Remarks by Lynn Cherry
134 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 2 of 6
- Play at 1:04:55
“But without knowing what staff said. Without knowing what staff imagines and thinks about as resilience. How are we as non-planners supposed to know that that objective or policy is a resilience related? I mean, we're not planners. I think the request is simple. It's a simple request. I don't see it as a magnificent undertaking. You guys are planners, you know exactly what resilience is. You know that it's infrastructure, it's local hazards, it's emergency services, it's preparing for, it's responding to, it's recovering, it's adapting, right? So, why can't we have a list of what that is?”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:06:12
“So if you'll turn to our comprehensive plan on page 13. I'll get there too. So we have a number five that relates to our north Panama City planning area. And then underneath that five, we have originally I guess A through F and three of the alphabet soups were proposed as deleted. So I scratched my head and said, these are really good. I don't know if these are objectives, but these are really good items. By deleting these items, how would these make Petamol City a better community? So I scratched my head on that and asked the question and understand the answer coming back is the problem…”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:10:25
“Okay, so if I looked at the conservation element in an area that's discussing the Deer Point Lake protection zone, would I see a sentence that says stormwater runoff should meet the Florida Outstanding Waterways requirements? Would I see that?”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:12:07
“So if I hear you correctly, what you're saying is that stormwater runoff has to meet florida outstanding waterway requirements is inside the county's deer point reservation protection zone correct okay thank you okay so now for what's being deleted item c provide and i don't pronounce i got too much southern in me i don't pronounce this word repin riparian repair repair and thank you you've got too much southern and i have a hard time with that one buffers you know all streams creeks yada yada okay so is that paragraph inside deer point reservation protection zone Ray do you know that if…”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:14:38
“but how does buffers to all streams, creeks, and tributaries consistent with the general, Perry, I can't say it. Thank you. I have tussled with that word all my life. Buffer requirements, but it doesn't say anything about deer point in this sentence or sentences.”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:15:37
“Okay. So is there an opportunity to think out loud together that we would say that this deleted item C could be considered up and above Deer Point Lake Protection Zone?”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:16:03
“Right. Understood that it would. But is so do we have an opportunity to say, hey, let's put this in our library. And when we have the opportunity to change the plan that we think about this in a bigger way, I guess where my mind's going is, why are we just thinking about Deer Point Lake? with this particular item? Why aren't we thinking about all of our streams, creeks and tributaries to our St. Andrews Bay?”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:19:11
“So, this 1 being our 1st example of an opportunity to say, we can't we can't tackle this now because the Senate bill 180, but let's, let's add this to our library. So how do we, as a planning board. transmit that idea to staff and it stay with staff. So when we can make revisions like this one, you have that data. How does that happen?”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:29:41
“I have facilitated for cities and counties strategic plans. I have facilitated for cities and counties conference of plans. So I've been a part of these conversations for the last 40 years. And it cringes me to think that when I look at C, I don't see any words that imply that item C is a part of the Deer Point Reservoir protection zone. ICC is something completely different. Yes, it's misplaced. It shouldn't be just north. We shouldn't just be talking about our buffers in our north Panama City. But I'd like to think that even within our constraints of Senate Bill 180, that we could take…”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:31:30
“So because this is underneath north, it'd be difficult to apply it to all.”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:31:36
“Okay. This year. This time around. Right. So the better answer for this moment in time, perhaps, is to say, okay, this goes into our library and we think about this particular item outside of Deer Lake.”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:31:56
“So how do, How does that move now to 2 years from now or a year from now to our visioning? How, how do we, how do we remember.”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:38:09
“Okay, so it sounds like related to item c on page three we have the opportunity to say hey let's put this in a library staff is going to note this and that we'll come back and have a broader conversation of where's the best place for this good thinking to exist going forward Is that a way to say it? Yeah. Okay, so y'all got that. Do we need to make a motion or do we need to do that procedure? We'll have it. Yeah, it's on the record.”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:38:53
“Okay, all right. Keep on going, guys. All right, so now the last one on this page is item D, and that's consider impacts to floodplain. Any development within a 100-year flood zone shall demonstrate yada, yada, yada. Okay, so when I read this, I don't read this as part of the Deer Point Reservoir Protection Zone. I see this as a bigger picture up and above Deer Point. Is that a correct thought?”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:40:10
“That's what I suspected. So in my mind, when I read this, I thought that this was more duplicative versus we omitted it because it shouldn't be in the north planning area. Nowhere in item D does it say Deer Point Protection Zone.”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:41:26
“Right. And I scratched my head on that as I saw the response that the reason that the The reason they're being deleted is because it's for the North planning and it's like, okay, so does staff have the ability to implement any 1 of these? If it's not. A property in North not to protect them. Yeah, this is limited to just animal city north and I assume that that was what the answer was going to be. Um.”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:42:22
“Right. We've got floodplain. So why was this even in North?”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:42:47
“Okay. So I guess for this one, the opportunity is as we get to conservation and as we look at what's inside conservation, look for the key policies or objectives that address floodplain and see if this two sentences are already embedded in something we already have in a different element. Does that make sense? So as opposed to, say, in library, because we intuitively know floodplain is in our concrete plan in another section. And that would be conservation?”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:43:44
“So if we could table this thinking to conservation, coastal management, and do a comparison at that time.”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:43:59
“All right. Oh, we're ripping. That's the first question. All right. Now, the next question is on page 20. If you'll flip to page 20. Policy 1.2. 4.5 through D, the heart of the question was why were these deleted? If duplicative, where were they? So the answer, as you can see, is energy efficiency policies are no longer required by Florida statutes, and that's why it was removed. So with the zeal for greatness, I don't see what's wrong with the city having a policy that says establish energy efficient land use pattern policies. I mean, why would we delete that? Why would we delete discourage…”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:46:22
“I mean, why do we want to have a city that's minimal? Why do we want to say we're going to, we want to vote for minimal. We want the most minimum thing that we can have with our city. You know, I don't, I don't think that way. When I was a business owner, I didn't say I'm going to, I'm going to be the minimalist consultant that I can for my customers. I didn't think that way. I said, what's the greatest thing that my company can do? If my business is going to perform and we're going to be touting ourselves as the best, then we're going to be the best. So, I mean, I get it. Florida statutes…”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:50:14
“Well, not 100% because there's other things that we've not had time to discuss that it's just patchwork thinking. And an item is over here in this element, and then that same topic is in another element, and then that same topic is in a third element. And so it's just like, okay, can we bring that one topic, think about it holistically, and bring it into one or two elements, not three or four elements.”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:50:59
“Right. I hear what you're saying, and it's not that I'm opposed, but I don't know that you can say today, okay, boom, everything that's deleted, we're going to vote on it, and it's okay.”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:51:33
“Well, not necessarily because within what's being added is you've got the addition is that establish energy efficient land use pattern policies and discourage urban sprawl through the use of development controls. So it's kind of removing A and D. It's just removing the A through D and putting them in a sentence form. that make sense it's like a blend but you like the specificity of A through D though it doesn't have to be it I mean it reads the same I think you could you could It doesn't mean that staff couldn't employ the intent of that policy.”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026
- Play at 1:52:49
“Yeah. Because you've got them listed in Senate's form. It's just how can we go about doing it?”
Planning Board · Oct 12, 2026