, total budget $262 million. Our consolidated budget is 199. So the difference between those two are what we call in our fund duplications. So the true actual dollars that we are budgeted to spend this year is 199 million. 261 just counts for all of the transfers back and forth between different funds due to government accounting regulations. Our general fund budget is right at 83 million. which is up 3.8% over 2026. And our capital plan this year, excluding SLOST, is right at 27 million. So it's a breakdown of our budget for this year, where our revenues come from, and how we spend that money. So the vast majority of our money is spent in public safety, as you can see. And the vast majority of the money to fund that does come from taxes. However, only 31% of the money that we use from those taxes comes from property taxes. The rest of it comes from sales tax, accommodation excise tax, and a few other smaller taxes. The rollback rate versus the proposed rate. So what we have to do to calculate this is we take the amount of money that we had in property tax revenue last year, and we calculate what our rollback rate would be based on this year's digest values. So digest values change when there's new homes built, there are remodels done to homes, values change. But they also change because of market adjustments. So the state has a law that requires us to be within a certain percentage of the market value. And if we're not within that certain percentage, which the percentage is 40%, so our goal is to be at 40%, we're not allowed to go below 36% of the market value, and we're not allowed to go above 44%. So we have a little bit of leeway. Right now, this year's, our audit, we're at 36.1% of the market value, which means when we had our study done this year, the approximately 300 home sales that they looked at, we were not quite at the market value of what those sold for for our assessed value for property taxes. We were below that market value. So we take the amount of revenue that we earned last year and we calculate what our rollback rate would have to be if we were going to earn the same amount of revenue this year. So we would have had to roll our millage rate back the 0.241 mills to earn the same exact amount of revenue as we did last year. However, we have already adopted our budget. And when we did adopt our budget, we used estimated property tax revenues. The actual final digest value came in less than what the proposed was. So we are already short. about $240,000 in the general fund for this year in our budget. If we were to adopt the rollback rate, we would be short $2.19 million in our general fund budget. So what does this mean for your tax bill? The .241 mill difference applies only to the general fund portion of your bill. So if you have a home with a Scarlett Williams homestead exemption, there will be no change to the county portion of your tax bill. So there will not be any impact by us keeping the millage rate the same. If you have a $300,000 property without the homestead exemption, this amount comes to $28.92 for the year additional taxes that would be paid, or $2.41 per month. This is a graph of our millage rate over the last four years. We have, I'm sorry, over the last six years, and we have reduced our millage rate four years in a row running. And then the last three years, we have held that rate study. This is a picture of why we cannot keep reducing the rate. So there on the right, you can see we had some very good years of digest growth, around 12%. And those years, we did reduce the millage rate. And we were able to bring the millage rate down. So for every quarter of a point, it's about $2 million. So our budget right now is over $8 million less in property taxes collected than it was back in 2021 for millage. based on the same digest value. On the right are a picture of our public safety operating costs. As with any homeowner, costs are continually rising and getting higher. So our rates and our digest values are starting to level out, but our expenses continue to rise. So we are at a point where those lines have crossed and we can no longer continue to lower the millage rate and adopt the rollback rate and continue to provide the services that we currently provide. This explains a little bit about how our fund balance is structured. We have a revenue stabilization reserve, which is right at $30 million. This is our hurricane fund or our emergency fund. To give everyone an idea of how far 30 million will go. When we went through Hurricane Matthew, we spent $14 million on that cleanup. And when we went through Hurricane Irma the next year, we spent $11 million on that cleanup. So we almost exhausted our whole emergency fund for two non-direct hit hurricanes. So this is why, with us living on the coast, I highly recommend, and it is actually in our adopted ordinances, that we keep that $30 million available for emergencies. In our general fund right now, we only have about $2 million in what's called unrestricted fund balance. So $2 million is... is all that we have unrestricted. So we do like to keep some in case we have things that come up during the year that may not be an emergency that we can use the revenue stabilization fund for, but we may need to draw out of fund balance. We also have some emergency and fund balances in our public safety funds. And then the rest of our funds are restricted and special revenue funds that we're not allowed to touch except for very specific reasons. These are grants, courts, drug seizure money, opioid settlement, lots of different things that are restricted by the state or the feds. So when somebody says, oh, the county has $50 million in cash, 30 million of it is that emergency fund, which we do invest, and we earn good investment returns on that as much as we can. Being a government, we're very restricted on what we can invest. But a lot of that money is restricted by law. It's not available for us to just spend as we wish. So I kind of went through why spending reserves is not the answer. We really need to keep our millage rate consistent enough to cover our reoccurring costs. So the bottom line, we're asking you to maintain the current 3.864 general fund millage rate after we've reduced it for several years. Even at 3.864, our property tax revenue is projected to be $238,000 below our adopted budget. Adopting the 3.623 millage rate would increase the general fund shortfall to 2.19 million. And we need to continue maintaining our emergency and operating reserves at appropriate levels. So we do accept written comments. You can email the Board of Commissioners list. If you have any comments, or you can come speak tonight or at the public hearing on August 27th at 2 p.m. And that is all that I have.

Thank you, Ms. Monson. And thank you for all the work that you've done, not only in producing our budget, but looking and analyzing our millage rate. I will add that Blaine County has the third lowest M&O rate in the state of Georgia, and it's through our fiscal responsibility that we've been able to do that. So our hats off to your entire department and certainly to you for the work that you do.

Thank you.

This is anything, Commissioner, before we go to the public hearing. All right. This is a public hearing. Anyone who wishes to speak against the adoption of the military as proposed, please come forward. State your name for the record. Same rules for our public hearing as stated earlier. Anyone to speak against? Seeing none, hearing none, we'll close that portion. Anyone who wishes to speak in favor? of the adoption of the 26-27 military. Please come forward and state your name for the record. All right. Seeing none, hearing none, we'll close the public hearing. And with that, we'll move forward to item number 37. Item 37 is to consider the adoption of an amendment to the Code of Ordinances, Glen County, Georgia, to amend Chapter 2 through 7 of the Fire Prevention Code to add a Section 2-7-13 to provide for the cost recovery associated with hazardous material incidents and for other purposes. And we have... Fire Chief Vinnie DeChristofalo with us this evening. And just one reminder before we move too far from the military, there will be one more public hearing on August the 27th. It will be at 2 o'clock in the afternoon at the Harold Pate Building across the street. Chief Vinnie.

Thank you, Commissioner. For the record, Vincent Cristofalo, Fire Chief, Glynn County Fire Rescue. This ordinance amends Chapter 2-7 Fire Provision Code of the Glynn County Code of Ordinances by adding a new Section 2-7-13 entitled Hazardous Material Cost Recovery. The new section establishes a framework for Glynn County to recover necessary and reasonable costs incurred by the county, including Glynn County Fire Rescue and other departments when responding to mitigating, containing, abating, or remediating hazardous material incidents. It defines key terms, identifies responsible parties, authorized recovery of direct and indirect costs, and establishes procedures for cost determination, billing, appeal, interest, and enforcement. Division Chief Steven Vigiano made a presentation on Tuesday at the special call meeting. And, Commissioner, if you have any questions based on that presentation or the ordinance, I'm here to answer them.

Thank you, Chief. Commissioners, any questions?

Mr. Chairman, I don't have any questions. I'd like to offer a motion, please. All right. I move to adopt The amendment to the Code of Ordinances, Glynn County, Georgia, to amend Chapter 2-7 Fire Prevention Code to add a Section 2-7-13 to provide for costs for recovery associated with hazardous materials, incidents, and for other purposes. Second.

That was a motion by Commissioner Duncan and a second by Commissioner Wafalski. Any other discussion? Commissioners? All right. All in favor, please raise your right hand. That is unanimous. Thank you. Chief Vinnie, thank you, sir. And thank you to your entire team for the job they do for Glynn County. All right. That concludes our regular agenda items. We do have two people that have signed up for public comment tonight. The first one that signed up was Ms. Jean Atkin. And if she will come forward, state your name for the record, please. And you will have five minutes.

I'm assuming this is on. OK. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Jeannie Aiken. I'm a Glen County resident and a local business owner here in Glen County for 15 years. I'm asking you to remove the flock cameras out of Glen County. Let me be clear. Removing flock does not mean replacing it with another ALPR system, changing the company name does not change the surveillance. I support law enforcement. I want all violent criminals caught, stolen vehicles recovered. But public safety should not require us to surrender our privacy or our Fourth Amendment protections. These cameras don't simply read license plates. They create searchable records showing where and when vehicles are seen. Put enough of those records together, and they can reveal a pattern of movements. Most people being recorded have done nothing wrong. They're simply going around on their daily lives. Where is the warrant or probable cause for collecting information about people who are suspected of a crime? The Fourth Amendment protects us against unreasonable searches and seizures. Technology should not become a way to sidestep those protections simply because surveillance can be done automatically and on a massive scale. Nobody voted for it. Nobody. That concern deserves more than reassurance. It deserves action. Flock surveillance does not stop at the Glen County line. Its nationwide network can allow participating agencies, depending on permissions, to search vehicle dictations far beyond their own jurisdiction. Who can access our data? Who has searched it? Is a warrant required? And who is autoing those searches? Those aren't anti-police questions. Those are accountability questions. Because once information is collected and placed into a database, control over the information becomes extremely important. Searches can be conducted for reasons having nothing to do with legitimate criminal investigation. Even civil disputes can create opportunities to misuse when safeguards fail. We have reported misuse and policy violations involving flock systems right here in the state of Georgia. and mistakes have real consequences. In Wisconsin, Amber Newell was reportedly stopped twice in one week after flock-related information connected her vehicle to a homicide investigation. And the Institute of Justice has documented dozens of innocent motorists reportedly pulled over, detained at gunpoint, or jailed because of the ALPR errors. No database should be treated as an impossible breach. Systems get hacked, passwords get compromised, accounts get misused, government agencies and private companies experience data breaches all the time. Recently, a commissioner said that while he was riding with a GCPD, he personally saw a flock pick up a vehicle wanted in connection with the armed robbery in Pooler. He said it's a tool. I responded, at the cost of the Fourth Amendment. He then asked, that cell phone in your hand tracks you better than any flock camera ever will. Am I wrong? He's right. My cell phone can reveal an extraordinary amount of where I go. But that's the argument for stronger privacy protections, not more government surveillance. In Chatterjee v. United Straits, The Supreme Court reinforced the Fourth Amendment protections of digital location data, and SCOTUS's blog says, there is now a strong argument to be made that historical ALPR database searches could require a warrant. That question isn't settled, but Glynn County should be asking it. And yes, FLOC is a tool. It can help locate a vehicle connected to a serious crime. But tools can fail, and tools can be misused. Law enforcement solves crimes before flock, and we can support police while insisting on constitutional limits. And we must think beyond the systems that do today. Technology changes, AI changes, databases become connected, Companies add new capabilities. As a business owner, I understand security, but I also understand trust.

MR. Ms. Akins, that's five and a half minutes.

MS. OK. MR.

Thank you very much. MS.

Thank you for your time.

MR. Yes, ma'am. Thank you for coming in and sitting with us tonight. Next is Ed Van Otterman. And if you would state your name for the record, please.

Good evening. My name's Ed Van Otter, and I've been up here. You've all seen me before.

And I'm going to talk about flock cameras, too. I don't know if you saw my shirt go.

It's becoming a very hot topic. But I got good news for you. I know how to save you $230,000. Let's get rid of our flock camera subscription, because that's what it's costing us annually, $230,000 basically. Of course, it cost us nearly $800,000 to have them put in to start with. So we can save money by getting rid of the flock cameras, and then they can keep the millage rate lower. I'm all for that. But I just wanted to bring to the forefront of your attention again that flock is a growing concern among our residents. And why? She hit on it for several points. Just this month alone, there's been over a dozen officers in the state of Georgia who've been arrested for misuse of flock. There's been over 50, well, I should say in the month of July. There's been over 50 in the month of July throughout the nation who have been arrested for misuse of flock. It is a system that is ripe for misuse, which is causing problems among us all. She hit a few of the incidences. I've been emailing all of you incidences as I see them pop up on my websites of people who've been mistreated by flock, I guess you'd say. They've been stopped, detained, even arrested because of proximity to crimes or because their license plates have been misread. San Diego did a, San Diego, California, did, who've just gotten rid of their flock cameras, did an audit and found out that flock misread license plates nearly 41% of the time. Imagine that. 41% of the time the license plates are misread. And there was just an incident like two weeks ago in Atlanta where a guy was pulled over, held at gunpoint because the last letter on his license plate was an X. and they were looking for somebody with a Y. He was completely innocent, but it wasn't until an hour after he'd been taken out of his car at gunpoint that an officer realized that. How would you like to be taken out of your car at gunpoint, held in the back of a cruiser for an hour, before somebody realized, oops, we got the wrong car because Flock put out an alert for the wrong car? You know, these are very, this is a very hot topic button. It's very, I don't know where it's going. I mean, we do need, there are instances where flock is good. I mean, I can see it in parking lots, okay, for a private business such as Walmart or Lowe's or Home Depot, right? But on our streets surveilling us back and forth, if somebody came and put a camera, put a bunch of cameras, if I were to go out and put all my dang trail cameras around Glynn County, what would you think about that? You'd think I was nuts because I'd be tracking everybody around. But with all the cameras that are out there, there's now 82 of them out there. I mean, you can track me. You can see when I leave my home Sunday morning, I go down, I pass six of them on the way to the first church we go to. And then we pass another seven going out to Darien. You know exactly where I'm going. That's no longer a single incident. That's no longer a single snapshot. of me passing by a specific point, you've now collected my track. And it's no different than if you'd put a GPS on the back of my car. And yet, if law enforcement were to put a GPS on my car and track me, they would need a warrant to do that. And if I don't take my average route, my normal route, one Sunday, That's searchable. Flock can search that and tell you. And she was hitting on one other thing I want to just hit on real quick. I've seen our contract and everything, and I know we're not part of a lot of the systems that Flock puts out there. But Flock is continuing to progress with their research on what they can do. And they've actually put out a statement. This fall, they're going to be putting out a new, it's not even a camera, it's a sensor. I can't remember what they called it, a VFR sensor or something. But it's going to be able to read cell phones as they go by. So they'll be able to say, hey, you know what? Ed Van Otter and cell phone just went by. And you know what it's going to be able to do? It's going to be able to go into my history and tell where I've been for the last 30 days. That is getting really scary. But anyway, I just wanted to bring it back to the forefront for you. It's not an issue that's going to be going away anytime soon. And I hope you just put a little thought into it.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

All right. That concludes our agenda for tonight. Mr. Attorney, we have no call for executive session. Entertain a motion to adjourn.

Mr. Chairman, motion to adjourn. Second.

I have a motion by Commissioner Rafalski, a second by Commissioner Sweat to adjourn. All in favor, please raise your right hand. That is unanimous. Thank you.

We stand adjourned.