City Council - Regular Meeting

You look like the president, too. Yeah, you do. Welcome everyone uh to our regularly scheduled city council session of February 2nd, 2026. If you would please stand with me for a pledge and invitation. Pledge allegiance to the flagy.

Lord, heavenly father, thank you for another beautiful day in Lake City. And Lord, please give us the wisdom to guide this organization to best serve the people, present, and in the future of Lake City. Cast a net of safety, opportunity, and vision over our community. And help us to serve those who need us most. In Jesus name I pray. Amen. Amen. Right.

We will now have our roll call. Miss Sykes. Council member Jernigan present. Council member Harris present. Council member Young here. Council member Carter present. Mayor Walker here. City Manager Rosenthal here. City attorney Martin here. Chief Butler here.

Thank you, Miss Sykes. Ladies and gentlemen, the Excuse me. Ladies and gentlemen, the Lake City Council has opened its public meeting. Since 1968, the city code has prohibited any person from making personal, impertinent, or slanderous remarks or becoming boisterous while addressing the city council. Yelling or making audible comments from the audience constitutes boisterous conduct. Such conduct will not be tolerated. There's only one approved manner of addressing the city council, and that is to be recognized and then to speak from the podium. Failure to abide by the rules of decorum will result in removal from the meeting. I will now we'll now move on to approval of the agenda. Mr. Mayor move to approve the agenda as written. Second.

We have a motion, a second. Do we have any comments, questions? Hearing none. All in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Like sign. All right, we'll move on to proclamations and recognitions. And Miss Young, we'll turn it over to you. We'll we'll meet up front. Um you want to introduce what is it? This is from Mayor Walker and I'm presenting this on behalf of um Miss Bernese Presley and the Presley Excel Installer Program.

Fantastic. Yeah. And it reads 18th annual Presley Excel and Scholars Program Incorporated Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. 97th birthday observance certificate of appreciation presented to Mayor Noah Walker for leadership, service, dedication, spiritual guidance, patience, intelligence, and an outstanding role model for the youth and the community. You are truly someone special. January 18, 2026, New Day Missionary Baptist Church, Reverend Al Nelson, pastor, Miss Bernie, Steve Presley, sponsor and advisor, staff members, Glenn, Glenise, Sharon, Debbie, Adrisa, Sage, Darra, and Travis. surprise.

Yeah. Very nice speech. Speech. Yeah, that's my ears are hot. Uh, I appreciate that. If Miss Presley, you're watching, I appreciate that very much. Thank you very much. It was a pleasure to be part of that that uh ceremony. All right. Um we will now move on from um proclamations and rec recognitions into public participation. We have several people signed up. So I will go in order that they signed up and uh begin with you, Miss Barbara Limley. Can I hold that till the topic comes up? Which uh hold on. I don't have you down. Which topic? All

okay. So item number seven. Seven. Okay. Right. Uh up next, Mr. George Hudson. Good evening.

Three weeks ago was the one-year anniversary of the opening of the Fisher Pier and Park at Camel Park at Lake Montgomery. I would like to give you a quick update on the park and the pier. After a few glitches, the locking gates are opening and closing on time for the park's stated times. The walkthrough gate needs a little assistance at times to completely close because of abuse and may need replacing down the road. Once again, the fencing, gating, and park hours are saving the park and the lake as both are the cleanest that they have been in years prior. To my knowledge, I could count on one hand the times that voters or park visitors have been locked in and needed police assistance to get out. And I know of only two times that someone decided that rules are not for them and jumped the fence at night taking lights out on the pier. Police dispatch would know the correct amount of times. I know this because, as most of you know, I have voluntarily gone into the park and onto the pier pretty much daily to greet the visitors, ask about their catch, give history of the lake, and most of all caution them that the gates were about to automatically lock. And if I have happened to pass by and see a boater, I stop and speak to them along with trying to get their attention if they're on the water near closing time. I have met hundreds of visitors with a ton of stories. 99.9% of them have thanked me for this information and caution and the other small percentage only complain about the hours and gates. I do this because I care about the future success of the park and the safety and security of the visitors, the property owners and the preservation of the lake. Are the times of opening and closing that you voted on perfect? No, they will never be for some, but they are doing the job as intended. Some days it is light for a while after closing and some days it is dark at closing. The LCPD has way too much going on to constantly go there to let folks out. And I'm pretty sure that I've saved the city a heck of a lot of

money by my voluntary work. And this task will only get tougher as the daylight grows and there are new visitors in the park almost daily. But I cannot do this forever. What are the answers? I have suggested additional signs to copet the park hours that state the gates close automatically. In fact, visitors ask me all the time, why is there not signs stating that they think someone comes and closes it? Maybe compensate a current employee to do what I do like is done at Alligator Park. I do know that we will all find out how much that I've done and how and do to help out when I stop doing what I do. I will leave you with these last statements. After never missing a meeting, whether it was in this setting or behind the scenes in the last four years when the project began, how in the heck did I miss either a workshop and agenda in council or reading about the plans to construct rock and gravel pathway in the park with workout stations? I even though I understand the equipment may have been donated, was there a vote to spend the money for the construction even after the fencing went way over the budget due to pier being redesigned? Thank you everybody. This has destroyed the park's natural beauty.

Thank you, Mr. Hansen. Miss Griffin.

Good evening, council. My name is Debbie Griffin. Um downtown resident, downtown business owner, downtown property owner. Um I just wanted to cordially and also as a new board member of the Lake City Humane Society which we have representation here tonight. Um but I would like to invite you guys if you had in a mood for a stake and want to support the Lake City Humane Society to come out to Texas Roadhouse on February the 17th between 3 and 10 p.m. They will give 10% of the proceeds that particular night uh to the Lake City Humane Society. All you have to do is either reference the flyer or tell tell your weight staff uh that that's what you're there for and get you some good old biscuits and a good old steak.

Thank you guys. Does that include takeout as well? Yes, that's a great question. I don't know those. Perfect. Say it. Thank you. Whether you bring in or take out Thank you, Noah. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Griffin. Mr. Ler. Thank you, your honor. It's nice to be here tonight, Stew of the Columbia County Observer. I got a couple things. I didn't find out about this. I'm not exactly sure even what to call it. this thing on the agenda about the Paul Dial severance pay until about 4:00 this morning. Why is it that the city Well, you pay a city manager 180,000 or thereabouts. You pay the assistant city manager 150,000 or thereabouts. I'm sure the head of it gets about 100 grand a year. If you add another 30% to that, probably cost $700,000 a year for the public for these three people. These are the top brass of Lake City, not the clerk. She puts the agendas together with what you guys have. Why is it that she can't get the material in a timely fashion so the public can't even at least get it by Wednesday? The county has been doing it for since 2010 or thereabouts. But this city with every city manager, they say they could do it. And the reason is it's always the attorney. I guess they just blame attorneys for everything. You could ask the attorneys about that. They get blamed for everything. And you can see that they're smiling except for Garris who doesn't get blamed for anything apparently. But it's about time that you guys gave the clerk a hand and took care of this because it's not fair. It's not fair to the public.

It's not fair to the taxpayers. It's not fair to you guys and it's not fair to the clerk. ADA compliance is not rocket science. I don't know why there's still a problem with that, but that needs to be fixed. Needs to be fixed soon. not excuses going to conferences not not does not fix ADA compliance I mean you guys really haven't been that bad lately the county is just horrible none of their planning stuff is ADA compliant and Fort White is just zero so you don't want to be in that kind of company I think you guys got to start doing your own department heads make enough money and there's enough staff that everybody can prepare the stuff and have ready to go on the website at least by Wednesday. And that's what I have. I don't I don't understand why there's an echo in here, but I'll take care of that when you have the bids for the microphones and the magic stuff, but you spent $65,000 for this and it still doesn't work right now. Before the meeting, Mr. Rosenth floor said they can't hear the echo up there, which I'm sure they can't, but you can hear it here. And the other thing, the final thing, Mr. Chairman, is when the microphones don't work, then it or whoever is running the microphones need to point that out of respect for the people that are talking.

Thank you, Mr. Thank you very much. All right, that concludes uh our public comment section. So, we will move on. We have no consent agenda tonight. We'll move on to our open quasi judicial hearing. And this is where I'll turn it over to you, Mr. Martin.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Council members, you have before you two matters that must be considered and voted on tonight uh in a quasi judicial manner. Uh the first is final reading on ordinance 2026 2349 for application ANX 25507 an ordinance considering an application for voluntary annexation submitted by Lake City47 LLC and final reading on ordinance 2026 2350 for application ANX2508 which is an ordinance considering an application for voluntary annexation submitted by Pam Stewart and Scott Stewart. Uh the purpose of tonight's uh procedure and hearing is to make sure that the parties receive a full and fair hearing on their applications. To uh do that, we'll proceed in the following order. First, presentations from the city, the applicant, and any party interveners, followed by public comment. Then cross-examination by parties and party interveners. Uh thereafter, uh if the mayor so sees it uh to uh ensure fairness, he can allow additional response by party or participant. Uh thereafter we'll receive uh questions from the city council and then final arguments and comments from the parties. At that time I'll advise the council as to law and necessary findings and the council can deliberate and vote. While the council welcomes comments from all persons with an interest in the proceeding, Florida law requires the council's decision and quasi judicial actions be supported by competent substantial evidence presided presented to the city council during the hearing on the application. Competent substantial evidence is evidence a reasonable mind would accept as adequate to support a conclusion. There must be a factual basis in the record to support opinion testimony from both expert and non-expert witnesses. People presenting testimony may support their testimony by relying on factual information provided by city staff, the applicant or other information included in the city staff report. Uh at this time uh I will uh inquire as to uh any exparte communications. But actually before I do that, I think Councilman Dernigan may be experiencing some technical difficulties with his monitor up here.

Don't worry about that. Just keep going. Okay, good enough. I just want to make sure you could see the presentation. So, uh, Councilwoman Young, have you had any exparte communications in this matter? No, sir, I have. Councilman Carter? No. Uh, Councilman Dernigan? No. Councilwoman Harris? Have not. And Mr. Mayor? No.

Okay. Thank you. Um, this person, if each person who's going to offer testimony or speak to these applications could stand and raise your right hand and take an oath. All right, Mr. Taber and uh, Mr. Angelo, do you swear to tell the truth, hold truth, nothing but the truth? All right. Thank you. Council members, you now have before you proposed ordinance 2026 2349 on final reading, which states an ordinance of the city of Lake City, Florida, pursuant to petition number ANX 257 submitted by Lake City 47 LLC, a Florida limited liability company relating to voluntary annexation annexing certain real property located in Columbia County, Florida, which is reasonably reasonably compact into the boundaries of the city of Lake City, Florida, making certain findings of fact and support thereof, providing severability, repealing all ordinances in conflict, and providing an effective At this time, Mr. Angelo, could you please introduce, summarize, and present the ordinance?

Yes. So, tonight before you, you have ordinance number 2026 2349, and this is for application number ANX 25507, which is annexation on um highway 47. At this time, I'd like to adopt my presentation and all documents from the previous meeting on January 5th, into the record. And that would be all for tonight. Thank you,

Mr. Taber. Did you have any presentation on behalf of the applicant? Okay, Mr. Taber is waving. Uh, I did not see anyone indicating that they had party intervenor status. Uh, is there any public comment on this? Seeing none, uh, assuming parties are waving cross examination. So, Mr. Mayor, would there be any questions from council members at this time? Any questions from council? No, sir.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. for the applicants and uh the city waving final comment. All right. Thank you. Uh the decision of the council should be based only on evidence provided by sworn witnesses. In addition, the ordinance may be adopted if part if the property proposed to be annexed is contiguous to current municipal boundaries or within an area subject to an interlocal service boundary agreement. If property proposed to be annexed is reasonably compact and if the property uh or if the application for voluntary annexation bears the signatures of all owners of property in the area proposed to be annexed. otherwise complies with applicable state laws and does not confer special privileges or rights on any person. This time the council may discuss the ordinance and any testimony and findings of fact and should it choose to do so about proposed ordinance 2026 2349.

Thank you Mr. Martin. Um do we have any questions, comments, or would anybody like to make a motion to adopt city council ordinance number 2026-2349 on final reading? Mr. Mayor, I move to approve ordinance 2026-2349. We have a motion. Second, and a second. Thank you, Mr. Jernigan. Um, any final comments, questions? Miss Sykes, will you please call the role? Mr. Carter? Yes. Mr. Jernigan? Yes. Miss Young? Yes. Miss Harris? Yes. Mayor Walker? Yes. Now we'll move on to city council ordinance 2026-2350. Mr. Martin.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Council members, you have before you ordinance number 2026 2350 on final reading which states an ordinance of the city of Lake City, Florida pursuant to petition number ANX 258 submitted by Pam Stewart and Scott D. Stor relating to voluntary annexation annexing certain real property located in Columbia County, Florida, which is reasonably compact under the boundaries of the city of Lake City, Florida, making certain findings of fact and support thereof providing severability repealing all ordinances in conflict and providing an effective date. Mr. Mr. Angelo, could you please uh introduce, summarize, and present proposed ordinance 2026 2350.

Thank you. Before you tonight, you have 20 uh ordinance number 2026 2350. This is for annexation 258. And they're also on Highway 47. And at this time, I'd like to adopt my presentation and all staff reports from the January 20th um agenda. And I move those into the record. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Angelo and Mr. Taber. Are you presenting or waving? Okay, thank you. Uh and uh didn't notice any party interveners. Uh is there any public comment? Is there any cross-examination? Seeing none, any questions from council, Mr. Mayor? Questions, comments from the council? No, sir.

All right. Seeing none, the parties are waving final comment argument. Okay. Uh the decision of the council should be based on evidence about uh provided by sworn witnesses. In addition, the ordinance may be adopted if the property proposed to be annexed is contiguous to current municipal boundaries or within an area subject to an interlocal service boundary agreement. If the property proposed to be annexed is reasonably compact and if the application for annexation bears the signatures of all owners of property in the area proposed to be annexed otherwise complies with applicable state laws and does not confer special privileges or rights on any person. At this time, the council may discuss the ordinance and any testimony and any findings of fact upon which it wishes to base a decision and adopt proposed ordinance 2026 2350 following an appropriate motion and second.

Thank you, Mr. Martin. Um, would anyone on the council have any questions, comments, or would like to adopt city council ordinance number 226-2350 on final rating? Mayor, I move that ordinance number 20 26 2350 be approved. Second. Have a motion and a second. Thank you both. Um, does anybody have any final comments or questions? Miss Sykes, will you please call the role? Miss Harris, yes. Mr. Carter, yes. Miss Young, yes. Mr. Dernigan, yes. Mayor Walker, yes. Before we move on to the next item, we're going to take a three minute uh break so that we can have a monitor looked at

Gavl back into this meeting. Um, welcome back everybody. Thank you for bearing with us. Well done, it getting that rectified quickly. Uh, we're moving on to item number four uh in our open public hearing on city council ordinance number 2026-2347 on mixed use. Mr. Martin, I'm going to let you read this by title.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, council members. You have before you ordinance 2026 2347 on second and final reading, an ordinance of the city of Lake City, Florida, amending the text of the city of Lake City land development regulations as amended pursuant to an application LDR2503 by the growth management department of the city of Lake City, Florida. Providing for amending section 4.1.1 entitled zoning districts, establishment of districts by adding an MU mixeduse zoning district. Providing for amending section 4.1.6 entitled zoning districts definitions of groupings of various districts by adding a definition of mixed use. Providing for adding section 4.19 entitled zoning districts mixeduse zoning district providing serverability repealing all ordinances in conflict and providing an effective date. Thank you, Mr. Martin. Uh we have nobody signed up for uh public participation on item number four. So, we'll move straight into council comments, questions, or if anyone would like to adopt um city council ordinance number 226-2347.

Mr. Mayor, move to adopt 2026 ordinance 2026 2347. Second. We have a motion, a second. Thank you both. Any final comments or questions on mixuse hearing? None. Miss S, will you please call the role? Mr. Carter? Yes. Miss Harris? Yes. Miss Young. Mr. Jernigan? Yes. Mayor Walker? Yes. Now, we will move on to item number five. Also open public hearing city council ordinance number 2026 2348 on um RMF in raising the height of buildings. Mr. Mar, will you please take this away?

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Council members, you have a before you on second and final reading, ordinance number 2026 2348, an ordinance to the city of Lake City, Florida, amending the text of the city of Lake City land development regulations as amended pursuant to an application LDR2504 by the growth management department of the city of Lake City, Florida, providing for amending section 4.9.8 8 entitled RMF residential multif family maximum height of structures section 410.8 entitled RORO residential office maximum height of structures and section 4.14.8 entitled C-CBD commercial central business district maximum height of structures by limiting the height of single family dwellings and duplex dwellings to 35 ft and all other structures to 85 ft providing for amending section 4.12.8 entitled CG commercial general maximum height of structures section 4.13.8 8 entitled CI commercial intensive maximum height of structures section 4.15.8 entitled CHI commercial highway intensive maximum height of structures section 4.16.8 entitled ILW industrial light and warehousing maximum height of structures and section 4.17.8 entitled I industrial maximum height of structures by limiting the height of structures to 85 ft providing for amending section 4.15.6 Six entitled CHI commercial highway interchange minimum lot requirement by deleting the minimum area and with requirements providing for amending section 15.7 entitled CHI commercial highway interchange minimum lot yard requirement by reducing the front yard requirement from 30 ft to 20 ft and by deleting the side and rear yard requirements providing severability repealing all ordinances in conflict and providing an effective date.

Thank you Mr. Martin. Um, we don't have any public comment on this item either. So, we'll move straight into council comments, questions, or if anyone would like to make a motion to adopt city council ordinance number 2026- 2348. Mayor, I move that we approve ordinance number 20 26 2348. Second. Thank you both. Do we have any final comments, questions from the board? Hearing none, Miss S, will you please call the role? Miss Harris, yes. Mr. Carter, yes. Miss Young, yes. Mr. Jernigan, yes. Mayor Walker.

Yes. All right. Now, we will move on to resolutions. Uh we will move on to city council resolution number 2026-012. This is a rereading uh from our previous uh meeting. Uh Mr. Martin, will you please read this by title and then we'll go to public comment.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Council members, I have before you resolution number 2026-012, a resolution of the city of Lake City, Florida, approving that certain agreement between the city and AVI SPL LLC, a Florida limited liability company for audiovisisual equipment related professional services, making certain findings of fact in support of the city, approving set agreement, recognizing the authority of the mayor to execute and bind the city to set agreement, directing the mayor to execute and bind the city to set agreement, repealing all prior resolutions in conflict, and providing an effective date.

Thank you, Mr. Martin. I'll now open public comment. Uh Mr. Lulker, have you signed up for this item? Thank you, your honor. This is this microphone. This is this is a wireless microphone. Maybe somebody could un help explain. I didn't turn on my computer. I kind of read that. RFP and remember most of what's in it that you're getting eight wireless mics. What are those for? The the commentary was to get eight wireless mics to put up from what I recall to the council people so they could pull the mics closer to them. But if they don't pull these mics closer to them, what difference does it make if it's a wireless mic? You guys just spent $65,000 to have this room redone. Now you're buying eight new wireless mics. I presume something like this Sennheiser is worldrenowned German microphone and you still have problems. These microphones are supposed to do something to and I forget the exact word, reprocess the speech or something. Maybe somebody could look at that RP and explain what these magic microphones are supposed to do. Microphones work pretty good if you speak into them and you speak clearly. They seem to work. That's been going on for a long time. As we used to call it in the old days, they called it riding the pot because it was a potentiometer that worked the view meters. Now everything's digital. And a good audio man will sit there and ride those switches. Now, they're vertical switches so that if Miss Harris can't be heard or she's speaking low or Miss Young can't be heard, they turn up the volume, so to speak, on the microphone. so that you

could be heard. That apparently is not done. That means that somebody who's ever sitting at behind the board needs to pay attention. And that apparently is I don't know if that's done or there's something wrong with these microphones, but I'd like somebody to explain those tens of thousands of dollars that you're going to spend on this. And the next thing is the screen. $10,000 for a screen and equipment that just about nobody uses anymore for these kind of meetings. Whether you go to the Florida Legislature, you watch the United States Congress, or you go to a ball game and watch a basketball game and they got those giant monitors. They're all LED monitors, you can get it for $1,500. You can buy a 100inch monitor now. It's pretty big. Why? this is going to be $10,000 to buy a monitor for another projector when all this stuff can be Bluetooth is uh beyond me. And the reason I bring that up is because you guys got a $75 million budget. I guess maybe I forget how many millions not a lot of millions you can connect collect in advor taxes. So all the taxpayers are paying for this. I'm paying for it. My neighbors are paying for it. Anybody that owns a piece of property or buy something in the store will pay for it. So I would ask you guys to consider that before you go out and respend all this money.

And maybe we could get an explanation. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, your honor. Mr. Dumis, we're closed public comment. Uh that was the only item for public comment. So we're going to have the IT director. Good evening, council.

Presentation. This uh project here was actually like a second phase for us to um add additional mics if we had bigger or had more participants in the room. It's like if we did a roundt meeting or something such as that um you would have the mics you currently have plus we'd have additional ones out here for that type of meeting. We once had those in the past. So we were trying to prepare for those type of meetings but if you you so choose we don't have to do it going forward. Um the uh the projector and the screen is something we kind of recommend that we kind of fix that up a little bit because it's it's outdated. Um I know Miss Miss Young has talked about um um monitors. That's something we can look into if you guys so choose to.

Thank you, Mr. Um Mr. Is there any questions for Mr. Jason? Miss Young.

Um I don't really have questions. Um, but I do have concerns because um, if you look around, we're we're really um, it's a small area and to add more mics to this small area, I just think it is too much. Um, and and I did suggest monitors because we're outdated here and if we're going to spend money, you may as well move up to 2026 um, with the monitors. But my greatest concern is spending this amount of money on these mics and and and all of the upgrades and we're we're talking about a new city hall. We spend all this money now and then get in a new city hall and you'll find that it probably be enough for the space that we hope to have then. So I don't know that it's something that we need to do right now. I think what we're working with our mics now, they're very clear and I think someone has made some adjustments because they weren't this clear before, but I hear really nicely. I sound pretty good. So, I think I think we're fine with these for the amount of space that we have to work with.

Thank you, Miss Mr. Jernigan.

You know, um I kind of agree with uh uh with Miss Young. I just don't think money needs to be spent. So, I'm not I'm not in favor of this. Um uh what I am in favor of is uh equipment that we do have speaking to it clearly. That way the people at home and the people in the audience can hear us uh speak. So, I'm not in agreeance with this uh spending that kind of money. Um so, uh that's my take on it. And uh again, I I I appreciate all the hospitality that you guys tried to do for us and make it uh convenient or whatever the case may be. Uh but the bottom line is it's our responsibility uh and spending the taxpayers dollars. That's that's that's nonsense to me. What I do say is speak into the mic and uh speak clearly that everybody can understand. Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Mr. Jernigan, um I had a question for you, Mr. Dumis. Um this it's all the cost in this is not just equipment. Correct. Correct. What else does it include? Well, you had installation and there's some transceivers which is part of the equipment, but to have it integrate into our system we currently have, you'd have to add all the additional stuff into it. So, and there's training involved also as well as actually to utilize the new equipment and adjust these things so you guys can't hear clearly. So there was some engineering uh installation, network wiring, etc.

Correct. Okay. And then this was not to replace these mics, but to add additional mics for larger meetings that like the chapter, what was it 164, Mr. Martin? Is that correct? So recalling that meeting there were limited microphones available because uh most all of the microphones in the room were were wired and so there was a lot of microphone sharing down here in a conference style setting versus being at the dis. So having more wireless microphones would in that circumstance allowed every allowed everybody participating in that meeting to be miked uh individually. So yes ma'am.

So wouldn't it be wise to just can't you buy additional mics instead of the whole package. You can buy mics, but for them to actually work in the system like we have it set up now, you have to buy the receivers to go with it as well. There's no more room to add any more mics to what we have equipment back there now. We don't have enough of what we have here. How often would we use the additional mics? That that's a question I can't answer. It's a good question. Yes, sir. Um I don't think it's necessary this time. Okay, perfect. Um I didn't hear sorry I said I don't think it's necessary at this point. Okay.

So item number six um we had public comment. Uh if anybody would like to make a motion to guess dismiss this item or just it fails due to no. Yes sir. Mr. Martin Mr. Mayor two two things can happen. Either it can die for lack of a motion and second or someone could move to approve it and it could die on that motion to approve by not receiving a majority. Uh either way would would cause the death of the motion, but it would generally be considered procedurally improper to move to uh not approve the the resolution.

Thank you, Mr. Martin. Well, it doesn't sound like anybody wants to make a motion to approve it. So, all right. Thank you. We'll move on to the next item, item number seven, which I will now turn over to you, Mr. M.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh so without belaboring the uh the history on this I think everybody is aware of the the the general circumstances regarding uh Mr. Dial the city and and uh the payment of Mr. Dial's uh severance uh at the time of his separation and the execution of the separation agreement at the time uh by Mr. Dial uh by the then mayor uh and uh the then city attorney. Uh at that time uh if or shortly thereafter uh the city council uh retained outside council to do a determination as to whether uh the city had a claim against Mr. Dial. Uh that was the uh the general idea of the two Caendish reports. Did the city have a claim? Uh following that, uh not quite a year ago, uh the council uh gave direction to uh me and to the city manager uh to uh retain council and to uh pursue that claim. Uh following the approval of the budget uh which allowed money to be appropriated for purposes of uh paying outside council to pursue that claim, uh Mr. uh Rosenthal and I uh reached out to and on a limited engagement uh engaged uh Guy Norris uh an attorney here in Lake City. Uh and uh the purpose of the limited engagement was to do a litigation analysis and then based on the outcome of that analysis to report back to council uh on that outcome uh and and then move forward from there. And if the council decided to to move forward with the claim than to uh retain Mr. Norris on a a broader

basis to do that, uh Mr. Norris uh examined all of the uh the documents, the history of the matter uh from the time uh that uh uh Mr. was uh retained and contracted with the city uh to be a city manager all the way through uh the uh the generation of the Cavendish reports. Uh and I I will let him more specifically summarize uh his uh his findings and his recommendations. But generally speaking, uh the the analysis he did as a litigation analysis was a very different analysis from the Caendish report and the Cavendish analysis. Mr. Caendish analyzed whether we had a claim. Uh Mr. Norris analyzed its viability in court, looking at the evidence that would be presented by both parties uh based on his experience, how that might be received by a jury when they're hearing the evidence. Uh and uh based on that analysis, uh the general recommendation that uh Mr. Norris has that I have, the city manager have uh the three of us jointly uh is that the uh city council if there is an opportunity to settle this claim prior to proceeding into court that uh the city council do that. Uh following uh Mr. Norris's analysis uh of this, as you all know, uh he met with uh each of the council members that desired to meet with him. Uh he went through that analysis. He explained it uh allowed uh council members to ask questions of him. Uh and uh following that I reached out to Mr. Dial uh directly to ask if he had legal counsel. He said he did not. I recommended that he get legal counsel. Uh because uh if there was going to be an opportunity to

resolve this before proceeding to litigation, it would be now. Uh not long after that conversation with Mr. Dial, I received a phone call from Mr. Foreman. Uh, and not long there after Mr. Foreman uh related to me that he had been retained by Mr. Dial and uh I received a copy of the letter that was uh transl uh transmitted to Mr. Norris that was included in your packet. Uh and uh from that letter uh we bring this matter before you here tonight. And uh Mr. Mayor, if it pleased the mayor and the council, I would recommend that uh Mr. Foreman be given an opportunity to summarize his letter uh outlining uh a desire to resolve this matter and then follow that up by comments from Mr. Norris and then uh the council can then uh move on to discussion.

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Martin. We'll have uh we will have Mr. Foreman uh then we will have Mr. Norris and then we will have public comment. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. You guys hear me? Okay. Yes, sir. Still, you're right. It's very echoey in this one spot. That's um first of all, thank you all for agreeing to allow me to actually Yeah. angle it up. There you go. I'm usually the one that's pointing like talking to the mic.

Okay. So, uh thank you all for your attention this evening. Uh I know this is a long-term issue that I'm a very recent comer to. Uh but I did want to uh as Mr. Martin indicated sort of go through my letter. Um I think we live in a world where we all know we're all entitled to our own opinion. Uh but more and more we all need to recognize that we're not entitled to our own sets of facts. Uh and this is a situation where when you analyze the facts as Mr. Cavendish did um you're going to reach a conclusion that we think a jury would share which is yes mistakes were absolutely made with respect to the engagement of Mr. dial under his contract and then the signing of the separation agreement that was appended to that contract that was approved. Uh there are technical deficiencies. We take no issue with that. We think Mr. Cavendish's conclusions are correct. Um however, I do want you to keep in mind it took Mr. Cavendish 30 pages to explain the technical issues that rendered that contract problematic. I also want you to remember that in January of 2023 when the council approved Mr. Dial's contract, attached to that contract was the form of separation agreement that about 10 months later would be completed and signed not just by Mr. aisle, but by the city mayor who was a licensed attorney, by the city's attorney, and by one of the best city clerks I've ever met, um, in the one that you currently have in Miss Sykes. So, three city officials, and then Mr. Dial is your separating employee, signed that piece of paper together. Again, your attorney took 30 pages to explain why the signature of that separation agreement was problematic. A jury would have to believe that Mr. dial at the time he signed it in October of

2023 was somehow more at fault in making a mistake or at fault at all in making a mistake by signing that settlement agreement which I think it's fair to assume well it was approved in January of 2023. Here I am in October of 2023. I'm just signing what the council already agreed to. So if mistakes were made, they were made on both sides. Mr. Cavendish's report concludes mistakes clearly were made. I was contacted by Mr. Dial again after Mr. Martin reached out to him and explained that there might be an opportunity to settle this. Mr. Dial and I have and I have had long conversations about this. I think as much as anything this becomes a business decision for both the city and Mr. Dial at this juncture. There are hard feelings. Mr. Dial is not here tonight. To my knowledge, Mr. D is not even watching this meeting tonight because he's concerned about hard feelings. He doesn't want to harbor them anymore. I don't think anyone with the city wants to harbor them anymore. Mistakes were made. Lessons have been learned. Things have changed. Mr. Dial is happy to sign a mutual general release that will put this matter to bed for everyone once and for all. Uh I do understand that may not be the most palatable um resolution from the city's perspective, but I would ask you to keep in mind there is no universe where Paul Du is the city of Lake City. none. He's there's no reason for him to sue the city like city. He's not going to do it. So to pursue this matter further, as Mr. Martin indicated when he was talking to you guys, you're going to have to authorize the expenditure of additional funds to go pursue this. I'll ask you to listen carefully to Mr. Norris and I'll ask you to review my letter carefully. I think the outcome of that litigation is likely to result in Mr. Dial not owing any money. So, with that in mind, I would ask you to consider the offer that's being made to let's let's all sign a mutual general release. Let's go

our separate ways. Let's put this ugly chapter behind us. U and I'm happy to address any questions that any of you may have for me. Thank you, Mr. Foreman. We'll um if you could hang tight just in case we do have questions during council comments. Is that okay? Oh, absolutely. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Mr. Foreman. Mr. Norris.

Good evening, council. I'm Guy Norris, Norris and Norris here in Lake City. Appreciate and thank you very much for the opportunity to represent the council in this matter. Um, it's not taken like lightly by a Lake City native. So, thank you very much. Um, I really don't have anything to I've I've met with four of the five of you. Uh, Mr. Jernigan uh did not meet with me, so I've rendered uh my thoughts concerning the matter with four of the five members of of the council. The um I don't disagree really with anything that Mr. Foreman has set forth. I think that the thing that I believe is really the most important aspect to consider in litigation is well what do you think is the ultimate result of that litigation and sometimes discretion may be the better part of valor um in doing that because no litigation matter is going to give you a uh guaranteed result. And so I even saw it published um a suggestion that the council advised um or passed a motion that suggested that this matter be pursued to a judgment. Well, that very well could be a judgment against the count the city. And so you have to evaluate what you consider to be in the best interests of the city. And the things that I think are the most important about that is that when you entered you, the council, when the city of Lake City entered into the contract with Paul Dial, it included a separation agreement.

And that separation agreement set forth exactly what were to be the terms of the separation of Mr. Dial's employment with the city. The exact terms of it that separation agreement includes a reference to 16 weeks of severance pay which was paid. That ref that separation agreement includes that he shall receive as an additional payment to compensate for his accumulated paid time off including pre-effective date of any variety annual and sick leave time at termination subject to customary payroll deductions. Um and um it was to be all of those not limited to 500 hours. All of them exactly as set forth in the contract, but not necessarily exactly as set forth under a section that maybe is titled termination or under a section that is titled severance or under a section that's titled resignation. But you notice there's no section titled separation. But the but nonetheless, the contract, the separation contract is included as the terms and conditions of the employment contract as a whole. In fact, if you turn to the table of contents of the employment agreement, the very first page, bottom of it, appendix one, separation of employment and general release, page 12, if you turn in his contract, page 12 is page one of the appendix, and it has some blanks. But what are the blanks? The blanks are

nothing but dates because obviously when you the city entered into the contract, the city did not contemplate the date of separation. It would have needed a crystal ball and some superior powers in order to have contemplated what would be the date of separation for Mr. Dial. You couldn't predict that. It was a matter to fill in the blank based upon the actual separation date. It also provided in the resolution that was approved by the city in December, actually executed by the mayor, the then mayor uh in on January 3rd of 2023 that let's see exactly where it says Paul Dial is appointed as the city manager and shall serve for an indefinite term which appointment shall be subject to the termination as provided for in the city manager employment agreement. Okay, which includes the separation agreement. And you might note that the date of his employment agreement, an employment agreement that did not come back to the city council for subsequent approval in January, signed by the mayor and the city attorney and the city clerk on January 11 of 2023. It shows an effective date handwritten in it of January 3, 2023. So in my view,

what would ultimately be asked of the tri of fact in a litigation matter is the city would be asking the trior of fact to save the city from itself. Also, I think that in my view, it could be strongly argued that the filling out of the separation agreement, simply dates that were determined based upon the mutual agreement between Mr. Dial and the city council. He offered his resignation. The resignation was accepted. Upon that mutual agreement, it set forth the 30 days for his last day of employment. his last day of employment. Then set forth all of the dates that were triggered under that agreement with respect to how to calculate the 16 weeks of severance and and determining how much acred um vacation, sick leave time, that sort of leave time that he had accured as of the date of his uh separation. So it seems to me that this was not a matter at that point in which the mayor, the then mayor or the the city attorney to whatever extent his discretion might apply. But where the mayor had any discretion with respect to the terms of this contract, the terms of the contract were set forth. They had previously been approved by the council in December of 2023, including the separation provision. It was simply a matter of now the date of termination is set and he signed the contract. So do I consider that to have been the most advisable way of going about this

contract from the start in in um what was it October I believe uh through December of 2022 when it was finally entered into. No, but again I think you are going to put a try of fact in the pos into the position of saying this is our contract. We don't like it now. We would like you to save us from our contract. I'll be happy to entertain any questions you have.

Thank you, Mr. Norse. Um, Ricky, Mr. Jernigan, do you have a question before we go to public comment? Yes. So, c can can you repeat what you just said? The the last sentence, can you repeat that just one more time, please?

Well, I didn't read it. It was off the cuff. So, I'm not sure that I can repeat it exactly, but what I was just trying to say in conclusion that I think that if you are to litigate this matter against Mr. Dial, the other, you know, both sides get to make arguments. Both sides get to present evidence and largely the evidence is going to be the same for both sides as to I mean, this is city government. So these resolutions are on paper, the the dates that they were signed, the date of the resignation, all of these sort of things are set, right? But what is ultimately not set is that we have this contract that in parts of it seem to limit when severance pay is applicable and and the amount of the um leave time that is payable. All of which was negotiated. I don't recall which of you were or weren't on for the most part which of you were or weren't were not on the council at the time, but one of the things that you may recall is that you were on the night that you approved this employment agreement, you were presented three different versions of it. You were presented a version of it that Mr. Dial was proposing that actually, if I recall correctly, was calling for 20 weeks of severance pay. And then you were um considering a a provision by a liaison from the council uh Councilman Jake Hill at the time and the city attorney uh Mr. Kennan at the time. They had drafted a version and it had some different terms with respect to the leave time.

And then the third version, which was called exhibit C in those minutes, is the version that was ultimately presented to the council as we recommending that you sign this one. And that's the one that the council approved. And so then it was modified in accordance with the ver the exhibit C to be that final version that was approved at that meeting. those revisions were made to it and it was attached with the resolution that was signed by the mayor on January 3rd in which he inserted the January 3 date as the effective date. All of these things are set, but what isn't set is the argument that folks are unhappy that Mr. dial received severance pay and received leave time that they don't think he deserve because it was a voluntary resignation. But the separation agreement does not require it to be or not to be a voluntary resignation. It simply requires separation,

termination of employment. And so for that reason, I think that whoever was representing Mr. Dial at any um action brought by the city would be making the argument that the city is seeking to be saved from itself. Right? in other that the city's actions at the time resulted in the series of facts. But now you want Mr. Dial to pay back compensation that was made in accordance with the terms of the separation agreement. And I don't see how you can take the position in good faith to the court that the separation agreement is not a material term of your employment agreement under this circumstance.

Yes. Thank you for for for that. Thank you. I get confused sometimes when you attorneys go through all these long. Well, we are long- winded. There's no two ways about that. Uh but so we're asking you well we're asking you to save the city from itself from the mistakes that we made. That's basically what you're saying if I were to take on the litigation. Yes, sir.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Churnigan. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Norris. We we're going to open it up to uh public comment and then we'll come back for council comments questions. So don't if you would uh please stick around. Uh we do have a couple people signed up for public comment and we will uh go in this order. for Mr. Ler, Mr. Lostrom, and then we'll have Miss Limley.

Okay, then we'll go Mr. Lostm, Miss Limley, and Mr. Ler. So, I love how Stu gets to rearrange his thoughts, and I had to rearrange my thoughts as he was talking because I started off with this whole I I knew what I was going to say, and I had it all figured out, and then he confused me. Um, because he's correct. If it's a separation and it hasn't been specified whether it's he quit or we fired him and it is simply separation, then we're mad that he quit and we're mad that we paid him. But it was in the agreement and we didn't plan on him quitting that quick and if he hadn't quit, he might still be here and working and it would never be an issue. But it kind of seems now that it's more the city's issue in it was in the contract. If he had never quit, it'd never be an issue. And so that took almost all the wind out of my sales. So there we go.

Thank you, Mr. Lawren. Miss Limley,

Barbara Limley, my concern is the city is throwing away money. attorneys. Attorneys, they looked at them. Isn't there something called insurance? If an attorney screws up that they have to pay for what they screwed up, you know, there was Kennan, there was Mayor Wit, both attorneys. Why should the taxpayers suffer because of the ignorance or incompetence of those who were in charge of all the documents? And I don't like the fact that all of us that are taxpayers are having to annie up that money for ignorance and incompetence of those that were in charge. Thank you.

Thank you, Miss L.

Up next, Mr. Loker. Thank you, your honor. A couple of things. There may have been three people that signed the separation agreement. Three people did not execute it. The city clerk witnessed the agreement. She did not execute anything. And I would remind this board, you should go back and not make any decision tonight. But think about this, that Mayor Wit was having a rather troubling time in his life. And he announced at this public meeting that he never read the agreement, that the only reason he signed the agreement was because Todd Kennan told him to do it. Todd Kennan being the city attorney. So, it seems that we got three attorneys here. The city attorney, Mr. Norris, and

don't forget me.

I don't forget you. And the county attorney, all being Mr. Dial's attorney. The fact that you're missing is is that the first time Mr. Dial got hired. He was he went to Alaska the first time and interviewed for a job where he told the people in Alaska that the people in Lake City weren't friendly. Then the city came and hired him. Mr. Dial resigned. This is facts. And you go I wrote all these stories. You go to the Columbia County. You go read them. There's all links to this stuff today. Ruined my day. Is that Mr. dial when he resigned. He had another job in Alaska, which is why he resigned. Now, Mr. Norris and Mr. Martin and my friend all want to give him a quarter of a million dollars in severance. Common sense, plain English language is severance is when you quit. He wasn't fired for cause. He didn't quit for cause. The simple fact is he pulled the wool over the city's eyes and and quit because he had another job in Alaska. I'd like to know where Mr. Norris's litigation analysis is. That's not fair to the public. I'll put in a request for that. Public never saw this. Why Why didn't Mr. Martin put that in the agenda? This is apparently his item. And another place where the public gets screwed. You got a bunch of attorneys, a gang running Lake City. That's just wrong. The public needed to know that. Mr. Lawstrom, he didn't he didn't get confused. He didn't know all the facts that Mr. Dial had another job and then quit because the people in Lake City at one time, according to him, weren't

friendly. So, the basic thing is Mr. Dial terminated himself. 30 pages of decision and it took Mr. Caendish to do his paperwork. What difference does that make if it took 30 pages or one page? The fact was clear. Mr. Caendish said the city did the wrong thing. Now, you're either going to set the course for future people to come and screw Lake City and the taxpayers or you're going to sit and let me just finish the sentence. sit and think about this and look at all the facts and then decide exactly what you want to do for the best interest of the taxpayers and to send a message to people that you don't screw the city council or the taxpayers. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Loger. All right. Uh that concludes our public comment on item number seven. Uh so we will move into to discussion by council and possible action. Uh but we'll have discussion first. So does anybody have any questions, comments? Um, questions of the attorneys, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Carter.

Um, I just want to start out by saying I was the one who started this ruckus. Um, when this what I think of as a string of incompetencies, uh, started, I was just a citizen, did not serve on the board at the time. I think, um, the attorneys here today have made lots of really good points. Um I think uh when I got here I wanted to see a a wrong write it if possible. I began by pursuing the idea that we may be able to apply or um file a claim against our attorney's um insurance. Did not seem like something we were able to do uh once we discussed it with other attorneys. Um I absolutely think that wrong was done here. I don't think it doesn't seem like anybody disagrees with that. I absolutely think that that contract was a hot mess and I don't you don't usually see contracts like that with separation agreements like that. Uh quite frankly maybe someone hoped they got that job and thought they may be separating at some point in the future. Who knows? Um and I think that the council at the time which is uh three-fifths of the council now is different. Um I think that there were mistakes at the administrative level. Of course one of the members of the administration was one of the parties signing the document. Um, all I can really say is my assessment after everyone else's assessment is that uh I don't think we could make a decision here today that doesn't disappoint the taxpayers. I think if we pursue judgment and we fail, we've spent

50 60 $70,000 um of the taxpayer money throwing, as you say, good money after bad. I think if we pursue the judgment and we succeed, we've 50 60 $70,000 uh to get a judgment and they say he owes us the money and then we have the arduous task of actually collecting the money, which in and of itself is its own thing. Very well may never happen. uh or we can acknowledge that there was indeed a stream of incompetency that led us here. We can ask better of our public servants moving forward. And I can promise that for my for what it's worth, I would never have agreed, signed, approved, or not protested such a silly contract. um and in the future won't. Uh but I do think in this case, and I'm furious about this as a taxpayer in Lake City, uh that I don't want to gamble with another 50, 60, $70,000 of taxpayer money to pursue getting a judgment to get money that we may never get, probably won't ever get. Um so that's my opinion on this. I think this is rotten. I think it stinks, but I I think that the government made this pickle and we're stuck with it.

Thank you, Mr. Carter.

Miss Harris, after um I met with um Mr. Norris, because I like James, I was furious when I found out the details of what was going on. Um I don't like to play with my money and I certainly don't want to try to play with nobody else money. And it seemed like at that time a lot of playing with the taxpayer payers money was going on then. Um but I believe somebody I hate for it to be the taxpayers but I just would hate for us to go down this road and we don't get what we want. Um, and I can say this now. The council that was here before, I myself wasn't here, the mayor wasn't here, and I don't think Carter was here. But we have to clean up this mess. But what I can say is if everybody could think back to around that time, it was a lot of stuff going on. I don't want to take up for the council or the mayor that was up here, but it was a lot of stuff going on. There's so many distractions and just a lot of foolishness going on even in the meetings itself it itself. So I don't want to just say that they were just totally incompetent. I think there were so many distractions whereas it got them off of their their game a little. I don't I don't want to give in to this. But when I look at it like it showing up is, I don't want to play with no more money either. So, I would have to say that I'm with Mr. Carter on this.

Miss Young,

um, as for myself, um, um, Journey and myself, we were kind of in the changing hands of the council. we were um fresh, if I can use that for lack of a better word. Um we're here now and as I said in the initial of my um of this when we um had to making the decision to get here. Um, I initially didn't even want to hire another attorney because my words were very close to what was said here tonight. Well, who are we fighting against ourselves? If we have a jury, who are we what are we asking the jury, and I like the words, are we asking them to save us from ourselves? Um, and that was my look on it before and it's the same now. It's not a good look. It's not a good feel. Um, and I do um say that there were um um bad bad things happening on both sides. As a as a city um representatives, we we didn't make a a good choice. Um, and I can say Mr. D may not have made a good choice. I I can't read Mr. D's mind. I don't know what is in. Um, but what I do know is we're here now. And as I said before, we hopefully get lessons from those things which we um make bad choices of when we don't call things the way um they should be

called whether it's by intention or whether it's um non-intentional. And I can assure you that it was nonintentional on the council's part. I can assure you I stand firm on that. I believe that. Um but we're here now and um we have to make a decision and we've like like they say we've messed up some money. So do we put money out there again and take a slim chance because I just don't see a jury or a judge scoring on our behalf. I just don't see it. So, um I would I would say as I said before that we have to swallow this. It's a hard pill to swallow, but we have to swallow this and we have to move on, but move on with um sound judgment. We've learned a lesson from this. We have to pay closer attention um to detail. This one slip by us. It slipped by us, but I I learned a lesson. I'm pretty sure we we all have. There was a lot a lot involved, a lot people involved. And like I say, it was a um council before us and and um Jouri and myself and now the new council and it it's really unfair to all of us and and somebody said that to me today and I I can see that it's really unfair to all and even Mr. D I can even see where it's unfair to him as well because there there it could have stopped at a certain point when we allow people if we if we know a person is wrong and we allow them if we feel like a person's wrong and we allow them then we're we're just as wrong as

they are. We could have we could have stopped it. So that's my say.

Thank you, Vice Mayor. Um I guess I'll I'll uh summarize my thoughts. Uh Mr. Cavendish whenever he came, if I recall correctly, laid out a case that the city had for claiming somewhere around $95,000 uh because of the overpayment of sick leave, sick and annual leave. Um, I believe that he said that there were differences in the contracts that were presented and the contract that was executed. I'd have to go back and review those notes again um again, even though I was looking at them um yesterday afternoon. There's definitely a wrong done here. And what I'm hearing from our attorneys and and maybe we should go back and consider the the AV equipment again for some funhouse effects to keep us all awake while attorneys are are pining a case in in a public meeting. Um what I'm hearing from the attorneys is it shouldn't go to trial because that is too much of a gamble of public dollars. There was still a wrong done. And I do think that we have to set a precedent that we're not we're not not even a speed bump. We're just a smooth road to run over and claim a check from the city of Lake City. If trial is not advisable, I would be curious as to what settlement would be advisable and if there is appetite of settlement from the other side and if not then we should make a decision based on that. Um

I don't think uh I don't think that I I'm okay walking away with nothing for the taxpayer. Um, but that's I'm one of five on a voting board. Uh, and that's my stance on it based on what Cavendish laid out and what we've gone through. And I don't know Mr. Dial. Uh, I've only ever sat in this room with him while he was at the dis and I was in the audience. So, this isn't personal. Uh, this is this is taxpayer business. So, that's my thought. Um, what do you what do we need to go forward, Mr. Martin? Mr. Mayor, uh there would need to be a motion from uh and and second vote on some sort of response or offer uh to Mr. Dial to resolve this matter. I would say at a a bare minimum uh and and threshold would be uh settlement for the exchange of general mutual releases as Mr. Foreman suggested. Beyond that, uh, the council certainly could, uh, ask for, uh, a nominal or could ask for a settlement amount. I would suggest that the further away the amount gets from a nominal settlement amount, uh, the less likely it is to be accepted by Mr. Dial, and we find ourselves right back where we were before we entered into the discussion tonight. uh what that nominal amount is. I I I would defer to the the wisdom and and judgment of of the council. Uh but uh I it would be something that would be more of a recommend or a uh a recognition uh and token as opposed to uh seeking any sort of uh full compensation or reimbursement because I think that would get beyond what would be considered an effort at reconciliation.

Thank you, Mr. Martin. Yes, ma'am. M I would like to ask the question um with Mr. G's attorney here. Has it been asked of Mr. D if if he would be willing to give some of the money back? I Yes, I absolutely had those conversations with Mr. Dial. The scope of my settlement authority is mutual general releases only. What was that, sir? That brings us right back.

Mutual general releases only. So, Mr. Dial is willing to release the city and you would release him and then everything's done with the the reason I'm saying settlement authority. Mr. Martin understands this and I'm sorry to be a boring boring droning attorney. I've told you what he'll settle for. That is settlement authority. If you accept that, we're done. We never have to talk about it again. If you make any sort of a proposal that I have to take back to Mr. Dial, he has to either accept, reject, or counter offer that. Now, because you're not in active litigation, and again, the only way we get into active litigation is if you file a lawsuit, you cannot have a shade meeting. So, every time we negotiate, it's going to look like this.

So, I did ask Mr. D to give me his maximum settlement authority for tonight. That's what I have. Mutual general releases, everybody washes their hands of each other and moves on. That's where we are.

So, Mr. Mayor, building on that, if the council were to make an offer uh or a counter offer back to Mr. Dial through his attorney uh at tonight's meeting, I would suggest that uh in addition to to whatever the substance of that is, that it include a deadline for acceptance. And I would suggest that that deadline not be any longer than 48 hours uh from uh the time of the offer at tonight's meeting. and to uh that the mayor be authorized to execute the documents uh to finalize that settlement uh if it is accepted by Mr. Dial within that period of time.

Thank you Mr. Martin discussion questions comments motions Mr. Foreman do you think that um Mr. D would um it almost seem like the the ball is is in his court, but do you think that um he could repay the citizens of Lake City the attorney fees that we use and then we can call it?

My understanding of the amount of attorney's fees you expended is that he would be nowhere near that on his best day. So, uh again, Mr. Dial did not authorize me to extend any monetary settlement this evening. Mr. Jernigan.

Well, let me comment on it too, I guess. Um I I hear Mr. D. Mr. Dial Mr. D. Um again, we have to save this city uh for ourselves. Um uh I I I think me I think personally what we should do is um the uh the mayor whoever name is on those documents those are the people we need to go after not Mr. Dao Mr. the DAO did exactly what uh he was authorized to do from my understanding. But the the uh we we got two attorneys involved in this and those are the people that I think that we should try to get some of the money back if it's possible. But Mr. Dao and and and uh Mr. Foreman and uh Mr. Norris over here and and even our attorney, you know, they they've already um uh put everything where we can get it and understanding. So, I don't know why we got to fight for Mr. D this that we we can forget about that. We might as well get the attorney, those two attorneys. That's the way I look at it.

Thank you, Mr. Chigan. Miss Young, that's going to cost as well. That's going to cost as well.

Thank you, Miss Young. Do we have any further questions, comments? It's just it it doesn't feel good at all. Um, it just seemed like we're in between a rock and a hard place trying to clean up somebody else's mess. But I can say this just from looking at the documents that I looked at, Mr. D did what he was supposed to. He accepted the money according to the paperwork. I I'm just at a loss of words right now. This is just ridiculous.

Mr. Mayor, I have a question for Mr. Martin. Mr. Martin, what have we spent so far on this? Or do you know, I'm sorry. As far as outside council goes, uh the tally of all of invoices received thus far was around $14,000 plus dollars for Mr. Cavendish and uh Mr. Norris. Uh Mr. Norris, I expect, is going to have another invoice that I would say would be safely south of 5,000. Uh, so I don't think it would exceed that. I don't know an exact amount on what time he spent since the last invoice at the end of December.

Thank you, Mr. McM. Mr. Mr. Mayor, you uh voiced your opinion that you'd like to see some sort of a Mhm. And do you have a do you have an idea of what you'd like to see?

I'd like to see um I'd like to see a token of what So when Mr. Cavend just laid it out, it was because there were discrepancies in the executed document along with the first the two contracts that were approved. Um, and so I'd like to see uh at least a portion of that in my mind, you know, I know that won't come even close to to covering what um we've spent or what we paid out, but I would say 5 to$10,000 I think would be a good token and probably um at least put a bump in the road for anybody that came along in the future, but I don't know how realistic that is. It's not really

Joel. Joel's saying those general mutual general mutual releases. That's me. Hey, look. I'm one of five again. Uh, sure. Please, Mr. Foreman.

The the Cavendish the Caendish report was explaining why the second set of council action would be necessary because the two documents that were approved in January were internally inconsistent. And what Cavendish was saying is you could have done that separation agreement to make it fully enforceable. It should have been approved again by the council because of those inconsistencies and that would have resolved the inconsistency. I think to Miss Harris's point, if you do, as Mr. Norris indicated, if if if it were argued to a jury, again, this is a contracts case and we all feel, you know, rights were done, wrongs were done. You're talking about equity. That's really not something that's going to come into play in a contracts case. and say, "What did the paperwork say?" Mr. Norris is absolutely correct. The argument Mr. Dah would make is when the council approved everything in January of 23 and that appendix was attached and the only thing left blank were the dates, the council approved it in January of 23. Now, Mr. Cavendish's opinion is a legal opinion. And he says, "No, no, no. You needed to come back." Don't forget the argument. You're suing Mr. Dial. Mr. D is going to say I, as a lay person, had every right to rely on the signatures from January of 23 when I moved forward and accepted the separation agreement in October of 23 even though I didn't have council action. So Mr. Cavendish's legal opinion, I think it's a strong legal opinion. I think he's exactly right. Is a jury going to care? And I think that's Mr. Norris's point when he talks about the arguments that are going to be made in a contract action. Those are the types of arguments we're going to make. And so, um, again, I I wanted to be real careful, not disputing Mr. Cavendish at all. Highly respected, very knowledgeable attorney, knows exactly what he's talking about. He's right. Okay. What you're talking about here is litigation. And that's where, you know, not to steal funding from Miss Hair, but Miss Harris said, you know, in in many

respects, Mr. Dial as the party who's received payment is in the catbird seat. And so when you talk about settlement negotiation with him, unless and until a lawsuit's filed, he does have the leverage and that's where he sits. Just being super candid with you guys since most of you are my friends. So thank you, Mr. Foreman. Mr. Foreman, so so you don't think you could possibly ask for that little bump that the mayor is talking about? When it comes to settlement, I never say I never close my ears. Yeah. But I will say that I don't believe Mr. dial is highly receptive to settlement beyond what he's authorized.

Mr. Nor, it it appears that you'd like to say something.

Well, I want to represent my client. So, look what you are in the unfortunate position of doing right this moment is negotiation of a settlement in public. And that's just not con conducive, you know, and and it's part of the, you know, the situation that we have under the sunshine law, which I I'm all for. But for example, like when you're hiring someone and you say, "Well, we we want to pay a range of a salary, whatever it is, whether it's 50 cents or $50,000 or whatever." Well, if I'm the employee and the council has given a range from $30 to $50,000, what do you think my my position is when I go into to the negotiations? Obviously, it's at the top of of that range. So, what Mr. Foreman has explained to the council is that he is here with settlement authority for only two things. one, each side each issues a mutual release and ends the matter. Each goes their own way. The second part is that his client doesn't pay any money. Okay? And neither does the city. Of course, he doesn't have a claim against you. So, I'm here to advise you that you can here in public make a settlement offer. And so, you can authorize me as your counsel to make a settlement offer to Mr. Mr. Foreman and to therefore to Mr. Dial of whatever amount you wish and I will do your bidding and take that to him. I'm obligated uh to communicate any settlement offer they make. I'm obligated to communicate any settlement offer that you make. Now, if the city authorizes the filing of a

lawsuit, then you are in a position to not only continue to conduct settlement negotiations, but then to do them in the course of shade meetings or where an exception to the Sunshine Law where we're able to have candid discussions about the the case and the merits of the case and the and the provisions of um likelihood of of uh prevailing at trial and and let you consider all of those things under a little greater comfort level because they aren't heard by the opposing party, which I think is in the interest of the public. So, some here in the room might argue that shade meetings are not in the interest of the public. Shade meetings are very much in the interest of the public. So there's a time and place for everything. If this council wishes to make a counterp proposal to Mr. Dial, you may do so. Obviously, his council will hear it tonight, but he and I will discuss it after that. And I'm happy to entertain any questions you have.

Thank you, Mr. Norris. Mr. Carter, you had something?

Well, Mr. Mayor, Mr. Child's council has made it clear that he doesn't believe that he'd be willing to pay anywhere near I think is what he said what we have spent which sounds like it's roughly five 15,000 so far and perhaps just a smidge more than that after that. You'd like to see a 5 to $10,000 pound of flesh. We'd all like to see it over. Uh I suggest that we ask Mr. Dial to pay us $5,000 and we sign mutual aid agreements and it's not a negotiation. If he accepts that offer, we all go our separate ways and see about not doing this again. Uh, and if he doesn't, I say we move forward with the original plan

with a do we want to do you want to set a 48 hour Mr. Martin? Absolutely. So, I was going to ask if uh there was a deadline associated with Mr. Dial accepting that and would the mayor be authorized to sign the documents necessary to consummate the agreement if he accepted it? 48 hours sounds good to me and I'm fine with the mayor accepting that. What What's you say the initial plan uh litigation? So if he says no to the $5,000

we I think we've all everyone in the room has agreed that he got an amount of money incorrectly. No one's confused about that. It's been years now while we're going on it. Uh I don't I think I think a pan of flesh is more than fair. And I mean again, there has to be some sort of precedent set that we will take this seriously. Clearly for the last year and a half, almost two years, I've taken it really seriously. I very much dislike how this whole thing is going and I will do everything I can to make sure that nothing like this happens again while I'm up here.

So we we have a motion um for for matters of and it's just been clarified. So, if we get a second, then we'll have discussion. I make a motion. I I explain what I think we should do. I will make I'm sorry. I'm I'm sorry. I thought that you said I'd make a motion to Well, well, uh, while he's explaining Go ahead. I want you to continue to explain. I move. I thought you would say he was going to explain. He did. He did just a moment ago. Yes, I know. So, so can I comment on your Yeah, before he makes a motion, please. Yeah, that's what I'm saying. I'm trying to do that before you make the motion. But if you want to make the motion, I'll I'll tell you the end, too, as well. I'm sorry. I thought he made the motion. Mr. Jernigan, you're recognized.

Thank you so much, Mayor. Uh, I mean, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out. The, uh, uh, the attorney over here, again, I'm not an attorney. I know how they explain things and they know all the all the, uh, the words uh, to use, the right words to use. But it's clear that Mr. out is not going to accept. I don't care if it's $5, he's not going to accept that. Um, and uh it's clear that we are going to lose um uh this case

to me. I I'm only speaking for me, okay? So, I mean, we we keep bouncing back and forth. Don't nobody wants to see the citizens of this community pay for a wrongdoing that we have done. And when I say we, just I said the council, I'm not talking about Carter. I'm not talking about the mayor. I'm not talking about Miss Harris. Let's make sure we get that understanding.

And uh we as as councils, uh Miss Young and I, we didn't even know it was executed. I don't I don't think you guys understand that. That's so when I say we, that's what I mean by that. They did this behind the scenes. If it wasn't behind the scenes, that's why I say, the uh uh the the attorney and the mayor at the time, those are the people that did this to us. So, it's clear that Mr. D is not going to pay for any of our wrongdoings. Period. It's clear.

Well, I think that um if we go to litigation um we most certainly will lose money, but Mr. Da will also cuz his attorney will demand to be paid and I can guarantee you it will be more than $5,000. So, you know, I Carter said five, but I'm um I'll say 750 or even the 10. But um you know, you you're almost speechless when you come trying to come up with something and and you're it just seemed like you're at a loss. So, with that being said, um if the I'm going to go with Carter. If it goes to litigation, that means the city will pay, but Mr. Da will also pay. And I'm thinking he would end up paying more than $750 to $10,000.

Miss Young, and I we're at this point where we don't know what to say. We're speechless because we're trying to make wrong right and we could can't make wrong right. Um the at this the space we're in now, we just have to do what's best. We can't do what's right because we're beyond that. Um can't make wrong right. So we have to do what's best now. Do you really think it's best to go to litigation? We're here and we have these attorneys in this room and we're here.

I mean, let's we don't want to. We we we we're not edging to go to court. We don't want to, Mr. At the end of the day, like the mayor said, we can't just keep this case is separate. What if something else come up next week? It'll be somebody else feeling like they can roll over the city without any accountability. So, our focus better be different. Our focus better be different. Now, we can't be tampered over like like this. We can't say that we're not catch this, but we can't we can't say we're going to punch him because he punched us.

Mr. Carter, you had something to say.

Yeah. I mean, obviously I've made it clear that I think that the attorneys are right. this would be a bit of an uphill battle, but I do not think that there is no case. To be clear, and if we had to go to litigation, I do not think that it's impossible that the city comes out on top, I think, is clear. And again, I don't care how many pages it took to explain that something wrong happened, something wrong happened. And also, I agree that there are multiple people who were at this dice uh who absolutely should have handled it really differently. I think we I think we had an attorney that it's not very familiar with municipal law. I think we had Mr. Mayor Mr. Mayor Whit just lost his son. I have no desire to speak ill of him.

Right.

But he said himself in this meeting that he did not read what was put before him. Neither of them are here. Now, if they were here, I would suggest to everyone in the city that we remove them for this. But that's not an option for us now. But wrong was done. And if we went to trial, I think there is a case. I don't think it's just a cut and Mr. Mayor, I'm I move to offer Mr. style, $5,000 and a mutual release from the city and himself.

I think it's a little piece of something and we can leave and we can get on with all the good projects we have going on. And to be clear, yes, our focus should be on high alert all the time. Mine has been since I got here, and I hope the rest of ours are from now on. You you you uh reformalize that motion, Mr. Carter. Please move that we offer to sign mutual aid agreement on mutual releases and $5,000 paid to the city. Um do you want to put a timeline on that, Mr. Garner?

48 hours and I am okay with the mayor accepting set off and if we but but not a back and forth, not a negotiation, not two more meetings, nothing of this. That's the offer. If not, I say we move forward. I second the motion second now more. Yes, sir. And the mayor sign just specifically in the mayor's author to sign the documents. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Okay. May I read back the motion? Okay. I wrote it up while everyone was talking. Sure. We have a motion and a second.

Okay. Yes. Okay. So, this is what I understood Mr. Carter to say initially. A motion to authorize Guy Norris to make a settlement offer to Mr. Dial in the amount of 5,000 in the signature of mutual general releases. that of course both the city and Mr. Dao. The motion includes authorization for council to move forward with the original plan of litigation if Mr. D refuses a settlement offer. There is a 48 hour deadline that the mayor authorized to sign documents if accepted by dial. Did that capture everything, Mr. Martin? I believe so. Yes. Yes. Yes. Thank you. Um, before we go to council comment, uh, we've got public comment on this specific

There's a motion on the floor. There has not been a second yet. I'm sorry. There was a There was a second. M did second. There was a second. These darn microphones.

Oh, yeah. So, we will now open it up uh for the public comment, Mr. Liller. And then uh because a proposition has been defined, we'll go from public comment back to council comment, final remarks, and then a vote. Thank you very much, your honor. Which is where this comments, public comments should have started in the first place about this thing. I think two weeks is too short. I mean, two days is 48 hours too short. It should be by the next meeting. So, it could be announced. Not withstanding that, if you want to give Mr. dial in 48 hours, which is clearly your prerogative, and you execute whatever agreement it is, but you know, I don't know that you really should execute it. You got in trouble the first time

with having a document executed that nobody saw. Now, and I don't mean any disrespect to Mr. Carter because I think his intentions are fine. Now you're saying you want to make a motion to allow the mayor to execute a document which you haven't seen.

So I think what would be fair to Mr. Dial, his three attorneys here, Mr. Norris, Mr. Foreman, and Mr. Martin is that he have until the next scheduled meeting to respond. I think that's fair to Mr. Dial, gives him plenty of time to think about it and the public would know what's going on. Notwithstanding that, I think it's just crazy to approve a document that nobody's seen. We don't know the exact words and you just got in trouble with this before. So, I I rest my case. If that's the case though and you approve that, I would respectfully request a press release go out to all the local media announcing that the mayor has executed the agreement and a copy of the agreement go with the press release. Thank you very much, your honor.

Thank you, Mr. Loker. Miss Young, you indicated first. I wanted to say, but he said exactly what I was going to say. We just sat here and gave instructions to do what we're sitting here in trouble about right now. That document need to come back. I'm not saying we don't trust you, mayor. I'm not the mayor that I'm not the the mayor when I haven't Let's do it the proper way.

Mr. Jernigan and then Mr. Martin. Uh thank you uh for recognizing me, mayor. Uh we we're we're town councils and you you have the mayor and and that's exactly what we are. We we we we represent the people of our district and this community, Lake City, Florida. Um when it comes to uh litigation and people saying they want to execute this, they want to do that and that mayor signed this. I mean, we got a sitting attorney right here to give us instructions. That's the reason why we have a an attorney, not not for Carter to talk about what he wants and not not for Ricky Jernigan to say what he wants or or or even the mayor to say what he wants. Uh we we should be getting advice uh from our city attorney to see if we're headed down the right road. Uh just like we we talked about the 48 hours. In my mind, I'm thinking 48 hours. Uh uh I don't even know if Mr. I was in the country or not, you know. So, so you have to uh get that legal that that legal counseling from our our city attorney before we make a u before we make another mistake or get back in the wrong area. So, it appears to me that the the city attorney should be uh telling us which way we need to go and hopefully He's leading us in the right direction and not the wrong direction. Again, I'm not an attorney. I don't think nobody up here is one. Uh but we need that legal advice from our attorney moving forward.

Thank you, Mr. Journey. Mr. Carter had something then Mr. Yeah. real quick. Mr. Foreman, is your client in the country? Are you allowed to tell us? Is he in the United States? I honestly don't know. It's fair. 48 hours. He's reachable by telephone. Thank you. Do you find that 48 hours is enough time for this one way or the other? Do you have an opinion? I I wouldn't. Yeah. The answer will be forthcoming fairly quickly, I would imagine.

The answer will be forthcoming fairly quickly, I would imagine. Yeah. So I mean I I'm understanding what Miss Young's concern is and and you know so I don't know that timing is as big an issue for my side as it would be for your s also to be clear it's not the same thing as what happened before because the council didn't authorize the signing that happened before in this case we'd be authorizing and to be clear if the document said anything other than a mutual release and money then we'd be having another lawsuit I reckon. Uh, so, um, I I I don't think there's anything wrong with my motion there. I don't mind the mayor signing a document that says exactly that. Mr. Martin, Mr. Martin,

and excuse me.

I I don't think I would be comfortable proceeding with the mayor signing something without it coming back to this body if the uh if the the motion were not as simple as what it is. Uh and and to be clear and and the other attorneys can add to this general mutual releases to be clear, if the city had any claim, whether we know about it, don't know about it, think we know about it, whatever it is, if if there's any potential claim that we might have against Mr. Dial as of the date of that document, once we sign that release, it is gone. We have a new baseline. Now, anything happens after that, different ballgame. Anything before it, whether we knew about it or didn't know about it or whatever, the claim is gone. Same thing with him. Any claim he may have against the city to that point arising from his employment, arising from uh things that may have been said about him by others because there there was a non-disparagement element of the separation agreement. uh you know anything he may claim that was said as a result of the uh non-disparagement agreement in the separation uh agreement itself anything like that any claims he may have any wrongs that he claims may have happened to him when he voided with the city they're gone so so those two documents are are are very comprehensive uh they're they're mutual uh and and uh and uh and final in their nature and then the other element of this is that the city get a check or some other tender for $5,000. So, it it's only because of the nature of the simplicity of what we're talking about that I would even remotely suggest that uh it not come back to council and that the mayor be authorized to execute those documents. It's merely the

simplicity. If it's anything beyond that, it would have to come back to council. Thank Thank you, Mr. Martin. Miss Young, I'm just sitting here thinking how much have we paid Mr. Nars turning. How much have we paid Mr. Norris? I think the first invoice was 3,800. Uh we haven't received an invoice for the time he spent for the last roughly 30 days or so. And tonight and and tonight, right?

Why did we pay Mr. Nars? What did we expect from him? We expected to for him to do what he did initially, which was to give a an analysis of our chances if we proceeded into court. In other words, we were asking him to be our attorney for the litigation. Any attorney when they're approached with a matter for litigation is going to do exactly what he did with their client. They're going to sit down. They're going to look at the the case, look at the evidence that's going to be offered by both sides and make some sort of analysis that the client can rely on regarding what the what the chances are of success uh both for the battle and the war. The the battle being the the the the case itself and then if we win the case and we get a judgment then winning the war which would actually be to get the money.

Thank and and what did he give us? What direction did he give us that's best for us? What what did we get out of it? So his recommendation and and again feel free to come up and correct me, but the gist of his recommendation is that if the city has an opportunity to settle this with Mr. Dial on mutually acceptable terms without litigating this matter that the city make an effort in doing that. that that was his recommendation that ultimately there there weren't any specific numbers involved but if there's a way we can resolve it short of litigation we make an attempt to do that because litigation is uncertain

and the term he used that we would go before jury I'm go past this judge that we would go before jury and ask jury to save us we pay for that and what do we do with it I don't I I'm not against asking Mr. D for whatever amount. We can ask him. He can only say yes or no. Um but as far as um as far as taking it in a farther, I think it's in our best interest. But yes, I I I I agree. We can ask him and he can say yes or no, but I don't believe we should use the taxpayers dollars to Did you take that off of your motion? Is that I did not.

You left that on there. I don't think he said it. Mr. Mr. Norris, you want to come back up? M. Harris, you had a question. All right. So, I'm thinking I'm I'm still with Carter. Um 48 hours to answer and by the next council meeting something be in place whereas the council can go over it and say, "Yeah, unable." but he has only 48 hours to answer to whether we're gonna do what we're going to do or not. That's I'm fine to amend the motion to have us approve it, but I still Yeah, because I mean he only has 48 hours to answer.

So yes or no proposition to come back. Uh the way we would word that would be 48 hours to accept and then uh to perform uh following an approval of the documents at the next council meeting. Does that make sense? Mr. Foreman and Mr. Norris. Am I okay? All right. Are you amending your motion for that? I will amend my motion that we that we that the mayor does not sign until it comes before the council. One more time. I mean, until it comes before the council, if it is indeed accepted, etc. Mr. Norris, you had something to add.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just I want to be sure that what I've indicated to the council is clearly understood. In a lawsuit, both sides present arguments. Both sides present evidence. What I'm saying to the council is that the other side will be arguing that the city is asking you to save it from itself. That is not my argument on behalf of the city. I'm going if I'm tasked with litigating this case on behalf of the city, which I that is not what I was engaged on. As Mr. Martin said, it's a limited engagement, just an analysis base um at this point. But if we go to to litigation, I'm going to craft pleadings and we're going to go litigate that case and we're going to try to litigate it to win. Okay? But my point to you tonight in a public meeting is that the other side is going to characterize the case as the city is asking you, the trier of fact. That means a jury or the judge depending on how the case comes out as to whether it's jury or non-jury asking you to save it from itself. That's going to be the argument.

Okay? And that's going to be somewhat of an argument to uh difficult argument to to get past because of the nature of all this. I do not represent former Mayor Wit, but I do want to point out to the council members who are are lay people. While Mayor Wit may have may be a lawyer that's licensed to practice law in the state of Florida, he was not retained as legal counsel for the city. So, he was the mayor. He is not the city's lawyer. And so, he cannot be sued for malpractice um in in this matter. All right. Um, and so you, you know, there are other measures that Mr. Mark, uh, Mr. Carter alluded to that might have, you know, if he were still in office or what have you, that you might want to take, but anyway, that that's really neither here nor there, but I just want to be try to be clear about this and and so, um, I'm I'm not going to go and argue to a jury, hey, save my client from itself. I I'll do a little better argument than that.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. We appreciate it. Uh, question for Miss Harris. I just want to say this, Mr. Norris, I do understand that. But at the same token, um, if we do happen to take it to court, let's just say we take it to court, that means he's going to have to have an attorney, that means he will spend more than $5,000 that the city is asking for. I could not agree more. It might not be the attorney that's saying, um, oh, this a slam dunk or whatever and we we got this. But at the end of the day, Mr. D have to pay that man.

And he will pay more than $5,000. So, yeah, we we already out of money. So, if he give us $5,000, he ought to be skipping to the bank to write that check. Mr. Mayor, can we hold a vote? Yep. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Her. Thank you very much. Uh, Miss Sykes, please reccharacterize the motion and we will then call the role right after.

Motion to authorize Guy Norris to make a settlement offer to Mr. Dial in the amount of $5,000 and the signature of mutual general leases by both the city and DA. The motion includes authorization for council to move forward with the original plan of litigation if Mr. D refuses settle if Mr. D refuses the settlement offer. There is a 48 hour deadline for Mr. vow to accept with any settlement offers with any settlement offer coming before the council at the next meeting. Thank you, Miss Ses. Uh, please call the RO. Okay. Mr. Carter, yay. Miss Harris, yes. Miss Young, I'll say yes. Okay. Mr. Jernigan, no. Okay. Mayor Walker?

Yes. All right. And now we'll have a uh fivem minute recess.

chocolate at the back of the room. Okay, go ahead and gavvel back in. I'm starting on my desk. So, welcome back to the city council regular session of February 2nd, 2026. Uh we are now on to resolutions of new business. Item number eight, city council resolution number 2026 015. This has to do with the Sunrise Consulting uh contract renewal. Um it's not necessary that we read these by title. So we will just uh go by with substance. Um Mr. Rosenthal, you want to say anything about this before we discuss?

Absolutely, Mayor. Uh I think this has been a good uh investment for the city. Uh they've they helps having a voice down in Tallahassee. We've gotten a $700,000 airport fuel truck and we've also gotten um over $100,000 in runway lighting. Um and it's just good to have a voice there and it's and the grants are showing that several grants and and we've got several active legislative asks this uh this session as well uh that they're moving forward for us. So I also think it's been a huge payoff. Anybody else want to say anything or make a motion? We'll entertain a motion. Mr. Mayor, I'd like to make that motion on resolution number 2026-015.

Thank you both. Do we have any further comments, questions? Hearing none, Miss Sykes, please call the role. Mr. Jernigan, yes. Miss Young, yes. Mr. Carter, yes. Miss Harris, yes. Mayor Walker, yes. Now, we're moving on to city council resolution number 2026-016. This has to do with a stump clearing contract um with uh Looks Great Services of Mississippi Incorporated. Mr. Rosenthal or Mr. Johnson, you want to say anything about this one before we go to council comments, questions? Just a regular 3% um um increase from the last contract and still the lowest vendor.

Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Any questions, comments from the council? Anyone want to make a motion for city council resolution number 226-016? Mayor, I'd like to make a motion that resolution number 2026 016 approved. A motion and a second. Thank you both. Do we have any final questions, comments? Hearing none, Miss Sykes, will please call the role. Miss Harris, yes. Mr. Carter, yes. Miss Young, yes. Mr. Jernigan, yes. Mayor Walker, yes. Moving on to item number 10. This is city council resolution number 2026-017. This is for uh plat delegation to growth management director for permit expedition. Anything else you want to say about this one, Mr. Rosenthal?

Mayor, this is just giving the uh gross management administrator the authority to uh accept and review and receive and process plats and plat submitts. It'll help speed up our permitting process. Thank you, Mr. Rosenthal. Uh Mr. Carter, you had something that you'd like to say? No. Okay. Uh any questions, comments? Anyone like to make a motion for city council resolution number 226-017? Mayor, I'd like to make a motion that 2026 017 be approved. Second. Thank you. We have a motion and three seconds. Um, do we have any final questions, comments? Hearing none, Miss Sykes, will you please call the role? Miss Harris, yes. Miss Young, yes. Mr. Jernigan, yes. Mr. Carter, yes. Mayor Walker,

yes. Uh, moving on to item number 11. This is city council resolution number 2026-018. has this pertains to our last uh uh meeting that we held in conjunction with the county on the feasibility study. Um Mr. Rosenthal, would you like to say anything else about this? Is this is just the feasibility study is going to tell us whether or not that combination is even practical? Thank you, Mr. Rosenthal. Anybody else have any questions, comments? I'll entertain a motion for city council resolution number 2026-018. Mayor, I'd like to move that resolution number 2026 018 be approved. We have a motion.

Okay, we have no second on this one. Um, it's a motion fails for lack of a second, unless somebody would like to second that. Right. Motion fails. Um, all right. Item number 12, which is discussion and possible action to consider appointment to planning and zoning board to fill an expired term through October 31st, 2028 for seat 3F. The applicant is Kria Jones. Mr. Mayor, is Miss Jones here? Uh, Mr. Martin, you had a question as well? I don't believe that M. Jones is here. M. Jones.

No. Um, Mr. Martin. Uh, thank you, Mr. Mayor. I was just going to try to jump in before a motion is formally made and suggest that rather than there be a motion to appoint Miss Jones, that the motion be if there is one, to direct staff to return to the next meeting with a resolution appointing Miss Jones. Thank you. Thank you. So, uh, if if you would if we do come to that conclusion, um, please do that. Yes, sir.

Uh, Mr. Mayor, I'd like to direct staff to uh bring that back in the resolution form. I would also like so having previously served on the planning and zoning board um and having watched quite a few of their meetings recently uh all the time actually. I love that board and stuff. Um obviously the only requirements in in in city code to serve on that board is that you are of age and are a res a resident. Uh so there's no official vetting process at all with that. Uh kind of falls down to us and whether or not we here deem whoever applies uh um suitable. So and I don't know how to go about it whether it's something that we can do officially or whether I can just make the suggestion. But uh when a resolution comes back with the possibility of someone being appointed to that board, um I think that we should ask them at the very least to be here to allow us to talk to them, meet them, you know, determine things like do they know what it does, do they know what's expected of them, why do they want to serve, etc. Because obviously we don't have to appoint just anyone who applies. We want to appoint people who we think will do well at the job. when that comes back, if if nothing else, Mr. Angelo, I'd like to see um them be invited to come and speak on their behalf and that in that regard that we at least are allowed to have them.

Thank you, Mr. Carter. Miss Young, so are we not approving um this Miss Kendra Jones because she's not here or because the resolution is not the resolution. Why the resolution not? He's he's asking because he wasn't sure that we would approve to to have that appointment made, I guess. Okay. Because it's on here for discussion and possible action. So, we should have had a resolution, right? This is how the last several appointments have been handled is that they were brought before council to recommend somebody for appointment via future resolution. And so, we just handled it the same way the past several have been handled.

Okay. Well, I've spoke with Miss Jones and she's very interested and um she does meet the um requirements. So, almost everyone does and I'm sure she'll be at the next one. Thank you, Miss Young. Um yes, ma'am. Um whoever the applicant is, not necessarily Miss Jones. I kind of before I say yay a nay to them, I kind of would like to meet them and know who they are. Maybe ask them some questions or what have you. I don't want to blindly say yeah put them on the board and I don't know them from Adam's apple. Oh, I didn't say do it. I didn't say do that. I was just ask the question is No, no, no, no. I'm just saying that's what I want to do

for now. Not just her. Anybody that comes up to try to be on the board wants to be on the board. Yes, sir. Mr. Jernigan.

Hey, thank you, Mayor. And you like like like I've told uh everybody before, I don't know exactly when I said it, but anybody who wants money, they want donations, they want to be on board, you know, I don't know why people don't come up here and present uh whatever they're looking for. But some some people could just come up and say, "Hey, I want uh uh monies." And then next thing you know, we're giving out money. We have no idea who these people are. And I've said this before, anytime somebody want to be appointed to any of these boards or they want money from the city of Lake City, I think they should come up here and let us see who they are, what they stand for. I mean, that's simple.

And also, Miss Kendra may not even know she's on the So, did anybody reach out to her? That would be I never knew Mr. Angela. I don't even know who she is. Yes. As far as reaching out to Miss Kendra, I um I did reach out to her and let her know that she would be this would be on the agenda for tonight. I wanted to make sure that she was aware of it. Okay. Mr. Carter, I have a question, too. It occurred to me it's been a it's been a while. Obviously, it's been a few years since I was on the PNZ. Um

I don't recall having any kind of background check done. I mean, do we do that any of that? I know I provided information, name, etc. Um do we do any sort of background checks at I know we're not required by code, but do we? I do not know that. Go ahead,

Mr. Mayor. I'd like to find out. May I'd like to, if I can be frank, uh, for for my own personal opinion, that board is not functioning as well as I think it could. And I think part of the reason is because of the lack of well, all the things I've just stated that we need to probably be trying to do there. Um so I would like to find out if we aren't doing that should we is there precedence like do are they usually etc. Mr. Mr. Martin, do you have

So, uh, on on the issue of criminal background, I I think the application asked the question, have you been convicted of a felony, which if there is a felony conviction, that would be uh prohibitive uh constitutionally in in Florida, but beyond that, I don't think there's any inquiry as to background beyond. Uh, Miss Sykes is I believe she filled out the old application. I don't believe she filled out the new one, if I'm not that correct. Yeah. So, she did not fill out the new application that I believe asks that question. Okay. Um, how did she get the old one? It's been a while since she applied.

Mr. did not realize we had updated the application and I did send him the revised one and I don't know if he forwarded it to her to fill out or or not. I did, but I don't know if she got it. I mean, I emailed it to her. And I would ask council if it's something that the council would like to do going forward and that you know maybe we can re look at the whole process and that and put some more criteria in as far as somebody to be on the board and um you know if that's something the council wants to do we can look at other jurisdictions and bring something back to council at a later date and kind of show you know hey this is what some other jurisdictions are doing and then get some direction.

Sure. Mr. Mayor, if I may, I would just follow that. Yeah, I I personally would really like to see that ship tighten up a little bit in addition to the other uh things I've alluded to. There's a lot I've noticed a lot of tardiness or uh absenteeism with some of the members of the board um that I find frustrating. I understand that it's a volunteer position, but if it's not something that is important to the people who are serving on it, they shouldn't. So, uh I I would like to see uh have staff come back with some recommendations always we may tighten that up and make sure that the people that we're appointing uh will perform well. All right. Thank you, Mr. Carter. Mr. Jernigan, and then Miss Young. Go ahead. Go ahead, Miss Young. Miss Young, what took so long for her application to be viewed and and her given the opportunity to become a part of this?

So, we wanted to make sure we were fair and transparent. Um, so they we wanted to go out for advertisement, advertised the application process, and gave a little bit of time for people to apply. And um, being that we didn't get any other applications, we proceeded to move forward. Okay. You do realize she applied way back. It's been a long time. It was back in I think December when she applied. Yeah.

Oh, it was before December, I'm pretty sure. Um because she's talked to me twice and the last time she talked to me is when I actually um talked to administration to pull her application and let us get her in here and find out um what go what's going on as far as her becoming a part of this board. And I sure hope that we don't, as long as it's been since she applied, I sure hope that we don't kick her around with these new ideas we coming up with about a person being on the board. No. Thank you, Mr. Young. Mr. J.

Yes. Um I I just want this this board to understand that uh uh when you talk about a a volunteer position uh keep in mind uh when these applicants put in the uh for these positions it's volunteer work and just like Mr. Carter said it's volunteer. So if uh they're not going to come uh uh at every meeting they're they they got to be tardy. They got to work. they they got to do all these other things before uh this meeting uh takes place. So just keep in mind uh as we move forward that we we can't be too hard on them but but we can't be u uh we can't be just uh lax with them as well. So uh keep in mind that this is a volunteer uh board that's appointed uh by us. So just want to make sure everybody understands that.

Thank you Mr. Jernigan. Any other thoughts, questions? No. Thank you. Do we Did we have them? Was there a defined motion to bring that back as a resolution or are we just coming to a consensus? Do they need to be? If I'm hearing consensus, that's what we're going to do. I'm fine with that. So, okay. I think there's enough for me to do what I got to There's a consensus for you to write everybody for him to bring back a resolution to our uh February 17th meeting to um approve Kry Jones to the planning and zoning board.

All right. All right. Great. All right. Well, that concludes all of our items on tonight's agenda. We will move straight into departmental and administrative comments. Uh and we will begin with you, Mr. Rosenthal.

Thank you, Mayor. Uh just want to let everybody know that the police department has has uh completed its annual report. It's either in your boxes or will soon be in your boxes. Also, we had a lot of water breaks in the past couple of days because of the inclement weather. Uh suddenly our teams uh led by Steve were out uh all day. Uh three trucks running constantly and that continued on into today uh with with most of our trucks out uh turning off water and helping people get ready for when the water starts flowing again. Um, so our our staff always does uh exemplary work. Uh, and this this past storm situation or or not storm but ice situation was no different.

Great. Thank you, Mr. Rosenthal. Mr. Martin. Uh, thank you, Mr. Mayor. I did want to give a report back on last Tuesday's uh, ADA conference that Miss Sykes and I attended. uh the focus of the uh session we attended was the I'll give you the long hyper techchnical term it's the the web content accessibility guidelines 2.1 2.1 level AA or 2A that that's the the long technical term for it uh for the city what that means is uh I just want to mention when he when he finishes I I forgot to mention something for the chief the chief wants to talk to the board

Mr. Um anyway, so that that's a long way of saying that uh there have been new guidelines put in place by the um the uh federal government concerning the ADA that local governments will have to comply with. Uh for the city of Lake City, that compliance will have to happen by next April. Uh it is uh more comprehensive and daunting than I anticipated it would be. Uh it is going to require a team effort of all personnel in the city uh particularly uh you know key administrative personnel directors and uh and above uh administration uh legal uh clerk's office uh I think everyone has to play a part what it did uh bring to light uh as well is uh that the city does not have a an officially designated and uh and somewhat trained uh ADA coordinator to coordinate all elements of of the American with Disabilities Act, not not just the web content guidelines that we're currently subject to. uh without turning this uh on on uh you know at this time into a full-blown workshop, I would just say that uh it would be my recommendation that uh the council reconvene on this issue and and that the city manager work with council to to designate a coordinator and to uh look at uh overall compliance with the ADA uh and uh as part of that as an immediate issue start looking at implementing uh the new web content uh guidelines because that's not we can't start that next April and expect it to come into place. It needs to start pretty quickly and it's going to take some training. I mean on my part the way I develop documents, things that I typically bold in a contract, I probably shouldn't bold so that uh it's easier for for people to read and easier to convert into a web

accessible document. uh use of pie charts, uh use of graphics, uh things like that that we use routinely in our uh growth management reports are things that need to be revisited. It's a very holistic approach. So, but it was a very good conference, much better than I expected. Thank you, Mr. Martin. Miss Hakes,

I think uh Clay summed it up about the ADA stuff. it was more comprehensive and daunting than we both uh realize and we do definitely have to do a lot more meeting on that. Um the only other thing that I'd like to say is I just want to express my heartfelt condolences to the family uh to former mayor Steven Wit and his family on the loss of his son and just to let everyone know that that funeral is tomorrow at Gateway Forest Lawn at 2 PM. Just wanted everyone to know that. Thank you, Miss Sykes. Vice Mayor Young. Oh, I don't really don't have much. I just want to say welcome to Lake City, the snow city. Yeah, right.

I didn't have water for a few hours Sunday morning, but just grateful that everybody was safe and we've been here a long time, y'all. Blame you. So, it right, but y'all have a good night. Very good meeting. Thank you, Vice Mayor Young. I'm going to bounce back before we go to to Chief Butler and Don Rosenthal.

Thanks, Mayor. I just want permission from the council. If you recall few months ago, we retired one of our police dogs. He reached the maximum age. We were in the process of looking for another dog. I have a canine officer selected. We do have a citizen that's always been interested in our canine unit and over the years she's donated some equipment. uh she found out the dog we were looking for at the kennel that we used and she gave the kennel the money to purchase the dog and wants the kennel to donate that dog to the police department. The cost to that dog at a minimum would be about $5,000. Uh when that they're going to be doing the medicals this week to make sure the dog passes all the medicals. Uh but it's not fair to the kennel to be housing and feeding the dog for the month it'll take me to get a report to council. What I'm looking for is authorization from the council as long as the dog passes the medical to accept the dog and then at the next meeting I will submit a report to council for the council to officially accept that donation.

Mr. Mayor, I don't know what we got to do to to to have him get that dog. But whatever we got to do, whatever language we have to use, let's make sure he gets that dog, please. Oh, that dog. What kind of dog is it? It's a It's a German Shepherd. Yes. Get that dog, man. And I think I think we're all of consensus that that's that's okay. Yeah. All right. No legal concern. I think that's something that that the city manager could authorize uh under his authority for the amount of money we're talking about. Considered authorized, chief. Thank you very much. Very good. Very good.

Mr. Jernigan. Oh my. Um, I had the honor to be at the uh retirement for Judge Johnson and I would like uh if it's possible, mayor, if we could do a proclamation, give her a key to the city. She's been serving the city uh for a long, long time. And you think about a six-year-old coming from Cuba uh going out to Wakala, whatever they call that out there, and then coming to Lake City. Uh, I think that's memorable of her. So, if we can do a proclamation to uh get her here at the next meeting, uh, I would really really appreciate that. Uh, I don't know if that's possible. You know, whatever y'all do, that's fine. I

I think that's that's awesome and and possible. Absolutely.

Okay. Thank you. And also, uh, I love my dentist, uh, down here. Uh, there's a a dentist in there, uh, Lisa Polymer or something to that effect. um uh very professional and uh as always I'm always uh trying to promote different businesses and if you have some issues dent wise uh I love my dentist is definitely the place to go. Not saying anything about any other dentist around Lake City because there's a lot of them. Uh but this lady stood out from the rest. So uh y'all keep that in mind. And again, uh, the fire department, city of Lake City, um, uh, police department and the public works, uh, I saw them out all weekend during that snow. I mean, it was it it was it was, uh, uh, most people know that, uh, that's lived in the country as long as we have, you know, you let your water drip uh, throughout the night. That way, it won't freeze up uh, in in the morning times. But, uh, getting that information out to our constituents, uh, I think it it would help them understand anytime we get freezing temperatures, just let that water drip just a little bit. Of course, you have to pay a little bit of money, but it's it's best to pay a little bit than a lot. I think everybody understands that, right?

Uh, also, um, I'm going back to, uh, uh, uh, Paul D. Um and uh I I I think that we uh any anytime it come to spending citizens money, I I I do not like that. Um and if um if we could resolve this as as soon as possible, that's that's I would love to do that. I would love to see that happen. Uh I take my feelings out of it. I just want to do what's right by all by all of our citizens here in uh in Lake City. So, uh y'all keep that in mind. So, thank you'all very much for everything y'all have done for me and um uh all the way from the city city clerk all the way down uh to finance uh uh what's uh uh HR uh there there's a lot of moving parts of the city of Lake City and we are doing uh we're doing the right thing. Uh so uh I I have a comment uh for the next meeting uh for the mayor and uh Carter. So so y'all keep that in mind.

Thank you, Mr. Jernigan. Up next, Mr. Carter. What I left y'all out, so I'll take care of y'all next time.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Well, all right. Um that's a tough act to follow, I'm telling you. Um I just had a couple quick things. um the ADA compliance. Uh I'm glad you guys went there and learned that stuff. I think that it makes a lot of sense to go ahead and start figuring out who this coordinator is going to be. Um obviously it's a city-wide um task. I think probably looking into having an ADA audit done on the city uh would be helpful. it would give whoever we put in charge of maintaining this compliance uh a list of things to do. Um so probably need to look at what's involved in that. You April, next April will be here before we know it. Um and we don't want to be catching needless lawsuits, etc. Um I was wondering I know in the recent past we were working on putting together a uh an agenda workflow process sort of a situation. Um are we are we into the workflow now? M Miss SS

we have sent out the instructions for the departments to start to familiarize themselves with the the directions. We are going to hold a mandatory in person. We're probably going to split it amongst two days. We were going to try to do it this week, but we may push it to next week. The election kind of took over my last week. Sure. um we want to do a hands-on then bring their laptops and we work through an entire um mock agenda per se for everyone to kind of work through the process and see how it's going to work. So we're getting very close. They have the directions, they have their login and so we're ready to go. We just need to do some u more training with them.

Well, that is excellent because I don't know about the rest I won't speak for everybody else but it is is my opinion that very generally I would like to see that agenda out by Wednesdays. um that gives everyone a really reasonable amount of time to be able to review everything. I understand that emergencies happen and some things just have to be added last minute, but I really hate seeing stuff added at 5:00 on a Friday or Monday. And I know that's it's I'm not no blame at one person, not fussing with anybody in particular. I know it's a process, but um I just I just want to throw down a challenge to see if we can't start getting that thing out um at an approachable time for the board and the citizens. So, um, with that being said, uh, again, I I hated that he had to even be spoke about tonight, but, um, I've known Mayor Whit for a long long time. Uh, and I think he's an excellent person. Um, grateful that we had him here to serve us for 20 years, and I've known Trevor Wit since we were since I was a teenager. Um, and he was a very very sweet and kind person. and I'm heartbroken uh to know that he's gone and I can't believe can't begin to understand what mayor must be going through. Um so I do want to offer my deepest condolences to him for that. Uh and with that being said, I have nothing else.

Thank you, Mr. Carter. Uh Miss Harris, yeah, I have a couple of things to say. Um, I had spoke with um D and D today and I'm going to read exactly what um D wrote down and then y'all have any questions y'all ask him. Okay, I asked him to write it down. So, I'd like to request that staff present a plan of action for rehabilitating our city owned and maintained parks at the next regular council meeting. Any question? Hallelujah.

Marita, one more time. I would like to request that staff present a plan of action for rehabilitating our city own and maintain parks at the next regular council meeting. Okay. Have y'all been to Young's part lately? Yes. Yes. It it Okay. We need some stuff going on out there

that the a lot of them um the toys and stuff they they need to be redone. That that's what that mean. He just dignified to put it on there. All right. And at the same thing um last year when I first got into office, I spoke to Mr. Johnson about a splash pad for the children. Um I met with him GI and Mr. um Steve Brown to talk about where we can put this flash pad at. So that will be one of the things that I would like to be incorporated in that as well. And I'm going to I'm going to tell y'all why I want all of this done. Okay. All right. I also want staff to identify any urgent safety or maintenance issues that need immediate attention as well as any general improvements that can be made in the budget this year. Now he got did what was what was talking about.

So, we have came across a few pieces that have been dry rotted that wasn't, you know, so we don't know in general everything. Steve's going to do an analysis and we could bring it back with some pricing and maybe some um alternatives and give y'all some idea of what is needed to um make it safe again.

Okay. So with that being said, um the year 2026 has we just been in one good month and it have been so many deaths and I mean just hellacious things that have been happening. And so I was in um Tallahassee and one of the things I did I read on the I Googled Lake City and one of the things Google said about Lake City it says some good stuff but it also says some bad stuff and chief I know that's in the county it's not city but I did end up talking to um four of the count county commissioners about putting together what we would call a festival of I told them that we're going to need funds and we're going to need big funds from them because they got more money than us. So, all four of them agreed to it. So, what I want to talk to the council about and I want you all to think about this is that we get together with the county and maybe do something for our city that will represent love. I mean, um, we have, um, the festivals and all of that, but I think that our citizens and the world need to see the county and the city working together to do something big that says love. Any comments?

I have a comment. We ain't going We ain't going to fight, but we going to have to box because I asked for a splash pad two years ago. Oh, we ain't got time. We just going to get it done. We just going to get it done. We just going to get it done cuz D going to make it happen cuz I I I be on him. I'd be on him and Steve. And I I'm grateful that um we have a great team in Lake City. We do.

If the citizens just knew what they have when they look up here, they would be so proud of the things that we have accomplished and the things that are to come. I mean, we have the best fire department, the And I don't say this lightly, we have the best fire chief in his um all of his people. I mean, city manager, even down to our work crew, we have the best of the best right now. And I am so proud and oh, we have the best. No, the best mayor. I shouldn't say the best, no, but we have the best mayor. And I don't when I go to Tallahass anywhere I be telling I say oh that's my merit that he's the best in Lake City Florida or some of them I say he's the best on this side of Mississippi but I brag on us because I don't want that narrative to say out there that we're like this criminal ridden place you know that kind of hurt my feelings especially when I know that where we're this council and all of the people that make this city great what we're trying to do right Now, you know, we're working through a lot of the stuff that previous things that has been done and I say and I say it again, um, a lot of distractions. So, I don't just put that on the council and stuff, but it there was a lot of distractions that were going on for the last 10, 12 years, but now we're in a place right now that we're trying to make things work. And I have a question for Don. Um, I asked that each um each department say what they did in the year 2025. And I told we have a lot of good stuff, but I told him to condense it because I want I want the Lake City Reporter to know, okay, these are the things that we made happen in the year 2025. and I want the rest of the council to to

um agree to let's put let's let's talk talk about what we got going on, the great things that we have going on. Okay. And I'll also like to say Noah Walker has the best city council person in the world. That's right. That's right. You talking about me?

Miss Young Harris. Um, and I I we think alike evidently, but um in March there will be a great expo of the city of Lake City. We're working on that. Um, and it's in the budget. Um, and each department will be displayed. So, that's kind of the same thing what we're saying. They'll say what what they what um what they do and how, you know, how how far we've come. And it's going to be really awesome. And I think that's the same idea that you have. That's that's that's great, too. But I want it to be in the Lake City Reporter. So if they don't come to that thing in March, they'll be able to read about it. If a company wants to come to Lake City, Florida, they'll be able to look it up in the newspaper say, "Hey, they this and that. It ain't like it used to be because they have the A team right now."

I call us the A team. That's part of the fire department. And with that being said, mayor, I yield the floor.

Thank you, M. Harris. All right. Um I apologize. I'm gonna be a little longwinded. Uh as well, first of all, I'll go over the events that are coming up. We were notified tonight um by friends of the Humane Society. They're going to be doing a fundraiser on February 17th, 3 to 10 p.m. That's 10% off uh donation night at uh or it's sorry, it's a 10% donation night. So, if you go and eat at Texas Roadhouse, it's not off, but 10% of your bill will go to the to the Humane Society, that includes takeout. Uh there will also be a complimentary uh or coffee with a cop, which includes complimentary coffee and conversation. This will be at Panera Bread on February 4th, that's this week. Uh in fact, that's two days from now, Wednesday, um at 8:30 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. So, join us there. Uh coffee with a cop. Again, that's complimentary coffee and conversation with uh some of Lake City's very best. Um, celebrating the contributions of African-Americans in American history. There's a ton of stuff happening in February. So, I'm just going to go through the list. Uh, there's going to be a history scout. This is all put on by our community cares. You can find out more information at facebook.comcares.n florida. Um, the February schedule includes history scavenger event. This is going to be on the 11th at the Lake City Historical Museum on the 15th uh from 3:00 to 5:00 pm at the Lake City Library main branch on the 20th 3 to 5:30 p.m. at the Swany Swany Regional Library and Live Oak. Uh, Flight to Freedom St. Augustine to Fort Mosy. Uh, on the 26th, free tickets available at any event. Movie matinea on the 14th. Uh, this is going to be 600 p.m. in Jasper City Park. And then the on the 22nd 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. at Darby Derby Pavilion in downtown Lake City. And then there will be a jazz and soul brunch on the 21st 11 to 2:00 p.m. at Wayside Park

in White Springs. All right. Um I'd also like to uh mirror the comments about Judge Leandrew Johnson um and in her long uh career. Very excited to do the proclamation and key to the city on that one. Um unfortunately I was sick and was unable to make it to it. Um, I also want to praise the water crews. I saw them out um fixing some busted, uh, backflows, those big backflows on the side of the road. So, uh, cheers to them because I hate the cold. I hate being wet. I hate being cold and wet. Um, so, good on them for getting out and getting it done. Um, and and helping folks get water back in their businesses and residences. Um, I'm excited to see ADU expansion come up. uh talked to Robert about that a little bit before the meeting. Um so that's coming. Uh we had some great state meetings last week. Uh delegation went over to Tallahassee. We met with both uh Bradley and Brandon and some other legislators uh pushing our legisl our city's legislative agenda uh and trying to serve our citizens best so that we can uh optimize our tax spend here and get help from the state. So we appreciate very much our partners at the state level. Um, and uh, tonight we talked about uh, C in the CRA. So, I'm going to jump way back to the very beginning of us getting here. So, CRA, we developed a, and I love this, that we're developing a carrot to redevelop uh, bits of downtown in our city and to um, raise property values and beautify our city. Uh, but we have another district here that overlays the CRA um that we're purely regulatory on, and that's the historic district. And I'd kind of like to see us shift in a way that is similar to what we're doing with the CRA or um maybe less restrictive as to what we are now. And I know that we were that way in the

historic district back in the 2010s, 2000s uh in our last iteration of it. So, how do we how would we move with that, Mr. Martin? What would we have to do to to revert back or or either create a carrot um for historic preservation um without, you know, how how would we do that? Thank you for dragging out the question and giving me a moment or two to think. I You mean you mean thank you for lawyering us? You're welcome. welcome for lawyering it. Um,

so if I understand the question, uh, it's, uh, we have a historic district, as you point out, it's largely regulatory. Yeah. Uh, it overlays the the CRA, uh, district. The CRA is taking a renewed focus on grants as a an incentive to encourage uh, redevelopment,

beautifification. Yeah. In terms of a historic context. Yeah. And so with the historic district, how would we shift uh uh back to a either a more incentive based or less regulatory uh framework for that district. Um as you pointed out uh and uh based on my recollection, there really have been only two iterations of the historic district as it relates to the land development regulations. There were the original regulations that were put in place that uh recognized that we had a state and a federal designated historic district. Uh and uh but that in and of itself doesn't carry any regulations with it. Uh they have to be designated under a state I mean under a local historic district. Our old regulations allow people to voluntarily subject themselves to that district. around 2020 somethingish. Uh the regulations pivoted and changed and uh made and implemented a regulatory structure that required nearly every change to a historic structure in the historic district uh to be uh to to be approved by the historic preservation agency. So it it went from a voluntary basis with few incentives to a regulatory basis that uh that had requirements in place that was enforced by the city through its historic preservation board. I would suggest the the way to go back to what we had would be simply to repeal what we've got and go back to the original framework knowing that right now it is coupled with the city's efforts to actually encourage uh beautifification, revitalization, and redevelopment in the CRA which largely overlays the historic district. So that that would be my

suggestion is that we just repeal what we've got and go back to where we were. Okay. interesting. Um my thought around that too was was and I didn't want to convolute the program that we created um or that we were moving forward with but was how uh could we how could we implement in a future date more of a carrot method of um incentivizing historical preservation to to do things like what are happening in in certain buildings in downtown High Springs uh where they all have a very cohesive look and feel about what's going on there and I think that we can play an active role in that. Um, yes sir, Mr. Carter,

I just uh want to say well I previously served on historic preservation agency. I consistently found it frustrating uh that it felt like it was our primary job there was to tell people what they couldn't couldn't put on their roofs, right? It was a it was

most of the time it felt like we were just inconveniencing people, right? And uh this is just my personal opinion. had these thoughts for a while. Uh I would like to see what you're suggesting some sort of incentive, right, rather than just the the government saying you uh you can't put that on the roof. It doesn't look like this or that or the other. And furthermore, unfortunately, our historic preservation agency efforts didn't begin until like the '9s when many of these buildings were irrevocably changed in some way. So that what you end up getting is a glorified HOA as opposed to something that is actually reaching some sort of historic look and uniformity. And I think that uniformity should be the goal there. Uh as opposed to no, you can't change those those metal tiles to metal planks even though the house right next to you and the house on the other side has shingles, right? like that's that's a frustration for people who want to move into the area, for people who may want to develop in the area. So, as you're as as you're moving forward with what you want to see done here and hoping to encourage some sort of a new system, I think that uniformity should be the goal to where like a a like a you come into this area, this is a historic district and it looks a certain way.

And one of the confusions is that because like I said, many of the houses in that district have been changed so much or many different styles of houses have been built that may not necessarily be historic. Um, yeah, you I don't know what you would do and I don't know what it would cost, but I agree it's finding some way to incentivize rather than just sure, I don't know, kind of bullying people into certain things would be nice.

And it sounds like um part of that would be a rever a shift reversion um back to that that former um historic preservation. I'm gonna let you and and Don and uh Robert work on that and bring if if that sounds good to bring something um forward. Okay. Uh last I'll say uh as always u because I had other things to say but it's almost nine o'clock. Um that we're as a as a council and as a city working to improve safety, beauty, and quality of life in Lake City. And I want Lake City to be the premier municipality for families and businesses to coexist together uh and move forward. And and so that's what we're doing here, folks. Uh and I hope you have a wonderful night. Thank you for bearing with us and see you next time.