City Council - Regular Meeting

We're going to go ahead and call this regular City Council meeting to order Wednesday, June 10, 2026. The time is now 6 p.m. We'll stand for a moment of silence, and then we'll remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance led by Councilmember Dodd.

All right, thank you so much.

Madam Clerk, roll call.

Mayor Jones.

Here.

Vice Mayor McPartland.

Here.

Council Member Nunn. Here. Council Member Matthews. Present. Council Member Dodd. Here.

All right, thank you so much for that. Council, do we have any agenda modifications or staff, any agenda modifications? Hearing none, we'll move forward to proclamations. We have none. Now we're on to the portion of public input, and this is input on anything that's not on the current agenda. Do we have anyone present who would like to speak? Yes, sir. Come forward.

Good evening. James Clifton, 817 Kane. At the council meeting on 5-13-2026, I expressed my dismay that I had not received any sort of communication relative to three letters that were copied to all of you. I was in direct responsible charge of three wastewater treatment plants over 21 years at the University of Florida Center for Training, Research, and Education for Environmental Occupations. For 12 years, I trained and provided technical assistance throughout the state of Florida. I cannot imagine receiving multiple copies of letters expressing issues with House Bill 1379, how they may be implemented in Sebastian, and no one responded to them. This issue isn't going away. Regardless of Sebastian's historical reluctance to have the county install sanitary sewers, compliance with HR 1379 is necessary. The two choices are enhanced nutrient removal septic systems or sanitary sewers with professionally operated and monitored treatment, The cost to homeowners will be significant in either case, but only one of them will actually result in achieving the goal of reduced nitrogen in the lagoon, day in and day out, year after year. Possibly I'm just out of the loop. Therefore, I am requesting that future meetings with the state and or county be summarized under unfinished business for each agenda in the future. Even better would be to have open meetings periodically so we could get a better idea of what is actually happening on this topic. Then we would at least have an understanding of why each homeowner must spend many thousands of dollars, as we eventually will, to reduce the nitrogen concentration in the lagoon. Hopefully you can Hopefully you will consider improving communications on this topic, which affects a very significant portion of Sebastian, and more importantly, or just as importantly, the water quality in the Indian River Lagoon. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, sir. I don't think you're getting an argument out of us. Is there anyone else who would like to speak on this?

Good evening, Council. Jeff Hamilton, Pinocchio Street. First, I want to congratulate the Council for being memorialized in the latest Carl Hyasson book. It nearly wrote itself between Matt Gaetz and development rubber stamping boards. I'd like to make a few suggestions for the Council to consider before the next spurious annexation for rezoning or development is brought up. Have you wondered why these speculators keep coming to the table with Sebastian? The same issues could be realized by just going up before the county. No developer does this out of the kindness of their heart or community spirit. They would have to install the same infrastructure elements no matter who has oversight. From experienced developing utilities, do you think Ironwood Properties said, hey, there's an impact fee increase coming up before we submit. It would be great to help the community. No, Kerry had us rip together 100 permit sets over a weekend, 4,500 signed and sealed sheets, and about 12,000 calculations. And we used a U-Haul to get them in the day before. He saved himself the amount equal to all of his consultant fees and the construction cost of a few houses. You think that wasn't a good profit for him by a few million? These developers are like card shark steak horses. They all use the same slick team with experience that knows the tells and submits here as there is something there sneaking past you. I know we supposedly do not want national chains, big boxes here, and that is the border annexation control you claim. Island Marauder thought so too. When we designed Worldwide Sportsman so that it was a stand-alone company, our checks came from Bass Pro Shops, national chain. you won't be able to stop a chain doing the same thing and then rebranding after the certificate of occupancy. As the saying goes, when you sit at the table and look for the Patsy and do not see them, look in the mirror. The other saying is, wherever you go, whatever board you're on, whatever commission you're elected to, the mirror moves with you.

Thank you. Thank you, sir. Is there anyone else? This is public input. Anything that's not on the current agenda, sir?

Good morning, Mayor, Council, Richard Gilmore, Sebastian. Just a few observations and a question. Are we still doing prayers before the council meeting, or is that no longer happening? The last two or three meetings, I haven't seen a pastor here.

We would welcome one. If you want to bring one, have them come in. Absolutely, 100%.

I mean, Wednesday's a tough night because most churches have services then, but I know there's a lot of them that don't, and a couple come to mind, and I'll certainly put the word out. Some observations now on Hardy Park, a great park in Sebastian. I love it. I'm there three or four times a week. And about six weeks ago, we noticed that there was a couple of small wire flags that were put in a route that was maybe an inch and a half above the surface of the walkway on the north part of the walk around. And those flags were there for over a month. And then finally, they weren't there. And a week or so ago, I saw they were kind of curled up. And it was just kind of the wire flags you'd see in a lawn after they're sprayed. I don't know how they got them to stick there in the root for, they must have drilled down in there for it to stay there for almost a month. But anyway, for about a week there was no flags. And then lo and behold, this Tuesday, there's two new flags there with a little yellow caution areas, you know, flags on them. And I'm thinking, you know, how long it takes to drill into those roots and just get an ax and chop it out and then fill it. It's a clear solution to a problem that is taking up man hours to worry about these flags is kind of crazy. But there's a lot of man hours being wasted on drilling holes in route. If they just take the ax, they could chop it out and fix the problem. Another issue on the Hardy Park close to it is the the bridge that goes across the canal there. I noticed a while back that the decking was replaced. And it was originally put in in 2009 or 10, I believe. And it was put in with initially non-pressure treated lumber. And it didn't last very long. It rotted out three or four or five years. It was gone. And it was replaced with properly pressure-treated pine. And it was two inches deep. Now, it was replaced recently with one-inch planked pressure-treated pine, okay? And I believe the problem is going to be that it's not going to last. because the holes are already popping out where the knots are in the wood. Initially, it was put in with a little tiny narrow... Mr. Gilmore, your time is up, sir.

Oh, okay.

Sorry.

Thank you. Is there anyone else on public input? Do we have anyone with their hand raised on Zoom?

No one has raised their hand.

All right. Thank you so much. Public input is closed. We'll move on to Agenda Item 8, Consent Agenda. Council, how should we proceed on that? Make a motion to approve the Consent Agenda as written. Second. Do we have a motion by Councilmember Nunn? Second by Vice Mayor McPartland. Any discussion? Madam Clerk.

Vice Mayor McFarland?

Yes.

Council Member Nunn?

Yes.

Council Member Matthews? Yes. Council Member Dodd?

Yes.

Mayor Jones?

Yes. All right, moving on to Item 9, Committee Reports and Appointments. We do have to consider some National Resources Board appointments. How should we proceed? Mr. Mayor?

Yes, sir. I've got to turn my mic off. Yeah. It's on. It's on. I'd like to move that we reappoint Charles Stadelman, Deborah Shellebarger, and Thomas Coran to positions on the Natural Resources Board that all expire on 7-1-2029. All right.

I would second that. Any other discussion on that? Anyone from the public who would like to speak on this? All right. Is this included with the... Should we include the other one? I would think we should include the alternate position to Ms. Natalie Aruz. Yes, Ms. Aruz. She's present, too, if you all want to ask her any questions. But I think we should include her in that motion. Mr. Dodd, if you wouldn't mind including her in that motion.

I would be inclined to second. Oh, yes. Okay. I'll amend my motion to include the application for the new alternate member term expiring 7-1-2028. And I amend my second.

So is there any other discussion? No. Roll call.

Council Member Nunn?

Yes.

Council Member Matthews? Yes. Council Member Dodd?

Yes.

Mayor Jones?

Yes.

Vice Mayor McPartland?

Yes. All right. We have item 10, public hearing. We have none. Unfinished business. Item 11, nothing. Item 12, new business. Item 12-8, consideration of resolution number R-26-21. All right. Good evening, Mayor.

Thank you all. I just wanted to bring this item, Resolution R2621. This is a request to authorize the submittal of a Safe Streets and Roads for All grant application for a sidewalk implementation project and improvement project, and it would authorize the mayor and city manager to execute the appropriate documents. What we have done here is we had received a request a few months ago to do a sidewalk assessment near the charter school down Wave Street all the way down George Street all the way to Barber due to the number of students that walk that corridor on a daily basis heading to the school. And during our assessment of that, we evaluated George Street and determined that it wasn't feasible to just install a sidewalk. So with that, we got a quote to install a curb with a sidewalk on top of it that would work better on George Street. And then this grant opportunity, once we got the cost estimate back, which is over a million dollars, with Mr. Plourd, I asked him to start looking for grant opportunities And as we were pursuing grant opportunities and looking to see what was available, he also took it upon himself to evaluate other areas in the city that we had heard from residents or from council members that we needed to look at sidewalk improvements. And we identified three additional areas. One is Schumann Drive. Another one, Fleming Street and Lake Street. These are areas that have asphalt sidewalks that are rapidly deteriorating and need improvement in those areas. So Staff put the entire plan together with all four of these areas and has requesting to submit a grant proposal for these projects. And it does require a match in the form of what we have looked at is potentially including DST funding over the course of the next two fiscal years that would match this grant proposal. approximately $240,000 on an annual basis for the match, but the total expenditure is a $2.4 million proposal. So it would cost the city about $480,000, but the entire project is estimated at $2.4 million, and that's what we supplied the grant documentation for. So with that, Mr. Plourd is available for any additional questions about the technical specifications, but that is the request tonight.

All right. Thank you so much for that, sir. I would just say that this is definitely needed, this infrastructure improvement, specifically in those areas. And these efforts obviously will make the help with the pedestrian traffic. Will this also connect? I believe we already have. Wave Street, where it goes to Engler, this will be a complete connection going down Engler all the way up Schumann. Those sidewalks connect over there, so this would make it even more walkable and rideable, make it safer for our citizens.

That is correct. For George, Wave to Fleming, and then also 88 Compliance and Connectivity down Schumann, east of Engler Drive.

All right. Thank you so much for that, sir. Anyone else? Mr. Dodd?

Yeah, I do. The Fleming Street, $170,000 for Fleming Street. Exactly, I can't tell from the maps, exactly where are we talking about?

So Fleming is, if you go down Main Street towards 512? Okay, so you're on the north side of 512 on Fleming.

Correct. And that is an asphalt? That's sidewalk all the way from basically from the north side, when you hit Bocell, all the way down Fleming, almost to the turn of Main Street. Just past Lake. That sidewalk is disastrous. Correct. Are you talking about replacing that entire sidewalk? That entire sidewalk. That $170,000 just doesn't sound like enough money to do that whole thing.

It's replacing the asphalt sidewalk and then also on Lake Drive as well to the park. Okay.

I don't, I mean, I would question whether we'd have enough funds in here to fix that particular sidewalk all the way. It might be worth trying to decide whether we need to do something more than just laying some more asphalt down. That thing is, it's sunk, it's down, it's, you know, there's just a lot of problems with that particular sidewalk. So I don't know. It's just something to think about.

So I call two separate contracts for pricing on them. Okay. All right. And have them out there. All right. Sounds good.

All right, thank you, Mr. Dodd. Anyone else? Yeah, I do. Mr. Dodd.

Thank you, sir. Yeah, I just want to say I'm very happy because obviously the charter school is a community school. It is in the city of Sebastian. It's served by our SROs, and they have a walking perimeter of one mile each way from that school that those kids are required to walk to school unless their parents drive them in the morning. A lot of kids are using, right now, the side of a road in the morning and the side of a road in the afternoon and trying not to get hit by cars. So that's a very important street for us to get done, and I'm very happy that we're able to do it. And not to mention that roughly $2.5 million, $2 million of that is grants, and great job there. Way to pull in the grant funds for sidewalks to help our kids be safe. And, of course, at the same time, improve the quality of a couple other sidewalks as well. But just say thank you.

All right. Thank you so much for that, Mr. Nunn. Anyone else? Mr. McPartland?

I guess it's pretty easy if you just do the math. This work is definitely needed, and we're winding up getting five times the work for what we're paying. So I think it's very important, and it keeps the safe streets. And just to go back on Mr. Nunn's comments, over there by the charter school, I don't know how they've been doing it all these years, and nobody getting hurt over there. Me too. So they would be happy to see that, as well as the parents. So I'm all in favor of it. All right, thank you so much for that.

Ms. Matthews?

If you could just explain a little bit more about, because there is a large, and it's more readily for the community, that on the George Street, you're putting the curbing in, and that's to keep the sidewalk closer to the, out of the drainage and out of the yards. And, you know, if you could just expand a little bit on that.

So the right-of-way access there is to be limited by... The right-of-way access on George is very limited, so we have to tuck the sidewalk close to the road. So to be compliant, we'll have to put a curb. And there is some drainage improvements that have to be done there as well along the way.

All right. Thank you. Is that already still the same on Fleming? Because do they have curbs there where the walkway is right near the road going down Fleming?

There is not. We'll have an area that we can have grass alongside the roadway. after we install. So we have some space there, a little bit more space.

All right. Thank you. I'm satisfied with my questions. Anything else? Anyone from the public who would like to speak on this item? All right. Anyone on Zoom?

No one has raised their hand.

All right. Thank you so much. Public input is closed on this item. Council, how would we like to proceed?

Mr. Mayor, I move approval of resolution number R-26-21.

Second. So we have a motion by Vice Mayor McPartland. Second by Council Member Nunn. Any other discussion? Madam Clerk, roll call.

Council Member Matthews. Yes. Council Member Dodd. Yes. Mayor Jones.

Yes.

Vice Mayor McPartland. Yes. Council Member Nunn.

Yes.

All right. Next item on our agenda is item 12B, consideration of professional service agreement with Levy Consulting. Mr. Benton, are you handling this?

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yes, two meetings ago we had a discussion and direction from City Council for staff to develop a plan for annexation as we continue to move forward within the city. And so taking that input or that direction from council and kind of seeing the workload that's currently in community development i felt that it was it was appropriate for us to consider a third party to come in and then they the third party consultant can meet with council on an individual basis uh receive your input on what you would like to see and then format a strategic plan uh for annexation as we move forward so i reached out to uh dr richard levy dr levy is a was a member of our strategic plan for the entire city a couple years ago he was a great resource for us in developing that plan and um and so i reached out to him to see get a cost proposal to do this annexation strategic plan. So presented before you tonight is an agreement with Levy Consulting LLC in the amount of $25,000 plus I added a contingency of $5,000. Just wanted to ensure that FOLLOWING INDIVIDUAL MEETINGS WITH EACH COUNCIL MEMBER, SOME ADDITIONAL WORKS OF SCOPE MAY POTENTIALLY COME OUT OF THOSE MEETINGS, AND IN AN EFFORT TO TRY TO ENCAPSULATE ALL OF THAT WITHOUT NEEDING TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL, I'M ASKING FOR APPROVAL UP TO $30,000. LIKE I SAID, THAT WILL INCLUDE THE $25,000 FOR THE AGREEMENT, PLUS SOME TRAVELING PER DIEM, BECAUSE HE WILL HAVE TO COME OVER HERE AND MEET INDIVIDUALLY WITH EACH OF YOU, AND THEN PLUS ANY POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL SCOPE THAT COMES OUT OF THAT WITHOUT HAVING TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL. So with that, I request approval of City Council for the agreement in the amount of $30,000, and it will be funded out of the existing community development operating budget. There is currently $89,125 remaining in consultants within that department, so I request your approval tonight.

All right. Thank you so much for that, sir. Does anyone up here have any questions for Mr. Benton? None? Is there anyone from the public who would like to speak on this item? Anyone on Zoom?

No one has raised their hand.

All right, hearing no one there. Public input is closed. Any deliberations, counsel?

No, I was going to say I'm just happy that we are moving forward with this. We talked about it. I'm glad we're stepping right into it now, quickly. So, thank you.

It's a great move, and I move approval. Second.

All right, so we have a motion and a second. Any other discussion? And I think also Mr. Levy did a fantastic job on the strategic plan before, so I think this will just fall right in line. Agreed. Madam Clerk?

Council Member Dodd?

Yes.

Mayor Jones?

Yes.

Vice Mayor McPartland? Yes. Council Member Nunn? Yes. Council Member Matthews? Yes. Motion carries.

I didn't have my mic on, but yes. Sorry. All right. We're going to move on to item 12C, consideration of an agreement with East Step Construction, Stone Crop Drainage Project. Ms. Miller.

Good evening, Council. So as you're aware, we had a contractor through bid 2304 go out and complete the stone crop project. They left the site and did not complete the project per the contract documents. We have outside council that is coordinating with the contractor as well as the surety, the bond company holding their bond. And we are looking to, since they have not yet made a decision, we are looking to move forward with the repairs prior to hurricane season, the later end of hurricane season, as well as to meet the timeline of our grant. So we have found E-STEP construction who will go out and complete the repair per the original contract drawings and specifications.

All right. Thank you. Yeah, this is a mess over there in this project and can't wait to get this going. If this is approved tonight from us, how soon can work start, Mr. Benton?

So, I know that staff has spoken with E-STEP and I believe if it were to be approved tonight, it would be somewhere around the second week of July that they could mobilize and begin the process. The contract documents provide for 180 days to cure the project, to complete it. They have stated to us that 90 days would be appropriate for them. Weather is going to impact on things are going to come into play. So, yes, you know, there is some concern that we would be taking on this project during the heart of hurricane season. However, you know, from a staffing perspective, we have concerns with the structural area of the ditch during hurricane season should that present itself within the city.

Yeah, it's going to be difficult, obviously, because there are definitely going to be some rain days when the heat of summer, when we get the afternoon storms. But this is something that is definitely needed. I wish the original contractor would have done what they're supposed to do. However, we find ourselves in this mess now, and we have to get out of it to save our city. So that's what I have. Anyone else?

Yeah, Mr. Mayor. Yes, sir. Brian, I should turn that up like you said to, and then I'd be able to see the light. I know, you do it and I just didn't do it. Okay, there are some issues that I think we need to think about before we actually approve this contract. First thing is there's a surity, there's an insurance company involved in this, and that insurance company has some rights involved in their process between themselves and their contractor that we have to be prepared to handle. No matter what we do tonight, if we approve this contract and this contractor starts working and the surrogate comes back and says, I want to do something else, then we're stuck. First of all, that's the first thing. The second thing is that they have not been truly put on notice that they're going to have to pay for this. And that step needs to take place. I'm personally, after spending quite a bit of time talking to the staff, I think that we need to have, along with this contract, FOR SEVERAL REASONS. FIRST, 90 DAYS SOUNDS NICE WHEN THEY SAY IT. THEIR CONTRACT SAYS 180 DAYS. WE TALK ABOUT WANTING TO DO THIS BECAUSE OF HURRICANE SEASON. WELL, 180 DAYS SINCE JULY 1ST, HURRICANE SEASON'S OVER WITH. THEY HAVE A FORCE MAJOR CLAUSING THE CONTRACT, WHICH MEANS THAT ANY TIME IT RAINS, THEY CAN PULL THEIR EQUIPMENT OUT AND TELL US IT TAKES 10 DAYS TO PUT IT BACK IN. AND I'M NOT KIND OF DISPARAGING THIS CONTRACTOR AS BEING SOMEONE WITH A LITTLE BIT OF INTEGRITY, BUT THAT'S JUST THE WAY THEY WORK. I MEAN, IT'S THAT SIMPLE. The process to make this ditch repair fail was a lot of steps that went through, and it was all the part of the original engineering staff, and not our staff. I'm not talking about our staff. Original engineering staff and the contractor, and I think the way that they actually chose to go about making this repair. I personally would not feel comfortable approving this contract without having some form of a work plan that talks about What process are they going to follow? I mean, they have to go through steps. They have to go in and pull out all that old stuff that was put in. They have to store it someplace. They have to then restructure the bank. They have to compact the bank. They have to make sure it meets appropriate standards when they compact it before they can put it back, or it's going to fail again. It's just going to fail all over again if they don't do that. And those were the things that possibly weren't done. I would like to see us tonight come to a conclusion that we have a consensus that we are going to move forward with repairing this, but give the staff an opportunity to work with the contractor in putting that together and give the legal team an opportunity to work with our outside attorney on making sure that the things that need to be clarified with the surety with the insurance company are done as part of the process. I don't think there's any imminent requirement that we approve this tonight. We're not going to, it's not going to happen. Okay, hurricane season is going to come and hurricane season is going to go. And we can't guarantee by anything in this contract that that repair is going to be done between now and hurricane season. And so the question comes about in my mind is it's time for us to take the responsibility of making sure that we have the steps in place to have this work correctly the first time. I think the city, for example, and Brian, if you have to go to an outside engineering firm, another one, a separate one, I think the city needs to take on responsibility for testing the impact standards on this thing and make sure it's properly impacted, make sure that it's properly dewatered. Instead of having an outside... agent come in and say we did that and we did it correctly which we know now after the fact that they didn't do it possibly and possibly I don't want to say anything because if we get in court they'll say well you said this in a meeting that they possibly didn't do it so I believe that we should that we should instead of voting on this contract we should table it or we can take whatever action we want to take in that regard but what we should do is come to a consensus that we are going to move forward with the contractor and repair this but we give the our outside attorney an opportunity to do what they need to do and give our staff an opportunity to work with this contractor and put together a work plan that shows us exactly how is it going to be repaired. We relied on someone else for 24 months, roughly, for 24 months, and it turned into a failure. Let's don't rely on someone else again. Let's make sure we have a plan in place that we are comfortable that we protect the interests of the city. I mean, this is a $2.5 million hit on our reserves. And if we end up in court and don't prevail in court, it's a $2.5 million impact on our reserves. Let's make sure that we are preparing ourselves to do this right. Thank you, sir.

All right. Thank you. Ms. Miller, do we have a backup plan in case, before all of this came down, before this plan came before us, do we have a backup plan in case something wasn't done by the time hurricane season got here or the rainy season?

Previously, The previous contractor was to complete it before hurricane season, but in the condition we're in right now, our backup plan is our stormwater department has already looked at if a storm event happens, they would have to go into that ditch and pull up some of those mats because the fear is that it would block drainage for the entire neighborhood. But that already has been discussed internally with staff. If something happens, we would deal with that at that time.

Right. And do we have the equipment necessary to move those mats from there if that happened?

It may include having to rent some equipment. That is what the previous contractor did, but we would evaluate it closer to a potential storm coming. but we would remove as much as we needed.

Right. My biggest concern with that is if we don't have the equipment necessary to move that, if a storm happens, it's just not going to affect us. It's going to affect a lot of folks around us. And will that equipment be available for us to use to unblock our drainage so that our city doesn't flood is my concern. So that's why I was asking that. Mr. Mayor.

Yeah, Mr. Mayor, if I can just jump in here. Obviously, we would have to take a proactive measure if we were to, at some point this hurricane season, find ourselves within the cone of uncertainty. And we would have to take those proactive measures way before we would even know if the city of Sebastian would be impacted. The moment that we would kind of be identified in that area, we would have to start making plans because I can tell you that in our evaluation, the ditch gets worse every single time it rains. Those mats... I'm not an engineer, but we have concerns that they would begin to break loose and then cause a structural blockage at the outfall to stone crop, which then would cause flooding not only in that area, but then all the way back up through Laconia and all of the area that begins to drain there. So that is our concern, and that's what we've expressed to the outside attorney, and even in his evaluation. And quite honestly, that's why we're here at this point, is we felt like we've given the surety all the information they've requested so far. We've given them adequate time. They were notified on March 13th, if I remember the date correctly, that they were put on notice on March 13th. So, you know, at some point we have to make some movement to begin to protect, you know, the residents in that area if it were to happen. Now, I agree with Councilmember Dodd. I'll tell you all this agenda item came from last Tuesday and And staff scrambled to get this information put into the agenda by Friday. I agree with Councilmember Dodd that we need a full detailed plan of action with this project. We have met on-site staff, I know between Lee and Karen, they've met on-site numerous times with East Step Construction to ensure that they can do this project and do it per the plan specs. And that's the route that we've decided to come before you all tonight. If it is the will of council tonight to slow this process down a little bit, Staff, we can work with the consultant or the contractor to get the information you're requesting. And also I know that our outside legal counsel is available on Monday and Tuesday after 2 p.m. to have individual meetings with counsel because we can't have an overall shade meeting due to Florida statutes. So we can have those and then hopefully get some comfort in beginning to move this process forward. But I also think we do need to set the stance that we're ready to move forward regardless of how much longer the surety is taking because this is a priority and is something that has to move forward for the residents and to get this project into a manner that would be successful if we were to be impacted by a major rain event.

Right. And Mrs. Stokes, have we met all about legal requirements? And to answer some of the questions from the other side about the surety bond.

Well, I mean, this is a problem. It's being handled by outside counsel. There is a responsibility to make sure the surety is put on notice and has the opportunity to cure this. And have they been put on notice? They have. They have. Our outside counsel did say that depending on what counsel does tonight, he is going to go back to them and let them know, you know, this has been authorized for us to do this. here's your last chance. If you are going to do it yourself or are going to authorize this, step up. So to Councilman Dodd's point, should council want to hold off on this, I would suggest you at least give the city manager the authority to put together a work plan, basically authorize that person we're going to cure this one way or the other, even if you don't say put ink to this contract, at least give him that authority so that our counsel will have that available to him too and can let the surety know. You do what you're legally obligated to do or else we'll do it and work it out in court.

All right, thank you.

Mr. Dodd, you want to follow up? Well, Mr. Mayor, exactly what the city attorney just said is what I would propose, that we authorize the city manager to move forward with the finalization of this contract, give the staff an opportunity to put together the work plan with the contractor. At the same time, we can notify the outside attorney that we are going to move forward with correcting this. that's what they need to go back to the surity. They have a decision. I mean, the insurance company can actually come through with their own solution. They don't have to use our contractor. They have a legal right to do that within their contract with their client. So we give them an opportunity to decide whether they're going to end up taking us to court or whether they're going to come up with an alternative or what they're going to do without us actually having an executed contract. At the same time, I would propose that if this contractor can do it in 90 days, and I would like to see some clause in the contract that identifies that they think they can do it in that window of time, and some execution arrangement in that. I mean, I, you know, and I understand you get force majeure at range, they can't put equipment in a ditch, whatever they have to do, so we have to have some leeway with that. So, yeah. Thank you, sir. All right, absolutely.

Mr. Nunn? Yes, sir. So, I don't have concerns. I do have concerns that you've both mentioned, and I don't disagree with any of that. My concern is new contractor. Obviously, it was understood that the original contractor was doing the job as per the specs by the map designer and creator, that everything was being done as proper per the specs of the original design. But that seems like it was not completely true And I just want to know, how are we going to know that the new contractor is going to follow all the specs and designs? Is that something we're going to inspect? Do we have an engineer that's going to inspect it? And are they going to be held accountable for that?

So we would have to have a third-party inspector. However, that would also be followed up with city oversight, direct oversight, direct daily reports on this project that would be documented from all parties on all sides. And then also, I think, you know, Council Member Dodd brought up a good point that, you know, looking at compaction testing and some of those measures as we continue to go forward. Okay.

Because obviously we don't want to be here again. We were under the assumption that as a council member that the first contractor was doing everything they were supposed to be doing according to the specs and the contract and apparently that is not necessarily completely true. Obviously we have a mess over there and a mess that needs to be addressed. But I'm all for approving this to give you the ability to move forward and I guess I would kind of agree with don't put into the contract unless... unless we understand that this is the direction we have to go. All right. Anyone else?

Yes. I honestly, I don't know if we can, in my opinion, there's a lot of, in reading the documentation that was delivered to us, there's a lot of gaps. I have a lot of questions. I would really prefer to meet with council and go over these questions and then go from there. I have a concern about that if we move forward with this, that what is that going to do where we are currently? Is it going to put it on the back burner? Is it going to lessen their responsibilities in this? What's going to happen? And then we're, you know, we're in a contract with two, we're at two million, we're already, and we do this, we're at another two million. I mean, there's, I'm not, I'm not, there's just so many unanswered questions that I'm not comfortable moving forward with this right now.

Mr. Mayor, if I may. All right, thank you. Council member, if you feel that way, that's very, NORMAL. THAT'S WHY WE OFFERED TO SET UP THE MEETINGS WITH OUR OUTSIDE COUNCIL SO THAT HE CAN LAY OUT And by meeting individually, as you all know, when we do an executive session, we can't have any other staff except for Mr. Benton and myself and our outside counsel in there. With these individual meetings, we'll be able to have our staff in there too, and we can get all your questions answered. And that is under the guise of attorney work product still in anticipation of litigation, so that would all be confidential, which is a better forum to talk about it than talking about it here.

All right. Thank you so much for that, sir. Anything else? All right. It's ready. We'll entertain a motion.

I'd like to make one. Yes, sir. I'll get my mic on. Okay. I move that the council intends to contract to correct the current deficiencies in the project and directs the city manager to bring the contract back at our, whatever the future meeting is, you feel comfortable, with an additional work plan and the additional cost required for the city to contract for an inspection engineer. I don't think our staff has the opportunity and time to do that. She has too much work to do. So I'd like to see that cost included in the overall project cost.

All right, so we have a motion by Councilmember Dodd. Do we have a second? Second. We have a second. All right, any discussion? All right.

One other thing. You know, obviously, while there are two issues here, we can't let it continue what it is. And We can't let the disaster that's there continue because it's starting to affect the residents' yards. It's very unsafe, and we can't let that continue. We have to fix that, and I understand that we're dealing with a potential legal situation on the other side of it, and I know that we have to deal with that, and I know the insurance company can always make things difficult and it can delay things. I just don't know that we can keep delaying This situation our residents are in, and I know that puts us in a situation, and it leaves us holding a big bag, possibly. But at the end of the day, we have to do what's right for the city at the end of this, and that's my concern. And the only reason I'm really willing to move forward with this is because we can't leave our citizens in the situation they're in right now. Is there a second?

And, Councilmember Nunn, I do.

Is there a second on the motion? Yes. Yes. There was a second. Thank you. I didn't hear that. Yes, ma'am. Yes, ma'am.

I agree with what's being said, but with the questions that I'm concerned about, I don't think that this is stopping. I think it's just we can even bring it back up at the next meeting or whatever, but I really, there are some questions that I think need to be, and it may be that those questions need to be answered in order to move forward with a new contract, the authorizations, and everything that we have a motion on the floor now for. But I think there's some really concerns here as to when we're moving forward and making this plan, are we taking those questions into consideration and moving forward with a backup if something happens or something comes up that... WASN'T ADDRESSED OR WHATEVER, AND THAT'S MY CONCERN, IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO END UP IN A SITUATION WHERE WE OVERLOOKED SOMETHING ELSE BECAUSE THE QUESTION WASN'T ASKED.

UNDERSTOOD. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT. MR. MENTON, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING?

YEAH, MR. MAYOR. SO JUST COUNCILMEMBER MATTHEWS, to try to answer some of your concerns with this. I think, you know, our offer, our discussion here is we have two dates, May, sorry, June 15th and 16th after 2 p.m. You all, any council member can let Mr. Stokes or I know. We'll set up a meeting between staff. We'll make sure staff's available. Every staff member that's been involved in this, Karen, Lee, myself, we'll all be in there with our outside counsel and also Mr. Stokes to discuss any and all questions that you have as we begin to move forward on this. I will state that I'm not signing this contract with your motion tonight. That has been clear. That's not going to happen. It is really we're now going to inform our outside legal that we intend to move forward However, we need to get a work plan developed. We need to get some additional questions answered. And then at that time, we'll bring it back for council's full consideration. I will not sign it until it comes back to council and you all give me the authorization to sign it. So that's not going to happen following tonight's meeting. That will be something, and I'm hopeful that following that meeting that we can set up for any, like I said, any council members just got to let us know when they're available. We'll get it set up and we'll address any and all questions in that meeting for all council members.

Does it also sound like this will also give the ability to outside counsel to put the pressure on the insurance company with the move forward approval? It sounds like that was from what you said, Mr. Attorney, yes.

Well, it certainly will give our outside counsel that ability to say, you know. We're moving forward. Yeah, if you're not, we are.

And that's probably a good push. Yeah, absolutely. Is there anyone from the public who would like to speak on this item? Yes, sir.

Yes, Council, Richard Gilmore, Sebastian. It looks like it says staff is requesting a waiver bid requirements. You're going to do a no-bid contract for $2 million on a deal that went south two years ago? You know, what happened to the contractor that was supposed to do this job? Did we pay him his last money? Maybe we did, maybe we didn't. But I think I agree with Councilmember Dodd. This is jumping the gun. If I was in an insurance company, I'd say, well, look, you did a no-bid contract. We didn't have time to go and bid it out to do a reasonable amount of time to get how much money this thing should take. Okay? I mean, a $2 million no-bid, and then you're taking almost a million dollars out of general fund reserve. This is a bad deal. Just a bad deal. The insurance company needs to fix this. And I don't know, it doesn't sound like if you go ahead with this, we're going to get anything done. That's all I have to say. All right. Thank you so much for that, sir.

Anyone else from the public?

Mr. Mayor?

Yes, sir. Are you closing that side? Almost. Is there anyone on Zoom?

There's no one. Raise their hand.

All right.

Public input is closed. Mr. Dodd? Okay. What Richard Gilmore just said is absolutely right. That's what an attempt is being made to do. The insurance company has not really been put on notice that we intend to do that. I mean, they've been given some information. This is a way to put the pressure on them. And it's an interesting project in that it didn't fail two years ago. It failed 12 years ago or 10 years ago, I think, whenever the original engineering was done, possibly. And so the objective here and the objective in the motion I made was for us to provide our outside counsel the ammunition he needs to go back to the survey and say we're going to move forward on this. You have to decide what you're going to do and to force them to either say we're going to court or we're going to pay you X dollars. And then we have to deal with that issue when it happens. We haven't even actually started full-blown negotiations with them because we haven't given them Any indication that the city, through their counsel, intends to correct this situation and intends to take action against them? We've got an attorney talking to them, but we haven't done that. And I agree 100%, Mr. Benton, that no, you're not going to sign this contract to resolve this. But I did leave a placeholder in my motion for a date that you'd like to, that you'd feel comfortable bringing it back to us. Are you comfortable with that, given that date now, or do you want to?

Yeah, I would just prefer to leave it open because it's going to be a result of the individual meetings and the potential information that comes out of those that we may have to gather. Also working with the potential contractor to get a work plan established. I don't know that we can bring it back on the 24th. It may have to be July 8th.

That's why I left it open, was to give you an opportunity to decide how long it would take. And I guess we can continue to leave that open as far as the motion's concerned. I am highly aware of the potential impact that this has on that ditch. If we get a major rain event, what's going to happen in that ditch? But I'm also not comfortable that if this contractor starts work tomorrow, that that won't happen at the same time. I'm just not, you know, we have to be realistic when we look at these things. And the realism of the situation is that we can tell that contractor to start tomorrow and we can write him a check for $2 million. And we don't know for sure if the first rain event in September and really what is the true beginning of the hurricane season for us. I mean, knock on some wood that we don't have a hurricane before September because I said that, but we don't know that they're going to be done by then. We don't know what will happen. I mean, we're in an unprecedented rain season right now. I mean, we may have 50 days of rain between now and September 1st in which they can't work or they can't keep your equipment in there or they have to move it out and then reposition it back in and so forth. I personally, as a council member, don't want the city to move forward on a $2.5 million fix to a $2.5 million problem and not have a really good level of satisfaction that that is going to fix the problem and that we're prepared to make sure that we are in control of that. Okay, that's the whole reason that I'm pushing the thing that I'm pushing. So with that, thank you.

All right, thank you so much for that, sir. So we've had public input. Anyone else have any input, council?

Can we just repeat the motion on the floor?

Okay. I move that the city council intends to contract to correct the project, the deficiencies in the project, and that we direct the city manager to bring back this contract at a future date WITH A DEFINED WORK PLAN AND ADD A POTENTIAL COST IN THERE TO ALLOW THE CITY TO EMPLOY AN ENGINEERING FIRM OR STAFF TO DO THE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU WANT TO CALL IT, DO THE, WHAT KIND OF WORD WOULD YOU USE, KAREN?

INSPECTION SERVICES.

OKAY, THAT WOULD WORK.

All right. That's my motion. All right. And the second still holds. All right. Anything else? Madam Clerk, roll call.

Mayor Jones.

Yes.

Vice Mayor McPartland. Yes. Council Member Nunn.

Yes.

Council Member Matthews. No. Council Member Dodd.

Yes.

Motion carries.

What was that? That was four to one? Four to one. All right. Thank you so much for that. Next on our agenda is item 13. Mr. Stokes, you're up.

Yes, just two, well, I was going to say quick items. I guess that will depend on how this goes. But the first one is I handed out to everyone a copy of a Florida statute, 106.113. And this is regarding the upcoming property tax bill. CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, AND I'VE BEEN ASKED A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO AS A LOCAL GOVERNMENT. SO I GAVE THIS TO YOU BECAUSE LIKE MOST STATUTES, IT IS NOT EXACTLY A PICTURE OF CLARITY, BUT IF YOU CUT OUT ALL THE SUPERFULOUS WORDS, YOU CAN GET DOWN TO WHAT WE NEED TO KNOW. THIS STATUTE WAS AMENDED IN 2022. WHICH ACTUALLY FAVORS US, BUT WHAT EXISTED BEFORE, IF YOU TAKE OUT ALL THE EXTRA WORDS, IT BASICALLY SAYS A LOCAL GOVERNMENT CANNOT EXPEND PUBLIC FUNDS for political advertisements to be sent to electors. And that part says whether it's just providing information or advocating. But then the 2022 amendment is a whole thing at the bottom that's mostly underlined. I underlined it in subsection two that says it does not preclude local government advertising. from reporting on official actions of the local government's governing body in an accurate, fair, and impartial manner, posting factual information on government websites or in printed materials, hosting and providing in public forums, providing factual information in response to inquiries, and so forth. So basically, when you strip down all the extra words, basically, I think the only thing this prevents us from doing is SENDING ANYTHING OUT TO THE ELECTORS. WE CAN'T SEND ANYTHING OUT TO THE PUBLIC. WE CAN PRINT MATERIALS. WE CAN HAVE THEM AVAILABLE IN THE LOBBY AND OTHER PLACES. WE CAN HAVE THEM ON OUR WEBSITE, SOCIAL MEDIA, We can talk about it here. We can have public forums. We can do all of that. I would stop short just of doing any kind of mailing because, in reality, that's what this statute has kind of come down to. I don't think it applies as much to us. I've had other cities reach out. I've talked to attorneys, and a lot of them that have utility bills, they like to send stuff out in utility bills, little information things. they're not going to, you know, if they're following this properly, you know, I think the advice is not to do that. But in our situation, I think we'll be okay. And then as far as council goes, that subsection three is very significant to you because it does say that nothing in this section precludes elected officials of a local government from expressing an opinion on any issue at any time. That's the bottom line. You guys all still have your First Amendment rights, even as elected officials. And so you can express your opinion on things anywhere, anytime. So if there are any questions on this, obviously this is going to be, you know, we're all going to be living with this probably for the next six months until November. So feel free to call anytime. And if there's any developments, if Oh, and the other thing, and I put it at the bottom here, which I think is very interesting, is just last year, like last May, 13 months ago, the legislature passed a companion statute that mirrors this one, and it applies to state government. So that's going to be interesting, because I think they're going to be wanting to advocate for passage of this, and their hands are going to be tied, too, if they actually follow their own rules. Is that it? Yeah. For that matter. One other thing is I've been working on our ballot, our charter amendment, the ordinance that I'll be bringing for first reading on the 24th. The one thing I wanted to talk to you guys about, and we can talk more about it on the 24th if you want, but looking at the four proposals of the Charter Review Committee, the last one was to eliminate completely Article 6 of the charter. Article 6 of the charter is a transition article that every charter, you look in charters, it always has that because when a city first gets a charter, they always have a transition article that says, you know, any property we own, we still own. Any ordinances or resolutions we had, we still have. Any debts, any, you know, everything. It preserves everything. SO THE THOUGHT OF THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION AT THE TIME WAS THAT SINCE OUR CHARTER HAS BEEN AROUND NOW FOR 50 YEARS, WE COULD PROBABLY ELIMINATE THAT BECAUSE THE TRANSITION IS DONE. THE MORE I LOOK AT IT AS I WAS PUTTING THIS ORDINANCE TOGETHER, I THINK IT'S BETTER TO LEAVE IT IN. We're an old city. There may be deeds out there that predate our charter. There may be ordinances and resolutions that we still rely upon that have never been amended that predate this resolution. I wouldn't want to eliminate some right that we have. And it doesn't hurt it to be there. It takes up an extra page in the charter. It's not a problem. So as I put the ordinance together, I'd like a you know, to ask you to let me go ahead and eliminate that Article 6, you know, repealing Article 6 of the Charter. I think we should leave it in place. Do you need a motion for that? I don't think we need a motion. We're going to have the ordinance, and you're going to approve the ordinance on the 24th. So if I get the consensus from counsel that you're okay with that approach, that's what I'll bring on the 24th. That's good.

You'll make the ballot a little bit smaller. All right.

All right, thank you very much. All right, thank you so much for that, sir. Mr. Benton, you're up.

Thank you, sir. So I have a few items. The first one is I want to build off what Mr. Stokes just spoke about in regards to what we are allowed to do in regards to property taxes. I've been working with staff. We're developing some what-if scenarios and addressing that currently. I'll have that prepared for council hopefully in the next two weeks or so. Staff has responsibility to get that information back to me next week. We're also developing this year's budget, so not everything's as simple as it seems to just get that put together. But once that's developed, I have a plan, and I wanted to kind of throw it by council, and you all can chime in tonight, or you can think about it, and we can discuss it at a future meeting. But meetings with outside entities, Chamber of Commerce, Little League organization, football organization, Realtors Association, different groups that are going to be impacted with the potential reform of property tax. And with that, I wanted to open it up so that council can have the discussion if you would like to appoint one specific council member to attend those meetings with me. That way we have one consistent voice or if you want to alternate or change it up, however you want to go about it. I just wanted to state it in front of all five of you that I have plans to have those meetings in the future. In the relatively near future, I'm looking to plan those once I'm able to gather the data from staff, meet individually with each council member so that you all are fully aware of what the data shows, and then we'll begin to kind of go out and meet with those entities at that time, and we can... Based on this information, we can have a public forum. We can have another meeting here in council chambers as well. But I just wanted you all to have the opportunity that if you wanted to dedicate one specific person to go to those meetings with me or if you just want staff to go and present on behalf of the city, I can handle it either way. I'll be glad to be the one that talks and provides the facts on this item and as we continue to go forward. But just wanted to give you all that option. If you have any input tonight, I'd appreciate it. If not, I'll bring it back at the next meeting so you have time to think about it. Any input? No. I can bring it back at the next one to see if you have time to think about it. And feel free to discuss it with me over the next two weeks so we can have that discussion. Annexation strategic plan that was approved tonight. I will work with Dr. Levy. We'll obviously work with the clerk to get availability of council members. What I do ask is we probably need to kind of get it within a one or two day time frame so that he can come over here and either meet with everybody in one day and go home or he meets one day and in the very next day he meets with the rest of council. So I'll get his availability. We'll start getting that out to council and see if we can get a consensus on a one to two day time frame so we can start moving forward with this. He obviously has a few tasks that staff will begin to work on immediately with providing him some data and some information. I will have a meeting with him to provide information for myself, and then we'll look forward to advancing the task along the way with getting council's input on that. I want to remind everyone we have posted notices. We have sent it out to the public. Tomorrow night here at City Hall at 6 p.m., there is a meeting soliciting public input on the Riverview Park playground and splash pad designs. We have received some designs on both of those features, and we'll be looking for public input on those items as we continue to go forward. So we'll have public input on those, and obviously then go to Parks and Recreation. So there will be multiple opportunities for the public to have input on this, but tomorrow night is kind of the first time that the public will see some of the proposals that we've received so far on playground and splash pad for Riverview Park. Last thing I have is I just want to recognize Friday will be the last day for three employees within the city that have been directors within the city as we go forward. And one of them is here tonight. So Cindy, just want to say thank you for over 12 years as our human resources director here at the city and everything you have contributed all along the way and supportive of all of our employees and the amazing things that have come out of human resources and from wage discussions and salary adjustments and benefits. And the benefits, Cindy was instrumental in developing a benefits committee so that our employees felt like they were heard whenever we have discussions on benefits as we continue to go forward. So that was one of her priorities a few years ago to get that accomplished. And just the wonderful things that Cindy has done. So thank you for your over 12 years at the City of Sebastian. I also want to recognize Jeff Sabo. He has been with the city a little over four and a half years or almost four and a half years as our airport director. His last day will be Friday as well. And we will begin a transition period for that position as we continue to go forward. I will tell you that we're looking at the positions. Every position that comes available right now with the potential property tax reform on the horizon, we're in consideration for how we fill those positions or if we fill them at all. But Jeff has been instrumental. He has received millions and millions of dollars in grants. He has gotten a lot of projects done at the airport. The airport has greatly increased its capacity in regards to hangar space and also new ground leases and future expansion on the northern portion of the airport. And he has left us with a very detailed plan of projects over the course of the next five years. So somebody's got big shoes to fill. in regards to that because there are some monumental changes out there that would bring in some economic development and bigger projects at the airport. And the third person, last day on Friday, he will be leaving us for 30 days and then coming back. But Chief Dan Acosta, he has over 27 years with the city. The last approximately six years as chief of police, Chief Acosta will be retiring on Friday. And he will then be returning to us in July. after his 30-day leave of vacation, I guess you could call it, unpaid vacation. But he will return back as our human resources and risk manager. So that will be his position once he returns back in July. But just want to thank all three of those. They all have played a major part in Sebastian and our success over the years. So just wanted to recognize them tonight since it would be their final council meeting here at the city. So that's all I have. Thank you.

All right, thank you so much for that. And next up is Ms. Jane Garcia, our clerk. Do you have anything for us?

The only thing I have to say is I'm really happy to be here.

Thank you. My first meeting. First meeting, absolutely. Thank you.

On the council matters, Mr. Nunn. Well, I'm just happy to hear that my First Amendment rights are safe and secure, even considering the state and their record. So thank you.

All right, thank you so much for that. Next up is Vice Mayor McPartland.

Okay, yes. I was at the Indian River County Veterans meeting last week, and I think a perfect person to come up and talk about property taxes would be Wesley Davis. I mean, he presented to the council, you know, very well, and only in a way that Wesley can to break it down. And I think it is important that, you know, Citizens get to vote on this, but I think it's most important that they're informed of all the possibilities of the changes that could happen. So I think him coming and presenting like he did last week would be extremely beneficial and open a lot of eyes for people. And then the other one is this morning, me and Mr. Dodd were at the MPO meeting, and they were talking about the update for County Road 510, all the expansion they're doing. AND IT'S KIND OF AMAZING THAT IF AND WHEN THEY GET ALL DONE, THE PROPOSED AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT WOULD BE SPENT THERE IS ALMOST $250 MILLION. And they're saying that the part up by the high school, they're ahead of schedule, although most people who drive there in the morning, I think they're way behind. But, you know, they're supposedly ahead of schedule, and, you know, that portion is costing $20 million. And then the next other portions are not, you know, slated to start until, like, 2030, 2031, 32, and then 33 would be where they build the flyover. over U.S. 1 from 510. So, you know, if you want to see the MPO meeting or if you want to see the PowerPoint that was presented, I think it's all, you know, pretty interesting in seeing that the amount of money that's going to be put into this county. Now, I don't know, hopefully a lot of that wouldn't change with the property tax, but, I mean, that road needs to be widened. But I just found it very interesting. And that's all. Bon voyage. So... Next time I'll be on Zoom.

All right. Thank you so much for that, sir. I just want to throw something out to council. I've been contemplating this, thinking about it, about whether or not there's appetite on the council to start a new volunteer board. And this board would be professionals in our community, doctors, lawyers, business owners, all of those. to take a look behind the scenes before ordinances of that nature like that come before us that they can put their input in before it gets to us. Look at it similar to the other boards that we have, but these will be professionals from throughout our community. It's just something that I've been thinking about and see if there's appetite for anything like that. So other than that, Ms. Matthews.

I'm good tonight. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. Mr. Dodd.

Okay, mic's on. I do have, first, I'd like to send my, I don't know if it's condolences on your trip that's coming up, or congratulations on your retirement, but we haven't given her a round of applause, I think we should do that. So thank you. That goes out to the other two people, to Jeff and the Chief. I mentioned to the Chief today, he talks about a trip to to uh niagara falls and i said well you should drive up there but rent a car because you're not going to drive back once you get there you know so okay um i did it again i looked at social media and i found in social media that i was accused of telling someone to shut up or call them stupid in a meeting okay and uh i just i just feel like sometimes i don't respond on social media these things but i feel like sometimes that it's important for me from my personal perspective, to correct that kind of stuff. I don't tell people to shut up or tell them they're stupid. I have made one mistake in a Planning and Zoning Commission meeting several years ago, and I paid for that dearly. I did not tell anyone that they were stupid. I said that the concept that what we should do is convince people that doing away with the property taxes is stupid. And I believe it is. It is creating a problem to solve a problem, and that's not the way you solve problems. You don't solve a problem by creating a problem. There's absolutely no intent on the part of the people in Tallahassee who passed that legislation to tell us the truth about what's going to happen next year when they put together the implementation legislation on the change that's going to happen in November. That implementation is going to talk about how they're going to fund all of this stuff that's not getting funded through property taxes anymore. And if you think that saving $1,000 on your property taxes will offset an 18% sales tax or an increase in fees or schedules, you're quite frankly misinformed as what the impact is. I'm all for changing taxes. I love lower taxes. If it was up to me, we would do away with taxes. But that's called anarchism. Anarchy, not anarchism, anarchy. And I've said this before. If you want to make sure that the street in front of your house gets repaired, somebody has to do that. And if we don't want taxes, then that's your problem. And if somebody falls on that street, they sue you, not the city. If you want your stormwater system to work, somebody has to do that. What we can do is what a lot of cities do. I know they do this in Port St. Lucie. We can put together taxing districts that says, okay, if we have to clean the canal, like, for example, what's happening at the end of my street right now, which, by the way, had a raccoon family and a rabbit family visit my yard for the first time, that we're going to bill the residents that live on that area for the cost of doing that. I mean, if that's what you want, then that's what could happen. If we want to solve the taxing problem, then we have to come up with methodologies by which we can provide the services that are needed. You're not paying rent on your house that is paid for when you pay property taxes. You're paying for the services that municipalities and counties provide to you. That's what you're paying for. It's important for people to understand that. I'm going to go on the attorney's little letter we got today that said I can say this stuff without getting in too much trouble. But it's important that people understand that. And I'm all for lowering taxes, but let's make sure you understand exactly what you're asking for. I can remember years ago in a document called There Ain't No Such Thing as a Free Lunch. probably I'm dating myself wanted to do. That was a 1960s document that talked about what happens to the world as we screw up our environment, right? There is no such thing as a free lunch. And if you think this amendment is going to be a free lunch, you're fooling yourself. So ask the questions. What are you going to do in January when you have to do an implementation, a piece of implementation legislation? Glades County is going to get money Any river county is not. They're going to raise our sales tax to give Glades County money because they're an impoverished county. We're not an impoverished county. We're just going to have to cut services. So listen to Brian when he talks about this stuff and think through the process and don't think that creating a problem to solve a problem is a solution. It's not. It's called popularism and it doesn't really work very well. Thank you.

All right. Thank you so much for that, sir. I have heard all of those. And from everyone up here, we are adjourned.