Built from the City's minutes records — no AI-written textBriefing final
The City's record
What the City's record shows
Built only from the City's minutes (2235_06_10_2025.pdf). Page numbers are the minutes' own. Discussion is in the minutes' text; it is not summarised here.
Attendance (the roll call)
Listed present when the roll was taken: Mike Blake, Patricia Weeks, Alex Goins, Lavander Hearn, Lorraine Koss
(Checked against the ballots and the printed roll lines.)
Absences: the minutes print an “ABSENT” heading with no names under it.
Also listed as present (staff and other roles): Anthony A. Garganese (City Attorney), Stockton Whitten (City Manager), Monica Arsenault (City Clerk), Abigail Morgan (Public Works Director), Rebecca Bowman (Finance Director), Charlene Neuterman (Community Services Director), Jonathan Lamm (Fire Chief), Jack Walsh (Utilities Director)
Named on at least one ballot later in the meeting: Alex Goins, Lavander Hearn, Lorraine Koss, Mike Blake, Patricia Weeks (participation, which can differ from the roll: arrivals and departures are in the minutes' text)
Adopted actions (10)
Il. Approval of Agenda and Minutes: 1 Agenda: Regular Meeting of June 10, 2025. (2025-429) — to approve the agenda for the Regular City Council meeting of June 10, 2025 with an amendment to add a presentation to Mayor Blake from Rockledge Youth Football (moved by Alex Goins, seconded by Mike Blake); CARRIED 5-0; ayes: Mike Blake, Patricia Weeks, Alex Goins, Lavander Hearn, Lorraine Koss; nays: none — the City's minutes, p. 2
to approve the minutes for the Town Hall Meeting of March 25, 2025 and the Town Hall meeting of April 24, 2025 as written (moved by Lorraine Koss, seconded by Alex Goins); CARRIED 5-0; ayes: Mike Blake, Patricia Weeks, Alex Goins, Lavander Hearn, Lorraine Koss; nays: none — the City's minutes, p. 2
to approve the Consent agenda (moved by Lavander Hearn, seconded by Patricia Weeks); CARRIED 5-0; ayes: Mike Blake, Patricia Weeks, Alex Goins, Lavander Hearn, Lorraine Koss; nays: none — the City's minutes, p. 3
Vi. Public Hearings: ie Approve Ordinance No. 03-2025 on second reading, amending Section 22-5 and creating Section 22 -5.2 of the City Code — to take a ten-minute break (moved by Mike Blake, seconded by Patricia Weeks); PASSED 4-0; ayes: Mike Blake, Patricia Weeks, Alex Goins, Lavander Hearn; nays: none — the City's minutes, pp. 7–8
Vi. Public Hearings: ie Approve Ordinance No. 03-2025 on second reading, amending Section 22-5 and creating Section 22 -5.2 of the City Code — to return from the break (moved by Mike Blake, seconded by Patricia Weeks); PASSED 4-0; ayes: Mike Blake, Patricia Weeks, Alex Goins, Lavander Hearn; nays: none — the City's minutes, pp. 7–8; the vote on p. 9
Vi. Public Hearings: ie Approve Ordinance No. 03-2025 on second reading, amending Section 22-5 and creating Section 22 -5.2 of the City Code — to reconsider the motion to approve Ordinance 03-2025 with amendments to amend the language under Subsections C and M to say “..discontinue and abandon or remove” and leave Subsection F included in the Ordinance (moved by Mike Blake, seconded by Lavander Hearn); PASSED 4-0; ayes: Mike Blake, Patricia Weeks, Alex Goins, Lavander Hearn; nays: none — the City's minutes, p. 9
Vi. Public Hearings: ie Approve Ordinance No. 03-2025 on second reading, amending Section 22-5 and creating Section 22 -5.2 of the City Code — to approve Ordinance 03-2025 on Second and Final Reading with an amendment to the language under Subsections C and M to say “..discontinue and abandon or remove” and leave Subsection F included in the Ordinance (moved by Lavander Hearn, seconded by Mike Blake); PASSED 4-0; ayes: Mike Blake, Patricia Weeks, Alex Goins, Lavander Hearn; nays: none — the City's minutes, p. 9
1. Discuss and provide direction on (1) museum operations; (2) program and exhibit development; (3) facility maintenance and capital improve — to table this item to the July 8, 2025 City Council meeting (moved by Alex Goins, seconded by Patricia Weeks); CARRIED 5-0; ayes: Mike Blake, Patricia Weeks, Alex Goins, Lavander Hearn, Lorraine Koss; nays: none — the City's minutes, p. 9; the vote on p. 10
1. Consider Approval of a Donation Application Request in the amount of $1,000 dollars for Marine Resources Council. (2025-492) — to approve the item (moved by Mike Blake, seconded by Lorraine Koss); CARRIED 5-0; ayes: Mike Blake, Patricia Weeks, Alex Goins, Lavander Hearn, Lorraine Koss; nays: none — the City's minutes, p. 10
to adjourn the Regular meeting of June 10, 2025 (moved by Patricia Weeks, seconded by Lavander Hearn); CARRIED 5-0; ayes: Mike Blake, Patricia Weeks, Alex Goins, Lavander Hearn, Lorraine Koss; nays: none — the City's minutes, pp. 11–12
Motions not adopted (2)
Vi. Public Hearings: ie Approve Ordinance No. 03-2025 on second reading, amending Section 22-5 and creating Section 22 -5.2 of the City Code — to approve Ordinance 03-2025 with amendments to remove Subsection F and amend the language on Page 7 and 8 to say “..discontinue and abandon or remove” and under Section C to say “affected property owner shall make the connection and discontinue and abandon or remove.” (moved by Patricia Weeks); died for lack of a second (no vote was taken) — the City's minutes, pp. 7–8
Vi. Public Hearings: ie Approve Ordinance No. 03-2025 on second reading, amending Section 22-5 and creating Section 22 -5.2 of the City Code — to approve Ordinance 03-2025 with amendments to amend the language under Subsections C and M to say “..discontinue and abandon or remove.” (moved by Mike Blake, seconded by Alex Goins); FAILED 1-3; ayes: Patricia Weeks; nays: Mike Blake, Lavander Hearn, Alex Goins — the City's minutes, pp. 7–8
Motions for which no result was read from the minutes' text (2)
Vi. Public Hearings: ie Approve Ordinance No. 03-2025 on second reading, amending Section 22-5 and creating Section 22 -5.2 of the City Code — to approve Ordinance 03-2025 with amendments to amend the language under Subsections C and M to say “..discontinue and abandon or remove”, with discussion (moved by Mike Blake, seconded by Alex Goins); no result was read for this motion from the minutes' text — the City's minutes, pp. 7–8
Vi. Public Hearings: ie Approve Ordinance No. 03-2025 on second reading, amending Section 22-5 and creating Section 22 -5.2 of the City Code — to approve the advancement of the advanced septic system, for discussion (moved by Mike Blake, seconded by Lavander Hearn); WITHDRAWAL REQUESTED; CONSENSUS NOT RECORDED — the City's minutes, pp. 7–8 Corrected to match the minutes, page 9.
Money named in the minutes' motions (what each motion did with the amount, in its own words)
$53,436 — Council: Consent agenda item 1, approved with the Consent agenda. “To Approve Amendment 1 to Task Order 2024-01 under Continuing Services Agreement RFQ-23-12-COC with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. in the amount of $53,436 for Engineering Services for the South Courtenay Parkway Water Main Replacement Project; To Approve a Resolution Amending the FY2025 Budget, BAF 25-067-IFT.” (motion result: CARRIED; the City's minutes (2235_06_10_2025.pdf, p. 3); fiscal period not recorded)
$330,422 — Council: Consent agenda item 3, approved with the Consent agenda. “Approve a Resolution Amending the FY25 Budget, BAF#25-070-A, in the amount of $330,422.” (motion result: CARRIED; the City's minutes (2235_06_10_2025.pdf, p. 3); fiscal period not recorded)
$1,000 — Council: listed on an agenda item that an adopted motion approved as presented. “Consider Approval of a Donation Application Request in the amount of $1,000 dollars for Marine Resources Council.” (motion result: CARRIED; the City's minutes (2235_06_10_2025.pdf, p. 10); fiscal period not recorded)
Agenda (the City's wording)
Time links are automatic matches to the machine transcript and may be off.
An item without a time link may still have been discussed; the link is only added when the automatic match is strong.
I. Opening Matters
1. Call to Order
2. Invocation
3. Pledge of Allegiance
4. Roll Call
II. Approval of Agenda and Minutes
1. Agenda: Regular Meeting of June 10, 2025.
2. Minutes: Town Hall Meeting of March 25, 2025.
3. Minutes: Town Hall Meeting of April 24, 2025.
III. Awards and Presentations
1. Proclamation recognizing Aging Matters for 60 years of service in Brevard.
IV. Delegations
V. Consent Agenda
1. To Approve Amendment 1 to Task Order 2024-01 under Continuing Services Agreement RFQ-23-12-COC with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. in the amount of $53,436 for Engineering Services for the South Courtenay Parkway Water Main Replacement Project; To Approve a Resolution Amending the FY2025 Budget, BAF 25-067-IFT.
2. Approve BAF 25-064-T to shore up Fire Department Overtime Budget for the rest of the year.
3. Approve the Purchase of an ILA ALPHA EAGLE Boom Mower with attachments utilizing Florida Sheriff's Association Contract FSA23--EQU21.0. Approve a Resolution Amending the FY25 Budget, BAF#25-070-A, in the amount of $330,422.
VI. Public Hearings
1. Approve Ordinance No. 03-2025 on second reading, amending Section 22-5 and creating Section 22 -5.2 of the City Code to update the City’s Mandatory Sewer Hookup Policy and authorize sewer system connection requirements following expansion projects To Provide Direction to Staff for Funding and New Policies, if Necessary, for the Indian River Drive Septic to Sewer Conversion. — 00:22:29
VII. Council Business
1. Discuss and provide direction on (1) museum operations; (2) program and exhibit development; (3) facility maintenance and capital improvements; and (4) volunteer recruitment and development for the Leon and Jewel Collins Museum of African American History and Culture.
VIII. City Business
1. Consider Approval of a Donation Application Request in the amount of $1,000 dollars for Marine Resources Council. — 02:44:06
IX. Informational Agenda
1. In accordance with City Code, Section 2-74, at the beginning of each month during the fiscal year, the City Manager shall submit to City Council data showing the relation between the estimated and actual income and expenses to date.
2. FY 2025 May Budget Adjustment Report
3. In accordance with the Financial Operations Manual (FOM) the City Manager shall submit to City Council in the form of an agenda item any approved change orders to construction contracts that the City Council has authorized the City Manager, by resolution, to approve in excess of the City Manager’s spending authority.
4. Informational Only - The City of Cocoa's Open Board Vacancies.
5. Bi-Weekly Report for May 23, 2025-June 4, 2025.
X. Reports
XI. Adjournment
XII. Notice to the Public
Transcript Partial transcript
Machine transcription of the meeting recording. The words are the recognizer's, except where a passage is marked as corrected or machine re-recognized; most have
not been checked against the audio, so words, numbers and names can be misheard.
It describes what was said. It cannot establish who voted how, an amount or an outcome — the City's
minutes do that (above).
A time links to its passage, and “Copy link” copies that link. “▶ Play” opens the recording at that moment, as the City's file, in a new tab.
630 suspect passage(s) marked in place; inspection incomplete: language review; 1 stretch(es) where a voice was detected and no words were recognized.
How this transcript was made. New machine transcription of the whole recording, with 26 voices separated from the audio.
73 short machine repair(s) (89 word(s)) are labelled in place, with the original words beside them: an ordinary word was replaced only where two further machine readings agreed on a different one.
Checks run on this transcript: the recognizer's own warning signs and whether a voice was detected where the words are. Not completed: language review.
A second, independent machine reading was compared with it word by word: the same words for 92.0% of 25,741 content words.
Dotted words (616 places) are ordinary wording differences: hover or tap to see the other reading.
630 passages (25% of the words) are marked suspect: their words are not shown ("unclear audio") and support no statement: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ; the language review questioned them; or no voice was detected there.
Agreement between two machine readings is not verification.
Inspection is incomplete: language review.
Voice detected, no words recognized (1 stretch). Something may have been said here that the transcript does not have:
00:08:22 (6 s) — neither reading has words
Speakers were separated by voice. A plain name rests on evidence tied to that voice; “provisional” is a name from an earlier text-only pass and is not verified; “Speaker N” is an unidentified voice.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:00:05–00:00:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:00:15–00:00:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:00:55–00:01:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:01:08–00:01:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:01:38–00:01:39 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:01:43–00:01:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:01:48–00:01:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:01:52–00:01:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:01:57–00:02:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:02:13–00:02:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:02:42–00:02:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
This small token is a reflection of our immense appreciation for all that councilman, doctor, principal, father, uncle, and devoted community leader, Mr. Dick
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:03:26–00:03:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:03:32–00:03:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:03:49–00:03:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:04:25–00:04:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
When you're doing this community work, sometimes it's very tough and ‸ you don't get a lot of thank yous. And so, again, we appreciate you and your family for sharing him with us.
Thank you very much, sir. Thank you, counselor. Thank you very much, sir. Thank you, madam president. You're a blessing. On behalf of the Blake family, we'd just like to say thank you all for opening up your heart to include us. Not all, I'd just like to say we have a she-ro, she-ro, meaning she-hero here. And I would like to thank President Mrs. Blunt for doing an outstanding job
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:05:19–00:05:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:05:48–00:05:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yes, ma'am. Yes, ma'am. Fine day there. Next on our presentation, we have the honorable Deputy Mayor Weeks. She will read this proclamation into the minutes for Aging Matters. So without further ado, the microphone is yours. Thank you, sir. Yes, ma'am.
Proclamation. Whereas Aging Matters in Brevard, originally known as the Community Service Council, was incorporated as a not-for-profit organization on June 7, 1965, and today promotes the independence, health, safety, and quality of life for seniors countywide. And whereas Aging Matters is now the leading agency providing direct services to seniors across Brevard
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:06:09–00:06:37 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:06:37–00:06:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
July 1. Whereas having grown alongside Brevard County now employs more than 90 staff members and mobilizes more than 800 volunteers who drive more than 400,000 miles.
life-changing services annually to hundreds of seniors countywide including 79,000 hours of companionship respite socialization safety and wellness checks and light housekeeping in 2024.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:07:23–00:07:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
just and distributed them daily through the Meals on Wheels program weekly at 13 seniors at lunch community dining centers and monthly provide pet food to 160 clients through Pets on Wheels.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:07:56–00:07:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
program volunteers for its own and many other organizations and conducted bone builders classes for 370 seniors to prevent osteoporosis. Now therefore be it
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:08:13–00:08:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:08:20–00:08:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:08:35–00:08:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:09:11–00:09:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:09:18–00:09:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:09:21–00:09:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:09:38–00:09:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:09:43–00:09:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
She is the Program Director for RSVP, which is our volunteer database that you just counted out. We have over 800 volunteers that she manages on a daily basis.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:10:10–00:10:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
that go out of our kitchen daily to individuals that are homebound that need our services. And our waiting list is growing every single day. We're currently holding 346 individuals in their home that cannot receive a plate because we don't have enough to cover. So if I can leave something in your heart tonight is please remember that with $30 a month, you can help us feed a senior for a whole week. So that's a lot. For us, it would be an amazing blessing if you can join our current campaign, which is celebrating our 60th anniversary. Um, and that is looking for those champions that are going to jump on board and help with the donations so we can bring our waiting list down.
Monica, would you raise your hand for us, please, ma'am? Look over to your immediate left. Your immediate left. Left. Hard left. Yes, ma'am. Make sure you collaborate with her,
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:11:38–00:11:38 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:11:47–00:12:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay. Okay. Thank you for the awards and presentation, city staff and council. I do appreciate you. Yes, sir. Yes, ma'am. Great job, Deputy Mayor Weeks, ma'am. Your articulation. ‸ So, yes, sir. Your ability to convey your thoughts clearly. People don't understand. Getting behind that microphone is ‸ very challenging, but as we say in the country, cream always
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:13:06–00:13:06 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:13:13–00:13:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
particular question or area of concern. I have two cards under. We have another one coming. Under delegation, I have Celeste Corrado. And then after that will be Paula Knowles. Thank you. And Celeste, would you come forward? Sir and ma'am, we have seats in the front. To your left or to your right? I feel like the Beverly Hill building is taking shoes off and come back. You hear? The floor is yours,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:13:52–00:13:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And what I would like to bring up is that ‸ as every U.S. citizen knows, having fair and equal representation is the cornerstone of American democracy and is a civil right that is recognized and protected by the Constitution. We have a fundamental right to be represented on key issues that impact us personally. Indeed, this
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:14:17–00:14:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:14:25–00:14:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:14:34–00:14:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
that will likely impact many of our lives. Ms. Koss, along with her 4,000 District 4 constituents, were prevented from weighing in on this new citywide ordinance, while all other districts and their residents were represented. Both the city attorney and the city manager have stated several times that this is a citywide ordinance applicable across all city districts. If true, then why was
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:15:21–00:15:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
who live in District 4 have the right to council representation on this critical citywide ordinance consistent with representation given to the other three city districts. Do the right thing, council and mayor, and reinstate Councilwoman
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:15:54–00:15:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:16:01–00:16:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:16:27–00:16:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:16:40–00:16:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the machine readings disagree here; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:16:57–00:16:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the machine readings disagree here; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:17:03–00:17:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:17:09–00:17:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:17:15–00:17:15 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Department. And she received an updated opinion regard specifically related to the ordinance that's being proposed tonight. And the opinion of the, attorney for the Florida Commission on Ethics, likewise concluded again that she has a voting conflict of interest with respect to the ordinance. um
from voting on this particular matter. It's, it's just an issue of Florida state law regarding the ethics rules and, um they've been interpreted by the Florida Commission on Ethics. And that's
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:17:56–00:17:57 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:18:00–00:18:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:18:15–00:18:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I just wanted to, I guess that clears up. uh There was a rumor that I had voluntarily uh recused myself, but um I was instructed. To. um And after that meeting where it was made very clear that this particular ordinance applies to the entire city, um I went back to the Ethics Commission to ask for another opinion to verify. um We got the opinion yesterday and it's based on, the
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:18:56–00:18:56 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
which was it was a lot less than any of the estimates that had been provided by staff. Now, anyone that's been by my house, and I know I see a lot of my neighbors here, you you know that the circumstances are my yard are probably no different than yours. um But because I had gotten the estimate and because the only other statement of facts they had were the estimates that had been submitted by staff, made as look as though I was going to suffer again over the other 88 households involved so
not to go forward in terms of getting estimates on our septics, having our septics connected to sewage So, we really don't know where my particular household stands. So,
based on the facts, and those were the facts that were presented to them. Obviously, they haven't looked at my house and aren't in the neighborhood. So, that is what we must abide by tonight, and I will be recusing myself. um
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:20:40–00:20:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
council that has a background in water and wastewater. um But this is the way it is, and we will hope for the best and the wisdom of the rest of the council. So thank you.
um Being the only member here at large, I represent the entire city, and I do represent the constituents of all four districts, and I know how to be fair and equitable across the board. And my thing is, um
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:22:04–00:22:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:22:09–00:22:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:22:11–00:22:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:22:23–00:22:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:22:37–00:22:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:22:47–00:22:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:22:51–00:22:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 00:23:08–00:23:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:23:20–00:23:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:23:36–00:23:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
into the minutes as well, but there's a few things that I would like to say in reference of this particular item because I want to make sure I'm on the correct page. And if I may, and then I'll
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:23:50–00:23:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:24:06–00:24:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:24:12–00:24:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Plan, was developed to identify and prioritize projects. Also, the plan was created in collaboration with scientists, economists, environmentalists, and multiple government agencies. It also conducted a detailed evaluation of septic to sewer impacts toon local surface waters,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:24:45–00:24:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:24:57–00:24:57 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:25:04–00:25:04 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:25:06–00:25:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
to the contrary, that the City shall be authorized to require an existing residential house, building, or property to discontinue or remove an existing property and functioning or failing septic ‸ system.
to assess all or portion of the City costs associated with the sewer line expansion project including but not limited to infrastructure and installation. The City has the right to reserve
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:26:01–00:26:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:26:18–00:26:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:26:29–00:26:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
brevard county florida creating a new section 22-5.2 of the city code authorizing the city council to require a property owner to discontinue and remove an existing functioning septic tank um or other existing functioning on-site sewage treatment or disposal system and connect to the City's sewer system in conjunction with the
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:26:50–00:26:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:26:58–00:26:59 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
that generally apply when existing residential houses, buildings, or properties with existing properly functioning septic tanks or other existing properly functioning on-site sewage treatment or disposal systems must connect to an available public sanitary sewer of the City, providing for the repeal of prior inconsistent ordinances and resolutions, incorporation into the Code, severability, and an effective date. This is also a public hearing item. I just want to bring to the Council's attention based on a conversation I have with the City Manager. The City Manager and staff are recommending a slight change to the ordinance with respect to page
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:27:47–00:27:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:27:49–00:27:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
subparagraph C. It talks about discontinuing and removing an existing functioning septic tank. Staff is proposing the language that states to discontinue and abandon or remove. So that's the only change that staff is um recommending. So again, it's a public hearing item. ‸ be happy to answer any questions.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:28:18–00:28:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:28:20–00:28:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:28:21–00:28:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
at the top page where it talks about on the framework road map very important that the City may establish an assessment methodology and payment structure which may include a lump sum payment installation plan or installment plan. excuse me
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:28:37–00:28:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:28:47–00:28:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:28:52–00:28:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:28:54–00:29:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:29:17–00:29:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
we do that? Because I have something I would like to. Yeah, okay. Okay, okay. um Well, I would like to um move to remove Section F from the ordinance. um and
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:30:09–00:30:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:30:10–00:30:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:30:10–00:30:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:30:11–00:30:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:30:15–00:30:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:30:39–00:30:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I would ask that you take this in consideration, please, ma'am, please, sir. Again, this is just a framework, the roadmap for connection from septic to sewer, but not specifically speaking about any one particular project. Thank you. All right. First on the list will be Greg
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:31:22–00:31:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:31:33]▶ PlaySpeaker 14 (introduced as “Greg Henry” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:31:33–00:31:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:31:35]▶ PlaySpeaker 14 (introduced as “Greg Henry” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
Again, my name's Greg Henry. I live at [address]. um A lot of what I was going to talk about has been discussed here, one of the ‸ issues being the uh conflict of interest issue. i
[00:31:47]▶ PlaySpeaker 14 (introduced as “Greg Henry” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[00:31:58]▶ PlaySpeaker 14 (introduced as “Greg Henry” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
uh My second point, I guess, or question item that I wanted to bring up was was again in Section F. Now, I think what I just heard is there's a recommendation to delete Section F. And does that mean the board is just going to consider it or is it deleted? I'm not sure. i Let me speak about it just real briefly. So my concern with F is F states that the city has the right to assess potentially all, it could be or less, but certainly potentially all of the city's subsequent expansion costs to affected property owners benefiting, quote unquote, from the project. Now, I believe a number of property owners in areas J and K agree that converting homes adjacent to the Indian River from septic to sewer is beneficial to the health of the Indian River Lagoon. I certainly am one of them. However,
[00:32:49]▶ PlaySpeaker 14 (introduced as “Greg Henry” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:32:55–00:33:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:33:00]▶ PlaySpeaker 14 (introduced as “Greg Henry” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
Quite the opposite when it comes to impacts to property because of the conversion and unknown costs that have yet to been totally defined. So I would then
[00:33:10]▶ PlaySpeaker 14 (introduced as “Greg Henry” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:33:10–00:33:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:33:10]▶ PlaySpeaker 14 (introduced as “Greg Henry” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
I would submit that therefore the project beneficiaries in this case, when you have this situation, are all Brevard County rep residents as well as specifically COCO residents in this case, not just J and K. um In summary, of course, I just mentioned we'll not discuss the uh the conflict of interest the ordinance uh that the con the excuse me
[00:33:37]▶ PlaySpeaker 14 (introduced as “Greg Henry” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:33:37–00:33:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:33:41]▶ PlaySpeaker 14 (introduced as “Greg Henry” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
to exclude affected property owners from infrastructure installation and related costs. Just installation and related infrastructure, installation and related infrastructure costs when the purpose of the sewer system expansion is to safeguard general public health and to achieve general environment protections and improvements. Those are my words, but something to that effect. In other words, I'm i'm on my concept of everybody benefits from this, just not people on project jk And the last one ‸ I'll go ahead and yield because it looks like well, assuming it is it is made, but there was a discussion about deleting uh the requirement. uh I believe a change has been proposed to delete the removal of on-site septic tank or other sewerage disposal system after disconnection. I would just add to that, yes, in fact, absolutely, because there's absolutely no incentive for a property owner who is now paying the monthly sewer bill to go back and reconnect to an old system. So it's a waste of money.
[00:34:45]▶ PlaySpeaker 14 (introduced as “Greg Henry” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:34:45–00:34:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:34:58–00:35:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
we live, my husband and I live just west of Indian River Drive and east of US-1. We currently do not have sewer service, but are hoping at some point that we will be offered that service because we sure do not want the advanced septic system. So it is possible that a main line could reach our area.
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); a language review questioned the wording · 00:35:38–00:35:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:35:43–00:35:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:35:59–00:36:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:36:00–00:36:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:36:08–00:36:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:36:14–00:36:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:36:39–00:36:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the full ‸ financial risk? What message does that send to people like me and my husband? That will be next to be required to pay for any over cost? I'm asking you to reconsider the precedent you're setting. I hope you'll protect all of us from future burdens like this by revisiting the decision
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:37:10–00:37:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:37:27–00:37:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
um if you would, if you could, could you please tell me which one specifically whenever you get the opportunity the opportunity to do your due diligence?
Because i I'm not aware of it, and I've done my research, but I would like to find out, because someone came up here ‸ made a broad statement previously about connection with the
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:38:16–00:38:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:38:21–00:38:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:38:51–00:38:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:39:41–00:39:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And in that 23 years, thank you. In that 23 years, I was often required to figure out how to make it work without like following the exact guidelines. That were set in front of us. And in doing that, I like
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:39:44–00:40:06 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
So the only thing I can really do is add that I don't think that it is a just proposition to say, okay, somebody has an advanced septic, they're doing the right thing, and they got it before the 2030 deadline, and that person is now being required to not only hook up to sewer, but then remove the sewer in its entirety from their yard.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:41:01–00:41:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
and do the responsible thing, and now we have to do even more money just to make this meet or make spec, it seems to me like it's a punishment for trying to do the right thing.
as leaders ‸ do the right thing. Because I believe in, in God. And I know that each and every one of you is appointed to your duties. And you wouldn't be here if it was not in God's will.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:42:02–00:42:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:42:21–00:42:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Like somebody put in advanced septic four years ago. Why should they be required to be connected to a sewer line? So what if that language was inside of the ordinance where, if it's possible, I don't, I don't know if the financing on the grants make this possible. And now I'm just asking the general question. If that language is in there saying, hey, look, if you, if you install a permitted advanced septic system within the last X amount of years, by the end of the project, if we go forward, would you think that would be a
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:43:15–00:43:15 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
I absolutely think that is, would be a great foundation because we are all situated in a precarious place right at the edge of the water and moving back from it. And we have paths or the street is lined with coquina.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:44:16–00:44:17 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
we first began this process. And so that's something that I think you said that, and also I got a few emails kind of going towards the advanced septic. But, but you see, the
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:44:37–00:44:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
what, what someone would like for their particular home or their area. Right. So you got someone says that septic, let's go. And someone else says, no, we must connect to sewer.
could do advanced septic and the grant is absolutely going to cover everything. Or you can do sewer and there may be some more stuff involved. I think more ‸ people would be, they would be supportive of the advanced septic over the, over the sewer. Okay.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:45:33–00:45:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:45:42–00:45:42 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:45:51–00:45:51 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
um, available, uh, public sewer system, the local government can mandate connection and there's ample legal authority for that mandating connection. Okay. It's all contingent upon whether or not the, the, the public sewer system is, is available under the guidelines under the state.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up; a language review questioned the wording · 00:46:41–00:46:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:18–00:47:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
available. Okay. So the state law does not require local governments to do that, at least yet. But the local government can choose to have a sewer mandate policy. And that's why we're here discussing this ordinance, because the city of
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:43–00:47:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
‸ for a long period of time, has never had a mandatory hookup to the city's sewer system. And, um you know, for a variety of reasons, I presume. um Part is it's it's very, um you know you know, troubling to property owners that have septic systems, right? To have to be, you know, to abandon or remove them and connect to the sewer system. But the law is very clear. it's There's ample authority for a local government to mandate ‸ connection to a public
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:48:18–00:48:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
In other words, you could fill it in with dirt if you have a septic system in your in your property or on your property. ‸ Instead of removing it, yeah so you can fill it in with dirt, sand, whatever the criteria may be. All right. um Councilman
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:49:10–00:49:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yes. uh To respond to your comments, which um I completely understand, as a property owner, you want to have uh ‸ say into which option you choose, which works best for you. um I will go back to what Councilman
Flag: the machine readings disagree here; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:49:27–00:49:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:49:37–00:49:37 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:50:03–00:50:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So we're trying to avoid that as well, move into a more futuristic style of managing our septic or sewage. And that's why I'm in favor of the sewage. So I completely understand, uh uh as stated, the intentions, at least in my understanding, ‸ intentions of the council is not to be punitive to the homeowners. We're just trying to move the city forward in a better way of managing our sewer systems
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:50:54–00:50:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:51:04–00:51:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So I hope that clears up a little of the misunderstanding. But I definitely understand ‸ the concern of wanting to, you know, choose what works best for you. So.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:51:29–00:51:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the machine readings disagree here; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:51:41–00:51:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:51:47–00:51:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:51:56–00:51:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
but I know that they've had significant uh participation across the board. I mean, that that's really all I know at this point. I've asked a few, and, you know,
books, their mandatory connection has been on the books for years, and they are primarily a sewer utility, meaning about 99 of their revenue comes from sewer, and
uh So scale wise so you understand, uh but I think they've had uh you know a different response, and they have a different path, because they are a sewer generating revenue uh utility. um But I believe they've had a high percentage, and I think we would want to achieve the highest percentage. The language in the in the general contract from Save
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:52:52–00:52:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
‸ otherwise the clawback provision comes back, which means we need to pay back any of the Save Our Indian dollars that we got for people who don't connect.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:53:25–00:53:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:53:32–00:53:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:53:38–00:53:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:53:55–00:53:55 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
million that we were estimating to deal with and hopefully be more than what we need. So if if the cost to do the septic is 2 million on everybody's in, then there's no cost. If it is over, then there's things to talk about. And that's why that ordinance needs to be identified and at least adopted so we can even qualify for the money and then be implemented somewhere probably further down the line. will be brought back to council once we get closer to actually implementing the project, meaning we've got funding lined up. We've got everything that we need. And now we get those bids in and now we can see how close we are. And if we're close, we might be in great shape. If it's really far away, maybe council chooses to go a different direction. But you'll have that option, at least based on the way I've read this ordinance, because it's the way it's been structured
i thinkI think nobody is saying at least, you know, these last few council meetings, I think we are talking about putting the framework together so we can make the choice at the right time. We're not making that choice tonight about whether it's being spent or not or being implemented or not. We are simply identifying that the ordinance needs to be in place for us to even begin to qualify for DEP and other grants that are floating around there and make us more competitive in which to receive those grants. Thank
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:56:10–00:56:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
yeah so um the private side we applied for uh a 319 dep grant uh for three million total 1.2 being pledged by the city via Save Our Indian River Lagoon, assuming we get that. And that money's been set aside for us. So there isn't any reason why we wouldn't think we wouldn't have that to use. And then the other 1.8 would be their match so the
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:56:41–00:56:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:56:48–00:56:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
side that leaves 5.5 roughly and if i go for a 50 50 match for the other grant, for the pub for the public infrastructure, that's going to put us at 11 million. Rough numbers.
and And I don't want to put you on a spot on this to give you a number, but do we I know we had at one point an estimated number from house to connection. Was that like between
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:57:12–00:57:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
It was high. And I think, uh you know, again, I did a very quick estimate and a just a high level estimate because i at the time, and that was just a couple years ago, but I wanted it to be high so that we have money to use. I don't want to come short. I don't want to leave it thin. I would rather estimate high. And if you remember, I had three sections because a
large setbacks, is pretty straightforward. ‸ But when you've got a retaining wall, and you've got a pool, and you got to go around the side, and you got trees in the way, and and all the other things that I saw on the folks who are in the very north end, some of those folks may end up being below the road. So there may be a small replacement of a pump in order to lift probably what they're lifting up to a septic system, which is the drain field up at the edge of the road because their house is down on the, literally at the water's edge. It would be the same thing. We'd want to lift that water into the sewer system so it can then drain on the gravity system. So
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:58:36–00:58:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:58:38–00:58:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:58:42–00:58:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:58:45–00:58:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:58:56–00:58:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
for almost 85 years in a family home that was passed ‸ down through my... through the different generations. I've retired like many of our neighbors. We don't live in mansions and we don't have lots of extra money to live, to turn into this, this sewer. And I say that
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:59:18–00:59:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:59:28–00:59:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:59:39–00:59:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:59:45–00:59:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:59:48–00:59:48 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:00:01–01:00:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:00:15–01:00:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
from the city. pardon Continue sir. ‸ Why are we being treated differently? Is it because we live on the Indian River Drive and assumed to be wealthy? Many of us and not. We're retired families and working people. This isn't right. The city council should rescind the vote. We desire the same... respect that every other resident
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:00:45–01:01:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:01:20–01:01:20 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:01:40–01:01:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:01:52–01:01:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Hi. One thing I'd like to start with mentioning, is starting my prepared mark, was in 2022 when we talked about it. I believe it was released to from the city and
grants for the anaerobic systems, just as a point, instead of going through the city. So we just need to check that. My one concern, of okay, we'll discuss that, but my one concern was that um they say that this is a framework. You've said this numerous times. So ‸ I've got to save a series of questions and then you guys can you know address my concerns. If it's a framework, then is it binding? And if it's
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:02:41–01:02:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:02:46–01:02:46 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:02:48–01:02:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
it really a framework? um ‸ The other question is, why is the ordinance, because he's referring to, you know we have to address it in 2030, but then if you look at
if the sewer line is not available. so you can still have that in 2030 um according to sb 1632 and executive order 2306. And I totally agree with the gentleman. If they have done the right thing and put the septic system or in already, they should not be penalized and have to pay more to keep the same services they have now.
citizens? It states, in isolated and extraordinarily hardship instances, the utility director may exempt owners of a property from a mandatory city connection required here within ‸ upon finding that the connection to the city sewer is not feasible. And does not affect adversely affect the public. But new words have been added. So
matter if it's going to bankrupt you, if you can't afford it, if your system's too hard. Somehow you're going to have to pay the money and you there's no hardship. There's no excuse. um So that's basically, oh and if the city, basically in your website, you said in 2026, the resolution will come before the city for approval of assessment. How can you have an assessment in 2026 where the project is not started? And then if you get a cost over one in 2027, are you going to come back and assess this again? Anyway, thank you. Those were my comments.
put it in place. That may be 2026, that may be 2029. And so um so the assessment occurs after all costs are known. um The, what were your other questions, ma'am?
I think on, I think on page six, the ability of the utilities director to the to grant hardship actually speaks to the uh the change in the statute there. So, so I don't, you know, if if the sewer line is available, Florida statute requires you to hook up. And so I don't think he can exempt anybody out from that. um And so
read at first was still in there. And then there was a additional cause that added a separate stipula stipulation for the mandatory connection. So if that's true, then the first one should be stricken.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:06:25–01:06:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the existing city code, there is a mechanism where the utilities director can allow a property owner to continue using a functioning septic system. So that's existing policy. Now, some updates were made, the 22-5, um for just update purposes. However, the city council directed that there'd be a mechanism to mandate sewer hookup in those circumstances where the city's going to have a public city sewer line expansion so a separate section of the code is being proposed 22-5.2 to address those project by project cases,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:07:22–01:07:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
other projects on a case by case basis where if the city council initiates those projects, the city mandates the connection to the city sewer system. So there was never any direction from the city council to citywide make mandatory sewer hookups um required for existing septic tanks. So, I mean, obviously the city could, if ‸ city council, if it wanted to, make the entire city subject to a mandatory sewer hookup. um But
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:08:07–01:08:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
that is not what um the council directed, and it's not consistent with long-standing existing policy regarding existing um functioning septic systems. So there, yeah, indeed, there are two
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:08:24–01:08:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
specific classes, for lack of ‸ better term, using, I think, your language language, but, um you know in order to pursue um grant funding, for example, with
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:08:38–01:08:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:09:03–01:09:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:09:20–01:09:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
that you know under the new proposed section 22-5, it it involves a a a new sewer line project. But at the time that project is is identified, the city council has to um describe the project area. And it's the project area that will be required to hook up as part of the project. And, you know, I i
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:10:07–01:10:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
of grant funding based on the reduction of nitrogen that will be added that's supposedly going to be removed on an annual basis from the Indian River Lagoon. So when and if the city council decides to describe a project area like that's in the
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:10:32–01:10:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the machine readings disagree here; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:10:45–01:10:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
area, because it's going to be a proportionate reduction in grant funding. So, you know, that that's not the issue before the council tonight, but I just wanted to raise it. And that's why this framework gives the city council the discretion and leeway at a later date when that project is moving forward to address all of these complex issues.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:11:11–01:11:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
is lays out a a binding process, but it's a process. It's not mandating or requiring any specific action of the council other than, here's a framework by which these decisions can be made and finalized.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:11:41–01:11:41 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:11:42–01:11:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:11:49–01:11:49 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
piggyback off what some of the others have said. Listen, if I were to just sum up what's happening here um on a human basis, we're talking about the difference between being forced into a single solution with
energy from all of us. Nobody wants to be forced into a situation. We all have very different, I guess, parameters around what's happening on our on our on our property. So we need a choice. Now, what's interesting is if you look at the House bill, there is a choice built into that. So I guess the question I will leave for ‸ this council, are you going to let the restrictive language in a grant
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); a language review questioned the wording · 01:13:06–01:13:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
process, not just now, on being forced into single solution with prohibited risk. You're just going to get trouble all the way through this process. You can vote on this ordinance, but I'm telling you, we're not
I don't think you would either if you were boxed into a corner. The second point I want to make a little bit more personal to piggyback on what Mr. Wood said, I do have an advanced septic system. It's four years worth, it's working extremely well, it's doing its job, and it's not a big deal. And to respond to
on, you know, there's been pushback, every one of the pushbacks I've heard from residents, it's because they don't own it, and they don't, they they're missing some facts. When we sit down with the facts, that sort of viewpoint changes. So I want to just bring that up. There's you know just fact base that needs to be done on these advanced septics. So like I said, question before you, are you going to let the restricted language of grants force supersede residents right to choose? So that's all I'm going to say on my own behalf.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:14:25–01:14:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:14:46–01:14:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
he asked me to read this out. So it'll be a straight reading out if that's okay. So with regard to the ordinance voted on last month regarding septic to sewer conversions, and in particular, the section that allows the city to pass on
benefit to affected homeowners. ‸ One, is it not having our properties disrupted, excavated, and otherwise damaged or reconfigured? Two, is it not having the privilege of having to pay additional utility charges going forward? Or three,
There is no evidence of this. Study after study shows that property values for homes with septic are at least equal, if not higher, in value to comparable homes in sewer systems. The above points are clearly not direct and special benefits that affected homeowners will receive, but instead are detriments. And they truly are. The above points, let's see. um The benefit from converting septic to sewer is the same for all ratepayers, residents and businesses alike.
its part to help restore water quality to the IRL, which will help to preserve, restore the economic, environmental, and quality of life attributes that the IRL has historically provided to these ratepayers This is an equal benefit to all and not just to affected homeowners. Therefore, any cost overrun justified justified by the city should be equally distributed among all ratepayers in the city If the city can't explain and demonstrate a quote unquote direct and special benefit to affected homeowners, then the city should modify its position and change the language in the ordinance to read the justified ‸ cost overruns may be passed on to all ratepayers who are the true beneficiaries of septic to sewer conversion projects. Anything less would ‸ be unethical.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:17:36–01:17:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:17:43–01:17:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:18:00–01:18:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
reasonable and was equal to what it would what my system cost, I think there is reason to look at that. But the way it's worded right now, I would choose advanced septic any day. It's working extremely well. I'm not having any problems. So hopefully that answers your question. Yeah,
you're spot on, ma'am. That's what I'm saying. Advanced septic system. And the funding is there for the advanced septic system. Is that correct, Mr. Walsh? Yes, sir.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:18:49–01:18:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:19:01–01:19:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:19:23–01:19:24 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:19:26–01:19:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:19:38–01:19:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:19:47–01:19:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
make any sense. It's super risky. So that's the first point. And then I would, um from what was said before on the lack of understanding of advanced septic,
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:20:23–01:20:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
to the community in regards to the facts. um Also, I just, I would ask everyone to just take a look back in in time, how we got to where we are today. How many no votes, how many times, you know, moving from septic to sewer was, that vote came and failed.
my thought process is, I thought we were all in favor of this project. um That's why I was so, I'm still passionate for it. Even if, you know, things were to happen where this this situation reverts to another option, um such as advanced septic. But from what I'm getting, is it's almost like trying to help someone that don't want to be helped at this point. um and, so, uh you know, if we were to go back, I can almost guarantee we won't get the votes. Like I said, it was, it was a hard fight to get to where we are now. And it seems like from what I'm hearing from the residents and you all, you have to deal with this. This is your home. This is your community. So what you, how you guys feel is it matters. And, uh
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:22:24–01:22:24 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
um I'll go ahead and say I would respect that. um uh It just sucks. ‸ You know, we're trying to move forward um and it's not getting through that in order to receive the funding to prevent residents from having to put the bill.
I just want to piggyback off of what uh you said. I know that when we voted this last time, most of the people who were here were in favor of uh septic to sewer. uh They just did not want the unknown costs tonight. We seem to have a lot of the the advanced septic people. But I do think uh it has seemed to be much more of the people who want septic to sewer and don't want the cost. And I'm hoping that we can address that later. But um
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:23:39–01:23:39 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
That was one of the two things consistently I've been talked to about. So that is uh a board of the next point of board. That's a step in the right direction. And uh so again, we need to obviously keep hearing from everybody, but we'll discuss more of this later. Bill
okay Thank you, ‸ Mr. Hearns and Mr. Blake, I appreciate you all talking about the river and how it used to be. That's good historical stuff for us to know. ‸ The thing I would ask, you know, if this was a science fair project, I don't think we'd get a really good grade on it. Because we didn't start out by measuring the level of nitrogen in the river. We never did define what we want the level of nitrogen to be. And I live on the river, and
see a horseshoe crab, I see grass in the river, and that's good. So whatever we're doing is making incremental uh improvement in the river. uh I also want to say that I would, uh ‸ more skilled in uh computers, I would have sent each of y'all the email that many of y'all got from uh Linda Dolphin and from uh Ross Clark. I concur with the points they made. The other questions I would ask uh are ones that I've asked before. And that is, what everybody what is everybody else on the lagoon doing to solve this problem? I mean, we, you know, Little
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:26:01–01:26:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
is not very, a big percentage of what stretches all the way down south and up north past Titusville. The other question that I will have, I was reading the uh the proposed ordinance on page
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:26:18–01:26:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:26:20–01:26:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
paragraph L, says, Existing residential houses, buildings, or properties with existing properly functioning septic tanks, or other existing properly functioning on-site sewage treatment of ‸ disposal system, shall not be required to connect to this ‸ or use the city's sewer system.
authorizing advanced septic, or perhaps ‸ requiring people that have existing septic systems to periodically, at their own expense, have those tanks pumped.
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:27:25–01:27:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:27:27–01:27:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:27:39–01:27:40 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:28:10–01:28:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:28:11–01:28:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
here. Raise your hand, please. Thank you kindly ma'am. Yes, ma'am.
[01:28:16]▶ PlaySpeaker 19 (introduced as “Tank Sherman” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Yes, Mr. Mayor, Council members and uh City Manager. My name is Tank Sherman. My wife and I have lived on Indian River in the affected area for the past five years
[01:28:26]▶ PlaySpeaker 19 (introduced as “Tank Sherman” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:28:43–01:28:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:28:50]▶ PlaySpeaker 19 (introduced as “Tank Sherman” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
And now we have one. We had to have it moved because the city's ordinance was not compatible with my wishes. It was above ground. So things have changed. But that's part of the history of where I, I guess I'm coming from. But I do want to applaud this council because ‸ you are addressing this problem. I first heard about this in 1996, which was 29 years ago. So you've been kicking it down the road, tabling us. Okay. So now Ii respect that you're finally going to do something about this problem. And I know it's a very difficult one.
[01:29:28]▶ PlaySpeaker 19 (introduced as “Tank Sherman” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 01:29:28–01:29:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:29:43]▶ PlaySpeaker 19 (introduced as “Tank Sherman” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
okay however
[01:29:45]▶ PlaySpeaker 19 (introduced as “Tank Sherman” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:29:45–01:29:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:29:48]▶ PlaySpeaker 19 (introduced as “Tank Sherman” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
because it states that those who benefit from the project contribute their fair share and that is not being done um the 88
[01:29:56]▶ PlaySpeaker 19 (introduced as “Tank Sherman” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Machine re-recognized
homeowners
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:29:56–01:29:57 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[01:29:57]▶ PlaySpeaker 19 (introduced as “Tank Sherman” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
if they were to accept an overrun of one million dollars that would be eleven thousand three hundred and sixty three dollars a piece that doesn't include the connecting which i don't have a problem with uh and
[01:30:10]▶ PlaySpeaker 19 (introduced as “Tank Sherman” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:30:35–01:30:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:30:38]▶ PlaySpeaker 19 (introduced as “Tank Sherman” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
from lots of people. They should all have to pay. And um anyway, um I think um I personally accept responsibility for connecting. And I think it's a wonderful idea. It's way beyond time to do that. But uh that's uh I just think all who benefit should pay their share. Thank you.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:31:03–01:31:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:31:10–01:31:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:31:15–01:31:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:31:20]▶ PlaySpeaker 20 (introduced as “Jeannie Day” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
My name is Jeannie Day, and I live on [address]. We're all here tonight to ask you to modify the proposed city ordinance section 22-5 code amendment regarding septic to sewer connection. I would be directly impacted by this ordinance. We love the Indian River Lagoon so much that we live on it. But
[01:31:42]▶ PlaySpeaker 20 (introduced as “Jeannie Day” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:31:42–01:31:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:31:44]▶ PlaySpeaker 20 (introduced as “Jeannie Day” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
The Indian River Lagoon is not your constituent. I voted for you, and I'm your constituent. You have an obligation to me and I to you. And I think we should strive together for a win-win solution. Section F of this amended ordinance stipulates that the city may pass on all a part of the cost overruns. This is like the city saying that I have to buy a car. It's going to give me down payment. It doesn't know how much the car is going to cost, but I got to buy it anyway. It would be ridiculous for any homeowner to agree to that. This section F is not necessary to bid this project or proceed. That is not a win-win situation. I ask that the section F be struck. Secondly, section C requires the homeowner to remove his septic tank. This is unnecessary and punitive, not a win-win solution. We ask that the language be changed to abandon septic tank. And finally,
[01:32:45]▶ PlaySpeaker 20 (introduced as “Jeannie Day” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:32:45–01:32:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:32:48]▶ PlaySpeaker 20 (introduced as “Jeannie Day” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
septic to sewer timeline on its website.
[01:32:50]▶ PlaySpeaker 20 (introduced as “Jeannie Day” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:32:50–01:32:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:32:57]▶ PlaySpeaker 20 (introduced as “Jeannie Day” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
a special assessment to make the homeowners pay for any cost overruns of this project. It's it's on the official website. This can only mean that the city knows that they cannot fully fund this project we have no choice but to oppose this. This is not a win-win solution. The best way as I see it is to do the project within the budget that we have.
[01:33:22]▶ PlaySpeaker 20 (introduced as “Jeannie Day” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:33:22–01:33:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:33:31]▶ PlaySpeaker 20 (introduced as “Jeannie Day” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
excess to the homeowners. That is the win-win solution. Thank you very much and my
[01:33:37]▶ PlaySpeaker 20 (introduced as “Jeannie Day” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 01:33:37–01:33:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:34:16–01:34:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
so linda wanted to share the contents of an email that she had sent to council uh She wanted to share some important facts about the Cocoa property tax contributions made by just 87 homeowners along North Indian River Drive and the
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:34:42–01:34:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:34:51–01:34:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:34:56–01:35:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Meanwhile, more than 3100 Cocoa properties pay less than 300 per year in property taxes. This all raises serious questions of fairness, especially as this small group is
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:35:21–01:35:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
for a public sewer project that benefits the broader community and provides an asset to the city. I hope you will take this into consideration as you review the city's policies around assessments and funding responsibility and
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:36:15–01:36:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Britain to people in the 13 colonies. Marked by clear and persuasive prose, Paine collected various moral and political arguments to encourage common people in the colonies to fight for egalitarian government.
The school of thought within political philosophy that builds on the concept of social equity and the idea that all humans are equal in fundamental worth or moral status? I thought, we're not doing that. That's not common sense. We're
that are already, to Linda's point, already paying four times the average property tax. We are already paying our fair share and more. It's ‸ not common sense to target us. A framework that allows it is
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:37:11–01:37:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:37:44–01:37:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
if they live on a structured income, how do you accommodate them? And when we have the system, an advanced septic system that addresses the concerns of it-
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:38:14–01:38:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
We have the adequate funding to cover that. And we have growth in the Indian River. We have Mother Nature returning to its natural form. It is happening in
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:38:27–01:38:27 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:38:31–01:38:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
we hung out together. So that's my thing, Mr. Riggs, sir. I want to paint you the entire picture. So how do I talk to someone over there living in the housing authority, come and ask me,
So we move forward. We get, we get the real numbers on the project as opposed to- Oops, try not to lean on this. We need to move forward on the project. We need to get the real numbers. We need to understand what that is. We don't know that today, but we don't need to target 87 homeowners to move forward.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:39:11–01:39:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:39:30–01:39:30 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
advanced septic. Oh, okay. Okay. Well, I'll grant that it's better than what we have. Oh, I'll grant that I have a septic system that is ‸ woefully out of date and needs to be replaced.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:40:01–01:40:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:40:23–01:40:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:40:30]▶ PlaySpeaker 22 (introduced as “Astrid Hurd” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
city ordinance. First, I want to point out that the exemptions clause is way too ‸ vague. It does not stipulate even large care categories of exemption types. And I would want to amend this clause to be a little more specific. Secondly, Section C requires the homeowner to remove the septic tank. This is unnecessary. We ask that the language be changed to abandon the septic tank, not remove. So please make this change to Section C. And then finally, Section F of the amended ordinance stipulates that the city may pass on all or part of the cost overruns for a septic sewer project to the homeowners. This includes the placement of the actual sewer pipe. It would be ridiculous for any homeowner to agree to that. This new Section F is not necessary to bid the project or proceed. Please delete it. ‸ Finally,
[01:41:34]▶ PlaySpeaker 22 (introduced as “Astrid Hurd” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:41:34–01:41:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:41:39]▶ PlaySpeaker 22 (introduced as “Astrid Hurd” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
website. The timeline states that in 2026, the city will have a resolution for a special assessment to make the homeowners pay for any cost overruns of the project. It is on the official website. This can only mean the city knows they cannot totally fund this project. We have no choice but to oppose ‸ this suggestion.
[01:42:03]▶ PlaySpeaker 22 (introduced as “Astrid Hurd” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:42:03–01:42:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:42:05]▶ PlaySpeaker 22 (introduced as “Astrid Hurd” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Machine re-recognized
budgets
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:42:05–01:42:05 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[01:42:05]▶ PlaySpeaker 22 (introduced as “Astrid Hurd” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
that we have. Just do pieces at a time. And lastly, is my big question. If this is a citywide ordinance, why is notification by a letter from, I believe it was Joe Walsh, only to the
[01:42:23]▶ PlaySpeaker 22 (introduced as “Astrid Hurd” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:42:23–01:42:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:42:28]▶ PlaySpeaker 22 (introduced as “Astrid Hurd” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
to everybody in the city? So that's about all I have. The main thing is that section F really needs to be removed. I have no problem with going to
[01:42:44]▶ PlaySpeaker 22 (introduced as “Astrid Hurd” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:42:44–01:42:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:42:50]▶ PlaySpeaker 22 (introduced as “Astrid Hurd” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
with the risk and overruns of the project. Thank you.
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:43:34–01:43:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:43:42]▶ PlaySpeaker 23 (introduced as “Michael Biggs” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
cost overruns to a small group of individuals, I found it unconscionable and I never thought that it would be true. As I'm hearing it tonight for the first time, I'm baffled and amazed that it is. The one good thing I heard tonight, which I was also concerned about,
[01:44:01]▶ PlaySpeaker 23 (introduced as “Michael Biggs” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:44:01–01:44:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:44:04]▶ PlaySpeaker 23 (introduced as “Michael Biggs” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
But if we were required to move to the sewer system, ‸ we'd have to remove that functioning tank when it would be much more cost effective and ecologically sound to fill that tank. So if there is some movement on the council tonight, I appreciate that. My wife and I are both retired. I'm 67 years old. Our number one cost, single cost per year, is my property tax.
[01:44:37]▶ PlaySpeaker 23 (introduced as “Michael Biggs” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:44:37–01:44:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:44:42]▶ PlaySpeaker 23 (introduced as “Michael Biggs” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
willing to spread those costs among the city. I'm very concerned about that because the city benefits from the Indian River Lagoon. And I think any cost overruns should be absorbed by all of the citizens of this city. That's
[01:45:01]▶ PlaySpeaker 23 (introduced as “Michael Biggs” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 01:45:01–01:45:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:45:12–01:45:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:45:23–01:45:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:45:42–01:45:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Indian River Drive. And I want to thank you, Mayor Blake, for voting against this monstrosity of this onious ruling against all of us. You have a great attorney, Anthony. But it's all against us.
So I think without telling us how much it's going to cost, when all this is going to happen, I'm very stressed out about it. I rarely get very stressed. Condolences on your father. Thank you, ma'am.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:46:20–01:46:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:46:28–01:46:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:46:56–01:47:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:47:05–01:47:05 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Everything has been kind of covered. Not everything. I just like to say what I already wrote. There's a couple of different things I'd like ‸ to suggest. Obviously, my name is Xavier.
I want to emphasize that many homeowners, including myself, were not fully aware of the specific financial impacts and details of this ordinance before it was adopted. We all use the Indian River Lagoon, which everyone said. We believe the whole community
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:48:07–01:48:08 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:48:17–01:48:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
city funds, or external resources secured by the city. Number two on F. You guys already discussed. This section allows the city to access all over a portion of project costs to homeowners. I ask that it will be amended to ensure homeowner costs are capped at a fair share after all secure grant funding and city contributions are applied. And number E. This section imposes monthly readiness to serve fees and homeowners who cannot afford to connect on time. Please amend this section to prevent these changes until the city can secure enough funding to reduce the homeowner costs. Number four, hardship exemptions. This current ‸ hardship exemption does not include financial hardship. I request that this be expanded to include financial hardship as a valid reason for exemption, especially the older people that are under fixed income. Number five, regular public updates. This ordinance
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:49:29–01:49:30 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
not require consistent updates to homeowners or grant funding ‸ for project status. Please add a requirement for the quarterly or monthly public updates so homeowners are fully informed of what is going on. So I do have a question, Mayor. You kept mentioning. Actually, I didn't know Jack Walsh.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:49:46–01:49:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So are you suggesting that if we do have funding, that if we do change it, what would, what would happen to this ordinance? That's where I'm a little confused on everybody. Well, that's where I stand anyways.
And like I said, I understand we have to pass the ordinance to get grants, to get grants for the city of Cocoa at the end of the day, because anything,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:50:30–01:50:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:50:33–01:50:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:50:54–01:51:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:51:28–01:51:28 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:51:32–01:51:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I've gotten lots and lots of emails and wrestled with this extremely. Um, and again, I do, uh, applaud the change into, um, not having to remove, but you can abandon the, the tank current tanks there. Um, I would like to remove the section F from the ordinance and this is my rationale on this. Um, it's causing many, many
move forward. I know some of you today are, are not in favor, but many of you want to see it move forward. Um, and I will say with this hanging over, it's going to make homes harder to sell. And as a realtor, I
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:52:40–01:52:41 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
that because as in the condos, they're not moving right now because people are terrified of assessments with this assessment, hanging over these homes, people are not going to want to buy them because they don't know what they're going to have to pay down the line. So I feel it just makes sense at this point in time to remove this. It can be revisited later, but let's give the people their, um, some sense of, uh, assurance that we, the council are not going to hit them with these humongous things. I don't believe that will happen because every project that has been done and all up and down the river, even Merritt Island, they're making everybody convert from septic to sewer.
to get the grants, but we do not have to have that particular section in the language to move this forward. And I understand. Thank you. I am. I understand
road. You lose power, all kinds of things can go wrong with the advanced septic. You still have yearly costs with that. So to me, sewer just makes the most sense.
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:55:00–01:55:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:55:18–01:55:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Ultimately there needs to be a motion regarding the adoption of the ordinance. Okay. Okay. So ‸ if the council wants to propose changes to the ordinance, that'd be said it would be included as part of the, um, the motion. Okay.
can discuss the individual proposed changes, um, to see whether or not there's a consensus before ‸ motion is made. Okay. Okay. There seems to be a consensus regarding the adding the language about abandoned.
I don't, I didn't hear any council members object, but with respect to any other changes, just, you know, you would all have to, uh, debate that issue before, uh, making a
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 01:56:19–01:56:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:56:24–01:56:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:56:37–01:56:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:56:40–01:56:40 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 01:56:43–01:57:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
hook up. But I think the big objection was that they were going to have to pay or have their yard stuck up to have the old tanks come out. And I think that that will help mitigate that. Will everybody be happy? But I think majority will, um, if somebody doesn't want to, uh, to hook up, I don't know why they wouldn't because, uh, in the long run, it's, um, better for, for everybody. But, um, I mean, septic just, or sewer just makes the most sense. And, uh, so we have to make it mandatory that they have to hook up and that's what they've had to do all over Brevard County.
And I just think that is what we have to do. I know people that they're probably one or two who are not going to be happy and hopefully that, uh, we don't deal with that. But if we do, we'll have to do it on a case by case basis as far as the, the claw back on those particular homes. Okay. Thank you.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:58:45–01:58:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:59:03–01:59:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Sorry. The, the, the language that we propose to, to rephrase it to, uh, to discontinue and abandon are removed is applicable to M on page seven. Okay.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:59:32–01:59:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:59:39–01:59:40 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:59:51–01:59:51 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:00:02–02:00:03 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
read, let me read the language on page seven under subsection M and that language, uh, would be not withstanding any provision in this section to the contrary. The city council shall be authorized to require an existing residential house comma building our property to discontinue and abandon or remove. Yes. And then on, on page eight of nine under section C, uh, the effect, it says the affected property owner shall make the connection to the city sewer system and discontinue and abandon.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:01:12–02:01:13 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
because some of the grant sources may, may fund a removal. Um, and so just want to be as broad as possible if there are funding sources that would, uh, fund a removal.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:02:26–02:02:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:02:56–02:02:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:03:06–02:03:07 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:03:14–02:03:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:03:26–02:03:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:03:40–02:03:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
project after hearing tonight, what I've been hearing over the past few weeks emails, I've been, you know, paying attention. Um, my request would be to, uh, resend your vote and, uh, to amend this whole ordinance to, uh, reflect the option for advanced septic.
I will amend my vote to that. I would love to have the advanced septic system. Yes, indeed. So, um, let me make sure I do this correctly with Robert rules of law.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:04:24–02:04:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:04:35–02:04:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:04:40–02:04:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
You mentioned Robert's rules. Yes. I don't think I heard a second to your motion as I understood your motion was to approve, um, the ordinance as written with the recommended changes presented by the city manager to include the word abandoned. Um, and on page seven, so paragraph M and page eight, so paragraph C, I did not hear a second to that motion. So that's not technically on the table. Now, Council.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:05:09–02:05:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
didn't know the timing was off there, so I didn't quite hear it. Now, if you second it, I mean, you've certainly, it's your prerogative if you want to second it.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:05:47–02:05:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:05:52–02:05:52 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 02:05:53–02:05:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:06:21–02:06:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
are doing that. Most of them want sewer. No, most of them want sewer. Tonight, there's a few more that want septic, but most want sewer. And over the last few weeks, most of them want sewer. Why in the ‸ world would you go back in time to septic that down the road is going to fail and have to, we're going to, it just makes no sense to me. The common sense thing to me is just, I'm ‸ absolutely floored. Absolutely floored. So I, I cannot believe it.
Yes, ma'am. Mr. Walsh. Sir. When we had the 88 homes, did we do a survey based on the 88 homes on how they felt about this advancement of septic disorder?
When we had gotten far enough along in the, in the engineering design, we did a presentation at the library and invited all the homeowners. I think we had 50 or so 55 or so homeowners come to look at the plans and ask questions. And during that we did a survey and asked the question that if there were a cost associated with the project, were people supportive and a good majority 42 or so of those 50 that were there said no. And that's kind of sort of what we're hearing. Overall, people are supportive and want to do the lagoon, but don't feel they should be responsible for, for the costs. So,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:08:05–02:08:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
uh, is there's a big, um, worry among citizens for ‸ the unknown. However, as it was stated for the advanced septic, that's something that we know that would be completely covered. Um, I've heard from multiple people tonight that we're in favor of it.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:09:28–02:09:28 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
it is what it is at this point. So is that a form of emotion? Cause if not, ‸ I will make a motion to approve the advancement of a septic system stated, and I'm looking for a second. Um, I need a second, but I have a second
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:09:51–02:09:51 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:09:57–02:10:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:10:09–02:10:09 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
ordinance. Because for now it's, they're not saying that they aren't willing to, if they had to pay a few dollars, but at this point they don't want an unwritten check out there.
And again, we do not think it's going to cost them anything. And even the city should have money in the game in this because it should not just be on the citizens. We should have put in here that it's either split between us and the citizens
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:11:17–02:11:17 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
‸ Mr. Walz, sir, Mr. Walz, sir, help me understand about a, a, uh, septic system about electricity. Is there something that help me understand that one?
‸ Yeah. So the, the advanced septic systems that, um, get the 65% or higher nitrogen removal, uh, they do require, um, aerobic digestion, which means it needs air. And so those systems have to have, you know, a small pump that pumps, you know, quarter inch type tube down into the septic system to allow the anaerobic bacteria to do the work and take out all the phosphorus and reduce those. Uh, nutrients so that it meets that criteria. So yeah, there is, um, there is an additional electrical cost that would be associated with that. You wouldn't necessarily have
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 02:12:15–02:12:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:12:26–02:12:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:12:31–02:12:32 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 02:12:35–02:12:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:12:59–02:13:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And sometimes, um, negotiation has to be made in some, uh, portion of the discussion. But now you say now that, um, well, we should have did a 50, 50 split or 40, 60 split, whatever it is. But that, that discussion has to be made instead of like, like, sometimes we
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:13:37–02:13:38 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
be able to read the room. And when we don't have certain votes, making that, making that argument would have been a perfect opportunity, just in my opinion, when, when the motion was on the table, what happens sometimes that ship sails.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:13:52–02:14:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:13:52–02:13:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:14:05–02:14:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:14:07–02:14:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
We have to live with the decision that we make. Either way that we go out of, out of 88 homes, 20 people may not like our decision. We may have, you're going to be somebody going, you're going to piss off. That's just part of what we do. We can't please everybody. Mm-hmm.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:14:44–02:14:44 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:14:54–02:14:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:14:59–02:15:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
They only last so long and then they overflow. So we have a hurricane and all those lovely advanced septic systems along Indian River Drive are overflowing. Now, how are we going to look?
don't think it necessarily overflows because you lose power. It doesn't treat it aerobically. The flow ‸ has to do with the volume of whatever you flush. So if you're flushing and flushing during hurricane and you would have to exceed the capacity of your tank during a hurricane, which I don't think would really normally happen, ever happen, but you wouldn't be getting the full treatment because you're not introducing new oxygen down into the tank.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:16:11–02:16:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:17:02–02:17:02 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
The consequences of not adopting the ordinance and the mandate essentially is a decision to go to advance septic because there's not a majority of the council that supports mandating on a project by project basis. The
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:17:50–02:17:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:18:27–02:18:28 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:18:47–02:18:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:18:58–02:19:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:19:03–02:19:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
to apply to sorrow directly for the 18 and for the water quality, I think, I think that the jurisdiction has to apply for the water quality. So the basic, my basic
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:19:31–02:19:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:19:52–02:19:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:19:58–02:19:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:20:01–02:20:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:20:08–02:20:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:20:10–02:20:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Well, that's the second reading of the ordinance was up for final adoption. It failed three to one. So that has consequences. That's what I was trying to get the city manager to explain, because he's best in the position to explain those consequences. And the consequences appear to be that, you know, that essentially means the city is going in a different direction on grant applications on the whole J&K project, rather than a sewer line expansion project that's going to become an advanced septic project. Right? I mean, those are the consequences. So, um, if that's the direction, I mean, that, that's, that's a different course of action.
line expansion grant funds, which may go in another direction under sorrow rules. And I can't speak to their rules, but that may be a potential consequence, ‸ which.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:21:52–02:21:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:22:03–02:22:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
sewer conversion. If you switch, there is $18,000 per lot for a conversion to advanced septic. The state has water quality grants for advanced septic. And I think that's a 50 50 match. And so 18 plus 18 is 36. Again, I'm not sure whether it's
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:22:38–02:22:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:22:49–02:22:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
The city applies to the state for the match. I'm looking at the state website and it says that for all water quality improvement grants discussed below eligible project proposals must be submitted by non state entities. Typically, this means local governments, universities
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:23:14–02:23:14 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:23:28–02:23:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:23:46–02:23:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yeah. Well, remember, we haven't actually executed that agreement. And so I, I think that they would ultimately go very quickly because those are in demand to releasing those and, and actually, uh, multiplying the 88 times the 18.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:24:10–02:24:11 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
homeowners have come and inquired about, Hey, I want to go to advanced septic. And we, they've had been turned away because they can't qualify for the 18,000. They can't even get that because they're already in the J and K area.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:24:26–02:24:26 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
it's a separate dollars, they have dollars for septic to sewer and they have dollars for advanced septic. So we'd have to release the dollars for septic ‸ or the septic to sewer and let, let the county know that we're opening it up for advanced septic.
but, um, I think the public has an opportunity, uh, to speak on this other motion. That's pending because you know, the consequences of that second motion that's on the floor is an official action. That's really going to undo previous actions of the council and go in a different direction. So you need to take public input on it. Thank you.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:25:14–02:25:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
which that, that the consequence of that is the mayor, the manager is going to have to work out all the forms with sorrel and stuff. It's, it's going to, it's going to result in a, in a release of the sewer line expansion funds. Okay. That's my understanding. So it's just a consequence of this, this motion that's on the floor.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:26:07–02:26:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:26:31–02:26:31 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:26:37–02:26:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
upgrade septic systems that are not feasible to connect to central sewer. Homeowner grants of up to 20,000. So I guess they changed that number are available for eligible homeowners to upgrade their conventional septic system to an advanced septic system.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:27:06–02:27:07 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
I ‸ wanted to ask Councilman, uh, her and, uh, both of you gentlemen down there. We know how ‸ the mayor feels back on the original motion for the septic to sewer.
the city also being responsible, uh, because when I took, asked to take out F, the vote did change, but then it was motioned without that. And then it got changed again. Um, if that was in there, is that something that you two would then be able to, would, would go along with?
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:28:05–02:28:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I mean, I think that there was, there were two things. I ‸ do believe the percentage. Um, I think the other project that we referenced the last meeting, um, I think that was Coco Hills or somewhere else. It had a 60 40 split on that one.
And I think it was a lot of talk about setting precedent on, um, charging residents and how much. And, and so that to me, that could be a discussion. Um, but also the other discussion was keeping F as it is. That was a, I know that's a deal breaker for you for sure. But, but that, I think that we all voted on that the last, um, meeting.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:29:06–02:29:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:29:13–02:29:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:29:29–02:29:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
there instead of all the homeowners being responsible, that it be in there as a 60 40 split with the city, uh, as a potential as a 60 40 split with the city. So the city has skin in the game in it as well, which has always been one of my things is that, you know, we should have had
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:30:06–02:30:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:30:15–02:30:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yep. I gotcha. And I was going to vote with F in there until I realized what it was doing to the homeowners. I got there in the uncertainty. So ‸ that's what I'm asking. And so I'm asking councilman Hearn would consider that as well.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:30:43–02:30:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:31:47–02:31:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:32:02–02:32:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Um, but again, she, she did clarify this 40% of the cost overrun or overruns, not of the total cost of the project, because I think the citizens wouldn't would
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 02:32:21–02:32:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 02:32:32–02:32:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:32:47–02:32:48 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:32:51–02:32:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:33:05–02:33:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I will remind everyone that the ordinance does not require that there be an assessment. It requires if they're going to, if the city council is going to pursue an assessment, then the methodology is going to have to be ‸ determined.
date. At a later date. And one speaker I think mentioned the phrase real numbers. I mean, you would need to know real numbers to kind of prepare the methodology to determine whether or not you want to assess in the first place. Third, just to remind everyone that even under the mandatory hookup section of the Florida statutes, it requires property owners to pay at their option. Right. I mean, that requires them to pay the connection fees.
after the initial notice is given regarding the mandatory connection. So, you know, um, that's kind of what was done on some of those other projects. Um, and anyway, so there's the skin in the game,
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:34:28–02:34:28 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:34:44–02:34:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
manager, which means F would stay in. Then a motion to reconsider would have to be, um, made and approved by majority vote of the, of the city council at this meeting to bring the ordinance back up as recommended by the manager.
As recommended by the manager is, is dead. You can't take up that recommendation absent approval of a motion to reconsider the ordinance as recommended by the manager.
unless there's a, a motion to reconsider the ordinance as recommended by the manager. Then you can take the ordinance back up. Otherwise you have to, you know, you need to vote, you need to vote down the, uh,
See you in 10 minutes. It is now. What time is it? Please turn from our recess to start the meeting. I need a second. Second. All right. Did you get the second Mrs. Um, Arsenal, ma'am, Madam city clerk?
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:37:47–02:37:47 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:38:15–02:38:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
um, last council meeting. Now, um, we can sit through another ordeal in reference to the, listening to the audience for advanced septic. We can do that. But if I get a unanimous consent to withdraw the current condition of advancement of septic and, and approve the recommendation by the city manager to change that wording
the septic tank itself. Um, and we fundamentally agree upon that. And I think that's a fair and equitable all the way across the board. I could be hardcore, but I'm not. So, um, I think, um, homeowners should have some skin in the game as well as everyone else. So what are the consensus from council that is willing to withdraw the current motion for advanced septic?
Per your rules, then that motion is withdrawn. And now the council, um, is free to consider a motion to reconsider the ordinance as recommended by the manager. ‸ That's your desire.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:40:13–02:40:13 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:40:15–02:40:16 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:40:18–02:40:18 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:40:28–02:40:28 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Okay. All right. We got everyone's agreement. So don't, don't, uh, do not. Do turn coat cause I'm counting you on your word, your word of integrity. Okay. We're good. Okay.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:40:55–02:40:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:40:56–02:41:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:41:03–02:41:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Now there was already unanimous consent to withdraw the other, other motion. Yes, sir. As I understand it, I think there's been a motion in the second on motion to reconsider. Yes.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:41:31–02:41:31 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:41:35–02:41:36 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:42:01–02:42:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:42:15–02:42:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:42:24–02:42:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:42:28–02:42:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:42:37–02:42:38 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:42:51–02:42:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:43:45–02:43:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yes, sir. The next item that we have, I would like to table this item. A lot of the individuals who came to speak on the item, we kind of, I'm not going to say ran them off, but it went a little bit longer than what was expected. And so I think it would be fair to just bring it to our next scheduled meeting.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:44:11–02:44:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:44:45–02:44:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:45:15–02:45:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
role. And, um, that's important for the health of the lagoon. The more we know about it, the more educated we are, the more we'll care for it. And the better its future will be. And ours too.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 02:45:36–02:46:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:46:13–02:46:14 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:46:34–02:46:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:46:39–02:46:40 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:46:46–02:46:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 02:47:38–02:47:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:48:00–02:48:00 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
and he looked at me and said we're getting that train station I said, yes, sir, we are. So, but this was part of our group. And then he was nice enough to give us a nighttime tour of the Capitol and there was nobody else in the Capitol we were in the Rotunda all by ourselves I've been in there before with a sea of people and to be in there just us was absolutely amazing. So, he very nice gentleman and working hard for us and then I was up there for the National Association I'm a NAR director and
and what an amazing two days that ‸ was and I look forward to part two I know it's in October unfortunately my husband ‸ are going on a cruise but so it'll be next April before I can do it but really good if ‸ every elected official should do this there were 37 of us in the in the class and I was I kept thinking where's all the rest of the local elected officials
as president of Florida League of Cities and it is a wonderful thing I've been sharing it all over the place so great job on that they said that was one of the things you wanted to do and so cities can put out on the web you know there's one place to search for government jobs and since everybody has a hard time finding them so anyway I wanted to give you kudos for that way to go thank
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:50:20–02:50:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:50:29–02:50:29 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:50:51–02:50:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:51:11–02:51:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 02:51:42–02:51:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:51:44–02:51:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 02:51:53–02:51:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:52:01–02:52:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
and it really encouraged I know me for sure that we do have people that ‸ interested I chose again today to table it because a lot of these individuals were here but you know it kind of ‸ maybe two and a half hours or three hours. And so there are a lot of interest from different organizations to host events,
to help the management with events, but they're not able as groups to maintain it constantly throughout the year. But it was a good meeting. And a lot of three or four of these individuals didn't even know that it was ‸ open. And so,‸ hey
Alex can I offer a suggestion on that which I when it comes up what about putting it out to lead Brevard as a project for them to look at because that would be I mean there I went through the program and as a project that might be something that would really give us some good direction
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:53:23–02:53:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the Green Gables and that was something similar so yeah I appreciate that thank you And this was just kind of in caveat to the discussion about the museums. so
so ‸ I really wanted to show this if we had this discussion today that we've been talking about possibilities for a while and again if you if you take the time to go online for Hannibal Square you will see that it's really similar to what the vision is so I just ‸ wanted to show ‸ that photo And that's it. Appreciate you. yes sir
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:54:41–02:54:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:54:49–02:55:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:55:32–02:55:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
we have got to focus on our corridors. Because if you drive down a very blighted street like that, or you drive down 520 and it's very blighted from Fisk, going down toward the village, that does not give a good impression. We can do better than that. So I'm really pushing that we invest some resources there. Also, I would like to see the utilities advisory board. I'd like that to be on the agenda, the coming agenda.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:56:21–02:56:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
It's, and citizen input and that kind of transparency and opportunity for people to learn and to speak will be helpful. Then, let's see, ‸ last item is I received a call from Wilson Williams. Probably most of you have spoken with, with him.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:56:46–02:56:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
course retired and he's not going anywhere. And it's very frustrating to him because I know he sits outside his house on the rocker for a lot of hours every day. And, you know,
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:57:01–02:57:01 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
and he's very frustrated by that. So I was going to ask because I explained to him the same thing the city manager explained to me, but I was going to ask the city manager if he would, if he could just share that with all of us right now and for, and for Wilson Williams, I told him I'd bring it up.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:57:30–02:57:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
share the recent meeting that we just had. And we're going to bring back to the council in July, the proposal from waste management to do, uh, twice monthly regular pickups without the need to call in. Okay.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:57:50–02:57:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
there's a cost associated with that. And so we did have that. We did have that conversation. It was, uh, Mrs. Morgan, Mrs. Singer and myself with the representatives from waste management. So, um, so they put something on the table and we're going to put a counter proposal, but planning on coming back to the council in July. ‸ And we also, um, we're in the middle of, uh, meetings with the departments on their budget proposals. And we have talked about, and you will see my, uh, and the city manager's balance budget proposal, some, uh, funding for the landscaping of
Okay, great. Really glad to hear that. And, um, just to say that, um, as I expressed earlier from myself, my husband, our condolences, your father passing. And, um, thank everyone for their patience tonight. Um, and,
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:59:15–02:59:15 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:59:48–02:59:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
appreciative of what he was throwing out there. His advice, uh, at many times he was probably the only one that could speak to certain issues. He was very knowledgeable on it. And I'm sitting back there, um, from my position, just proud to see chief lamb there and really represent for the city of Cocoa.
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); a language review questioned the wording · 03:00:20–03:00:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:00:36–03:00:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 03:00:39–03:00:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:00:41–03:00:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So also, um, I'm just appreciative of direction that we're going overall in the city of Cocoa. As you know, I ride all around this city. I'm looking at,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:01:07–03:01:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Uh, first of all, I want to say thank you to everyone for your prayers and condolences and support during these challenging times that we're facing. But more so than anything else, I'm very proud of the council, how we agreed to disagree, but came to an equitable and fair solution.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:01:52–03:01:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Even though we have single member districts, you still have the vote and you still represent this, this city as an entirety. I don't care the independent and I respect that, but I'm just saying we still have the vote as a collective body.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:02:09–03:02:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:02:12–03:02:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:02:19–03:02:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
But it's okay to agree to disagree, but we do it decent and in order. And I say thank you very much. Happy Father's Day for this up and coming Sunday. And happy birthday. TRB sounds good to me. Happy birthday, everyone. Juneteenth. Excuse me. June 10th. I know
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 03:03:01–03:03:02 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
about it, we had an at length conversation about property taxes. How do we pay for our police department, our fire department, ‸ and our public services? Maybe utilities, maybe you be public works. We have to come up with a fair and ‸ equitable solution. And we must reach out to our state legislatures. And you're right. You're right. With the Florida City jobs under our initiative. So is our Florida City jobs
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:03:31–03:03:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:03:39–03:03:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
We had the scholarship program where recipients took place from from Titusville to Cocoa to Eastern Florida State College. So a lot of that and everyone participated in that. And I thank you for attending
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:04:08–03:04:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 03:04:14–03:04:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording