[8. Resolution 26-26, Approving a Continuing Services Contract to Advanced Archaeology Inc. for Historic and Archaeological Services in an amount not to exceed $50,000 annually.]

ONE I PULLED, RESOLUTION 2626.

I KNOW I'VE BEEN A MINORITY ON THIS, SO I WON'T BELABOR THE POINT. I DON'T SUPPORT THE CONTRACT AWARD. I DO BELIEVE, AND I'M GOING TO CONTINUE TO ADVOCATE FOR IT, THAT OUR PROCURING PROCESSES SHOULD BE AMENDED. I'M BOTHERED BY THE FACT THAT WE SECURE COMPETITIVE PROPOSALS, SUPPOSEDLY, BUT IT WILL NEVER BE THE CASE THAT A CONSULTANT THAT YOU'VE BEEN USING FOR A DECADE, YOU'RE GOING TO SWITCH FROM IF YOU'RE UNHAPPY. AND THEN WE DON'T ASK COST, WE DON'T EVALUATE COST. BUT IN THIS CASE, THE LONGTIME CONTRACTOR INCREASED HIS HOURLY RATE 33%. I THINK IF WE'RE NEVER GOING TO CONSIDER COST, THEN THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS. SO I DON'T SUPPORT THIS ONE. SO I'LL TAKE A MOTION AND A SECOND, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2626. I HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT ONE, ACTUALLY. I DON'T KNOW WHO WOULD BE RESPONDING TO IT. BUT ON THE... SO I JUST HEARD THE HOURLY RATE WAS INCREASED.

WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME WE HAD AN HOURLY RATE? UM, LIKE, WHAT WAS THE LAST? HOW LONG HAS THE CURRENT HOURLY RATE BEEN IN PLACE? NOW? THAT THAT'S ACTUALLY A MR. SICKLER QUESTION. OKAY, SORRY TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT. THE PRIOR HOURLY RATE, UH, WAS 75, AND THAT HAVE BEEN IN EFFECT SINCE, UH, 2023, 2023. OKAY, SO NOT TOO LONG AGO. SO I ASKED ABOUT THIS AS WELL, AND THE CRITERIA DO NOT LIST COST. AND SO I LOOKED AT THE MECHANISM, AND IT SAYS IN THE LETTER FROM ADVANCED THAT IT'S AN RFQ.

IS THAT RIGHT? REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS. SO WHY IS AN RFQ USED HERE, AND WHY IS COST NOT LISTED? IS FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. AND THEY WENT OUT SPECIFICALLY UNDER THE CCNA, WHICH IS FLORIDA STATUTE, WHICH COST CANNOT BE A PROVISION OF RANKING FOR SELECTION. WHAT TYPES OF SERVICES, ACCORDING TO FLORIDA STATUTE, NEED TO GO THROUGH AN RFQ FOR QUALIFICATION? WELL, THIS IS ONE OF THEM. ALSO ENGINEERING FIRMS, OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SUCH AS THAT. STATE IT IS A FLORIDA STATUTE REQUIREMENT THAT THIS BE AN RFQ AND BE BASED SOLELY ON QUALIFICATIONS ON THEIR QUALIFICATIONS THAT IS COUNSELOR. IF I MAY, YES, ANSWER THAT QUESTION. SO, UNDER THE STATUTE, IT IS SPECIFIES FOR ARCHITECTS, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, SURVEYORS AND ENGINEERS. THOSE THOSE ARE THE DISCIPLINES UNDER CHAPTER 287 THAT ARE SUBJECT TO CONSULTANTS

[00:45:02]

COMPETITIVE NEGOTIATION ACT.

THAT'S THE STATUTE. AND IT'S ARCHITECTS, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS, AND SURVEYORS. THE ARCHAEOLOGISTS ARE INCLUDED IN THIS? NOT UNLESS THEY'RE AN ARCHITECT. SO MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT IT WAS COVERED BY THE STATUTE. THAT WAS OUR UNDERSTANDING AS WELL. VERIFY THAT GOING FORWARD. ANOTHER THING I LEARNED WAS THAT WE HAVE TO, WE CAN ACCEPT MORE THAN ONE FIRM, RIGHT? WE CAN.

IN THEORY. SO FOR AN RFQ, WE CAN ACCEPT MULTIPLE, BASED ON QUALIFICATIONS ALONE, WE CAN SAY U3 OR U10 OR U2 ARE QUALIFIED. WE'LL TAKE YOU THROUGH THAT ROUND. AND THEN GOING FORWARD, BASED ON AVAILABILITY OR COST OR OTHER FACTORS, THERE COULD BE A SECOND LEVEL THERE BEFORE SELECTION. IS THAT CORRECT? AND JUST HOW IT'S BID AS WELL, YOU WOULD NEED TO NOTIFY UP FRONT THAT YOU WERE GOING TO MAKE MULTIPLE SELECTIONS.

OKAY. AND THIS BID SAID ONE SELECTION, NOT MULTIPLE SELECTIONS. WE WERE SEEKING ONE FIRM. OKAY.

SO WE'RE WORKING ON A PURCHASING POLICY UPDATE.

IN SELECTING THROUGH THE RFQ, WOULD THERE BE AN ISSUE WITH ALWAYS SELECTING MORE THAN ONE? SO THAT YOU HAVE IN THAT SECOND LEVEL, MORE DISCUSSION OVER COSTS AND POTENTIALLY PRESERVING. WHAT WE WOULD DO IS WE WOULD SELECT MULTIPLES AND THEN FROM THERE WE WOULD GO TO CONTRACT WITH THESE FIRMS. AND THEN IF WE HAVE A JOB THAT WE CAN SELECT FROM ONE OF THE FIRMS THAT WE HAVE IN OUR STABLE, SO TO SPEAK, OF CONSULTANTS. AND WHAT FACTORS OR CRITERIA ARE USED IN SELECTING FROM THOSE QUALIFIED? COULD BE THE TYPE OF JOB THAT WE'RE HAVING THEM, OR REQUESTING THEM TO GIVE PROPOSALS ON, IN WHICH WE SHOULD GIVE IT TO ALL, SAY, IF WE HAD THREE OF THEM, YOU SHOULD ASK ALL THREE TO REVIEW THE PROPOSAL OF WORK AND GIVE THEIR PROPOSAL. THEIR PROPOSAL, THEN YOU SELECT THE BEST ONE.

SO THAT IF YOU SELECT MORE THAN ONE AT THE RFQ PHASE, AND FOUR CAME FORWARD HERE, GRANTED, WE SAID IN THIS RFQ ONLY ONE, WE'RE SELECTING ONLY ONE.

IN THE FUTURE, AS WE LOOK AT OUR PURCHASING POLICY, WE COULD MAKE A DECISION TO CHOOSE MORE THAN ONE. WE COULD. AND THEN ALLOW FOR THAT ADDITIONAL LAYER OF COMPETITION. ABSOLUTELY.

OKAY. AND WE DO DO THAT WITH OTHER ENGINEERING FIRMS THAT AMANDA AND GEORGE, THEY USE PRETTY REGULARLY. OKAY. SO THAT. IS SOMETHING I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN, IN TERMS OF SOMETHING WE CAN DO. WELL, IF I MAY, SINCE I PULLED THAT ONE AND TOOK JUST A COMMENT ON THAT ONE, BECAUSE I'VE BEEN PRETTY CONSISTENT ABOUT THIS, I'M JUST NOT GOING TO BE APPROVING ANYMORE, IS THAT, FIRST OF ALL, I THINK THE PROCESS NEEDS TO BE REVISED BECAUSE THE OUTCOME IS PREDICTABLE. WHEN YOU'RE IN A PROCESS WHERE YOU DON'T CONSIDER COSTS AND YOU'RE USING... AND YOU'RE HAPPY WITH YOUR CONSULTANT, THE CONSULTANT YOU ARE HAPPY WITH WILL ALWAYS COME OUT TOP SCORE. I MEAN, I WAS IN THE BUSINESS. SO AT SOME POINT, COST HAS TO BE A FACTOR. YOU DON'T GET THAT COST UNTIL THEY'VE BEEN RANKED NUMBER ONE. AND SO I'M CONCERNED ABOUT PEOPLE BIDDING WHEN THEY DON'T NEVER HAVE A CHANCE. I THINK THIS ONE, IN FAIRNESS, IT'S $50,000 ANNUALLY. I WOULDN'T WANT, AND THIS IS NOT A... QUITE FRANKLY, THIS IS A GENERIC ISSUE, WHICH IS WHY I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE DEALT WITH THE PROCESS.

THIS ISN'T PLANNING AND ZONING ALONE. BUT THIS IS A $50,000 CONTRACT. IT'S NOT LIKE THE MILLIONS THAT UTILITY DOES. BECAUSE I DISCUSSED THIS WITH MR. REYNOLDS EARLIER TODAY. AND IN MY VIEW, THE SOLUTION ON THIS ONE WOULDN'T BE GETTING ANOTHER PROPOSAL. BECAUSE NOW YOU'VE GOT ALL THESE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS, YOU KNOW, AND REALLY, THERE'S NOT BIG COSTS INDIVIDUALLY, RIGHT? SO THAT'S NOT MY INTENT, EITHER. YOU KNOW, YOU SAVE $10 AND YOU SPEND $10, YOU'RE NOT GAINING ANYTHING. IT'S JUST A PROCESS THAT ALLOWS FOR YOU PICK WHO'S NUMBER ONE.

AND THEN SOMEONE THEN CAN SAY, WELL, IT'S A 33% PRICE INCREASE AND YOU CAN'T REACT TO IT BECAUSE YOU PICKED THEM NUMBER ONE. THE PROCESS HAS TO ALLOW FOR THAT. AS WE'RE SITTING HERE, WE DON'T KNOW THAT THE SECOND BIDDER WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN HIGHER, BUT WE DON'T KNOW THAT BECAUSE OUR PROCESS DOESN'T ASK THAT. AND SO IT'S THAT I DON'T FEEL I'M BEING A GOOD STEWARD OF PUBLIC MONEY WHEN I'M ALLOWING THAT PROCESS TO CONTINUE. AND THAT'S WHY I

[00:50:01]

RAISED THIS ISSUE. I'VE RAISED IT BEFORE. BUT AGAIN, IN MY VIEW, I APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATION, COUNSELOR. BUT IN THIS CASE, GETTING A SECOND ONE WOULD PROBABLY COST US MORE MONEY BECAUSE THIS IS NOT A BIG, THEN WOULD BE BURDENING STAFF. I'M NOT SAYING THAT WE WOULD DO THAT NOW. I'M JUST SAYING, AS YOU'RE ASKING, AS A SOLUTION. I AGREE. YEAH, BUT I ALSO WANT TO SAY I DON'T THINK ANYONE'S PICKING FAVORITES OR... WHAT'S BEING IMPLIED IN THAT IS REALLY CONCERNING. I THINK THIS IS CLEARLY COVERED BY STATUTE.

IN THE CASE WHERE IT'S COVERED BY STATUTE, IT CANNOT INCLUDE PRICE, IS MY UNDERSTANDING, BECAUSE I ASKED WHEN I SAW THE CRITERIA. IT'S NOT EVEN FIVE POINTS. I KNOW I WANT IT TO BE INCLUDED, AND CERTAINLY HEAVILY INCLUDED, SO WHY IS IT NOT HERE? IT'S A FUNCTION OF THE MECHANISM, WHICH IS A RESPONSE TO STATUTE, CUT AND DRY. AND I SAW THE REPORTS. I BELIEVE IN OUR STAFF. I THINK IT WAS DONE WELL. IT'S A LOW COST ITEM.

ALL I'M SAYING IS GOING FORWARD, AS WE LOOK AT OUR PURCHASING POLICY, LET'S MAYBE, YOU KNOW, OPEN THE DISCUSSION. THERE'S A LOT. I'M ARMED AND DANGEROUS UP HERE, OKAY, AND I ONLY KNOW SO MUCH ABOUT THIS. BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS WHAT I LEARNED FROM YOU WAS THAT WE COULD HAVE MORE THAN ONE QUALIFIED FIRM FOR THESE TYPES OF JOBS. AND THEN PRESERVE MORE CHOICE GOING FORWARD, WHICH MAY BE MORE BENEFICIAL TO THE TOWN. THAT'S SOMETHING I WOULD SUPPORT GOING FORWARD. AND THAT'S ALL I WANT TO SAY ON IT, REALLY, AND I'M OKAY WITH APPROVING THIS. IT'S DEFINITELY NOT AN UNREASONABLE REQUEST TO ADD INTO THE PURCHASING POLICY THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY REVIEWING. AS LONG AS THERE'S ONGOING JOBS GOING FORWARD THAT WE CAN TAP INTO THOSE MULTIPLE CONTRACTS, THAT DEFINITELY MAKES SENSE.

SO WE'LL MAKE SURE TO INCLUDE THAT. OKAY, AND IF I'M WRONG, TELL ME. NO, WE WOULD. BUT I DO THINK WHAT I'VE HEARD TONIGHT, I'M NOT CONVINCED THIS IS REQUIRED PER STATUTE BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT. OUR TOWN ATTORNEY SAID THAT IT INCLUDES ARCHAEOLOGICAL SERVICES, SO YOU BELIEVE IT DOES, HE DOESN'T, I DON'T, NOT KNOWING THAT, BUT WE'LL JUST LEAVE IT AT THAT FOR TONIGHT, BUT THERE'S NOT A CONSENSUS ABOUT THAT. CAN I GET, IS SOMEONE ABLE TO GIVE A CLEAR ANSWER, OR, I MEAN, I'M HEARING FROM OUR ATTORNEY THAT...

YEAH, I HAVE A CLEAR ANSWER.

UNDER CHAPTER 287, ONLY FOUR CATEGORIES ARE... IS THE TOWN PROHIBITED FROM SOLICITING COSTS FROM, THAT'S, ARCHITECTS, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, SURVEYORS, AND ENGINEERS? SO CAN WE...

DOES IT INCLUDE PLANNERS? DOES IT INCLUDE ARCHAEOLOGISTS? DOES IT INCLUDE ANY OF THOSE OTHER PROFESSIONAL CATEGORIES? DOES IT INCLUDE ATTORNEYS? SO WE HAVE A CLEAR ANSWER. SO HOW DO WE ADDRESS? THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY FINAL QUESTION.

YEAH, YEAH, AND BRING SOMETHING BACK. I MEAN, WHAT'S THE CONSEQUENCE? THE COUNCIL CAN REJECT, AND THEN WE CAN GO BACK AND RE-BID IT, WITH COST BEING ONE OF THE PROVISIONS. OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANY PROJECTS THAT NEED THIS IMMEDIATELY, OR WHAT'S THE LARGER CONTEXT? WE HAVE THE UPCOMING ACTIONS WITH THE SETTLEMENT. AND AMENDING THE CERTIFICATE TO DIG. WE ALSO HAVE AN OBLIGATION IN THE TOWN CODE TO RESPOND WITHIN THREE DAYS SHOULD AN ISSUE ARISE. WE ARE OUT OF CONTRACT, AND WE RUSHED TO GET THIS THROUGH, AND SOME DELAYS ALONG THE WAY. SO IT WOULD PUT US IN SOME JEOPARDY OF NOT BEING ABLE TO MEET THE CODE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE IN PLACE. WE WOULD HAVE TO GO OUT AND BID INDIVIDUALLY, I GUESS, AN INDIVIDUAL PROJECT.

THAT WOULD HOPEFULLY BE UNDER THE LIMIT SHOULD A SITUATION ARISE. I RECOMMEND THAT WE APPROVE THIS AND DOWN THE ROAD REVISIT THE WAY WE DO OUR BIDDING, JUST FOR TIME'S SAKE. WHAT, MR. SICKLER JUST TOLD US IS GOING TO BE PUT UPON THE EIGHT BALL.

YEAH, AND WE ALSO, I THINK, RECEIVED A MEMO RELATED TO THE STATUTE AS WELL. I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE A HARD LOOK AT THIS AND APPROVE IT. IT'S A LOWER DOLLAR NUMBER. WE NEED THIS OUT THE DOOR. THERE COULD BE GREATER COSTS. RIGHT. AND THE COST OF THIS CONTRACT IF WE FAIL. I AGREE WITH THAT. I WOULD SUPPORT THAT RECOMMENDATION, AND, LISTEN, LEARNED, WE NEED TO COME BACK WITH THIS FOR THE FUTURE. I CONCUR WITH APPROVAL RIGHT NOW.

MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2626, OR DO YOU WANT MORE DISCUSSION? WELL, MAKE THE MOTION A SECOND, THEN I'M JUST GOING TO COMMENT, AND THEN I'LL CALL IT TO A VOTE. MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2626. SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE. I'M NOT GOING

[00:55:01]

TO SUPPORT, BUT I JUST WANT TO SAY ON THIS, I APPRECIATE WE'RE HAVING SOME DIALOGUE ABOUT THIS, BUT I SPENT THE BETTER PART OF MY CAREER CONTRACTING FOR ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES. I DID NOT, IF IT WAS INTERPRETED, MISINTERPRETED, LET ME EMPHASIZE. YOU'RE ALWAYS GOING TO, WHEN YOU'RE EVALUATING PROFESSIONAL CAPABILITIES, YOU'RE GOING TO RELY UPON WHAT YOU KNOW. SO IT STANDS TO REASON. IT ALWAYS HAPPENS THAT WHO YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE SATISFIED WITH THEM, IS GOING TO COME OUT THE HIGHEST RANKED. IT ALWAYS WORKS OUT THAT WAY. THE DIFFERENCES WHERE I WORKED, YOU DID CONSIDER COST. YOU DIDN'T JUST SAY, OH, THIS IS NUMBER ONE, AND THEN ALLOW SOMEBODY TO JUST ESCALATE PRICES ALL THE TIME.

WE DID CONSIDER COST. I DON'T FEEL, I'M NOT. I DON'T ALLOW MYSELF TO BECOME A VICTIM. IF, IN FACT WE. IT'S THE CASE THAT WE BELIEVE THIS IS PER STATE STATUTE THAT WE HAVE TO BE VICTIMS AND ALLOW THAT KIND OF ESCALATION. WE OUGHT TO TALK TO OUR LEGISLATORS AND GET IT CHANGED, YOU KNOW, BUT I'M NEVER GONNA, I'M GONNA CEASE. I'VE BEEN COMMENTING ABOUT THIS FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS WITHOUT SUPPORT. I APPRECIATE.

WE'RE GONNA CONVERSE ABOUT IT, BUT IF WE'RE NOT GETTING COST, I'M GONNA OBJECT. PARTICULARLY WHEN THE PRICE WAS GOING UP.

IF, IN FACT, I HAD ASKED THE QUESTION, IF, IN FACT, IT HADN'T GONE UP, THEN AT LEAST I'D FEEL GOOD. BUT WHEN I HEARD IT WENT UP 33%, I THOUGHT, THAT'S UNREASONABLE.

WE DON'T HAVE A PROCESS TO CHALLENGE IT. THOSE OLD THINGS COULD BE. AND I DO REMEMBER ONE TIME I THOUGHT THAT AMANDA BARNES CHALLENGED IT WHEN SHE GOT A COST IN THIS KIND OF SITUATION, AND IT WAS LOWERED.

BUT LEAVE IT AT THAT. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. I ALSO WANT TO SAY. I ALSO WANT TO SAY THAT FLORIDA STATUTE, NOT IN THIS CASE, NOW THAT WE HAVE A CLEAR ANSWER FROM OUR ATTORNEY, AT TIMES DOES DICTATE IT. AND WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THESE CONTRACTS AND OUR PROCESS. THAT WE NOT LAY BLAME ON OUR STAFF, BUT WE LAY BLAME AT TIMES WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE, WHICH AT TIMES IS AT THE STATE OR IN OTHER ENTITIES. WE NEED TO FULLY UNDERSTAND THE CONTEXT OF OUR PUBLIC PROCESSES FOR A PUBLIC SECTOR OR PUBLIC SERVICE, WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM PRIVATE SECTOR. AND WE NEED TO LOOK AT THIS AS WE EVALUATE OUR CONTRACTS. I THINK, I MEAN, I THINK WE HAD A GREAT DISCUSSION TONIGHT. I THINK WE CAN MAKE SOME CHANGES GOING FORWARD. WE CERTAINLY NEED TO DO. I WANT TO UNDERSTAND CCNA A LOT BETTER NOW AND FLORIDA STATUTE. AND I THINK THAT'S AN OUTCOME OF THIS. BUT IT'S NOT ALWAYS HERE WHERE THE PROBLEM LIES.

AND I DON'T THINK THERE ARE MANY PROBLEMS HERE. I THINK OUR STAFF DOES AN EXCELLENT JOB AND CONTINUES TO DO AN EXCELLENT JOB. SO LET'S JUST, WE SHOULD ALL BE CAREFUL.

WE'RE STUCK WITH CERTAIN PARAMETERS THAT THE PRIVATE SECTOR ISN'T REQUIRED TO LIVE BY. THEY'RE FOR PROFIT. YEAH, THEY CAN INVEST. THEY CAN DO ALL SORTS OF THINGS. WE CAN'T, YEAH.

PUBLIC SECTORS KNOW THIS RESPONSIBLE FOR SPENDING MONEY PRUDENTLY.

SO LEAVE IT AT THAT. PRIVATE SECTOR HAD THE HIGHEST RATE HIKE. MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. MOTION MAY MOTION CARRIES FOUR TO ONE, WITH MAYOR KORESKY DISSENTING OKAY, UM, I THINK SOMEONE MAY BE HAVING SAT IN THE AUDIENCE HERE ABOUT THIS ONE. BUT ITEM 10 WAS POSTPONED. UH, MOVING ON

[11. Resolution 38-26, Quasi-Judicial, Piatt Public Safety Marina and Park – Site Plan & Special Exception.]

TO ITEM 11. THIS IS QUASI JUDICIAL. UH, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY EXPERTISE DISCLOSURES ON THIS ITEM? THIS IS, THE, PIATT PUBLIC SAFETY MARINA AND PARK SITE PLAN. I JUST HAVE ONE, I GUESS, IS, YOU KNOW I, THE THE ITEM OF THE MARINA AND PARK SITE PLAN DID COME UP.

IN CONVERSATIONS THAT I'VE HAD WITH THE TOWN MANAGER, I WOULD SAY MORE IN PASSING, BUT WE DID HAVE CONVERSATION ABOUT THAT. I MET WITH STAFF REGARDING IT, SO THAT WAS IT, AND THAT WAS STAFF AND DROVE BY THE SITE. OKAY, THIS IS QUASI-JUDICIAL, SO I'D ASK, I KNOW THIS IS ODD, BUT IT IS QUASI-JUDICIAL, I'D ASK THOSE THAT ARE GOING TO BE GIVEN TESTIMONY TO BE SWORN IN. DO YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE IN THIS HEARING IS THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? I GUESS SO. WE ARE THE APPLICANT. WE ARE THE STAFF, SO IT'S ABBREVIATED VERSION OF THIS. I DON'T HAVE A POWERPOINT FOR YOU TONIGHT, COUNCIL, BUT I DO JUST WANT TO BRING UP THE SITE PLAN,

[01:00:01]

WHICH WAS PROVIDED AS ATTACHMENT 3, JUST FOR A TALKING POINT. GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL, FOR THE RECORD. GARRETT WATSON WITH PLANNING AND ZONING. YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT.

RESOLUTION 3826 TO APPROVE THE PIAT PUBLIC SAFETY MARINA AND PARK. THAT'S A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR A MARINA AND A PARK AND SITE PLAN. AMENDMENT TO THE PIAT PHASE TWO PROJECT FOR FIVE SLIP PUBLIC SAFETY DOCK, A RIVERWALK, OVERLOOK, AND A PUBLIC PARK. BACK IN 2024, WE WERE BACK, WE'RE ON THIS PROPERTY, WE APPROVED THE FIRE STATION AS PART OF PHASE ONE. AND ATTACHED TO THAT WAS A CONCEPTUAL PHASE TWO FOR A FUTURE PARK.

AT THE TIME, WE HAD SHOWN A RIVERWALK CONNECTOR LOOP THAT WAS GOING TO CONNECT TO THE PLANNED SUN TRAIL, LOCATED ALONG U.S. HIGHWAY 1.

THERE WAS GOING TO BE A RIVERWALK SECTION BEHIND THE FIRE STATION, A POTENTIAL KAYAK LAUNCH, AND SOME MARINE AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENTS ON THE PROPERTY.

SO WE'RE BACK HERE TONIGHT TO APPROVE ESSENTIALLY AN AMENDED PHASE TWO, A MORE FINALIZED VERSION OF THAT. THIS PROJECT BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS IN AND OF ITSELF A PHASED PROJECT, WITH THE FINAL PHASING TO BE DETERMINED BY YOU, THE TOWN COUNCIL, THROUGH FUTURE POLICY DECISIONS, AS WELL AS UPCOMING MEETINGS AND THE CIP BUDGETING PROCESS. PHASE ONE OF THIS PROJECT TONIGHT INCLUDES THE PUBLIC SAFETY DOCKS, WHICH WE'RE INTENDING TO START AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, PENDING APPROVAL TONIGHT AND PERMITTING IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT THAT DOCK IS.

IT'S FULLY FUNDED AND READY TO GO. WE'RE GOING TO BE COMING FORWARD WITH SOME ACTIONS FOR YOU, WHICH I'LL DETAIL HERE IN A MINUTE. PHASE ONE INCLUDES THE PUBLIC SAFETY DOCK WITH THE FIVE SLIPS PROPOSED, AS WELL AS THE RIVERWALK OVERLOOK AND THE RIVERWALK LOOP BEHIND THE FIRE STATION.

IN PHASE TWO, YOU'LL SEE THE LIGHTER COLORED PARKING SPACES ON THE NORTH END OF THE SITE.

THAT'S PHASE TWO, AS WELL AS THE UPLAND APPROVAL FOR THE PARK, WHICH IS A PAVILION AND SOME PICNIC TABLES. SO IN ADVANCING PHASE ONE, WE'RE HERE TONIGHT FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL. ASSUMING WE GET THAT, WE'LL BE BACK HERE IN TWO WEEKS, ON THE 17TH. AS PART OF THE CRA, YOU'LL BE REVIEWING A WORK ORDER FOR CONSULTING SERVICES TO HELP ADVANCE THE PERMITTING TOWARDS CONSTRUCTION. AND THEN, AS PART OF THE COUNCIL MEETING.

IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THAT, IT'LL BE APPROVAL OF THE EXECUTION OF THE FINE GRANT, WHICH IS A MATCHING GRANT AGREEMENT.

NOW, THAT GRANT AGREEMENT IS BASED OFF THE PREVIOUS DESIGN, SO THE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN GOING BACK TO THE OLD PHASE TWO APPROVAL IN 2024. BUT WE'VE CONTACTED FIND, WE'VE SHOWED THEM THIS LATEST PLAN, THEY'RE IN SUPPORT OF IT. BUT THEY DID RECOMMEND THAT WE GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD WITH EXECUTING THE GRANT. AS IS SO WITH THE OLD DESIGN. WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE'LL COME BACK WITH AMENDMENTS TO THEM AND THAT THEY'RE SUPPORTIVE OF IT. SO THAT WAS THEIR RECOMMENDATION TO US THROUGHOUT THE PHASES OF DEVELOPMENT. AS WE'RE GOING THROUGH PERMITTING, WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH SOME ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING AS WELL WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. THAT CAN TAKE SOME TIME. WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO PURSUE GRANT FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES TO TRY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE GOOD STEWARDS OF THE TAX DOLLARS. MOVING ON TO THE ITEM IN FRONT OF YOU TONIGHT, RESOLUTION 2826, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF ITEM.

AS I NOTED PREVIOUSLY, IT'S A PUBLIC SAFETY MARINA. WE HAVE FOUR BOAT LIFTS PLANNED, AS WELL AS ONE FLOATING BOAT SLIP PLANNED TO KEEP A VESSEL IN THE WATER AND READY TO DEPLOY. PHASE ONE, AS I MENTIONED, INCLUDES THE PUBLIC OVERLOOK AND RIVERWALK LOOP, AND THE FUTURE PHASES ARE THE UPLAND PARK. AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE SITE PLAN, WHICH IS ATTACHMENT THREE IN YOUR PACKAGE, THE DOCK FACILITY AND THE RIVERWALK OVERLOOK. CONNECTION WAS DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE IMPACTS TO THE ENVIRONMENT. WE PICKED THE NARROWEST PORTION OF THE MANGROVE FRINGE AND NARROWEST PORTION OF THE PREVIOUSLY PLOTTED SEAGRASS BEDS TO MAKE SURE WE WERE MAKING AS MINIMAL IMPACTS AS POSSIBLE. ANY IMPACTS THAT WE DO MAKE ARE GOING TO BE MITIGATED ON SITE TO THE EXTENT FEASIBLE. THAT WILL ALL BE LAID OUT AS WE GO THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING. WE ALSO DESIGNED THE SHAPE OF THE DOCK TO ACCOMMODATE THE NEEDS. AS EXPRESSED BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THE MARINE UNIT HAD SOME DESIRES FOR THE ORIENTATION. YOU'LL NOTE THAT IT'S ALSO BEEN DESIGNED TO HELP PROTECT FROM KEEPING VESSELS FROM GOING IN INTO TOO SHALLOW OF WATERS AND IMPACTING FUTURE SEA GRASSES. LASTLY, WE'VE REVIEWED THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND SITE PLAN CRITERIA AND FOUND THAT THE PROPOSED APPLICATION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

AS PROPOSED, AS WELL AS THE TOWN CODE. I'LL GO AHEAD AND

[01:05:01]

LEAVE THIS UP AND I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU. DOES COUNCIL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? I JUST HAVE ONE.

AT THE OVERLOOK, OUT AT THE END, THE FIRE, I GUESS THE FAR NORTH PART, WOULD THAT INCLUDE BENCHES FOR THE PUBLIC TO SIT? IT CERTAINLY COULD. IT'S NOT IN THE PLAN RIGHT NOW, BUT THE DESIGN, IF IT'S DESIRED BY COUNCIL, COULD INCLUDE SOME BENCHES OUT THERE. DO YOU HAVE A RAILING AROUND TO KEEP IT FROM FALLING IN THE WATER OR ANYTHING? IT HASN'T QUITE ADVANCED TO THAT DESIGN YET, BUT IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE COUNCIL DESIRES, WE CAN CERTAINLY MAKE SURE IT'S AN ELEMENT OF... I'D LIKE TO INCLUDE THE BENCH OR TWO THERE IF WE COULD, FOR THE PUBLIC. CERTAINLY. AND YOU SAY THE PARK ITSELF, THE PAVILION, WILL BE AT A LATER DATE? WE'LL DISCUSS THAT? YEAH, AND THAT CAN BE...

ESTABLISH THIS PART OF FUTURE FUNDING SO THE CIP CAN BREAK DOWN WHEN THOSE PHASES ARE.

BUT AT THIS POINT, PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY IN THE RIVERWALK IS PHASE ONE AND THOSE WOULD BE PHASE TWO. AND UNLESS IT WAS DECIDED DIFFERENTLY AS PART OF FUNDING, OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER? I HAVE A QUESTION. SO THE. THERE'S SOME BOATS MORE THAN THAT AREA, BUT THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE REMOVED BECAUSE YOU IS IT 500 FEET? YOU CAN'T BE MORE IN PROXIMITY TO A DOCK, IS THAT CORRECT? I DON'T RECALL THE EXACT AMOUNT, BUT YOU ARE CORRECT. THERE IS A PROXIMITY AROUND A PUBLIC FACILITY, 150 FEET AROUND A PUBLIC FACILITY WHERE VESSELS CAN'T BE MOORED.

THAT'S IT FOR NOW. I HAVE A QUESTION, BUT IT'S REALLY A COMMENT BECAUSE I DON'T SEE IT ON HERE. BUT JUST AS A STANDARD PRACTICE, YOU KNOW, THIS SITE IS A SITE.

THAT WE MAY BE ACQUIRING THE SAME THING WOULD APPLY WHEN WE'RE DOING THE PERMITTING FOR SOMETHING LIKE THE DOCK, THAT'S THE TIME TO ALSO PERMIT. SEAGRASS INFORMATIONAL BUOYS. IT'S A SMALL ITEM. I CERTAINLY WOULDN'T WANT TO MISS THAT OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE THE WHOLE WHEN ALL THE CONVERSATIONS WE'VE HAD AS A COUNCIL AND STAFF IS TO. WE'RE TRYING TO BE AS RESPONSIBLE WE CAN TO THE ENVIRONMENT AND PROTECT.

SEAGRASS. AND YOU WENT INTO THAT AS THE DESIGN WAS CONSIDERING THAT SO SMALL ITEM, BUT CAN YOU ADD, YOU KNOW, SOME SEAGRASS BUOYS? SO THAT PEOPLE NOW UNDERSTAND, BECAUSE THIS PROJECT WILL CHANGE THE BEHAVIORS OF WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING THERE FOR YEARS, ABSOLUTELY. WE CAN INVESTIGATE GRANT FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES TO INSTALL THOSE AS WELL.

YEAH, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT EVEN RAISES TO THAT LEVEL BECAUSE WE FUNDED THEM, YOU KNOW, WITH THE INLET AT JUPITER, WHATEVER. IT'S SO, IT'S NOT A BIG COST, BUT I DON'T. I KNOW. YOU HAVE TO HAVE PERMITTED IT, SO IT'S A SMALL LITTLE AD IN THE PERMIT APPLICATION, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, TO DO IT SO.

BUT THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH OUR STRATEGIC, YOU KNOW, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR SEAT, SO THANK YOU.

WITH THAT. IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, I'LL TAKE A MOTION IN A SECOND TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 38 26. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND.

MOTION TO SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. AYE. MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. OKAY, MOVING ON TO THE ROUNDTABLE ITEM.

[12. Fire Non-Ad Valorem Assessment Discussion.]

TURNING IT OVER TO OUR DISTINGUISHED FINANCE DIRECTOR, MR. REYNOLDS. THERE WE GO. OKAY, SO THERE AGAIN, WHAT YOU JUST SAID, MAYOR, WE'RE HERE THIS EVENING TO DISCUSS THE NON-ABHIVORMOUS FIRE ASSESSMENT IN A ROUNDTABLE. AND FIRST THING, I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE A COUPLE OF PEOPLE REAL QUICK. SANDRA NEWBERTH WITH ACCENTURE, WHICH IS OUR CONSULTANT. THAT WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH OVER THE LAST YEAR. SHE'S IN THE AUDIENCE THIS EVENING.

[01:10:02]

BUT I ALSO WANTED TO CALL OUT SOME PEOPLE ON STAFF THAT HAVE BEEN WORKING VERY HARD.

THOMAS GATES, WHO'S OUR GIS MANAGER OVER IN IS. HE WAS ESSENTIAL TO THE TEAM. AND BEING ABLE TO EXTRACT THE DATA AND PUT IT IN A MEANINGFUL ORDER FOR SANDRA AND HER TEAM TO BE ABLE TO WORK WITH THE DATA.

DEPUTY, I'M SORRY, THE FIRE CHIEF AND HIS STAFF, ALSO A VERY HEAVY LIFT WITH THE DATA AND THE BUDGETARY INFORMATION THAT WAS NECESSARY TO PUT THIS STUDY TOGETHER.

SO, YES, IT'S TAKEN A LONG TIME TO PUT IT TOGETHER, BUT WE FINALLY HAVE SOME DATA THAT WE CAN SPEAK. IN TERMS OF THIS EVENING. WE'VE ALSO RECEIVED, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THE STATE THAT WE RECEIVED SOME QUESTIONS FROM SOME RESIDENTS THIS AFTERNOON SINCE POSTING THE AGENDA ITEMS. SO I'M HOPING TO BE ABLE TO ANSWER A LOT OF THOSE QUESTIONS THAT I'VE SEEN COME ACROSS TO THE TOWN THIS AFTERNOON, AND MAYBE EVEN SOME THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP THIS EVENING. SO WHY ARE WE HERE? WE'RE HERE AGAIN TO DISCUSS THE POSSIBILITY OF POSSIBLY IMPLEMENTING A NON-AVALORAN FIRE ASSESSMENT.

TO FUND THE JUPITER FIRE RESCUE, WHICH WILL START OCTOBER 1, 2026. GOING TO DISCUSS WHAT IS A NON-AD VALOREM FIRE ASSESSMENT, THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF A FIRE ASSESSMENT, FUNDING OPTIONS AND MILLAGE IMPACTS, GOING TO BE SEEKING POLICY DIRECTION FROM THE COUNCIL THIS EVENING, AND REVIEW SOME OF THE TIMELINES AND THE IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE, IF APPROVED, TO PROCEED BY THE COUNCIL THIS EVENING.

SO THE AD VALOREM VERSUS THE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT. ONE OF THE THINGS I WANT TO MAKE CLEAR IS, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU'LL SEE IN THE PRESENTATION THIS EVENING, IT'S NOT JUST THE NON-AD VALOREM PIECE. I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE INTERESTED IN, WELL, WHAT WOULD THE MILLAGE ULTIMATELY BE TO FUND THE ADDITIONAL PORTION THAT CAN'T BE FUNDED BY THE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT? SO WE'VE HAD TO MAKE SOME ASSUMPTIONS BASED ON BUDGET AND ALSO WHAT WILL THE THE TAX RATE LOOK LIKE FOR NEXT YEAR. SO WE'VE HAD TO MAKE SOME ASSUMPTIONS FOR THE VALUE, WHICH WE WILL SEE MOST LIKELY IN JUNE FROM THE PROPERTY APPRAISER.

SO AVERAGE TAXES ARE BASED ON PROPERTY VALUE, MILLAGE RATE, TIMES, TAXABLE VALUE.

THE REVENUE IS BASED ON THE REAL ESTATE MARKET. WE KNOW THERE CAN ALSO BE FLUCTUATIONS IN THE MARKET.

WE'VE SEEN THAT IN 2008, WHERE ALL THE JURISDICTIONS HAD A, UH, DECREASE IN THEIR VALUES, AND THEN WE'VE HAD TO LIVE WITHIN THOSE VALUES. SO THE MARKET CAN HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE NON-AD VALOREM TAXES RECEIVED. A NON-AD VALOREM FIRE ASSESSMENT IS BASED ON SPECIAL BENEFITS TO THE PROPERTY THAT'S OUTLINED IN FORD'S STATUTE. IT'S NOT BASED ON PROPERTY VALUE. SO WHAT ARE SOME OF THOSE BENEFITS? THE PROTECTION OF THE PROPERTY VALUE OVERALL? BY HAVING A FIRE DEPARTMENT, THE AVAILABLE FIRE SUPPRESSION.

YOU SEE THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING FIRE INSPECTIONS OF COMMERCIAL PROPERTY TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S SAFE FOR OUR RESIDENTS, REDUCTION IN INSURANCE PREMIUMS, LIFE SAFETY INSPECTIONS THAT WE JUST MENTIONED, AND AVAILABILITY OF THE CAPACITY OF THE FIRE SYSTEM ITSELF.

ALSO, ONE THING I WANT TO MAKE SURE TO POINT OUT, AND WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS A LITTLE BIT FURTHER IN THE PRESENTATION THIS EVENING, IS THE STABILITY AND PREDICTABILITY OF THE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT OVER AD VALOREM TAXES. IT'S ALSO A CHARGE LEVIED ON PROPERTY TO FUND FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES.

IT EXCLUDES ANY KIND OF EMS SERVICE BEYOND THE FIRST RESPONDER LEVEL. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT CANNOT FUND THE EMS PORTION, IT'S ONLY THE FIRE PORTION. IT MUST BE BASED ON A SPECIAL BENEFIT TO THE PROPERTY, BE FAIR AND REASONABLE. IT'S BILLED SEPARATELY AS A LINE ITEM ON THE ANNUAL PROPERTY TAX BILL. THE RESIDENTS, IF YOU SO ELECT TO GO FORWARD, THEY WILL SEE A LINE ITEM ON THEIR BILL TOWARDS THE BOTTOM.

THAT WILL INDICATE THAT IT'S A JUBER FIRE ASSESSMENT. IT CAN BE USED TO HELP PAY DEBT SERVICE. IT'S ALSO BASED IN FLORIDA. STATUTE.

SO, IN ORDER TO START THE PROCESS OF EVALUATING, THEY HAD TO EVALUATE THE TYPES OF SERVICES AND THEN THE CALLS FOR SERVICE BY PROPERTY TYPE.

SO YOU CAN SEE HERE THEY EXTRACTED, WE UTILIZED... CALL DATA FROM 2022, 23, AND 24. WE WORKED WITH PALM BEACH COUNTY ON GETTING THIS DATA AND THEN WAS ABLE TO SCRUB IT THROUGH THE INDIVIDUALS THAT I INDICATED EARLY ON.

BUT YOU CAN SEE HERE, RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY WAS THE PREDOMINANT USE OF THE SERVICE AT 63.78%, COMMERCIAL AT 19.78%, INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE AT 2.79%, THE INDUSTRIAL

[01:15:01]

AT 8.68%, AND THEN NURSING HOMES, AND WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE NURSING HOMES AS WE GO FORWARD AS FAR AS THE SERVICE LEVELS. SO, COST APPOINTMENT. WE ARE SUGGESTING TO USE A SQUARE FOOTAGE FORMULA INSTEAD OF A FLAT FEE. IT'S BASED ON, AND USUALLY WHAT YOU'LL SEE HISTORICALLY WHEN SQUARE FOOTAGE IS USED IS BASED ON THE COMMERCIAL TYPE RATE.

WE'RE GOING TO BE USING IT ACROSS ALL CATEGORIES. ALSO, ONE THING I WANT TO POINT OUT IS THAT THROUGH THE STUDY, THE COSTS THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED BY THE CONSULTANT THAT'S LEGALLY DEFENSIBLE IS JUST OVER $16 MILLION. THE TOWN COULD ASSESS UP TO $16 MILLION WORTH OF COST ACROSS ALL THESE CATEGORIES.

WHAT'S CURRENTLY BEING PROPOSED IS ONLY 15% OF THAT TOTAL OF THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE AMOUNT.

SO HOW DOES THAT TRANSLATE? THE AVERAGES ACROSS THE TOWN, BASED ON THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, YOU CAN SEE ANYWHERE BETWEEN $15 TO $93 FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY.

THAT'S BASED ON THE AVERAGE SQUARE FOOT THAT WE'RE SEEING IN THE DATA THAT'S BEEN EXTRACTED. THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, ANYWHERE BETWEEN $40 AND $477 ANNUALLY. INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY IS BASED ON THE AVERAGE SQUARE FOOT, AGAIN, $11 TO $168. AND THEN THE EXEMPT INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY, ANYWHERE FROM $8 TO $613 ANNUALLY. NOW, THESE ARE THE AVERAGES THAT WE'RE SEEING ACROSS THE TOWN. SO WHAT DOES THAT TRANSLATE TO? BECAUSE WE'RE ONLY ASKING, OR SEEKING TO USE 15% OF THE TOTAL ALLOWABLE AMOUNT.

WHAT WE'RE SEEKING WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY $2.1 MILLION OF THE $16 THAT COULD BE USED TO FUND THE FIRE ASSESSMENT.

SO THE BIG QUESTION IS, THAT I KNOW WE'VE ALL BEEN ASKING IS, WELL, WHAT IS THIS GOING TO LOOK LIKE AS FAR AS? AND HOW IT WORKS WITH THE MILLAGE RATE THAT THE RESIDENTS ARE GOING TO SEE. SO WHAT WE'RE SHOWING ON THIS SLIDE IS THE CURRENT FUNDING YEAR OF FISCAL YEAR 2026. YOU CAN SEE THE PALM BEACH COUNTY FIRE RESCUE, THE JUPITER MSTU AT 1.7251, THE CURRENT TOWN OPERATING MILLAGE AT 2.3894. FOR A TOTAL OF 4.1145, A TOTAL AMOUNT OF JUST OVER $72, ALMOST $73 MILLION.

YOU CAN ALSO SEE GOING WITH, WE WOULD HAVE TWO OPTIONS. ONE IS THE USE OF THE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT THAT WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING, THE $2.1 MILLION THAT WOULD BE COLLECTED THROUGH THE NAV. BUT BASED ON A 6% ESTIMATED INCREASE IN THE VALUES FROM THIS...

CURRENT YEAR GOING INTO FY27.

WHAT WE WOULD BE PROJECTING BASED ON THE DOLLAR VALUE THAT'S NEEDED TO COVER THE FOR THE JUPITER FIRE RESCUE, THE EMS PORTIONS, AND THE OTHER PORTIONS NOT COVERED BY THE BY. THE NAV WOULD BE 1.1047, JUST ALMOST $20 MILLION. ONE THING I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THESE DOLLARS, THAT TRANSPORT REVENUE IS NOT INCLUDED IN ANY OF THIS.

THAT'S APPROXIMATELY $2 MILLION, ESTIMATED TO BE ABOUT $2 MILLION. WE ARE CONTINUING ON WITH THE, WE ARE ESTIMATING TO CONTINUE ON. THE JUPITER OPERATING MILLAGE AT 2.3894, A TOTAL OF .34941, WHICH WOULD INCREASE TO THE DOLLARS TO 67,449203. OPTION TWO WOULD BE WHAT'S CALLED A PURE MILLAGE OPTION, MEANING THAT YOU WOULD NOT WANT TO PROCEED FORWARD WITH THE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT. WHAT WOULD THAT MILLAGE LOOK LIKE BASED ON THAT 6% INCREASE IN VALUE? WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE UP FOR SOME OF THAT LOSS OF THE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT WITH A MILLION DOLLARS IN SALES TAX, BUT YOU CAN SEE WHAT THE MILLAGE RATE WOULD GO TO, WHICH IS 3.5564, A TOTAL OF 67,449. SO ONE THING I WANTED TO POINT OUT, TOO, WE ALWAYS LIKE TO COMPARE OURSELVES TO OTHER JURISDICTIONS IN THE COMMUNITY AND HOW WE RANK.

RIGHT NOW, WE SIT AT ABOUT THE THIRD LOWEST MILLAGE IN THE COUNTY. IF WE ENACT THIS WITH EITHER OPTION ONE OR OPTION TWO, BASED ON THE COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE A FIRE DEPARTMENT, WE WOULD BE STILL RANKED THE FOURTH LOWEST MILLAGE IN THE JURISDICTION.

SO, SUMMARY OF SAVINGS, THAT'S THE NEXT QUESTION.

WELL, HOW MUCH ARE WE GOING TO SAVE? WELL, ON AVERAGE, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT ACROSS THE TOWN IS RESIDENTIAL WOULD

[01:20:01]

BE SAVING $276.44, COMMERCIAL, $463.36. ALL PARCELS, ON AVERAGE, TOTAL OF $301. ONE THING TO POINT OUT IS WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS IS WHAT'S THE OVERALL SAVINGS. IT'S BASED ON THE BUDGET. RIGHT NOW, LOOKING AT $9.8 MILLION. NOW, THAT'S BASED ON THE FY26 BUDGET THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY SEEING FROM PALM BEACH COUNTY FIRE RESCUE, JUST UNDER $32 MILLION.

WE'VE TRENDED OUT, AND WE DID THIS INITIALLY, AND WHEN WE FIRST STARTED LOOKING AT GOING TO OUR OWN FIRE DEPARTMENT, WE TRENDED OUT, AND THIS ACTUALLY CAME IN FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.

FROM PALM BEACH COUNTY, IS WHAT THAT FY27 NUMBER WOULD LOOK LIKE. IT WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY $35 MILLION. SO YOU CAN SEE.

WE'RE GOING TO SAVE APPROXIMATELY $10 MILLION IN THE FIRST YEAR FOR THE RESIDENTS. SO WHAT ARE SOME OF THE ADVANTAGES AND SOME OF THE CHALLENGES? THE THAT NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT ADVANTAGES, WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS AND YOU'VE BEEN SEEING IN THE NEWS ABOUT STABILITY OF REVENUE.

THAT'S ONE OF THE BIG THINGS.

THAT COMES WITH THE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT IS THAT IT'S STABLE, THAT IT'S NOT REACTING TO THE ENVIRONMENT OR THE MARKET.

IT'S BENEFIT-BASED. MEANING THAT YOU CAN CORRELATE A DIRECT BENEFIT TO THE PROPERTY TO A COST. IT'S A DEDICATED FUNDING SOURCE FOR JUST FIRE.

WE JUST TALKED ABOUT THAT.

BUDGET CERTAINTY GOING FORWARD.

SOME RELIEF TO THE MILLAGE.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO INCREASE THE MILLAGE BECAUSE OF THE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT.

AND ALSO THE CRA. HERE'S A VERY IMPORTANT FACT I WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS IS THE CRA CURRENTLY IS, THEY RECEIVE MILLAGE. DOLLARS.

SO WHEN WE INCREASE THE OPERATING MILLAGE OF THE TOWN, THE CRA GETS A PORTION OF THAT GOES INTO THE CRA TRUST FUND. THE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT WILL BE, THOSE FUNDS STAY WITHIN THE CRA. WITH THE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT, WE CAN ASSESS THAT WITHIN THE DISTRICT. THOSE FUNDS CAN COME BACK OUT AND BE USED SPECIFICALLY FOR THE JUPITER FIRE RESCUE INSTEAD OF STAYING WITHIN THE TRUST FUND.

CURRENTLY, PALM BEACH COUNTY, THE MSTU... THEY ASSESS THAT ACROSS THE CRA, AND THOSE FUNDS GO BACK TO PALM BEACH COUNTY TO FUND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.

SO I DIDN'T KNOW IF EVERYBODY KNEW THAT. I FOUND THAT A VERY INTERESTING FACT THAT SOME PEOPLE DID NOT REALIZE. SOME OF THE CHALLENGES IS THE LIMITED USE OF FUNDS. YOU CAN'T REDIRECT THAT FUNDING TO BE USED FOR EMERGENCY PURPOSES IN THE GENERAL FUND. AND IT ALSO REQUIRES THE USE OF SANDRA AND HER TEAM ON AN ONGOING BASIS TO UPDATE. STUDIES AS WE GO FORWARD, IF WE WANTED TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

FOR THE MILLAGE OPTION, ONLY OPTION, THE ADVANTAGES IS OBVIOUSLY THE EASE OF APPLICATION, NO STUDY REQUIRED, CAN FUND ALL OF JUPITER FIRE RESCUE, PLUS THE EMS PORTION. THERE'S NO LIMITATIONS ON WHAT THE COUNCIL CAN DO.

THE BIGGEST THING IS THE CRA PARCELS WILL NOT PAY INTO THE JUPITER FIRE RESCUE. WE JUST TALKED ABOUT THAT. AND THEN THE DEBT SERVICE EXPENSES. SO WE WOULD HAVE TO COVER THAT. THAT WE KNOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME DEBT SERVICE RELATING TO THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY FOR THE NEW STATIONS. SO WE WILL HAVE TO USE SALES TAX REVENUE TO COVER A PORTION OF THAT. A LOT OF QUESTIONS THAT WE'VE BEEN RECEIVING IS REGARDING OTHER JURISDICTIONS IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, AND WHAT ARE THEY DOING FOR THE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT. I HAD SANDRA AND HER TEAM PULL SOME OF THIS. THEY'VE ACTUALLY WORKED SOME OF THESE PROJECTS. SO YOU CAN SEE... MOST OF THEM ARE, IN FACT, ALL OF THEM, ARE FLAT RATES WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE RESIDENTIAL PIECE. SO, YOU CAN SEE. CITY OF ATLANTIS HAS $222 ANNUALLY FOR A DWELLING UNIT. CITY OF WEST PALM, THEY'RE AT $100 FOR A DWELLING UNIT. I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY'VE BEEN BASED ON A STUDY FROM 2019, SO IT'S BEEN SITTING DORMANT. SAME THING WITH BOYNTON BEACH.

THEY'VE BEEN BASED ON A 2008 STUDY. AT $145. AND THEN THE CITY OF BOCA, I DO KNOW THAT THEY ANALYZE THEIR COSTS PRETTY REGULARLY, BUT THEY'RE UPWARDS OF $155. THEY'RE LOOKING TO POSSIBLY INCREASE THEIR FEES AS WELL. YOU CAN LOOK AROUND ON THE NEWS OR EVEN IN THE NEWSPAPER THAT EVERYBODY'S LOOKING FOR ALTERNATIVE REVENUE SOURCES. I CAN IMAGINE GOING FORWARD INTO THE FUTURE, YOU'LL SEE A LOT MORE OF THESE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS.

COMING INTO PLAY TO HELP FUND FIRE DEPARTMENTS.

SO AGAIN,

[01:25:01]

WE'RE SEEKING POLICY DIRECTION FROM THE COUNCIL THIS EVENING.

IF THEY WOULD LIKE US TO CONTINUE TO PROCEED WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT, AGAIN, WE'RE SEEKING TO ONLY USE 15% OF THE ALLOWABLE ASSESSMENT.

THAT'S $2.1 MILLION. IT'S $16 MILLION THAT'S ABLE TO BE USED. IT ALLOWS THE TOWN TO GENERATE A DIVERSE FEE STRUCTURE TO SUPPORT THE TOWN'S FIRE SERVICE, WHICH INCLUDES DEBT SERVICE.

DEBT SERVICE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT. THE OTHER THING IS, WE'LL BE SEEKING THE COUNCIL'S DIRECTION ON EXEMPTION POLICIES OR BUY-DOWNS FOR GOVERNMENTAL PARCELS, INSTITUTIONAL TAX-EXEMPT BUILDINGS, TOTALLY AND PERMANENTLY DISABLED VETERANS AND THEIR SURVIVING SPOUSES, SENIOR EXEMPTIONS, INCOME-BASED. NURSING HOME BUY DOWNS TO A COMMERCIAL RATE.

THIS IS IMPORTANT. WE'VE RECEIVED A LOT OF COMMENTS FROM RESIDENTS THAT MAINLY THE SENIORS THAT ARE RECEIVING CURRENT EXEMPTIONS. SO WE'RE SEEKING THE COUNCIL TO ALLOW US TO USE THOSE SAME MECHANISMS TO HELP BUY DOWN THE COST OF THE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT.

TO HELP THOSE RESIDENTS AS WELL. I KNOW THERE WAS A QUESTION ON HOW MANY PROPERTIES OF THAT TYPE THERE ARE WITHIN THE TOWN. THERE'S 429 OF THOSE PROPERTIES. AND THEN ANOTHER QUESTION THAT CAME IN THIS AFTERNOON REALLY HAS, DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT. MORE ABOUT THE MILLAGE. BUT THE FLORIDA STATUTE SETS THE INCOME RATE OF JUST OVER $38,000 A YEAR FOR THAT TO QUALIFY FOR THAT BENEFIT. AND THEY MUST QUALIFY TO THE PROPERTY APPRAISER EVERY YEAR ON THOSE AMOUNTS. SO I WANTED TO MAKE SURE TO BRING THAT UP. SO WHAT'S NEXT? WE'VE ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO POSSIBLY DO A NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT. WE DID THAT IN OCTOBER OF 2025. WE APPROVED AGREEMENTS WITH THE PROPERTY APPRAISER AND THE TAX COLLECTOR, IF WE WANTED TO PROCEED FORWARD, THAT THEY WOULD BE OUR COLLECTING AGENT.

AND ALSO TONIGHT, THE ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION ON THE THIRD. AND THEN GOING FORWARD, THERE'S SOME, THERE'S AN ORDINANCE THAT WE'LL BE BRINGING BACK AND SOME PUBLIC HEARINGS. WE HAVE A PROCEDURAL TYPE ORDINANCE. THIS BASICALLY LAYS OUT THE RULES OF THE ROAD ON HOW WE'RE GOING TO PROCEED FORWARD WITH IMPLEMENTING THE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT. AND THEN THE ACTUAL SENDING OUT NOTICES, AND THEN THE FINAL ADOPTION AND RESOLUTION. WE REALLY NEED TO HAVE THIS KIND OF SORTED OUT BEFORE TRIM IN JULY SO THAT THE COUNCIL WILL KNOW WHAT MILLAGE RATE THAT THEY'LL NEED TO BE SETTING. SO WE'LL BE GOING THROUGH THE SUMMER, UH.

PUTTING FORWARD THESE ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS AND THESE PUBLIC HEARINGS TO DISCUSS THE RATES FURTHER AND MAKE SURE THAT THE PUBLIC IS AWARE OF WHAT'S BEING DISCUSSED AND INTENDED. AND THEN THE COUNCIL CAN MAKE A FINAL DECISION. OKAY. I WANT TO CLARIFY SOME THINGS FROM MY UNDERSTANDING AND THEN OPEN IT UP. SO, REALLY, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT THE COUNCIL WILL REALLY BEGIN THE PROCESS OF MAKING, YOU KNOW, RATE BUDGET DECISIONS FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. WE HAD ASSUMPTIONS WHEN WE EMBARKED ON THIS, AND CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, I'M DELIGHTED. THE FIRST THING I DID WAS, IN FACT, WHEN... I WAS GETTING THIS PRESENTATION AS WE ALL DID EARLIER. I WAS FIXATED ON THE NUMBERS, COMPARING THEM TO WHAT WE HAD EXPECTED. I TOLD OUR FINANCE DIRECTOR, I'M NOT EVEN HEARING YOU, CAN YOU PAUSE HERE? BUT YOU REMEMBER THAT JOKE. BUT I'M DELIGHTED THAT WE'RE COMING IN UNDER MORE SAVINGS THAN WE HAD COMMITTED. AND JUST TO WANT TO REMIND EVERYBODY IS THAT, AND WE USED THE TERM BEST CASE BECAUSE WE WERE WORKING TOWARDS A TARGET BUDGET WHEN WE BEGAN IN 27, AND WHAT WE HAD WAS A PALM BEACH COUNTY. AND THIS ISN'T A CRITICISM, IT IS WHAT IT IS. IT WAS A FORECAST OF WHAT THEIR RATES WERE GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, GOING FORTH.

SO WE HAD PRESENTED THE FIRST YEAR SAVINGS AS BEING, YOU KNOW, A MINIMUM OF FIVE AND A HALF MILLION AND UP. DEPENDING UPON WHERE. THE PALM BEACH COUNTY, THE DEFUND RESCUE LINE ENDED. SO WHEN WE GOT THE ASSESSMENT FOR 26, I WENT BACK AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG ON ANY OF THIS, MR. REYNOLDS, BECAUSE YOU AND I TALKED ABOUT THAT, AND I BELIEVE THESE ARE NUMBERS YOU AGREE WITH.

YOU KNOW, THE 95% BASIS WAS $1.8 MILLION HIGHER IN 26 THAN

[01:30:06]

WE HAD ASSUMED. SO OBVIOUSLY COSTS ARE GOING UP HIGHER THAN THE ASSUMPTION ON THE CURVE.

AND THEN I'VE ALWAYS HAD THIS QUESTION, STILL NOT CLEAR, IS THIS UPSIDE? TAX COLLECTIONS THAT I STILL BELIEVE ARE BEING SWEPT, THAT MAY BE ANOTHER $1.3 MILLION, BUT WE'LL SEE.

FOR THOSE THAT DON'T KNOW, YOU PUT YOUR BUDGETS TOGETHER ON 95% OF THE TAXES, AND THAT'S A STATE REQUIREMENT.

BUT HISTORICALLY, WE'VE ALWAYS COLLECTED MORE, AND THAT'S IN, YOU CAN LOOK IN THE CAFR AND SEE THAT. SO DATING BACK, YOU KNOW, I HAD ASKED WHEN WE WERE NEGOTIATING THIS CONTRACT. TO THE PALM RIDGE COUNTY FIRE AND RESCUE CHIEF, HEY, CAN YOU SHOW ME THAT WE'RE GETTING CREDIT FOR THAT? AND TO THIS DAY, I HAVEN'T SEEN IT.

BUT ANYWAY, NONETHELESS, THE POINT IS, WE'RE... WE'RE IN GOOD SHAPE. WE DID LEARN ALONG THE WAY, THOUGH, THAT WHILE THE COUNTY, BECAUSE OF STATE REGULATIONS, COULD USE CRA MONEY, WE CAN'T. YOU SAID THAT. I DO THINK WE NEED TO RECONCILE THAT. THAT'S SOMETHING WE DIDN'T KNOW, WILL STILL COME IN UNDER THE MINIMUM THAT WE AGREED UPON.

BUT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO RECONCILE FOR THE FACT THAT THAT MONEY WILL GO TO THE CRA OUTSIDE OF OUR CONTROL. IT WOULD TAKE SOME KIND OF LEGISLATIVE ACTION THAT BE IMPOSSIBLE TO HAPPEN, OR THIS ENVIRONMENT. SO I JUST WANT TO, ALTHOUGH THAT'S NOT AN AGENDA ITEM, I THINK WHEN WE'RE AT SOME POINT IN TIME, WE SHOULD BE GIVEN POLICY DIRECTION. SO AS WE'RE GOING FORTH, YOU KNOW HOW WE'RE DOING THIS.

SO, YOU KNOW, YOU POINTED IT OUT. I'M JUST SAYING, I'M FOR PUTTING THAT IN, THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE UP FOR THAT. IN THE ASSESSMENT, THE UM TRANSPORT FEES, I WAS REMINDED THAT WE'VE ACTUALLY ALREADY ACTED UPON THEM, BUT THE TRANSPORT FEES ARE EXACTLY THE SAME AS PALM BEACH COUNTY HAS BEEN USING, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. NOW, EVERY YEAR, THAT'S A DECISION THE COUNCIL COULD MAKE.

OBVIOUSLY, IF YOU WERE TO LOWER THE TRANSPORT FEES, BECAUSE PUBLIC HAD COMPLAINED ABOUT THAT TO SOME OF US OVER THE YEARS, THEN YOU HAVE TO MAKE IT UP WITH ANOTHER FUNDING SOURCE.

BUT I JUST WANT TO EMPHASIZE.

FOR SOMEBODY LISTENING THAT THAT'S COMMON ACROSS THE BOARD, UM, SO IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE'RE DOING OTHER THAN CONSISTENT WITH HOW THAT HAD BEEN. UM, AND THEN, UM, YOU KNOW? SO, A QUESTION TO KICK OFF ON THE QUESTIONS. AND I APPRECIATE THIS IS GREAT WORK, I APPRECIATE STAFF NUDGED US INTO DOING THE STUDY AND HAVING THIS AS AN OPTION. AND WHAT HAVE YOU. AND I NEVER WAS COMFORTABLE IN ANYTHING ABOUT IT UNTIL I SEE WHERE THE NUMBERS ARE, RIGHT? BECAUSE I WANT TO DELIVER WHAT WE HAVE REPRESENTED. SO WE'RE BOUNDED BY HOW THE STUDY WAS DONE. LET ME ASK THE FULL QUESTION, MR. REYNOLDS, AND THEN YOU CAN ANSWER. I THINK WE MAY BE BOUNDED BY HOW THE STUDY WAS DONE. I NOTICED THE... FOUR OTHER MUNICIPALITIES DID IT PER DWELLING UNIT. WE DIDN'T. I KNOW WHY WE DIDN'T, BECAUSE THE TOWN HAS HISTORICALLY TRIED TO BE MINDFUL OF SOMEBODY IN LOWER INCOME LEVELS, SO THAT'S WHY THAT WAS DONE THAT WAY. AND THEN, AS MR. REYNOLDS SPOKE, AND I THINK WE ALL KNOW THIS, BUT MAYBE THE PUBLIC MAY NOT KNOW, THE SENIOR EXEMPTIONS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE ENACTED FOR AD VALOREM TAXES. SO STAFF USING THAT POLICY DIRECTION, YOU KNOW, STATE MADE THAT AN OPTION, BUT MANY MUNICIPALITIES DIDN'T DO IT, BUT WE DID. SO THAT ONE WAS JUST CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE'VE, WHAT WE'VE DONE BEFORE. SO, BUT AGAIN, SO MANY OF THESE OVER THE LONG TERM WILL BECOME COUNCIL POLICY DECISIONS. SO WE CAN JUST CLIMB ABOARD WITH THE ASSUMPTIONS HERE AND CONFIRM THEM, OR, YOU KNOW, WE CAN CHANGE. BUT, YOU KNOW, BUT THEY AFFECT THE TOTAL BOTTOM LINE, RIGHT? UM, SO YOU WERE CLEAR. I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF SUMMARIZE THAT YOU SAID EVERYTHING I'VE JUST SAID.

BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE I'M SAYING THAT.

SO, YOU KNOW, I'LL OPEN IT.

AND THEN. SO, ASKING THE QUESTION, I ASK, ARE WE BOUND BY THAT, UH, SPREAD RATE FOR RESIDENTS, OR COULD THAT BE CHANGED? I DON'T EVEN KNOW THAT

[01:35:03]

WE'D WANT TO. I'M JUST ASKING, I'M GOING TO ASK SANDRA TO COME WEIGH IN ON THAT.

SANDY NEWBARTH WITH ACCENTURE. THE REASON WE DID IT FOR YOU AND NOT OTHER JURISDICTIONS, TYPICALLY WE DO DO IT BASED ON A DWELLING UNIT BASIS. YOU HAVE SUCH A WIDE SPREAD OF THE SIZES OF YOUR HOUSES.

YOU HAVE ONE HOUSE IN YOUR CITY, THAT'S 43,297 SQUARE FEET. THAT'S ONE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE. YOU HAVE ABOUT 20% OF YOUR HOUSES ARE UNDER 1,500 SQUARE FEET. AND THEN I'M 50. YOUR AVERAGE SQUARE FOOTAGE IS 2688 SQUARE FEET. AND YOU HAVE 50 PERCENT OF THEM ARE 3000 OR LESS, BUT THEN YOU'VE GOT THE REST OF THEM THAT ARE EXTREMELY HIGH.

YOU'VE GOT 24 PERCENT OF YOUR PARCELS ARE BETWEEN THREE THOUSAND AND SIX THOUSAND SQUARE FEET, WHICH, AND THEN YOU'VE GOT, UM, ABOUT FIVE PERCENT THAT ARE OVER SIX THOUSAND SQUARE FEET.

SO YOU HAVE SUCH A A WIDE RANGING OF YOUR SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES.

WE FELT IT WAS FAIR AND REASONABLE TO DO IT BASED ON SIZES, OTHERWISE WE WOULD HAVE DONE IT BASED ON A PER DWELLING UNIT BASIS.

AND YOUR SQUARE FOOTAGE IS GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE, WHICH INCLUDES GARAGE AND PORCH.

EVERYTHING UNDER ROOF, EVERYTHING UNDER THE ROOF. I JUST WANTED. I HAD LEARNED THAT. BECAUSE THAT IS THAT IS WHERE YOU'RE PROTECTING THE FIRE FROM ANYTHING UNDER ROOF, DOESN'T MATTER IF IT'S AIR CONDITIONED OR NOT.

AND THOSE CORRECT. NO, I UNDERSTAND THEY ARE. BUT LIKE WHEN WE WERE DISCUSSING, AND YOU WERE LOOKING AT MY HOUSE, I HAD A DIFFERENT NUMBER THAN YOURS. BECAUSE HISTORICALLY, PEOPLE THINK AIR-CONDITIONED SPACE. NOBODY THINKS PORCH AND WHATEVER. SO EVERYBODY THAT HAS A PORCH WILL END UP WITH A HIGHER SQUARE FOOTAGE THAN THEY MAY HAVE EVER THOUGHT BEFORE. IT'S ALL PART OF THE STRUCTURE. I UNDERSTAND.

MAKE SURE WE ALL UNDERSTAND WHAT THE LOGIC WAS. IT IS WHAT IT IS. THAT WAS THE ASSUMPTION MADE. OKAY, I'LL OPEN IT UP TO ANYBODY THAT HAS ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, SCOTT. WHY WAS 15% ALLOWABLE ASSESSMENT CHOSEN? WE CHOSE THAT AMOUNT BECAUSE IT MINIMIZES IMPACT TO THE RESIDENTS, AND THEN THE NEXT THING IS. IT DOES THE JOB OF COVERING THE DEBT THAT WE WILL BE INCURRING, WHICH A PORTION OF IT, WHICH WE'RE LOOKING TO HAVE JUST UNDER $2 MILLION.

IN DEBT SERVICE, SO THAT THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO HAVE THAT DEBT SERVICE.

PLUS GOING FORWARD, THE COUNCIL COULD FLUCTUATE THAT AMOUNT GOING FORWARD, BUT A MINIMAL IMPACT.

DIVERSIFIED REVENUE SOURCE AND ALSO HAS, UH, DEBT SERVICE COVERAGE. OKAY, SO RIGHT NOW, IT'S THE RIGHT CHOICE. 15 OTHER QUESTION ON YOUR, UH, YOUR HISTORICAL FIRE PROTECTION CALL DATA, I BELIEVE IT'S PAGE FIVE PIE CHART. THAT DATA CAME FROM PALM BEACH COUNTY FIRE, RIGHT? DO THEY SEPARATE OUT EMS VERSUS FIRE? WERE WE ABLE TO DO THAT? SO IS THERE ANY UNCERTAINTY IN THAT DATA AS FAR AS THE DISTRIBUTION BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, THOSE TYPE OF THINGS? WE FEEL VERY CONFIDENT WITH THE DATA THAT WE'VE RECEIVED. NOW, I WILL TELL YOU, GOING FORWARD, CHIEF DONATO AND HIS STAFF WILL BE COLLECTING THAT DATA AND SUBMITTING IT. WHEN WE GO TO REVIEW IT IN THE FUTURE, IT WILL BE OUR DATA, BUT WE DO FEEL VERY CONFIDENT THAT WHAT WE'VE RECEIVED AND ANALYZED IS ACCURATE. AS DEPICTED. OKAY, SO FOR 2028, WE'LL TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT THIS DATA? WE WOULD ANTICIPATE THAT GOING FORWARD, EVERY THREE TO FIVE YEARS, WE'D BE ASKING THE COUNCIL TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE DATA. OKAY, ALL RIGHT.

SEE IF WE'VE GOT ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. NOPE, YOU ANSWERED ALL MY QUESTIONS. I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. I HAD ONE QUESTION ON THE SAME SLIDE, SLIDE FIVE, WITH CALL DATA. IS IT DISAGGREGATED BY TYPE OF CALL? IF THERE'S A CALL TO, I DON'T KNOW, A SMOKE DETECTOR, AND THEN THEY FIX IT AT HOME AND THEY CANCEL IT. I MEAN, THERE'S A WIDE VARIETY OF CALLS AND WHAT A CALL REPRESENTS.

ACTUALLY, I'M GOING TO LET THE CHIEF. THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT THAT BEFORE. HE GAVE A GREAT ANSWER ON IT. SO THIS REPRESENTS ONLY FIRE-RELATED CALLS. NOT EMS RELATED CALLS. THAT IS ALL CONTAINED WITHIN THE... DATA SET, WE KNOW WHAT'S FIRE, WHAT'S NOT. WHAT MIGHT CONFUSE SOME FOLKS IS THAT IF SOMEBODY CALLS FOR A PUBLIC ASSIST OR A SERVICE CALL, HELPS SOMEBODY GET PICKED UP, THOSE KIND OF THINGS, THAT DOESN'T INVOLVE MEDICAL CARE, THOSE ARE FIRE CALLS,

[01:40:01]

SO THAT IS GROUPED INTO THE FIRE CALL SETTING.

SOMEBODY CALLS FOR, YOU KNOW, THEIR SMOKE DETECTOR IS MAKING A NOISE, RIGHT? THAT IS A SERVICE CALL, SO IT IS IN THE FIRE SETTING, IT IS A CALL. AND YOU SEE IT BASED ON IF A TRUCK LEAVES, IF A RESOURCE LEAVES THE STATION, OR IF YOU'RE PULLING RESOURCES TO ADDRESS SOMETHING. YEAH, I BELIEVE THIS DATA IS YOU ARRIVE ON SCENE. YOU ACTUALLY GO TO THE CALL. OKAY, THANK YOU.

BUT ON THAT ONE, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING WHAT IT SAYS ON.

THERE IS NURSING HOME BUY-DOWNS TO COMMERCIAL RATE. SO, AGAIN, TYPICAL OF JUPITER, WE ARE.

NOT CHARGING THEM FOR WHAT THE CURRENT RATE WOULD BE. BECAUSE YOU'RE ASSUMING YOU'RE GOING TO WORK WITH THEM TO USE OTHER WAYS AND LIMIT IMPACTS. IS THAT NOT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

WE FOUND A VERY HIGH NUMBER OF CALLS IN A VERY SMALL NUMBER OF PROPERTIES. THIS IS THE NURSING HOMES. THEY TEND TO USE THE SERVICES A LOT. AND AGAIN, THIS IS BASED ON DATA FROM PALM BEACH COUNTY. YEP.

AND OUR GOAL IS TO HELP THEM REDUCE THOSE SERVICE-RELATED CALLS, TRANSFER THAT. STAFF BURDEN BACK TO THEM AND KEEP OUR UNITS FREE FOR EMERGENCY CALLS. SO WE'LL WORK ON THAT.

BUT THE COST WOULD BE VERY HIGH FOR THESE FEW PROPERTIES. MOST OF US ARE AWARE THAT THAT IS THE CASE, SO WE'RE TAKING A KINDER APPROACH TO WORKING WITH THEM TO LOWER IT, AND THEN IF WE DON'T ACHIEVE REDUCTIONS, BECAUSE TO SOME DEGREE, THEN THEY'RE SAVING ON STAFFING AND WHATEVER.

THEN, AT SOME FUTURE DATE, WE COULD ADJUST ON THAT. BUT, I MEAN, I THINK WE ALL SUPPORT THAT.

BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M POINTING OUT WHAT THE BUY-DOWN MEANT, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, SCOTT HAD SHARED THAT WITH ME. THERE ARE SOME JURISDICTIONS THAT USE THOSE RATES TO CORRECT THOSE NUMBER OF CALLS (INAUDIBLE). RIGHT.

RIGHT. THIS WOULD BE THE FIRST TIME THEY'D BE GETTING HIT WITH THEIR PREVIOUS PRACTICES, SO THEY COULD TRANSITION INTO A LOWER USAGE IF THEY WERE MOTIVATED TO DO SO. IF WE DO GIVE, AND I EXPECT WE WILL GIVE DIRECTION ON THIS TONIGHT, OR IF WE GO FORWARD WITH IT, IS IT POSSIBLE, WE HAVE OUR FIRE RESCUE WEBPAGE THAT WE'VE PROVIDED A LOT OF SOURCE MATERIAL ON. I REMEMBER WE HAD A CALCULATOR. SAVINGS, ALL THAT. I DO THINK THAT HAVING A FEW EXAMPLES SPECIFIC FOR ALL DIFFERENT SCENARIOS, I'M ENVISIONING LIKE FIVE TO 10 DIFFERENT INCOME. THERE'S ACTUALLY A TIER RATE THAT'S IN BEHIND THIS THAT WE HEARD ABOUT FROM THE RESIDENT EARLIER.

THERE IS A TIER RATE WITH THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT PEOPLE CAN LOOK AT, AND THEY CAN FIND THEIR OWN RATE BASED ON THEIR SQUARE FOOTAGE. WE'LL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO SHARE THAT.

BUT I THINK ALSO JUST LIKE, ALMOST LIKE A WORD PROBLEM, YOU KNOW, LIKE, WHAT THE ANSWER WILL BE. I THINK FOR RESIDENTS, THAT WOULD HELP TRANSLATE SOME OF THIS TO THEIR UNDERSTANDING.

ABSOLUTELY. AND WE CAN COMPILE THAT AND INCLUDE THOSE EXAMPLES. OKAY. MY FIRST QUESTION WAS, WHY THE 15 PERCENT? AND IS THAT MOVABLE DOWN THE ROAD? WOULD WE EVER WANT TO RAISE IT OR LOWER IT? OR WHAT'S YOUR? RIGHT, AND THAT'S THE THING WITH THE FIRE. ASSESSMENT IS.

YOU HAVE THE ABILITY, BASED ON THE STUDY, TO GO UP TO OVER $16 MILLION, WHICH WOULD BE 100%. YOU COULD DO THAT GOING FORWARD BASED ON CONDITIONS OF, SAY, IF THERE'S ANOTHER 2008 RECESSION AND YOU NEED TO FUND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, YOU COULD DO THAT.

BUT RIGHT NOW, IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THERE'S A NECESSARY REASON TO DO THAT, UNLESS THE COUNCIL SO WISHED.

BUT, YEAH, AND THEN... THREE TO FIVE YEARS, WE'LL REEVALUATE AGAIN, AND THEN THE NUMBER COULD CHANGE AGAIN. THE WHOLE THING HAS A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY, JUST BAKED INTO IT. ABSOLUTELY. AND I REALLY LIKE GOING BY THE SQUARE FOOTAGE CALCULATION FOR HOMEOWNERS, AND OBVIOUSLY THE SENIOR EXEMPTION. AND DID YOU SAY, SO WE WILL BE PULLING CRA FUNDS DIRECTLY INTO THIS? IF YOU DECIDE TO DO THE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT, THE ASSESSMENT PIECE CAN COME BACK INTO. HELP FUND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, THAT $2.1 MILLION THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT. THE AD VALOREM DOLLARS, NO, THAT WOULD HAVE TO STAY WITHIN THE CRA TRUST FUND.

RIGHT, OKAY. AND I JUST THINK THIS IS, I JUST LIKE THE FLEXIBILITY ASPECT OF IT. WE HAVE A PRETTY HEAVY LIFT TO GET THIS DONE, WE'VE GOT SOME GREAT STAFF THAT REALLY MADE IT HAPPEN, AND ALL OF OUR CONSULTANTS. GREAT, THANK YOU. THAT'S IT. I THINK THIS IS A GREAT REPORT. THANK YOU. I'M JUST GOING TO GO BACK

[01:45:01]

TO PAGE FIVE WITH A LOGISTIC QUESTION IN MY MIND. I'VE HEARD THE WORD PARCEL AND DWELLING. WHEN YOU COME UP WITH THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, AND AGAIN, GOING TO THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE, CORRECT? WOULD A CONDO OR A SINGLE FAMILY HOME BE LOOKED AT DIFFERENTLY? BECAUSE I'M THINKING, IN A CONDO, YOU'VE GOT THE REST OF THE BUILDING BESIDES THE UNITS. WE USE... THE PALM BEACH COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISERS DATA AND THEY DID GIVE US THE SQUARE FOOTAGE ASSOCIATED WITH EACH CONDO UNIT. AND ALSO SO THAT YOU GUYS UNDERSTAND IF YOU DO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS, YOU HAVE TO SEND OUT FIRST CLASS NOTICES TO EVERY PROPERTY OWNER. SO EVERY PROPERTY OWNER WILL GET A NOTICE INDIVIDUALLY ADDRESSED TO THEM 20 DAYS BEFORE YOU HAVE YOUR PUBLIC HEARING. AND IT'LL SAY, THIS IS WHAT THE TOWN IS THINKING ABOUT DOING. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS. YOU'RE INVITED TO ATTEND. AND BY THE WAY, THIS IS THE UNITS THAT WE SEE ON YOUR PARCEL. YOU HAVE THIS MUCH RESIDENTIAL, YOU HAVE THIS MUCH COMMERCIAL.

AND SO AT THE RATES THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING, THE MAXIMUM RATES THAT THEY CAN GO TO THIS YEAR, THIS IS HOW MUCH IT'S GOING TO COST YOU. NOW THERE'S ALSO, IF THERE'S AN ERROR ON IT, SO IF THEY DISAGREE WITH THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OR THE USE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THERE IS A CORRECTION. WAY WE CAN DO IT. SO THEY WOULD CALL AND WE WOULD LOOK INTO IT FURTHER. SO SOMETIMES IT MIGHT BE THAT THE PROPERTY APPRAISER LOOKS AT IT IN A DIFFERENT WAY BECAUSE THEY'RE CHARGED WITH VALUING THE PROPERTY.

WE'RE LOOKING AT IT AS WHAT DO WE NEED TO PROVIDE FIRE SERVICES FOR? SO THERE MIGHT NOT BE 100% ONE FOR ONE. WE DON'T WANT TO...

INCORRECTLY CHARGE ANYBODY. SO WE REALIZE THERE MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT OF CLEANUP THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. PROBABLY 95 98 PERCENT OF THEM IS GOING TO BE EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE, BUT THERE MAY BE A LITTLE CLEANUP. AND THEN THAT PROVIDES THE PROPERTY OWNER WITH THE INFORMATION AND THEY CAN CALL IN AND IF THEY FEEL THEY'RE BEING INCORRECTLY CHARGED, WE WILL FIX IT. OR WE WILL LOOK INTO IT AND WE WILL LET THEM KNOW IF WE DISAGREE WITH THEM OR WE AGREE WITH THEM. I HAVE A QUESTION, THEN, THINKING ABOUT WHAT, COUNCIL MEMBER CHOI SAID. IN ABACOA, WE HAVE CLUBHOUSES.

THESE ARE SHARED PROPERTIES.

SO WOULD MY NON-AVALOREM ASSESSMENT BE JUST FOR MY HOME? WOULD I PAY THEN TO THE HOA TO GO TOWARDS THAT SHARED ASSESSMENT, OR WOULD IT BE INCLUDED IN MINE? SO COMMON ELEMENT PARCELS IS WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. THEY DO NOT GET A TAX BILL. AND AT THIS POINT, WE DON'T HAVE ANY WAY OF...

TAGGING THEM BACK TO ALL OF THE INDIVIDUALS. SO, NO, YOU WILL GET BASED ON YOUR INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY, UNLESS THE PROPERTY APPRAISER HAS THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE BAKED INTO YOUR SQUARE FOOTAGE, WHICH I DON'T THINK THEY DO.

NO. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE MANY IN THE INCORPORATED AREA, BUT JUST IN CASE, IF WE DID, ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS, COULD THEY BE TAGGED SEPARATELY? WHAT KIND OF DWELLING UNITS? ACCESSORY DWELLING, ADUS. IF THERE'S A SQUARE FOOTAGE ON THAT BUILDING, IT'S GOING TO GET CHARGED. AND DOES IT, AGAIN, THIS IS MORE FOR EDUCATION, DOES THE TAX APPRAISER SEPARATE THEM ON THE TAX BILL? SO IF IT'S A MISCELLANEOUS BUILDING, WE DON'T PICK IT UP. SO IF IT'S A MISCELLANEOUS OR AN EXTRA FEATURE, WE DON'T PICK IT UP.

LIKE A SHED OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. POOL HOUSE, IT'S COMING IN BECAUSE IT'S A BUILDING.

AND YOU HAD TO GET A PERMIT AND ALL THAT STUFF. EXTRA FEATURES, WE DON'T LOOK AT THOSE. WE ONLY LOOK AT THE BUILDING. SO WHATEVER THE PROPERTY APPRAISER IDENTIFIES AS A BUILDING ON THE PROPERTY, WITH A SQUARE FOOTAGE, YOU WILL GET CHARGED FOR IT.

AND HOMESTEAD, NON-HOMESTEAD, HAS NO IMPACT ON THIS ONE? IT HAS NOTHING. IT'S BASED ON THE SERVICE THAT'S BEING PROVIDED.

IT'S NOT BASED ON YOUR TAXABLE VALUE. AND THEN THE LAST QUESTION, MR. SCOTT, WHY THREE TO FIVE YEARS? WITH THIS BEING THE FIRST YEAR, WOULD WE NOT WANT TO DO IT SOONER, TWO YEARS? WELL, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING, THREE TO FIVE YEARS. WE WANT TO HAVE ANOTHER THREE YEARS WORTH OF DATA, AT MINIMUM, TO BE ABLE TO GO THROUGH AN ANALYSIS. OKAY, THANK YOU. SO FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS TO WHAT WAS ASKED AND ANSWERED.

SO ON THE PUBLIC NOTICE, CONGRESS, THAT'S THE SAME PUBLIC NOTICE WE GET ANYWAY, JUST NOW. IT'S GOING TO BE ADDED TO IT AS EXTRA.

AND I SAY THAT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I HAVE TWO NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS I PAY NOW. I PAY, WHICH A LOT OF PEOPLE DO IN THE TOWN, BOTH NORTHERN AND THEN SOLID WASTE. AND I DON'T GET A SEPARATE FOR THAT. IT'S THE SAME ONE. WE GET ONE NOTICE. IF YOU REMEMBER WHEN WE DID THE VEGETATIVE CLEANING NOTIFICATIONS, IT'S THE SAME PROCESS. WE HAD TO NOTICE THEM AS WELL, ALL THE RESIDENTS THAT WERE THE SAME PROCESS. IS THIS JUST THE FIRST

[01:50:02]

TIME OR EVERY YEAR? RIGHT. THE FIRST TIME YOU INCREASE THE RATE. SO AFTER THAT, YOU DON'T. NOW, UM... NOT ALL JURISDICTIONS REQUIRE IT TO BE ON YOUR TRIM NOTICE. YOU HAVE A SPECIAL ACT IN PALM BEACH COUNTY THAT REQUIRES ANYTHING THAT GOES ON. THE TAX BILL ALSO HAS TO BE ON THE TRIM NOTICE.

SO THIS WILL ALSO BE ON THE TRIM NOTICE, EVEN THOUGH THE WAY THE SCHEDULE IS, YOU WILL HAVE MADE YOUR DECISION ON THE FINAL RATES BEFORE THE TRIM NOTICES GET MAILED OUT. SO, BUT THAT'S, I MEAN, BY SPECIAL ACT, IT HAS TO STILL BE ON THE TRIM NOTICE, BUT THE TRIM NOTICE DOESN'T COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS.

SO THERE'S... 197.3632 IS THE STATUTE FOR THE TAX BILL COLLECTION METHOD, AND IT LAYS OUT THE INFORMATION THAT HAS TO BE IN THOSE FIRST CLASS NOTICES.

YOU HAVE TO TELL THEM WHAT THE PURPOSE IS, HOW MUCH IT'S GOING TO COST THEM, HOW MUCH THE TOWN IS GOING TO GENERATE, WHEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IS, AND THEN THERE'S ALSO SOME LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT SAYS IT'S GOING TO BE COLLECTED ON THE TAX BILL. AND IF IF YOU DON'T PAY THAT ASSESSMENT, THEN A TAX DEED COULD BE SOLD AND YOUR PROPERTY COULD BE FORECLOSED. PEOPLE HATE THAT, BUT IT IS A STATUTORY REQUIREMENT THAT HAS TO GO IN THOSE FIRST CLASS NOTICES, BECAUSE IT IS. ANYTIME ANYTHING GOES ON THE TAX BILL, YOU CAN'T PAY PARTIAL TAXES.

YOU HAVE TO PAY ALL OF YOUR TAX BILL, INCLUDING THE SCHOOL BOARD, TAXES, ANY OTHER MISCELLANEOUS MILLAGE, OR ANY NON-AD VALOREM, OR THEY CAN'T ACCEPT YOUR, AND THEN THEY'LL SELL A TAX DEED.

SO, BUT IT IS ALL THE SAME.

STATUTORY LANGUAGE, AND THAT'S ONLY THE FIRST YEAR OF A PROGRAM. OR IF THE RATES INCREASE ABOVE WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY NOTICED. SO IF YOU EVER IN THE FUTURE DECIDE TO INCREASE THE RATES MORE THAN WHAT YOU NOTICE, UM, THEN YOU'D HAVE TO SEND NOTICE. YEAH, WE UNDERSTAND THAT, RIGHT? IS THAT SIMILAR TO, LIKE, A SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT? THE WAY THEY GO ABOUT THAT? NO, IT'S NOT AN ALARM. TAXING DISTRICTS ARE BASED ON MILLAGE RATES. SO, BUT THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO THE SAME NOTIFICATIONS AND ALL THAT. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT.

I REALLY DON'T KNOW. I DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT THAT EITHER.

IT MIGHT BE INCLUDED SINCE IT'S A MILLAGE RATE. IT MIGHT BE AS PART OF THE TRIM NOTICE, AND THAT MIGHT COVER ALL OF THAT. I DON'T KNOW. JUST FOR CLARITY ON THE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE CRA AND 15%, BUT THE 15% IS FIRE COSTS ONLY.

SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ALL GET IN OUR MIND. IT'S NOT 15% OF THE FIRE RESCUE DEPARTMENT COSTS, IT'S 15 PERCENT OF FIRE COSTS, WHICH ARE ABOUT HALF, SO IT'S SEVEN AND A HALF, YOU KNOW, ROUGHLY. BUT IT MAY NOT BE THE CASE IN CRA WITH THE NON-AD VALOREM FORMULAS. UH, COUNSELOR, YOU KNOW, EVERY ONE OF US UP HERE WE TRY TO THINK OF FAIRNESS, SO, YOU KNOW, WE KNOW ALL THESE EXEMPTION POLICIES WE'VE DONE. UM, COUNSELOR TROY ASKED A GOOD QUESTION ABOUT THE CONDOS, THE WAY I INTERPRETED THAT, AND THEN COUNSELOR SUNSTROM FOLLOWED UP. IN MIND ABOUT ANOTHER THING WAS. SHE ASKED, DOES IT INCLUDE ALL OF THE UNDER THE ROOF LIKE THE RESIDENTS DO? AND NO, IT DOESN'T, SO ALL THE COMMON AREAS DON'T.

THEY'RE JUST NO LESS A FIRE HAZARD. SO THAT ALMOST SEEMED LIKE THAT'S INCONSISTENT IN A WAY, BUT I GET IT. YOU ELIMINATED BY PULLING THE INFORMATION UP.

BUT THEN COUNSELOR SUNSTROM, YOU KNOW, ASKED A QUESTION ABOUT, WELL, WITH WHEN YOU HAVE A CLUBHOUSE? WELL, GEE, THAT ISN'T INCLUDED. WELL, THAT'S SOMEWHAT LIKE WHAT A CONDO WOULD HAVE, BUT A CONDO TYPICALLY WOULD HAVE A LOT MORE THAN THAT. YOU KNOW, YOU SO, YOU KNOW, AND WE DON'T WANT TO BEAT THIS TO DEATH, SO I'M NOT SUGGESTING HERE, BUT STILL KIND OF NOT CLEAR ABOUT WHY IT SEEMS TO BE INCONSISTENT, HAVING USED GROSS FOR RESIDENTIAL. IF YOU HAD USED AIR CONDITIONED, IT'S MORE CONSISTENT ACROSS THE BOARD. AND THAT'S MY TAKEAWAY OF WHEN COUNCILOR CHOI ASKED THAT QUESTION. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT, I DON'T KNOW. AND SO IT WAS DONE THE WAY IT WAS DONE, BUT IS THAT SOMETHING THAT COULD BE LOOKED AT TO SEE WHAT THE DIFFERENCE WOULD BE? AND I'M NOT TRYING TO, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S AN AGREEMENT ON THAT. I THINK IT MAKES SENSE.

ANYTHING UNDER THE ROOF SHOULD BE COVERED.

BUT THAT'S NOT THE WAY IT IS IN CONDOS. WELL, WE USE THE PROPERTY APPRAISERS' DATA BECAUSE IT'S AVAILABLE. NO, I UNDERSTAND. DEFINITELY. IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO GO OUT AND MEASURE ALL THE BUILDINGS IN THE TOWN AND BRING THAT IN.

NO, I DIDN'T SAY THAT. THE PROPERTY APPRAISER GIVES AIR CONDITIONED SPACE AND GROSS SPACE. CORRECT. BUT YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF PLACES THAT MAYBE SOME INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE PLACES

[01:55:02]

THAT HAVE A LOT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE, THAT MAYBE AREN'T AIR CONDITIONED, BUT THERE'S A LOT. NO, NO. I WAS TALKING ABOUT UNRESIDENTS. SO I'M TALKING ABOUT. YOU HAVE TO BE CONSISTENT ON HOW YOU DO IT. SO WE LOOK AT THE SAME SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR RESIDENTIAL AND NON-RESIDENTIAL. SO. YOU CAN'T KIND OF PICK AND CHOOSE.

FOR THIS. WE WANT TO DO THIS, AND FOR THIS WE WANT TO DO THAT. SO YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT IT. I DON'T KNOW ANYWHERE WHERE, FOR EXAMPLE, A GARAGE IN THE COMMERCIAL WOULD BE, EVEN IF THEY HAVE A GARAGE STRUCTURE THAT'S TYPICALLY NOT INCLUDED AS SQUARE FOOTAGE.

WELL, YES, WE DO PARKING GARAGES, YES, WE PULL THOSE BUILDINGS IN, TOO. NO, BUT I'M JUST TAKING, FOR EXAMPLE, A COMMERCIAL AT HARVESTSIDE WHEN YOU THINK WHERE YOU HAVE, I DON'T KNOW THAT. ANY GARAGES IN THE TOWN WOULD BE LISTED AS A TAXABLE ITEM BECAUSE IT'S BURDENED INTO THE APPRAISED VALUE, BUT YOU WON'T FIND THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE PROPORTIONED. WELL, THEY'RE IN HARBORSIDE, SO I DON'T THINK, OTHER THAN SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES, I'M NOT GETTING WHERE GARAGES ARE INCLUDED. GROSS AREA FOR ALL BUILDINGS, YES. AND I'LL GO BACK OUT AND LOOK AT IT, BUT I KNOW I RESEARCHED A LOT OF THEM MYSELF. AND WE EVEN HAD TO, THERE'S SOME MIXED-USE PARCELS IN WHICH WE HAD TO, AND THOMAS WAS REALLY GREAT ON THE ONES THAT WE COULDN'T DO THROUGH THE INTERNET. IT'S WHAT PORTION IS COMMERCIAL VERSUS WHAT PORTION IS INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE. SO WE'VE DONE A LOT OF RESEARCH ON MAKING SURE THAT WE ASSIGN THE CORRECT. SQUARE FOOTAGE AND THE CORRECT CATEGORY. WELL, THE ONES I'M THINKING ABOUT, THERE'S GARAGES THAT DON'T PAY ADVERUM TAXES, SO IT'S COVERED BY AN IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT OR WHATEVER. WELL, IF THE BUILDING ISN'T CAPTURED BY THE PROPERTY APPRAISER, THEN WE WOULD NOT KNOW ABOUT IT. YEAH. SO BACK TO THE CONDOS, ARE YOU CONCERNED ABOUT SOMEBODY OWNS A CONDO, THEY HAVE A GARAGE ON THE BOTTOM FLOOR? I'M JUST LOOKING FOR CONSISTENCY. BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'RE COUNTING ALL OF THAT BECAUSE IT'S UNDER THE ROOF AND IT'S OWNED BY THE HOMEOWNER. NO, IF I GO IN A CONDO BUILDING, EVERY CONDO WOULD ONLY BE WHAT'S IN THEIR UNIT ALONE. IT WOULDN'T INCLUDE ANY OF THE COMMON SPACES. WELL, I UNDERSTAND, BUT THEY'RE NOT INCLUDED IN THAT, WHICH I'M FINE WITH, BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE COVERED WITH THE AD VALOREM, CORRECT? THE AD VALOREM IS BASED ON VALUE. THIS IS STRICTLY HOMEOWNER SQUARE FOOTAGE, INCLUDING NON-AIR CONDITIONED SPACE UNDER THE ROOF, WHATEVER THE ROOF IS. IT'S THE STRUCTURE. RIGHT, THE STRUCTURE. IT'S COUNTING THE WHOLE STRUCTURE. THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO YOU? IT DOES TO ME, BUT I'M JUST CURIOUS WHERE YOU'RE GOING WITH IT.

NO, BECAUSE, FIRST OF ALL, WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT NON-AD VALOREM. AND IT SEEMS LIKE FOR THE NON-AD VALOREM, WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I APPRECIATE THE EFFORT. WE'RE BEATING IT TO DEATH. NO, I APPRECIATE THE EFFORT BECAUSE INSTEAD OF JUST DOING IT PER UNIT, WE TRIED TO BE MINDFUL OF THOSE THAT CAN AFFORD IT LESS. GOT THAT. I DON'T THINK ANY OF US WOULD DISAGREE WITH THAT.

BUT THEN WHEN YOU START LOOKING AT THE DIFFERENT UNIT TYPES, I WAS JUST SURPRISED. I'M JUST USED TO THINKING AIR-CONDITIONED SPACE. AND I GET THE LOGIC WHEN THEY SAID, GEE, UNDER ROOF. WELL, THEN SAME THING APPLIES IN A CONDO. THERE'S A LOT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE UNDER ROOF, BUT IT'S NOT COMING UP IN THE PROCESS BECAUSE YOU'RE COMING UP WITH THE INDIVIDUAL UNIT OWNERS, NOT THE TOTAL, SO IT'S NOT CONSISTENT. SO IT'S JUST A CONSISTENCY THAT I'M JUST PONDERING ABOUT, RIGHT? AND THEN YOU'VE GOT A LURE WITH GARAGES THAT ARE SEPARATE.

WE COULD GO. WE COULD SURGICALLY. ALLURA AND ABACOA HAS GARAGES THAT ARE REMOVED.

NO, LOOK, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO BE MINDFUL. AND ARE THEY COMMON, OR HOW ARE THEY ASSIGNED? BECAUSE RESIDENTS ARE GOING TO ASK THIS QUESTION. YES. WHY WAS THIS? WHY WAS THAT? DID YOU THINK ABOUT THIS? DID YOU THINK ABOUT THAT? WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS TO ANSWER. SO THAT'S WHY I WAS JUST ASKING, YOU KNOW, WHAT WOULD THE DIFFERENCE BE IF, FOR THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS, IF YOU WERE TO JUST HAVE USED THE AIR-CONDITIONED SPACE, WHAT WOULD THE DIFFERENCE BE ON THAT? I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S AN EXERCISE THAT IS REALLY TIME-CONSUMING OR... NO, I MEAN, THAT INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT'S NOT, THAT'S JUST WHAT YOU'RE PROVIDING FIRE SERVICES FOR. SO, BUT THAT INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE, BUT FOR SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES, YOU WOULD SAY IT'S BASICALLY THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE HOUSE, MINUS THE GARAGE. SO WHATEVER SIZE THEIR GARAGE IS, THAT'S TYPICALLY WHAT YOU WOULD FIND.

NO, THE PORCH. I THINK TO ME, THE PORCH IS OPEN. THE PORCH IS LESS LIKELY TO BE A FIRE HAZARD THAN... WE JUST USE THE GROSS AREA. WE ALWAYS HAVE BECAUSE IT'S UNDER ROOF. IT'S WHAT'S FIRE PROTECTION. SO IF THERE'S NOT A ROOF OVER IT, IT'S NOT CAPTURED AS A BUILDING. AND THERE ARE TIERS, TOO, SO IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE EXACTLY PRECISE. SO IT'S RANGES. SO IT GIVES YOU THAT LITTLE BIT OF. I THINK IT HAS TO BE, RIGHT? LIKE, WE'RE

[02:00:03]

LOOKING IN BROAD. WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT UP TO THE ONE SQUARE FOOT.

THERE'S RANGES. AND THEY'RE BASED OFF OF. NFPA STANDARDS, NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION STANDARDS, SO IT'S NOT LIKE WE JUST MADE THEM UP. SO WE USE THOSE TIERS TO DEVELOP THE RANGES. AND I'M GRATEFUL FOR THE SQUARE FOOTAGE APPROACH BECAUSE I HADN'T SEEN THAT IN OTHER MUNICIPALITIES.

AND I'M STILL SHOCKED TO KNOW THAT WE HAVE A HOME THAT IS 43,000. IS THAT RIGHT? JUST TO CONFIRM. THERE'S ONE.

SQUARE FEET. WE CAN GUESS WHERE THEY MAY BE. SO WE'VE GOT FROM LIKE 1,500 OR UNDER TO...

43,000. THERE'S ONE HOME.

WELL, THAT HOME AND SQUARE FOOTAGE. SO I THINK, YEAH, I'M GLAD THAT WE'RE DOING THAT.

AND I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT IF THOSE TYPE, IF THE SAME DIVERSITY EXISTED IN ANOTHER MUNICIPALITY, THEY WOULD PAY THE EXACT SAME ANNUAL FEE. SO THANK YOU FOR THE WORK YOU'VE DONE. I APPRECIATE THAT.

BUT WE'LL DEFINITELY, WE'LL MAKE AVAILABLE, IT MIGHT CLEAR UP FOR THE COUNCIL IF WE, NOW THAT WE HAVE THIS, TO GIVE YOU THOSE RANGES.

WE'LL POST IT OUT FOR THE RESIDENTS SO THEY CAN SEE IT.

AND TO HAVE THOSE RANGES AVAILABLE BECAUSE THAT DOES MAKE A FACTOR. IT'S NOT SET IN ONE EXACT NUMBER. IT'S A RANGE OF SQUARE FOOTAGE TO CREATE THE TIER. SO THAT MIGHT HELP YOU A LITTLE BIT.

SO, TO OUR RESIDENT THAT ASKED THAT QUESTION, WE ALL HAD THE SAME QUESTION.

AND STILL HAVE IT UNTIL WE LOOK MORE AT HOW THAT WORKS OUT. OKAY, SO I'M THE KIND OF GO BACK TO THE POLICY DIRECTION. WE COULD ONLY ACT ON THE WAY THE STUDY HAS BEEN DONE. SO WE'RE BOUND BY THAT, CORRECT? THAT'S WHAT I'M SUGGESTING, YES.

OKAY. AND YOU WANT TO GO, SO THIS IS THE POLICY DIRECTION ONE. AND YOU WENT TO THE, CAN YOU GO TO THE TIMING SHEET WHEN WE, THE DATE SHEET, THAT WHEN YOU HAD TO HEAR FROM US? SURE. THAT WAS ANOTHER SLIDE, WASN'T IT? YEAH. YEAH.

YEAH, SO AGAIN, THROUGH THE SUMMER, THERE'S GOING TO BE A NUMBER OF PUBLIC HEARINGS. THE NEXT ONE IS GOING TO BE THE PROCEDURAL ORDINANCE THAT'S GOING TO BE COMING UP IN APRIL. AGAIN, IT'S SETTING THE RULES OF THE ROAD ON HOW WE ADOPT THE FEE. AND THEN WE WILL HAVE THE NEXT FEW MONTHS, WE'LL GO THROUGH SOME ADDITIONAL PUBLIC HEARINGS.

BUT WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS WE WANT TO TEE UP BY JULY TO KNOW WHAT WE WANT TO SET FOR OUR RATE. OR IF WE DON'T WANT TO PROCEED FORWARD, WE DON'T HAVE TO.

BUT IF WE WANT TO PROCEED FORWARD, WHAT THAT RATE'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE SO WE CAN PREPARE FOR THE BUDGET HEARINGS. WE'RE ALSO GOING TO HAVE WORKSHOPS.

AS YOU ARE AWARE, IN JUNE, WE USUALLY HAVE OUR OPERATING BUDGET WORKSHOP. SO WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT MILLAGE DURING THAT PROCESS. WE'LL MAKE SOME ASSUMPTIONS AND HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT AND THE MILLAGE. SO THOSE ARE ALWAYS HOT DISCUSSIONS. AND THEN YOU'LL GET TO SEE ALSO THE FIRE RESCUE FULL BUDGET.

PROJECTION FOR FY27. I THINK THAT SO, BUT ACTUALLY, THE CRITICAL PATH IS JUNE 26, BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN YOU WOULD MAIL AND PUBLISH NOTICES, CORRECT? IN JUNE, YES. SO THAT'S THAT'S THE CRITICAL PATH, AND OBVIOUSLY YOU HAVE.

WE HAVE TO HAVE TWO READINGS OF AN ORDINANCE BEFORE YOU COULD GET TO THAT POINT. SO THERE ISN'T A LOT OF TIME, IT ISN'T JULY, BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN WE'RE ADOPTING. WE'RE COMING IN ON DECISION THIS SUMMER.

ACTUALLY EARLIER. I'M PERSONALLY NOT READY TO MAKE ONE TONIGHT, BUT MY COLLEAGUES MAY BE. LET ME ASK A QUESTION.

FOR THE PROCEDURAL ORDINANCE, DO WE NEED TO GIVE DIRECTION ON OPTION ONE VERSUS TWO TONIGHT? WHAT'S THAT? NO, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GIVE THAT DIRECTION TONIGHT.

JUST TO KEEP PROCEEDING FORWARD AS IS OUTLINED IN THE STATUTE. OKAY, ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. WELL, WE DON'T HAVE TO. WE HAVE TO COME TO GRIPS ON THAT, PROBABLY IN THE NEXT TWO MONTHS, RIGHT? CORRECT. SO I'M NOT READY TO DO IT TONIGHT, SO I WASN'T BEING PUSHY HERE, BUT I'M JUST SAYING, AT SOME POINT, ARE WE GOING TO OR ARE WE NOT GOING TO DO A NON-AD VALOREM? WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DECIDE THAT.

AND I'M JUST PRESIDING OVER THE MEETING. I'M NOT DRIVING IT, BUT I WAS UNCOMFORTABLE, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY ELSE IS.

I'M OKAY WITH IT. I KNOW THERE'S OTHER NUMBERS YOU WANT TO LOOK AT WITH THE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND ALL THAT.

[02:05:01]

BUT I'M OKAY WITH THE THEORY OF MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS. I LIKE THE FLEXIBILITY ASPECT OF IT. IT'S NOT COSTING ANYBODY ANY MORE MONEY. SO IT'S KIND OF SIX, HALF OF ONE DOZEN OF THE OTHER. AND THIS IS GETTING US OUT OF THE GATE.

YEAH. BUT IF YOU NEED MORE INFORMATION, I UNDERSTAND.

YEAH, THAT'S IT. THEORY, I LIKE THE CONCEPT. WELL, I'M OPEN TO IT. I APPRECIATE, YOU KNOW, AND AGAIN, IT'S A PERCENTAGE, QUITE FRANKLY.

FOR DEBT SERVICE, IT'S A CLEANER DEBT SERVICE. I KNOW WE REALLY HADN'T EMPHASIZED THAT, BUT THAT'S WHAT IT IS.

BUDGET. YEAH, WHICH IS WHY IT'S A LOW PERCENTAGE. AND THEN IT ALSO, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT TRYING TO SELL THE PROGRAM, BUT JUST IT POSITIONS THE TOWN THAT IF YOU WISH TO USE THE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT, WE'VE DONE THE STUDY, WE KNOW THE AMOUNTS, THE TOWN CAN PROCEED FORWARD TO IMPLEMENT SOME KIND OF RATE IN THE FUTURE THAT MAY BE NECESSARY. DUE TO WHAT HAPPENS IN TALLAHASSEE. I KNOW WE'VE ALL BEEN TALKING ABOUT THAT.

IT'S JUST AN ALTERNATIVE REVENUE SOURCE THAT'S AVAILABLE. THAT WAS THE MAJORITY OF THE REASON THAT WE WENT THROUGH THIS PROCESS INITIALLY WAS TO CREATE FUNDING SOURCES FOR THE JUPITER FIRE RESCUE, ALONG WITH THE DEBT SERVICE.

THAT'S ONE OF THE BIG ITEMS. I DON'T KNOW HOW IT IS THESE DAYS. PERHAPS SOMEONE IN THE REAL ESTATE PROFESSION MAY.

BUT, YOU KNOW, ONCE UPON A TIME, AN AD VALOREM TAX WAS FAVORED OVER NON-AD VALOREM BECAUSE OF TAX BENEFITS, INCOME TAX BENEFITS. AND THAT'S ALL DIFFERENT NOW, SO YEAH, IT'S DIFFERENT.

BUT I'M JUST SAYING, ONCE UPON A TIME, IT WAS SO PEOPLE WERE LESS INCLINED TO WANT A NON-AD VALOREM TAX.

WHEN, UM, BUT THIS IS ON THE LOWER END ANYWAY. 15.

BUT AS YOU TALK ABOUT GOING ON, YOU KNOW, INTO THE FUTURE, WE COULD.

ONCE YOU DO IT EACH YEAR, YOU COULD CHANGE AND MOVE FROM ONE TO THE OTHER UP TO THE LIMIT THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT, WHICH IS A PERCENTAGE OF THE OVERALL DEPARTMENT BUDGET. I'VE SEEN JURISDICTIONS THAT DURING THEIR BUDGET DELIBERATIONS THAT HAVE THE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT, THEY TALK ABOUT THAT EVERY YEAR.

ON THE RATE THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO GO UP TO TO HELP FUND SOME OF THE FIRE RESCUE. SO OBVIOUSLY, IF WE WERE TO GO FORWARD EACH YEAR, THERE WOULD BE A DISCUSSION ON IF WE WANTED TO CONTINUE ON WITH THE RATES THAT WE CURRENTLY ARE AT. OR SOMETHING DIFFERENT. AND IT STRENGTHENS OUR POSITION OF LOCAL CONTROL, SEEING WHAT HAPPENS IN TALLAHASSEE GOING FORWARD WITH THAT AD VALOREM TAXES. AND I'M ALL ABOUT THAT. I AGREE. I SUPPORT THIS AS WELL AND THE THEORY OF GOING FORWARD WITH IT. THE TIMELINE, I JUST WANTED TO ASK, THIS IS PRETTY TIGHTLY PRESCRIBED.

IT'S A PRETTY TIGHT... PROCESS.

SO EACH OF THESE STATES, IT'S WITH THE PROPERTY APPRAISER, IT'S TRIM, ALL OF IT KIND OF TELLS US WHEN WE HAVE TO DO. RIGHT. YEAH, OKAY.

THANK YOU. DO YOU FEEL YOU HAVE WHAT YOU NEEDED TONIGHT? JUST TO REEMPHASIZE, MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND, NO FINAL DECISION IS BEING MADE ON WHETHER WE ARE OR WE ARE NOT. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS AND THE PUBLIC HEARINGS. AS WELL AS NO DECISION HAS BEEN MADE ON THE 15% AND ALSO THE EXEMPTIONS POLICY. SO, BASICALLY, THE TOWN COUNCIL IS STATING THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED FORWARD WITH AT LEAST THE PROCEDURAL ORDINANCES, THE PUBLIC HEARINGS, AND DISCUSS FURTHER DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS. THE PROCEDURAL, OKAY, I'M GLAD YOU SAID IT THAT WAY.

SO WE COULD DO THE PROCEDURAL ORDINANCE BUT DECIDE NOT TO DO IT? YOU COULD. OKAY. THE FINAL ASSESSMENT RESOLUTION IS THE DECISION POINT. OKAY, WELL, THAT PUTS A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE ON IT. YOU KNOW, I STILL WANT TO HAVE LOOKED AT WHAT I THINK IS A FAIRNESS ISSUE WITH ASSESSMENTS, AND WE MAY BE HANDCUFFED BY CHANGING ANYTHING FROM WHAT I'M HEARING. SO THEN THAT WILL BE A DECISION I'LL HAVE TO MAKE, WHETHER OR NOT THAT DOES OR DOESN'T AFFECT.

AGAIN, I'M MINDFUL WE MADE COMMITMENTS THAT WE WERE GOING TO DELIVER A CERTAIN REDUCTION, AND I'M GOING TO BE JUST THINKING ABOUT IF A CATEGORY OF RESIDENCE DOESN'T WORK OUT FOR THEM. OKAY. SCOTT, THANK YOU AND YOUR STAFF. GREAT WORK.

AND THE CONSULTANT, GOOD WORK

[TOWN ATTORNEY]

ON THIS, SO APPRECIATE IT.

OKAY, UNDER REPORTS, TOWN ATTORNEY. THANK YOU, MAYOR. UPDATE ON THE SENATE BILL 180 LITIGATION. THE

[02:10:01]

STATE'S MOTION TO DISMISS WAS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART, WHICH MEANS THE LITIGATION CONTINUES TO MOVE FORWARD.

ALSO, THERE HAS BEEN SOME DIALOGUE IN THE HOUSE REGARDING... SENATE BILL, 840.

YOU'LL RECALL, THE LAST TIME I REPORTED, THE SENATE HAD MOVED FORWARD, BUT THERE WAS NO COMPANION BILL IN THE HOUSE. THERE'S NOW APPARENTLY SOME MOMENTUM FOR A COMPANION BILL IN THE HOUSE. THAT JUST HAPPENED THIS WEEK, AND SO WHERE THAT GOES IS STILL SUBJECT TO THE LEGISLATURE'S TURNS.

BUT THERE'S REASON FOR SOME OPTIMISM,

[TOWN MANAGER]

AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO REPORT. THANK YOU. TOWN MANAGER. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

THIS FIRST PART OF MY REPORT PAINS ME TO HAVE TO TALK ABOUT, BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU'RE AWARE OF A CONCERN RAISED BY ONE OF OUR RESIDENTS. YESTERDAY, A RESIDENT IN OUR TOWN CONTACTED THE JUPITER FIRE RESCUE REPORT THAT DURING A RECENT RESPONSE CALL TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD BY PALM BEACH COUNTY FIRE RESCUE, THE RESIDENT APPROACHED ONE OF THE FIREFIGHTERS ON THE CALL AND WANTED TO THANK THEM FOR THE WORK THAT THEY DID.

AND THE MEMBER OF THE PALM BEACH COUNTY FIRE RESCUE SERVICE THAT THE RESIDENT SPOKE WITH PROCEEDED TO INFORM. THE RESIDENT THAT THE LEVEL OF SERVICE WILL BE SHORT-LIVED ONCE IT SWITCHES OVER TO JUPITER FIRE RESCUE DEPARTMENT, THAT OUR RESIDENTS WOULD BE PUT AT RISK. WHEN THE RESIDENT ASKED FURTHER, ACCORDING TO THE RESIDENT, THE FIREFIGHTER SAID, WELL, I'LL GIVE YOU THIS LITERATURE AND PASSED HIM. TWO PIECES OF LITERATURE THAT EXPLAINS WHY THE FIRE RESCUE PERSON FEELS THAT THE LEVELS OF SERVICE WOULD BE REDUCED.

THIS LITERATURE IS CLEARLY MARKED AS BEING A PAID POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT, AND YOU WOULD PROBABLY RECOGNIZE IT FROM SEVERAL YEARS AGO.

TO BE CLEAR, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE DISTRIBUTION OF THIS POLITICAL MATERIAL OCCURRED WHILE THE FIREFIGHTER WAS ON DUTY AND ENGAGED IN AN OFFICIAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE.

AND BECAUSE OF THAT, IT LEFT OUR RESIDENT WITH A FEELING OF BEING UNSAFE. AND HIS GREATER CONCERN WAS FOR OTHER RESIDENTS THAT MAY NOT BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND THE POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS. AND WERE MORE CONCERNED ABOUT SAFETY. THE JUPITER RESIDENT ALSO NOTED THAT WHEN THE PALM BEACH COUNTY FIRE RESCUE PERSONNEL PRODUCED THESE DOCUMENTS, ACCORDING TO OUR RESIDENT, HE DESCRIBED IT AS THE PALM BEACH COUNTY FIRE RESCUE PERSON. HAVING A STACK OF THESE. AND SO YOU COULD IMAGINE THAT THIS CAUSED SOME CONCERN. I WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT AS SOON AS WE GOT THIS THIS MORNING, I STARTED WORKING ON THIS. I WAS ABLE TO REACH OUT AND SPOKE WITH OUR COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, MR. ABRUZZO. I'VE SINCE FOLLOWED UP WITH SOME DOCUMENTATION TO HIM, EXPLAINING WHAT OCCURRED, AND THEN TO INCLUDE COPIES OF WHAT WAS DELIVERED. I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE CHIEF ROWLEY, WHO IS HERE IN THE AUDIENCE, AS HE ALWAYS IS. THAT WHEN I CALLED HIM TODAY, HE CAME OVER, DROPPED WHAT HE WAS DOING. I HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH HIM. OBVIOUSLY, HE TAKES THIS VERY SERIOUSLY. AS I EXPLAINED TO BOTH HIM AND TO MR. ABRUZZO, I WANTED TO MAKE A POINT TO EXPRESS THE TOWN'S DISPLEASURE AND DISAPPOINTMENT WITH THIS ACT. A CONCERN IS THAT THIS MAY NOT BE AN ISOLATED INCIDENT, AND WE ASK THAT IF ANY OTHER RESIDENTS HAVE BEEN FACED WITH A SIMILAR SITUATION AND RECEIVED THIS LITERATURE DURING A CALL FOR SERVICE, WE'RE ASKING THAT

[02:15:01]

THEY CONTACT THE TOWN.

IN THE MEANTIME, CHIEF ROWLEY ASSURES ME THAT THE DEPARTMENT IS LOOKING INTO THIS, AND WE DON'T KNOW THE SCOPE OF IT. HOPEFULLY, IT'S JUST AN ISOLATED INCIDENT, BUT CERTAINLY, AT A MINIMUM, IT'S... ALARMING BEHAVIOR. SO I WANTED TO BRING THAT TO YOUR ATTENTION BECAUSE I'M SURE IT'S GOING TO GAIN SOME TRACTION AS THIS BECOMES PUBLIC.

ON A SEPARATE NOTE, A LITTLE ON THE LIGHTER SIDE, THIS PAST SATURDAY, OUR PARKS AND RECREATION STAFF HELD REGISTRATION FOR A POPULAR SUMMER CAMP, AND WE CONTINUE TO REFINE THIS PROCESS EVERY YEAR. IN TOTAL, 400 JUPITER CHILDREN ARE REGISTERED FOR AT ONE OF OUR TWO CAMP SESSIONS. WE HAD 333 CAMPERS REGISTERED FOR THE FIRST SESSION, WHICH RUNS FROM JUNE 8TH THROUGH JULY 2ND, AND 340 REGISTERED FOR THE SECOND SESSION, WHICH WILL RUN FROM JULY 6TH THROUGH THE 31ST. I'D LIKE TO THANK ALL THE PARKS AND REC STAFF FOR ALL THEIR HARD WORK ON SATURDAY, AND I'M SURE THEY'RE PLANNING A GREAT SUMMER CAMP FOR THESE CAMPERS. IT'S REALLY, QUITE REMARKABLE WHEN THE KIDS SHOW UP TO SEE THEM ALL OUT THERE, AND I KNOW PARKS AND REC DOES A GREAT JOB WITH THEM. ALSO, I WANT TO TAKE AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONGRATULATE FOUR MEMBERS OF THE JUPITER POLICE DEPARTMENT AS CHIEF. HENNESSEY IS PUTTING THE FINAL TOUCHES ON HIS LEADERSHIP TEAM. AND I'M PROUD TO REPORT TO YOU AND EXCITED TO REPORT TO YOU THAT. SCOTT KIMBARK IS BEING PROMOTED TO THE RANK OF DEPUTY CHIEF AND IS ASSIGNED TO THE OPERATIONS BUREAU. JOE CUNAHAN IS BEING PROMOTED TO THE RANK OF MAJOR. JASON ALEXANDER IS BEING PROMOTED TO THE RANK OF CAPTAIN. AND MATT OWEN IS BEING PROMOTED TO THE RANK OF SERGEANT. AND SO THE PROMOTIONS WILL BE EFFECTIVE ON MARCH. 14TH AND A PROMOTION CEREMONY HELD HERE IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 2 P.M. ON MONDAY, MARCH 16TH.

ALSO, THIS PAST WEEK, THE JUPITER POLICE DEPARTMENT ADDED LAUNCHED ANOTHER NEW PROGRAM AND INITIATIVE AS PART OF THEIR E-BIKE PROGRAM, AIMED AT ENCOURAGING SAFE AND RESPONSIBLE E-BIKE RIDING. I KNOW IT'S A BIG ISSUE FOR THE COUNCIL AND FOR OUR COMMUNITY AS WELL. JPD OFFICERS NOW ON THE LOOKOUT FOR E-BIKE RIDERS, PARTICULARLY YOUNGER RIDERS, WHO ARE FOLLOWING TRAFFIC LAWS.

AND DEMONSTRATED SAFE E-BIKE RIDING HABITS. WHEN ONE OF OUR OFFICERS SPOTS AN E-BIKE RIDER FOLLOWING THE RULES AND RIDING RESPONSIBLY, THEY WILL GIVE THE RIDER A VOUCHER FOR A FREE TREAT AT EITHER BAHAMA BUCKS OR ANNIE'S ITALIAN ICE. WE'D LIKE TO THANK THE TWO COMMUNITY BUSINESSES FOR TAKING PART IN THIS PROGRAM TO HELP US ENCOURAGE SAFE E-BIKE RIDING IN JUPITER, AND I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE JUPITER POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR BEING CREATIVE IN THEIR... ENDEAVORS IN THIS REGARD. IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT ENFORCEMENT. IT'S ABOUT POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT.

[TOWN COUNCIL – LIAISON REPORTS AND COMMENTS]

SO THAT'S MY REPORT, MAYOR.

THANK YOU. GO DOWN TO COUNCIL.

TO CONTINUE ON WITH THE E-BIKES, EVERYONE IS FOLLOWING VERY CLOSELY WHAT'S HAPPENING IN TALLAHASSEE. AND WITH HOUSE BILL 243 AND SENATE BILL 382. HOPEFULLY WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME LEGISLATURE THAT COMES DOWN TO SUPPORT. WHAT YOU'VE BEEN DOING, I THINK WE'RE ALL HEADED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. THIS HAS BEEN A HUGE PROBLEM ACROSS THE COUNTRY. SO WAITING FOR TALLAHASSEE TO COME BACK WITH SOME POSITIVE, POSITIVE INFORMATION WOULD BE GOOD.

JUST WANT TO SAY IT WAS REALLY FUN LAST WEEK. MELISSA AND I, OR COUNSELOR SANDSTROM AND I, DID READ FOR THE RECORD DAY WITH THE LOCAL SCHOOLS. WE HAD SO MUCH FUN, AND IT WAS, IT TOOK A LOT OF HEARTFELT SITTING WITH THESE LITTLE ONES AS, AND IT WAS SCHOOL PICTURE DAY IN THE CLASS THAT I WAS WITH.

SO, AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO REPRESENT OUR TOWN. IT WAS FUN. LOOK FORWARD TO IT NEXT YEAR. AND I THINK WE'LL BROADEN IT NEXT YEAR TO INCLUDE OUR FIRES, OUR POLICE. I DIDN'T REALIZE THE AMOUNT OF... HOURS WERE CALCULATED. SO WE'LL MAKE THAT A LITTLE BIGGER. THANK YOU FOR THAT OPPORTUNITY. JUST ONE ITEM. THIS REALLY JUST JUMPS OUT AT ME. AND, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE FIRST TOOK THIS VENTURE TO START OUR OWN FIRE DEPARTMENT, THE ESTIMATE OF COST SAVINGS IN THE FIRST YEAR, AND LOOKING DOWN AT THESE NUMBERS, AND YOU'RE JUST UNDER $10 MILLION, IT'S REMARKABLE HOW ON POINT THE NUMBERS CAME OUT.

AND SCOTT, FRANK. THE WHOLE EVERYBODY INVOLVED WITH THIS IS JUST, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST PROUD. IT WAS A, I WON'T SAY IT WAS A RISKY VENTURE, BUT IT WAS A TIGHT TIME FRAME.

THREE YEARS IS A TIGHT TIME FRAME. I MEAN, IT'S

[02:20:01]

LIKE EVERYTHING, EVERYTHING WENT AFTER ANOTHER RIGHT DOWN THE LINE. SO I JUST WANT TO JUST, YOU KNOW, SAY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT QUITE THERE YET, BUT WE'RE ON THE RIGHT TRACK AND JUST INCREDIBLE WORK.

YOU KNOW, SOME GOVERNMENTS MAKE PROJECTIONS, OH, WE'RE GOING TO BUILD THIS BRIDGE OR DO THAT.

THE ESTIMATES AREN'T WORTH THE PAPER IT'S WRITTEN ON, BUT NOT AT THIS TOWN. AND YOU GUYS ALWAYS COME IN RIGHT ON THE MONEY, SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.

SO, THANKS A LOT. WELL, SINCE YOU SHARED THAT NUMBER, THE NUMBER WAS $5.5 MILLION MINIMUM. RIGHT. NOT THAT NUMBER. OKAY, WE'RE NOT THERE YET. WE'LL SEE. I'LL JUST GO INSTEAD OF WAITING. I JUST WANTED TO SHARE AN EXCITING ANNIVERSARY THAT... I MISSED SHARING LAST MEETING, 20-YEAR ANNIVERSARY, AND I WANT TO SHARE JUST A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY. ON FEBRUARY 14, 2006, BY A 4-3 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER VOTE, THEY SELECTED JUPITER TO GET THE SCRIPPS, FLORIDA FACILITY TO LAUNCH A BIOSCIENCE CLUSTER.

IT'S BEEN 20 YEARS. YOU KNOW, I WAS FONDLY REMEMBERING...

YOU KNOW, WE WERE THE LONG SHOT AND WE GOT IT, BUT I DO THINK FROM A HISTORY LESSON, I WANTED TO SHARE. THIS WAS, SO, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A BASE IN TWO OPTIONS, THREE OPTIONS, SO FOUR OPTIONS IN TOTAL FOR THOSE THAT DON'T KNOW.

SO, YOU KNOW, THE COUNTY HAD PURCHASED A MECCA SITE, AND THEN PEOPLE WERE OBJECTING TO DEVELOPMENT, YOU KNOW, WAY OUT WEST. AND ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AND OTHER ISSUES. THREE OTHER OPTIONS MERGED, OR APPEARED. ONE WAS FOR A RESEARCH PARK, ONE WAS BOCA, AND THEN ONE WAS JUPITER. BUT WHAT WAS UNIQUE...

THE THING ABOUT JUPITER WAS WE WERE THE ONLY ONE THAT DIDN'T APPROACH IT AS A SINGLE SITE, BUT APPROACHED IT AS A CLUSTER.

SO WE WEREN'T COMPETING AGAINST THE GARDENS AND NORTH PALM BEACH AND WHATEVER. IT WAS A CLUSTER. AND SO THE STATE HAD VALID REQUIREMENTS. THE VALID REQUIREMENTS WERE 500 ACRES OF LAND AND 8 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF BUILDING. THAT'S WHAT, YOU KNOW, THEY WERE THINKING, YOU KNOW, WITH IF IT HAD BEEN ON THE MECCA SITE, AND THAT WAS WHAT THEY JUDGED.

SO WE CAME UP WITH THE CLUSTER, AND I HAVE THE PRESENTATION STUFF HERE, ACTUALLY, BUT I JUST WANTED TO SHARE THIS. SO WITHIN A MILE AND A HALF OF SCRIPPS AT THE HUB AT THE CENTER, WE HAD 942 ACRES, 6.4 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF POTENTIAL. TWO AND A HALF MILES SUMMARY, WE HAD 1,028 ACRES AND 7 MILLION SQUARE FEET. AND THEN, AT THE FIVE MILES SUMMARY, WE HAD 1,728 ACRES AND 16 MILLION SQUARE FEET POTENTIAL.

AND OR EXIST IN A COMBINATION THEREOF. JUST FOR PERSPECTIVE, THE FIVE MILES SUMMARY HAPPENED TO GO TO THE COUNTY NORTHERN LINE.

SO THAT WAS THE ONE THAT ENCOMPASSED THE ISLAND WAY PARCELS AS AN FYI. AND THEN THE TOTAL CLUSTER, BECAUSE WE REALLY, IT WAS, WE CAME UP WITH THE CONCEPT OF IT'S A REALLY TEAM EFFORT.

AND SO WE WENT 10 MILES OUT.

AND AT 10 MILES OUT, WE HAD, YOU KNOW, JUST UNDER 4,800 ACRES VERSUS 500, AND POTENTIALLY 52 MILLION SQUARE FEET VERSUS EIGHT. STATE REQUIREMENT. NOW, FAST FORWARD 20 YEARS. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE ENDED UP WITH IN THE REGION, BUT WE ENDED UP WITH A LOT IN THE REGION. AND JUPITER BENEFITED FROM HAVING NOT ONLY GOT SCRIPPS, BUT THEN WE GOT MAX PLANCK AND WHATEVER. BUT BECAUSE I'M VERY SENSITIVE TO, YOU KNOW, OUR COMP PLAN, WE WERE, SINCE IT WAS A STATE REQUIREMENT AND WE COMMITTED TO THE OVERLAY, WE THE TOWN, WOULD NEVER HAVE REMOVED AN OVERLAY ON ANY PIECE OF PROPERTY UNTIL THE STATE SAID. YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND DO THAT. SO YOU'VE HEARD ME SAY THAT I JUST WANT TO DRIVE THAT POINT HOME, THAT. SO, WHEN I SAT IN ON THE LAST TWO BIOSCIENCE OVERLAY MEETINGS, THE SECOND AND LAST ONE.

BECAUSE THERE WAS A REPRESENTATIVE THAT WAS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA, YOU KNOW, APPOINTEE, AND I ASKED THE QUESTION, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WE WERE YOU, DO WE CONTINUE GOING AS THAT GROUP OR NOT? AND HE CAME BACK AT THE NEXT MEETING, AND JOHN SICKLER WAS THERE AT THE MEETING,

[02:25:02]

IN THE AUDIENCE, AND HE SAID, NO, WE'VE ACCOMPLISHED WHAT WAS SET OUT TO DO WHEN THEY PUT THE HUNDRED AND SOME ODD MILLION DOLLARS TOWARDS THIS. AND SO WE NO LONGER NEEDED THAT REQUIREMENT NOW. WE AS A COUNCIL HAD NOT YET TAKEN ACTION TO REMOVE ANYTHING FROM THE OVERLAY, BUT IT'S OUR PREROGATIVE TO DO SO AT THIS POINT IN TIME. AND I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT, IF YOU THINK THE NUMBERS ARE STAGGERING, IT'S LIKE, WE KNEW WE NEVER WERE GOING TO GET, WHEN WE OPENED IT UP, AS OPPOSED TO, LET'S SAY, YOU KNOW, TWO OF THE OTHER SITES WHERE WE'VE JUST BEEN ON THAT SITE, IT WENT OUT. SO IT'S A NATURAL... I WOULDN'T SUGGEST THAT WE WOULD REMOVE THE OVERLAY FROM EVERY SITE, BUT WE KNEW, THIS IS NO SURPRISE, WE NEVER WOULD GET 52 MILLION SQUARE FEET AND 04,800 ACRES. I JUST WANTED TO, IN BOTH CELEBRATING THIS ACHIEVEMENT, BUT ALSO FRAME THAT. BECAUSE WHEN WE'RE MAKING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGES, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S RECOGNIZED BY...

THOSE THAT WEREN'T AROUND BACK THEN, THAT IN LARGE PART, IT WAS A COMMITMENT THAT WE HAD TO MAKE IN ORDER TO GET, YOU KNOW, SCRIPTS.

BUT WE KNEW THAT... WORKED HARD FOR YEARS, BUT KNEW THAT THERE'S A CHANCE THAT WE WOULD NOT NECESSARILY FILL UP ALL THAT WAS IN THE TOWN, RIGHT? BUT AGAIN, YOU KNOW, CELEBRATION. THERE'S A FEW OF THEM WE HAVE COMING UP, BUT I'LL LEAVE THAT ONE FOR TONIGHT AND MOVE ON DOWN TO COUNCILOR SUNSTROM. YOU GUYS ARE SO POSITIVE. I WISH I COULD SHARE ALL OF THE POSITIVITY. I'LL START WITH SAYING, I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU SAVED THAT NEWSPAPER.

OF COURSE YOU DID. WHAT OTHER? IS THIS IN THE ATTIC WITH THE HOLIDAY DECORATION? NO, IT'S NOT IN THE ATTIC.

OH, OKAY. COVERED BY THE NON-AD VALOREM. JUST CHECKING. AND I WILL SAY, READ FOR THE RECORD WAS INCREDIBLE.

IT IS COMPETITIVE. WE HAVE NEVER BEEN VERY COMPETITIVE, BUT WE CAN ASK OTHERS TO HELP US AND BROADEN THE SCOPE. AND HOW FUN WOULD THAT BE? SO I SUPPORT THAT, AND THANK YOU FOR MENTIONING THAT TONIGHT. I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GREAT IDEA. BUT I JUST, TO THE TOWN MANAGER'S COMMENT, I WANT TO SAY, I MEAN, I CAN'T LET THAT GO. I'M DISAPPOINTED IN HEARING WHAT I HEARD, AND I HEARD IT EARLIER TODAY. I THINK YOU AND I WERE MEETING WHEN I HEARD AND SAW THE LAMINATED COPIES. I DON'T KNOW WHO LAMINATES THESE FLYERS ANYMORE.

WHO KNOWS? BUT I'M VERY GRATEFUL FOR THE RESIDENT WHO BROUGHT IT TO OUR ATTENTION, THAT THEY WOULD CALL FIRE RESCUE AND REACH OUT AND SHARE THAT.

WE'VE BEEN THROUGH A LOT, AND SO IT'S A WONDERFUL THING TO SEE. I'M GRATEFUL TO OUR JUPITER FIRE RESCUE DEPARTMENT FOR, IT'S A HARD ROAD BUILDING THIS IN THIS ENVIRONMENT. AND WE MADE A TOUGH DECISION. IT WAS THE RIGHT ONE. BASED ON THE FINANCIAL INFORMATION WE'RE GETTING, NEARLY $10 MILLION OF SAVINGS IN THE FIRST YEAR, WELL ABOVE. THE PROJECTION.

BUT, YOU KNOW, IMPLEMENTING IT, ALL THE CHILI COOK-OFFS, ALL THE EVENTS THAT THESE FIRE RESCUE DEPARTMENTS SHARE, IN EVERY EVENT, ALL I HEAR ABOUT, PARTICULARLY FROM OUR DEPUTY, IS HOW HARD THEY WORK TO BUILD THOSE BRIDGES, TO REACH OUT, TO BE POSITIVE, TO BE AN EXAMPLE, TO CHANGE THE NARRATIVE, AND TO FOCUS ON SAFETY. AND WE TALK ABOUT OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT STARTING OPERATIONS OCTOBER OF THIS VERY YEAR. THIS IS A SETBACK AND I HOPE I NEVER HAVE TO HEAR ANYTHING LIKE THIS EVER AGAIN. I THINK THAT IT HURT AND SCARED A RESIDENT, AND THERE MAY BE MORE, AND I HOPE THAT THAT'S NOT TRUE. YOU KNOW, I HOPE WE LEARN THAT THESE THINGS ARE LIMITED IN SCOPE. BUT IT ALSO HURTS OUR FIREFIGHTERS AT JUPITER FIRE RESCUE, WHO ARE WORKING SO HARD, AND IT HURTS THE FIREFIGHTING PROFESSION.

AND I JUST THINK THAT THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO KEEP HOLD OF. I THINK, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT THE FIRST TIME WE'VE SEEN SOME OF THIS BEHAVIOR. I HOPE IT IMPROVES.

YOU KNOW, I DON'T, I JUST DON'T WANT TO SEE IT AGAIN. BUT I DO WANT TO SAY, YOU KNOW, IN MY ROLE AS AN ELECTED, TALKING TO OTHER ELECTEDS WORKING IN THIS COUNTY, I DO THINK IT'S A FAIR QUESTION TO ASK. SOMETIMES, WHERE DOES THE FIRE UNION END, AND WHERE DOES PALM BEACH COUNTY FIRE RESCUE BEGIN? OR

[02:30:01]

VICE VERSA? BECAUSE I THINK SOMETIMES THERE'S A LOT OF CONFUSION AND A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT PROJECTS, AND IT WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE MORE CLARITY THERE.

THAT'S ALL I'LL SAY. AND TO THAT, WE DO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME OCTOBER 1 TO PROVE THEM ALL WRONG, AND I THINK WE'LL DO THAT WITH FLYING COLORS. SO HATS OFF TO WHAT THE TOWN IS DOING, PUTTING TOGETHER. JUPITER FIRE COME OCTOBER 1ST. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK CHIEF HENDERSON AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR ROLLING OUT THAT E-BIKE SAFETY REWARD PROGRAM. WHAT A GREAT PROGRAM AS A POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT OF CORRECT E-BIKE SAFETY. AND ALSO, I'D LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE WHAT THE TOWN MANAGER SAID, THAT SPECIAL THANKS TO BOTH ANNIE'S TIE AND ICE. AND I THINK IT WAS BAHAMA BUCKS FOR THEIR PARTICIPATION IN THE PROGRAM.

IN OUR LAST MEETING, WE GAVE A LOT OF ACCOLADES TO... OUR UTILITIES DEPARTMENT FOR WHAT A GREAT JOB THEY DID.

THE TOWN-WIDE FLOOD ASSESSMENT, VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENT, BUT ALSO ONE PARTICULAR PERSON, REBECCA WILDER, RECENTLY RECEIVED THE TOWN MANAGER'S MERIT AWARD FOR HER CRITICAL ROLE IN LEADING THAT TOWN-WIDE FLOOD VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENT, AND SHE DID A FANTASTIC JOB, AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE RECOGNIZE THAT THROUGH WHAT THE TOWN MANAGER HAS DONE. SO I APPRECIATE THAT, FRANK, FOR RECOGNIZING HER. AND USUALLY I WAIT TO DO MINE FOR THE VERY REASON THAT HAPPENED TONIGHT. SOMEBODY ELSE WILL BRING SOMETHING UP I WANT TO COMMENT ABOUT. SO I APPRECIATE, COUNSELOR SUNSTROM. AND, I FIRST OF ALL, I APPRECIATE, OUR TOWN MANAGER AND THE LEADERSHIP. I APPRECIATE THE RESIDENT COMING FORWARD. I APPRECIATE OUR TOWN MANAGER.

UH, FOR GETTING WITH HIS COUNTERPART AT PALM BEACH COUNTY. AND YOU KNOW, I'M ANXIOUS TO SEE THAT SOME GOOD COMES OUT OF THIS. IT IS EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTING BECAUSE I WOULD HAVE THOUGHT BY NOW THAT OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT, LOOKING FORWARD, WORKING COOPERATIVELY WITH PALM BEACH COUNTY MUTUAL AID, GOING FORTH, THAT SOME OF THE... THINGS THAT WERE SAID IN THE EARLY DAYS, THEY'VE COME TO REALIZE, NO, THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE TRUE OF JUPITER. AND WE'RE GOING TO BE PARTNERS HERE. SO THIS, I COULDN'T BE MORE DISAPPOINTED. BUT I'M SO GRATEFUL THAT I THINK LEADERSHIP WILL STEP UP AND THIS WILL BE CORRECTED. THE FACT THAT IT HAPPENED IS DISTURBING AND WILL ALWAYS BE DISTURBING. BECAUSE THE CULTURE ALLOWED IT, BUT I'LL JUST KIND OF LEAVE IT AT THAT.

BUT YEAH, THIS IS JUST, I'M NOT SURE THERE'S ANYTHING THAT I'VE EVER BEEN MORE DISAPPOINTED ABOUT IN THE BEHAVIOR OF A PUBLIC SAFETY PROFESSIONAL THAN THIS. ANYWAY, AND WITH THAT, THE TIME IS NOW 9.32 AND WE'LL ADJOURN THE MEETING.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.

Mar 03, 2026 Town Council

Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download Selected Item