2026-10-06 - City Council Workshop

00:22Now I'll call this regular workshop

00:24meeting of the Jacksonville City Council

00:26to order. Uh the council, you've been

00:28provided with a agenda, a copy of the

00:30agenda for tonight's meeting. I would

00:31entertain a motion to adopt the agenda.

00:34>> So moved second. I

00:35>> have a motion and a second. Is there any

00:36discussion? Hearing none. All in favor

00:39signify by saying I.

00:40>> I.

00:40>> All oppose. Next we have three uh

00:44consent items and also uh minutes from

00:47the September 22nd, 2026 regular

00:50meeting. I think Mr. Yero, you want to

00:52make some comments about three?

00:55>> Yeah. I mean, I just like to commend the

00:56police department and the sheriff's

00:58department for coming together. You

01:00know, I mean, a lot of times we talk

01:01about the city county relationship and,

01:04you know, coming together with an

01:06important piece of equipment like they

01:07purchased, I mean, will save lives. And

01:11uh and I and I appreciate the staff of

01:13the police department and chief and the

01:15uh staff of the sheriff's department and

01:17the sheriff coming together and and uh

01:22doing that collaborative program. Uh it

01:25it saves us uh both the city and the

01:28county in and tax dollars.

01:33>> Okay. So I need a motion to adopt.

01:37>> So move second.

01:40>> Any any further discussion? Hearing none

01:43on all in favor sign. I

01:45>> all oppose. We'll move on down to

01:47discussion items. We have number four,

01:49the redistricting.

01:51And uh we have

01:55our representative here tonight. But we

01:57do have uh some there's two motions

02:00motion and amendment that were put out

02:02here on the floor

02:04and uh

02:08>> yes sir you'd asked me to look into

02:09that. Um so at the last meeting we had a

02:12motion by Mr. Willingham to adopt a

02:15resolution which we've attached to the

02:16agenda as attachment A and that motion

02:19was made to adopt that resolution as

02:21written. Then we had a motion to amend

02:24council member Willingham's motion by

02:26Mayor Pro Tim Edwards and that was to

02:29amend council member Willingham's motion

02:32to adopt the resolution as written with

02:35an additional criteria which is listed

02:37as number 11 in attachment B on the

02:40agenda item for the proposed resolution.

02:43Um, I believe, sir, that you were

02:45looking to determine whether or not to

02:47rule council member Edward's motion out

02:49of order. And in asking for some

02:52direction on that, you had asked me to

02:54reach out to some other um folks who

02:56were kind of experts in this area. I

02:58reached out to a professor at North

03:01Carolina Central who unfortunately

03:02didn't get back to me. I reached out to

03:05the school of government. I reached out

03:07to the North Carolina League of

03:08Municipalities. and I reached out to u

03:11an attorney in your firm, Miss Mackey,

03:12to get the perspective of a private

03:14practice attorney. Uh the school of

03:16government sent me an email back with

03:18their opinion in writing. Um the

03:20gentleman from Miss Mackey's firm, Mr.

03:21Tusco, and the attorney from the league,

03:23Ben Mount, were both more comfortable

03:25telling me over the phone what their

03:27thought process was. And in both of

03:29those gentlemen, um speaking to them

03:31over the phone, they indicated it was a

03:33very tricky issue. They indicated that

03:35whether or not to rule Miss Edward's

03:36motion out of order did hinge on our

03:38local rule, which is local rule 21J,

03:41that covers our local rules on motions

03:43to amend. Um, they both indicated that

03:46they could see my argument that it would

03:48have been out of order, as well as

03:50council member Smith's argument that the

03:52motion to amend was in order. Um, they

03:54both conceded that ultimately, of

03:56course, it's the mayor's decision

03:58whether or not to rule it in or out of

03:59order and left the discussion with me to

04:02give you that opinion.

04:04um but the school of government that was

04:06a response in writing. Um that response

04:09in writing was a response to kind of the

04:11hypothetical I laid out for her. I

04:13didn't explain to the professor at the

04:14school of government how I had ruled or

04:17not ruled but how I had advised you. Um,

04:20and so she wrote out an explanation as

04:22to what she would have advised. And she

04:24would have advised ruling the motion out

04:26of order under our local rule 21J

04:29specifically just because council member

04:32Willingham's motion was to adopt the

04:35resolution as written. So they felt like

04:37the latest school government felt like

04:39council or mayor prom Edward's motion to

04:42amend we're getting down in the weeds

04:44should have been rolled out of order as

04:45a rejection of council member

04:47Willingham's motion to adopt it as

04:49written. All that being said even at the

04:51end of her email she also said I defer

04:53to the city attorney. So, having

04:55gathered all that additional

04:56information, I can tell you currently my

04:58position, um, I still feel as if it is

05:02appropriate for you to rule Mayor Pro

05:04Tim Edwards motion out of order to amend

05:06Council Member Willingham's motion. Um,

05:08but of course, it is your call to make,

05:10sir. And also, I understand that there's

05:12no motion on the table at this time.

05:15That's just sort of my advice to you if

05:17that issue does come up with again the

05:20input from those other experts.

05:22>> Mr. Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we

05:24approve the resolution to adopt the

05:27criteria for redistricting the city with

05:29the 11th item added as marked in our

05:32agenda as attachment B. Nope.

05:35>> That's the same as the amendment that

05:36was made.

05:37>> It is, sir. I don't believe we have

05:41anything on the table yet. Council

05:42member Willingham, did

05:46>> Yeah, I don't I believe that's the only

05:47motion on the table at this time.

05:49>> No, there was already a motion on the

05:51table. If she's out of order,

05:54>> she's out of order.

05:55>> That's it. And that motion is on the

05:56table that I raised. Okay.

05:59>> Brought back. It was deferred, but no.

06:01To vote on

06:02>> So, is there a motion to bring the

06:04motion up?

06:06>> Yes.

06:06>> Okay.

06:08So, that was your original motion as you

06:11stated. Okay.

06:12>> Discussion.

06:13>> I'd like to have discussion.

06:16>> Well, you need a second, right?

06:17>> I did.

06:18>> Didn't I? I second originally. Second.

06:22>> Okay. Second. Bringing it back up.

06:25>> Discussion.

06:25>> Discussion.

06:26>> Okay.

06:29>> Can I have the um slide?

06:32>> I'm checking right now with Terrell.

06:33That's where he went.

06:37>> And if you don't mind, so um Bear Pro

06:40Tim Edwards motion is not on the table

06:43currently. Did not have a second.

06:44Council member Willingham's motion to

06:46reconsider the motion that was deferred

06:49at the last meeting has been seconded is

06:50properly on the table. That also does

06:52bring Mayor Pro Tim Edwards motion to

06:55amend back up according to the experts.

06:58>> I withdraw.

06:59>> So, okay. Okay, that's easy then. So,

07:02the only motion on the table currently

07:04is Mr. Willingham's motion to adopt the

07:06resolution as an attachment.

07:09>> Let's don't make it any more confusing

07:11than it already is to me. That's that's

07:14that's what we sit right now discussion.

07:22>> Okay. They can get in if they can with

07:25the whatever I'm talking about. Okay.

07:27This this is uh slide one, but what it

07:30is is it's the discussion of the judge

07:33from the Joe Mccclaclin lawsuit and um

07:42the opponents of the proposed resolution

07:45uh from the attorney seek a resolution.

07:48Mlaughlin alleged that the base

07:51districts discriminated against white

07:53people. His solution was to divide um

07:57the base

07:59to change the results of the election

08:02where blacks got elected. He thought it

08:04was unfair.

08:07The courts rejected that. But his

08:09solution was to divide the ward. I mean

08:13the base that is result oriented. That

08:17was his result that he wanted from the

08:19courts. So that was rejected by the

08:23courts.

08:25Adding additional crit criteria seeks to

08:28affect the results of an election

08:31to address the MLAN discriminatory

08:34unfounded elections. No other city with

08:38the base population does this. This is

08:42um deviant of the direction of Klay to

08:46keep the um districts contiguous

08:51and compact. It ignores the history and

08:54the culture of a community east of

08:57Highway 17 who still have ancestors

09:02who still have ancestors.

09:06Okay. Who still have ancestors. um

09:11buried on the base. And when they talk

09:14about how you put these wards together,

09:18the cohesiveness of a community, the the

09:21history of a community, that's

09:22important.

09:24And just arbitrarily dividing that up at

09:28the convenience of that community is

09:30certainly not consistent with

09:33compactness.

09:36On slide two, um, this is the Supreme

09:39Court case and I I I I'll read this

09:43portion. The framers endorsed allocating

09:45House seats to states based on total

09:48population, debating what would become

09:51the 14th amendment. Congress

09:52reconsidered the proper basis for

09:54aortionment and rejected proposals to

09:56allocate seats to uh state states based

10:00on voter population. voter a voter

10:04population rule is inconsistent with the

10:06Supreme Court precedent that states that

10:08localities may comply with the one um

10:11person one vote principle by designing

10:13districts with equal total populations

10:16adopting voter eligible aortion

10:19proportion aortionment would upset the

10:22well functioning approach to

10:24districtricting that all 50 states and

10:26count countless local jurisdictions have

10:29um long followed representative serve

10:32serve all residents. Non vote and this

10:35is the ve a very this is critical

10:37representatives serve all residents. Non

10:40voters have an important stake in policy

10:43debates and constituent services. What

10:46when you say that they don't um pay

10:49taxes when you say that they don't vote

10:52you ignore this principle that's right

10:55here in the Supreme Court president.

10:58If

11:00um

11:02uh council member Sosa has 2,000 voters

11:07and I have 300 voters,

11:11right? Who do we represent? Does he

11:13represent the 200,000? Do I represent

11:15the 300? No.

11:18We all represent in the districts.

11:21Of course, we try to do what's in the

11:23best interest of the city, but we

11:25represent 18,000

11:28That's who we represent. Each

11:29approximately 18,000 give or less 5%.

11:33Give or take 5%. That's what this is

11:35saying. We represent the voters.

11:39To do otherwise is to try to carve it up

11:41and say, "Well, we represent

11:44the the people who decide to vote,

11:48the people who

11:50um live there.

11:53And you all know we provide services

11:56and they deserve compactness. They

11:59deserve to be able to come together with

12:01their neighbors and elect the candidate

12:03if they choose.

12:06So this is Jacksonville

12:10on uh slide three

12:13and

12:15you can see the pink is is World War I.

12:19What we were supposed to be doing under

12:22Clay is

12:26getting away from any allegation of

12:28germandering.

12:31And specifically, I think in the lawsuit

12:33it was brought up that my district is

12:36almost like a satellite where I live and

12:39you have the blue around it.

12:43If you wanted to make that consistent

12:45with clay, you would just take the blue

12:49that's this side of 17

12:53and turn it pink.

12:56It would be compact and contiguous.

13:00But to stretch for a definition of

13:03contiguousness

13:06and

13:08the definition really means opposite

13:11opposite the river opposite the highway.

13:14It doesn't mean take the highway and go

13:16to DC.

13:18It doesn't mean go from Northwoods down

13:23the river. It doesn't mean navigate. It

13:25doesn't mean go down the river to get to

13:27Camp Lleon. That's not contiguous.

13:30Ward um three is simply not contiguous

13:34with cample. And to put that in put

13:38portions of camp loun in ward 3

13:43is to divide the very descriptions that

13:46are included in klay when they talk

13:49about compactness and um contiguousness.

13:54If you tried to drive it, you possibly

13:56would go through

13:59war two and war to get the to the base

14:02from war three. It's simply not

14:05contiguous. And to use language and

14:08labels like it's common sense to do

14:09this. It's nowhere to be found. That

14:12common sense is not found in any

14:13precedent. I couldn't find any cases.

14:16And I asked the attorney, where did

14:18anybody else divide the base? Why are we

14:20dividing it if nobody else want to

14:22divide it? because we want a certain

14:24result and that's not what drawing

14:27districts is about. It's about

14:29representing even those people who don't

14:31vote.

14:34Now, I got this from Ghost Grow today.

14:38That's slide four. It's from Kelly

14:41Henkins.

14:44Kelly says, "The city of Gbor has six

14:47municipal districts. Districts two and

14:51four include portions of Syo Johnson Air

14:53Force Base.

14:56And

14:57the next slide is a map.

15:02Okay?

15:06They didn't divide it up. They didn't

15:07chop it up

15:10because they weren't trying to produce a

15:11result. And to say that we're not trying

15:13to produce a result is disingenuous.

15:17The lawsuit told you it was trying to

15:18produce a result and that was how to do

15:21it. The fail lawsuit and now we're

15:24trying to pick up from there for special

15:27interest that's not representing the

15:29people

15:32slide six.

15:36portions of Fort Bragg now well I don't

15:38know Fort Liberty Fort Bragg

15:41tomato tomato at this point that fall

15:44within federal city limits are located

15:47primarily in district 1.

15:50They got almost all of the base voters

15:53in one district.

15:57Why? Because of contiguousness and

15:59compactness because that's where they

16:02are.

16:03And if we happen to and if if the base

16:07happens to be on the east side of 17, so

16:10be it. And to try to manipulate this and

16:14jerrymander this

16:16is just not consistent with the law.

16:21And

16:23just because the case might not

16:26specifically say um

16:30you can't do it, it's probably because

16:32nobody's done it

16:35because it's inconsistent with the law.

16:38It's inconsistent with compactness and

16:41um

16:44contiguousness.

16:47And

16:48the last slide number seven

16:51is bad bill.

16:54Nobody has done this

17:01and special interest shouldn't force us

17:02to do it.

17:09Oh,

17:11>> further discussion.

17:14>> Um, I'll comment that, um, while there's

17:17lots of talk about what's disingenuous

17:19and inconsistent with the law, there is

17:22indeed no case precedent against this,

17:25there's also no law against this. It's

17:27perfectly legal to be a consideration in

17:31our process. Um the issue is not whether

17:35um

17:37the issue is not how people will vote.

17:39It's not even where people will vote

17:40because no matter how we draw the wards,

17:42there's going to be polling places

17:44within those wards for the neighborhoods

17:46that are served.

17:48The question is whether Jacksonville can

17:49establish word boundaries that provide

17:51fair geographic representation that is

17:53contiguous and compact and include the

17:56military across the entire population of

17:59dwarves. Those goals are not mutually

18:01exclusive.

18:03Both can be achieved. They can be

18:05compact. They can be contiguous. And

18:08they can spread the military population,

18:10which is a population of interest in our

18:12community across all four. The map will

18:15look different than a grid, but it is

18:18entirely possible if we choose to

18:20explore this as an option that we could

18:21make it happen. It's not one or the

18:23other. It is possible that it can be and

18:26both.

18:28It is a reasonable thing to consider for

18:30a population as such as ours. It's not

18:33about who votes. It's not about where

18:35they vote. It's about representation

18:37across the entire city and all sections

18:41of it. We are not using military people

18:44as pawns. If anything, grouping them

18:46together in what was formerly minority

18:48wards would be considered using them as

18:49pawns. But we are not doing that. I am

18:51not attempting to do that at all. I

18:54think this is a special population in

18:55our community that matters a whole heck

18:57of a lot and we should all be as you

18:59said nobody votes for a single

19:00neighborhood. No issue that comes before

19:02this council is vote decided for just a

19:04single neighborhood or another. It's a

19:07citywide decision almost every single

19:08time. There are certain pockets of you

19:11know park or this or that but it's got

19:14to be made in the best interest of the

19:15whole city. My point is that it is not

19:17only not illegal and not forbidden and

19:21not upended by any president, it's also

19:25possible to do both at the same time. It

19:28is possible. They're not mutually

19:29exclusive. And that's all I have to add

19:31to the discussion at this time. others

19:34>> just taking as I'm listening um to

19:39um Miss Edwards about

19:43I can't seem to tell the difference

19:45between

19:48using the minority factor from the past

19:55and using the military those on base.

19:59I can't see the difference between the

20:01two. is as if we it's the same argument.

20:08So if we're based on clay,

20:12we're not to use race as a factor,

20:16we shouldn't be using military as a

20:19factor. We shouldn't be using any

20:22descriptive

20:24uh pattern of a set group of individuals

20:29as a reason

20:31to

20:35district to redesate or to redistrict.

20:38So

20:40it's almost from listening to your

20:42argument as if you made the case for

20:46what Mr. Willingham stated

20:50with the exception of saying that it's

20:52not illegal.

20:58Just because we can come up with it

21:00doesn't mean that that's something we

21:02should use without any type of base, any

21:05type of concrete um backing to do it.

21:10Whereas with the minority wars, we had

21:13the uh voters's right act with singling

21:17out our onbased military. And I'm saying

21:19that specifically because we have

21:20military within our general population

21:23who are not being pulled out and sorted

21:27into four.

21:30We shouldn't be using

21:33the ones who are on base as a designated

21:36group. Um i.e. like minority communities

21:40in determining our redistricting.

21:43So, um I'm I'm one to agree with the

21:51motion of Mr. Willingham as well as the

21:55source documents that has shown it's not

21:58something that's done by military bases

22:01here in our state and not too far from

22:05us. But if we don't have any weight

22:09behind why divide it in fours only

22:12because it's fair or only because it's

22:17um the uh a non-ilgal way to do it. I I

22:22just don't think that's weighty enough.

22:23I don't think that's it doesn't give us

22:25proof and it seems like it could be

22:26something that could bring be brought up

22:28at another time because we have no

22:31justifiable reason to do it or let me

22:34say this any justifiable reason to add

22:36it in the resolution. If it's something

22:39that could be looked upon while they're

22:41redistricting

22:43then that's an option but I can't

22:45understand why putting it in the

22:46resolution.

22:47>> If it's not in the resolution it will

22:49not be considered in the drawing of maps

22:51and redistricting.

22:53But I also think it gets it will

22:55>> absolutely be said that it's not a

22:56criteria that was adopted and therefore

22:58will not be used.

22:59>> We're not drawing maps tonight. All

23:01we're not all we're doing is talking

23:03about how we're going to use the

23:06criteria to divide up those things.

23:09>> But we're also making it putting it in

23:11writing that those who will go into

23:14redistricting will consider that as a um

23:18our criteria.

23:20>> We don't have to move for it. We can say

23:21we don't agree with that.

23:23>> Yeah. I mean that that I think I think

23:24the criteria means we look at the base

23:27and now we've annexed a large portion of

23:29the base and so how does that fit into

23:32to the drawing of our wards? We're not

23:35we're not drawing it from a from what we

23:37have to or a couple months ago before

23:41House Bill 16 116. We're we're talking

23:44about adding all that other part of the

23:47base and how we're going to do that. And

23:50I think it's incumbent of us to look at

23:51that and to use that as a criteria to

23:54divide it up because I mean we annexed I

23:57don't know how many how many acres but

24:00it's it's been a it's it's it's a good

24:02size portion that goes almost to Holly

24:05Ridge down to Sneeed's Ferry and and in

24:08those areas

24:09>> and we use the services too. I mean

24:11trade back and forth. I mean, fire

24:12department, you all do that back and

24:14forth.

24:15>> And with the IG with the IG that we're

24:17going to be doing sewer work on there

24:19>> based on the division that we have now

24:22and the district that we have now where

24:24there are military personnel that's on

24:26base that are in wars. What's the

24:28difference? What's the number of um the

24:31population difference

24:33>> between

24:35what we have now? Now, now we have the

24:38annexation. What was the difference in

24:40the population? the new population

24:42annexed. Yes. Potentially 2500 to 3,000.

24:46>> 2500 to 3,000

24:48>> if that's the qu the additional

24:49population.

24:50>> Yes, that's what I'm asking.

24:51>> That was annexed.

24:52>> Approximately 2500 people.

24:55>> That's not just counting the base

24:57though, right?

24:58>> That's 2500 new people annexed in from

25:02the base annexation. Yes, sir.

25:05And if we look at this resolution,

25:08number 10 talks about considering future

25:12growth of the city to the extent

25:15possible,

25:18which there is no need to add number 11

25:21because if you add number 11, it's going

25:24to violate 3, 4, 5, 7, and 8.

25:32That is assumptive. It does not have to

25:33violate 357.

25:35>> It will violate it will violate because

25:38now what you're also talking about

25:40specifically for number five,

25:43if you were to redraw the maps to try to

25:46include all of the wards, you're now

25:49going to disenfranchise

25:52certain neighborhood boundaries. It's no

25:54longer going to be continuous. the snow

25:56going to have the harmony to it because

25:59what you're talking about is getting rid

26:01of all of the maps as it exists right

26:04now and redrawing all of the boards. But

26:08number 10 already basically lays out the

26:12future growth of the city which includes

26:15camp leg. So there's no need to add

26:18number 11. It's in violation

26:21to 3, four, five, seven, and eight.

26:24And I have to agree because it dividing

26:27the base into four, it does not fall

26:30within number three for compact, number

26:32four for continuous. And I mean is plain

26:36and simple for me. I have to agree with

26:38you on that too. Um Dr. Washington, um I

26:43can't see why number 11 is a major

26:45factor and we're going through this to

26:46put it in the um because the base is

26:50considered just like everyone else. And

26:53if we have population from the base

26:56already in our districts,

27:00why are we now taking those who are

27:02already in our district are accounted

27:03for, why are we now going to take those

27:06and then we're going to split everybody

27:07up into four pieces? It doesn't make

27:09sense to me based on the criteria that's

27:12been given to us. That that doesn't make

27:14sense to me. Um in putting it in writing

27:16in this resolution, can it still be

27:18looked at looked at when they do it? It

27:21still can be. I don't see why it can't

27:23be, but

27:24I don't think it needs to be put in the

27:26resolution. That's all I have. Sir,

27:29>> I have a question for

27:32um Council Member Edwards and

27:36um Council Member Mero.

27:41We have the base in three of the wards.

27:44Now,

27:46what is the problem that you're trying

27:48to correct?

27:50What has been a problem so far?

27:52>> I'm not I'm not looking to to correct a

27:54problem. I said we've annexed this this

27:57entire other part of the base, whether

28:00the whether we increase population or

28:03not. And I think I think we h we need to

28:05look at at how how those b how that

28:08annexation has affected us. And I think

28:12that that looking at the base and

28:15looking at how it how it affects us is

28:18is important as we draw the maps. I'm

28:21not trying to fix a problem. What I'm

28:23trying to do is look at the most

28:25equitable way and the most contiguous

28:28way that we can do that with the base.

28:30And I mean obviously it's not done now

28:33because there's a carved out area that's

28:35that you know you could throw a rock

28:37from your district to someone else's

28:39district. But we're, you know, we're not

28:41um promoting that. We're not suggesting.

28:43>> I'm not I'm not saying that.

28:45>> Trying to fix that.

28:46>> Let me finish. I think

28:46>> Okay. I thought you were. Go ahead.

28:48>> I think that it's important for us to

28:50look at at how we use the base and how

28:53we divide those up, whether it's by

28:55census districts, whether it's by uh

28:58geographical areas, water or or

29:01roadways. And I think looking at the

29:04base is important when we're dividing

29:07when we're deciding how how these maps

29:10would be drawn.

29:11>> But looking at the base involves

29:14geographically

29:16WS one, excuse me, WS one and Ward four

29:21and now part of Ward two geographically

29:24speaking.

29:26>> I don't know. Oh, I don't

29:27>> because of the way that the Wilson Bay

29:29and the New River

29:30>> I haven't seen any of the maps that you

29:32know we're just talking about the

29:33criteria.

29:34>> Well, we have our current map in which

29:35you ran an election on. So that's the

29:38map we're talking about the reset map

29:40that was completed by the 2020

29:42redistricting committee. Oh, the map

29:43does exist.

29:44>> Oh, I know it does. I know it does.

29:47>> So your guiding feature for WS one and W

29:50Yes.

29:52one one person at a time.

29:53>> Wars one and ward four you were bound by

29:56Wilson Bay and the New River. So we

29:59can't move Wilson Bay and New River.

30:02Those are

30:04natural boundaries that are contiguous

30:07as set forth by the United States Census

30:10government based on their definition. So

30:13based upon that definition we have we

30:16looked at those basically those features

30:20and considered those features and making

30:23sure that our maps were contiguous

30:28and it was adopted by council.

30:31>> Just let me clarify get one thing

30:33clarified too when you're talking about

30:35future growth too. I mean, we got how

30:39many uh permits are out for housing

30:41developments now

30:43>> that we're going to move the goalpost in

30:45different directions?

30:46>> Most in W three.

30:47>> Mostly in W three. So, W three is going

30:49to end up having to be redrawn in some

30:53form or fashion because it's kind of

30:55weighted there now.

30:58>> It was redrawn in this last past

31:01election for 20.

31:02>> But I don't I don't see that as a

31:03campus.

31:05>> Yeah. No, but it shifts. It shifts every

31:08Go ahead.

31:08>> Well, you

31:10>> I just wanted to I think um for sake of

31:13the public understanding um we keep

31:16saying the base, let's consider the

31:18base. Well, portions of or there's a

31:21population on the basis already within

31:24our districts, within our wards. So when

31:26we say we need to consider the

31:28additional

31:31numbers, not the base cuz that's puts

31:34everybody, you know, that puts that one

31:35number into play. No, there are portions

31:38of the base that are already in our

31:40wards. So we're just talking about the

31:42additional 2500.

31:44And I just want to make sure that as a

31:46public is listening or they say, well,

31:48why don't they consider the base? Well,

31:50we are. We're considering the additional

31:52portion of the base. So I think that

31:53needs to be considered as well. making

31:55sure that when we talk about this for

31:58our public to understand the base is

32:01already in play when it comes to our

32:02zone our our wards is the additional

32:05numbers on base. Now when you say um

32:09divided into four are you saying the

32:11additional numbers or are you saying the

32:14entire numbered amount of population? It

32:18is already stated as written equal

32:20distribution of the population aboard

32:22military installations between all

32:24awards to the extent possible

32:27and that may not be possible in four

32:29might only be possible in three but if

32:31we don't have it on here as a

32:32consideration

32:34my concern is that it will be dismissed

32:36as a consideration and not part of any

32:39discussion from here forward. Well, when

32:41Mr. Willingham was successful with his

32:43lawsuit. Camp Ljun was annexed into the

32:47city of Jacksonville and it has been

32:50within the city of Jacksonville

32:52specifically with WS one and Ward 4. It

32:55was only in 2020 when there was a spike

32:58growth that actually um when the

33:02redistricting committee looked at our

33:04populations for redrawing the lines. Um

33:08the biggest growth really happened in

33:11war three where war three

33:16had to be decreased by 2500 roughly 2500

33:22citizens and ward two had to be

33:26increased roughly by 2500.

33:31Ward one had to be decreased, if my

33:34memory serves me correctly, roughly less

33:37than 200. And my ward was the only one

33:40that was pretty much balanced.

33:46So, Camp Leon has always been considered

33:50for the last past what 36 years.

33:53And with the shifting of the wars with

33:56the last redistricting map,

33:59I gained some of Mr. Willingham's

34:02um residence only because

34:08in 20120 one of the features that did

34:11not exist

34:14as in 2010 was Wilson,

34:18excuse me, Wilson Boulevard. That's the

34:20delineating line for Ward 4. So that was

34:25my line which means I had to shift some

34:29of my upper residents into ward two. So

34:33that's why count June falls within ward

34:36one, ward two, and ward four.

34:47>> Yeah. So I guess my thing I guess I'm

34:49kind of lost on is what's harmful if we

34:51do add it. So, like hear what you said

34:53earlier about it's already included,

34:55right?

34:56>> Which one?

34:56>> Well, you just said earlier that um that

34:58your warer had the base included in the

35:00numbers, right? Is that what you just

35:01said a few minutes ago?

35:02>> Yes.

35:02>> Okay. So, like and if the whole purpose

35:05of keeping the ward system was to make

35:07it fair for all, why would we not

35:09consider that and just divide it all up

35:11so it's equal? I mean, that's what makes

35:12sense to me is just to do it that way

35:14cuz if we don't include the base, I

35:16don't really see how we're going to get

35:17much different than what we have right

35:18the second. I mean, that's kind of where

35:20I'm at with it. I mean, I don't really

35:22see the harmful thing to split it up and

35:24just divide it up equally. So then your

35:27point earlier was to represent all the

35:28people of the city, then that kind of

35:30checks that box in my opinion. Then we

35:31all represent it, right?

35:37That's the way I'm looking at it.

35:39>> Okay.

35:41We keep talking about what's not um

35:46legal, what's legal.

35:49the case. Kite talks about compact and

35:52contiguousness. I think we can all agree

35:54on that.

35:56You're you're when you do something

35:58that's not compact and contiguous

36:02that gets into the territory of an

36:04illegal violation. So just claiming it

36:07as as lawful and legal,

36:11that's not accurate because you don't

36:14know until you cross that line of not

36:18being compact and not contiguous. So why

36:21venture there when we know we can make

36:23them compact and contiguous? How do you

36:27get and and these problems about all

36:31this adding the base? It's nothing new

36:34with growth. If ward three is growing,

36:39then

36:41you shift two

36:44to pick up some of W three and then you

36:47shift four. That's how you do this. You

36:51going to have to do that regardless.

36:53If if you divide the the base up where

36:56you're talking about, you're making it

36:57more complicated because once you try to

37:00adjust that to get the population, then

37:03you got to manipulate four more um I

37:07mean four more areas of the base as

37:09opposed to just dealing with the wards

37:12in that alignment. Now you got to go and

37:14try to get the base equal again. Mhm.

37:18>> Mhm.

37:18>> And what determines what section goes to

37:21what ward?

37:23>> And and how do you even do this? If if

37:25they follow this and they put emphasis

37:28on compact and contiguousness

37:33and the population, you're going to have

37:37initially four equally divided areas.

37:40Okay?

37:42and then you have to go back and divide

37:44again on base to add into those areas.

37:49Whereas if it's just um a quadrant, you

37:53just have four sections that are

37:55contiguous and compact and you just

37:58equalize the numbers. It's very simple.

38:02>> Again, they're not mutually exclusive.

38:04Both can be accomplished.

38:06>> Well, I think in her in her

38:07presentation, she said that water does

38:09make something contiguous. Is that

38:11right?

38:11>> Yeah. A body of water is not a boundary

38:13maker.

38:14>> I didn't make that up.

38:16>> Then you're continuous with Richlands.

38:18>> Sure.

38:19>> That's not what that's not how you draw

38:21a boundary. You you have to navigate the

38:24river to get to Ridgelands. You got to

38:25navigate the river to get to um the

38:28base.

38:30That's not what that means. I can be

38:33contiguous with Virginia Beach.

38:34>> Our current wards cross a body of water.

38:37Saying a body of water must be between

38:40wards is not always possible.

38:41>> Opposite. They are opposite. I'm

38:44opposite of Jacksonville.

38:46>> Adjacent to one another.

38:47>> I don't have to drive down the river

38:50>> to get

38:50>> Nobody's advocating for

38:51>> but you would if for W three. You would

38:54look at the map. You would have to drive

38:56down the river to you would have to

38:57drive through you would have to drive

38:59through contiguous areas of Ward One.

39:03You can't get there any other way unless

39:04you drive. And if you drive, you would

39:07have to drive through contiguous areas

39:09of Ward 2 and Ward 4. That's not

39:12contiguous when you got to go through

39:14other areas that are contiguous.

39:17But this is what I'm saying. Just look

39:18at this. If you look at this map, this

39:21is uh Georgetown. This is my area. If

39:24that's contiguous,

39:26if I'm contiguous with Georgetown, you

39:29got to come through my contiguous area

39:31to even get to um Sneeze Fairy, if you

39:35will, that part of of Camp Loun or you

39:39would have to come through there. You'd

39:41have to come through this. Just imagine

39:42that all being pink cuz this is

39:43contiguous with that. You got to come

39:46through a contiguous area to get to

39:50he uh here.

39:54That's not Y'all are just stretching the

39:57definition of contiguous because it's

39:59convenient. That's not what contiguous

40:01means. I argue.

40:02>> Well, that's not what I was arguing.

40:03What I'm what I'm asking wasn't arguing.

40:06But what's harmful? But like I don't

40:08understand what the big deal. I I don't

40:09I can answer that. I can answer that.

40:11That's what I want. I can answer one

40:12person at a time.

40:13>> I was trying to respond. Okay. Okay.

40:18This is what's harmful.

40:21We have based on the um recommendation

40:26or the the uh resolution that was put

40:28forward by the um attorney

40:32something that satisfies

40:35Clay. Okay.

40:38Now you have to have context and the

40:42context is what we are picking out

40:47and advocating

40:50is something that was in a lawsuit

40:53that was designed to produce a result.

40:56That's why it's there and that's why

40:57it's here. Okay. He didn't like the

41:00result. The plaintiffs didn't like the

41:02result, right? You would agree with that

41:04of the existing system.

41:07That's

41:08>> that's your point of view. But they

41:11didn't like the results. So there was a

41:14solution designed to fix the results.

41:17That's looking at the results. The

41:19solution was divide up the base. That's

41:22where that came from. That's where it

41:24came from. Let me finish.

41:27So, you're taking something that the the

41:30suit was pretty much kicked out of court

41:34and reviving it and saying it's fair

41:38when it's totally unnecessary. Totally

41:40unnecessary. Anything that uh uh council

41:46million was concerned about with the

41:49base expansion

41:51can be accomplished by that first

41:55proposed resolution. Anything we always

41:58have to adjust the boundaries. You might

42:01not know where it's going to grow. We

42:03adjust them. It has absolutely nothing

42:05to do with dividing the base.

42:09It hadn't been done before for a reason.

42:12Okay. Um but

42:15to say that you can take the water and

42:18navigate it through a contiguous area

42:23makes you contiguous.

42:26>> That's just stretching.

42:27>> Your entire hinges upon a grid system

42:29being primary foundation. That grid

42:32system is altered at all. So you're not

42:34going through contiguous pieces. It's

42:36all about considering the options. There

42:39are other options available and we don't

42:41even know what they will look like yet.

42:43No maps have been put in front of us.

42:44These are just the criteria that we

42:46would like to have in consideration when

42:48those maps are drawn.

42:50>> And like she's saying here, no no

42:53decision is being made as maps right

42:54now.

42:55>> Nope. It's all about the criteria. And I

42:57think we about beat this to death here.

42:59Everybody's had an opportunity to to

43:02have input here. I have one more

43:04question I wanted to ask Miss Attorney

43:06Mackey.

43:08>> During the redistricting for 2020, Mr.

43:12Carter expressed to the committee that

43:17if the city of Jacksonville were to draw

43:20word maps

43:22that is nonontiguous,

43:25it could not be done because it would be

43:28in violation of federal law.

43:31Is that correct?

43:33>> I am not aware of federal law that

43:41requires contiguity period. Now, let me

43:45say

43:46you you cannot

43:50subvert traditional redistricting

43:52principles like contiguity for improper

43:56purposes. And so, I wonder if that's

43:58what Mr. Carter was getting it that you

44:01can't

44:03use

44:04it sort of as an endound to to um you

44:08know improperly consider race for

44:10example and you subvert

44:13compactness or contiguous contiguity in

44:16order to draw districts based on race.

44:19>> So we know about race and I think

44:22everybody is familiar with the term

44:24race. Can we use another terminology

44:26that individuals not may not be aware of

44:29that you can use to subvert the drawing

44:31of the lines?

44:34>> Um,

44:38I I'm not sure that I'm following your

44:41question.

44:41>> Can you give us another example?

44:43>> Another example of an an improper

44:45criterion

44:47in redistricting. Um most of the

44:49litigation is is based on race and

44:52that's what the case law has been for

44:55for many years. Um

44:59>> what about respect to neighborhoods?

45:02So respecting neighborhoods is a term

45:06redistricting criteria that you you see

45:09sort of in in lots of jurisdictions and

45:11courts have said that is that is a

45:14legitimate criteria that a governing

45:17body can use to redistrict.

45:19>> Okay.

45:19>> We're not breaking up neighborhoods. H

45:22>> we're not breaking up any neighborhoods

45:29arbitrarily

45:30dividing arbitrarily operative word

45:34dividing the base

45:37is that

45:40going counter to tradition traditional

45:43ways of doing it

45:46>> I don't know that that has been

45:47litigated so I cannot answer that a

45:51court has held

45:52But there is an argument that

45:56since no other city and at least the two

46:00neighboring cities that you've pointed

46:01out that also have military populations

46:04that they have not done that that

46:06there's an argument that could be made

46:07that it is arbitrary because others do

46:10not.

46:11>> All three all these criteria that are

46:14listed on this sheet are going to be

46:15examined closely for legality. Is that

46:18not correct?

46:19Yes, they they have been

46:24the the these that are all on here have

46:27been and for this potential additional

46:29one, there's just not a case on it. The

46:33the closest we have is the 2016 case

46:35which gets into registered voters versus

46:37total population and the Supreme Court

46:40said you don't have to divide based on

46:42registered voters.

46:45>> What court at at what level? That was

46:48the US Supreme Court.

46:50>> US Supreme Court did.

46:52>> Okay.

46:56>> Question,

46:56>> Mr. Attorney. Mr. Attorney, I think uh

46:58we've

47:01we're going to call question. I think

47:03Mr. Edwards, is that what you just said?

47:05>> I think it's time we've talked about it

47:06for a while.

47:07>> I think everybody's an opportunity to

47:08put input into the discussion. And I

47:10think we could uh I mean there's a lot

47:12more that probably can be said you know

47:14that uh we do have a motion and a second

47:17on the floor.

47:20So at this time I'll call a vote

47:23on Mr. Willingham's motion as he stated

47:26before. You want to read that motion

47:27back again?

47:30>> Mr. Willingham's motion was to excuse

47:34me. Sorry. Was to adopt the resolution

47:39as presented.

47:40Excuse me. As presented

47:44with the 10 criteria.

47:47>> Sorry about that. Mayor,

47:49>> all those in favor of Mr. Willham's

47:51motion, please indicate by raising your

47:53hand.

47:56>> Those opposed.

47:59Okay, we're going to add that that 11th

48:01on there. I think it's I think it's a

48:03good idea even though we may not use

48:05that criteria but

48:09>> if it doesn't work out it doesn't

48:10>> motion for that don't you okay Mr.

48:12Mayor, I move that we adopt attachment

48:14B, the criteria with the 11th being

48:17added of equal distribution of

48:19population aboard military installations

48:21between all warts to the extent

48:22possible.

48:27>> That is my motion.

48:30Be a second. Second.

48:32>> All right. Discussion again.

48:35I would again say that adding number 11

48:37is totally antithesis to the original

48:40motion of 1 through 10.

48:45>> You you keep saying nobody has to mayor

48:50pretty much abide by that.

48:53>> But we're telling them

48:56that this is the criteria.

48:58We're not telling them that they can

49:00come up with their own maps. for you.

49:04>> I mean,

49:04>> I don't know. I can, but

49:07>> I could too, but I'm not going to.

49:08>> But I don't.

49:10>> Who? Well, who are you referring to? I'm

49:14referring to the people who will be draw

49:15people that will be drawing clips. So,

49:17>> we're telling them to use this

49:20>> and then they present it to us and then

49:22we can decide. If we don't agree with

49:23it, we just decline. Go back to drawing

49:25board. But you would need to add it

49:27because again it states it in 10. And by

49:31adding it clearly violates three, four,

49:33five, seven, and eight.

49:35>> Well, she just said it didn't. She just

49:37she's the lawyer, right? Did you say all

49:38this would have been checked out and

49:40vetted? Correct.

49:41>> I said the the 10 are are all legal and

49:44that the 11th has not been tested that

49:47I'm aware of.

49:48>> But it was reviewed by multiple

49:51attorneys and found to be legal. You are

49:53concerned.

49:54>> That's what she said. review by

49:56attorneys have found to be legal.

49:57>> 1 through 10.

50:00>> No, she's talking about 1 through 10.

50:01>> No, she didn't say that. You're saying

50:03the three, four, whatever the other

50:04number was.

50:05>> I said by adding number 11 violates

50:08three, four, five, seven, and eight. So,

50:11if it violates, there is no reason to

50:13add it because it's in opposition to

50:15what's already present.

50:16>> Well, if we add it, then y'all check it

50:18out and you come back and tell us, hey,

50:20you're you're out of

50:21>> You shouldn't be able to add it because

50:22it's in violation.

50:23>> Well, how do we know that? It just said

50:25she said it hasn't been checked out.

50:28>> Then why would you do it?

50:28>> Why would you do it?

50:29>> Because you're trying to add and make it

50:30fair to everybody like

50:35>> one person at a time. Okay. One one

50:39person at a time. Please get the

50:40attention of the chair or the mayor and

50:42I will

50:43>> You know I do that.

50:44>> I know you do.

50:47No, I can't I can't hear two different

50:50>> I just I just want to ask Logan when you

50:53when you say it's fair to everybody.

50:55>> Yeah.

50:56>> What is the problem with the way it is

50:59now when it is not equally divided

51:01amongst all? What's the problem?

51:02>> I don't have any problem with it. I

51:04don't have this way. I don't have any

51:05problem the other way. I voted to keep

51:06the water system. So just chop it all up

51:08and let's just

51:10>> and make let everybody have a voice.

51:11That's what you want, right?

51:13>> You want everybody to be have a voice.

51:14So we're letting everybody have a voice

51:17>> and we're having discussion.

51:19>> Yeah, I agree with you.

51:20>> That that's the best way to reach.

51:22>> So we're doing that. We're letting

51:24everybody have decision. So there's no

51:26problem no problem from you

51:29>> with not with the way we have it. No

51:32problem from you.

51:33>> I think we should add it to make it

51:34everybody's

51:35>> the problem is are you fixing the

51:37problem? Um councilwoman,

51:39>> it's not my job to fix the problem.

51:41>> Yes, that's our jobs.

51:43Not by myself. I have one vote.

51:45>> But I'm asking you, is there a problem

51:47with not dividing all the boards

51:50equally? What's the problem? What is it

51:53that we're going to be able to do that

51:54we can't do in terms of at the addition

51:59of the base or anything? What what is

52:01it?

52:04>> It's the equitable way to distribute

52:06population separately with all of them.

52:10I think they are not mutually exclusive.

52:12I don't think it's an either or, but I

52:15think it's an and both.

52:17>> What's the equity that you're referring

52:18to?

52:20>> Military population, civilian

52:22population, all of it. We have a giant

52:24new geography to deal with.

52:27I think it's fair. I think it's

52:29equitable. I don't see a reason for it

52:32to be illegal. So, here we are. We've

52:35got the same discussion happening that

52:36we just had.

52:37>> So, the way we're doing it is unfair.

52:40Well, if we're not including everybody,

52:43>> how are we not including?

52:45>> The facts have to change anyway because

52:47of the annexation and because of the

52:49Klay case. We have to redraw them

52:51anyway. This is just a good

52:53consideration to have on the

52:55possibilities. That is all.

53:03>> So, were you vote again?

53:05>> Well, I want to make sure everybody has

53:07to speak.

53:10I just want to make sure it's not on the

53:12record that um the resident lawyer here

53:14did not say that number 11 has been

53:18vetted as being good to go. Right. You

53:20didn't say

53:21>> but what I said then I do want to also

53:24be clear about this is I am not aware of

53:27a case where this specific question has

53:32been litigated.

53:33>> Okay. Table motion.

53:36Second.

53:41>> Now we still

53:44>> We have a motion in a second out here.

53:47An original motion. Call on the table.

53:49See can make the motion.

53:50>> Yeah. Call the vote on the table.

53:52>> All right. All those in.

53:54>> Do I need to explain?

53:56>> No.

53:56>> No.

53:56>> Okay.

53:57>> All those in favor of tableing the

53:58motion, raise your hand.

54:01>> All those against.

54:04>> Three.

54:05>> Okay. I have a question for the

54:06attorney. Please,

54:10>> I know you're not that familiar with

54:11wards and how they're drawn, but we do

54:14have a map and I'm sure you you've

54:15looked over it. Is ward

54:20three.

54:24>> Do you need any help identifying?

54:26>> No. No, I'm good.

54:28>> Is is that contiguous with campus?

54:32>> Does she help June now? not

54:36>> the way it's drawn.

54:37>> Technically, it is contiguous.

54:40>> That's still not the way it's drawn

54:42>> or might be by water, but I I think what

54:45you're getting as that would not be a

54:48compact district because you're going

54:49from the northern part of the city

54:51snaking dam. So, the argument I think is

54:54more compactness and not not so much

54:57contiguity because you you do

54:58technically have water contiguity and

55:01you've got a lot

55:01>> by navigating.

55:02>> What's that? by going all the way some

55:06distance.

55:06>> I think it's a question of compactness

55:08because compactness is is how how tight

55:11and compact a district is as opposed to

55:14a winding snake.

55:20>> But you're going to look at all that

55:22when you start to advise or start to

55:25draw those awards, right? We we will

55:28look at all of that and the criteria,

55:31you know, remember my analogy about

55:33buying a car. Sometimes things have to

55:35to give and take. So if you have

55:38districts that are more compact, then

55:40you may not be able to divide the base

55:42population evenly. And so this is sort

55:46of a a policy question that is going to

55:48have to be sorted out. And um

55:54it's it it may very well be that

55:56dividing up the base population

55:59conflicts with some of the other

56:00criteria that's listed and that's

56:02something that you all will have to sort

56:04out if you do add this 11th criteria.

56:07>> But you're going to but you're going to

56:09give us options to look at different.

56:12>> We will give you as many options as you

56:14all want. And so so moving the districts

56:17and or moving the wards around would uh

56:22could enable could enable some

56:24significant changes especially with the

56:26growth up around Williamsburg and those

56:28things that that area up in there.

56:31>> Sure.

56:32>> But you're also talking about disrupting

56:34and disenfranchising neighborhood

56:37boundaries. So you're back to

56:38disenfranchising special populations.

56:42And it it may be that making some of

56:44these changes, like I said, the criteria

56:46may conflict with one another. So things

56:48will have to to give and take and

56:51council will have to decide which ones

56:53to prioritize over others. But part of

56:56the guidelines with the redistricting is

56:58that you maintain the harmony.

57:01You can take cultural artifacts, you can

57:03take cultural grounds, you can take in

57:06respect to cohesiveness of

57:09neighborhoods. So adding number 11

57:14as opposed to just keeping 1 through 10,

57:17there's a possibility that you're

57:19talking about

57:21eliminating the wars as they are now and

57:24redrawing all the wars over again, which

57:26you're now talking about disenfr which

57:28is is in violation.

57:30>> It's not my call. I want to be clear

57:32about that. Um this is this is a policy

57:34decision for council to make. I'm here

57:36to advise you. But even with the policy,

57:39your policy can disenfranchise

57:42>> it. It's not my policy and

57:44>> it's discrimination.

57:45>> It's um this is a just a policy

57:48consideration for council to make. And

57:50so I was asked about the legality of it.

57:53It was something that was litigated and

57:55rejected in the Mclofflin suit.

57:57>> And you were our attorney.

57:58>> I was your attorney in that. Um, and we

58:01got the case dismissed because it wasn't

58:03required based on that 2016 US Supreme

58:07Court case to to divide based on voter

58:11registration figures.

58:14All in favor of Miss L's motion, please

58:17raise your hand.

58:20All against.

58:23I'm voting for it. I think it's a fair

58:26way of distribution.

58:28Thank you.

58:31part here.

58:38>> Mayor, with that, then we'll go into

58:40Miss Matthew is going to go into the

58:42process and the timeline presentation.

58:46>> So, um, with the criteria decided, we we

58:50now sort of have an open period, and

58:52this is where you all get to decide how

58:55you want this to look. Um, just a

58:58reminder of where we've been. There was

59:01an initial resolution to engage in this

59:03process. And let let me back up. I've

59:05been speaking for a while. Let me

59:07introduce myself. My name is Caroline

59:08Mackey. I'm an attorney with Pointer

59:10Sproul. I do um a lot of different

59:13things, but a portion of my work is

59:15redistricting and election related. and

59:18I have worked with uh about 10 to 15

59:21different jurisdictions in redistricting

59:23as well as redistricting litigation

59:25which is my previous experience

59:28representing the city. Um so I'm here to

59:32advise you about the law and to assist

59:34you and again you all are the policy

59:37makers. So tonight we're going to talk a

59:40little bit about process um where we

59:42have been on September 8th. You all

59:45passed a resolution

59:47indicating your intent to begin this

59:49process and then uh we had a meeting on

59:53September 22nd where we introduced the

59:55criteria. We talked about it and then

59:58tonight you all have now adopted a

1:00:01resolution for criteria and I want to

1:00:03talk about process. So,

1:00:08it's up to council what sort of public

1:00:11input you get, how you get that input,

1:00:13how you want the maps drawn. I know five

1:00:15years ago you had a citizen commission

1:00:17that did it. Um, most of the

1:00:19jurisdictions that I've worked with did

1:00:21not do that, but I will say we were

1:00:24doing it in 2021 when there simply

1:00:26wasn't time because the census data was

1:00:28delayed and we had to get maps in place.

1:00:31Um,

1:00:33you all will get to decide when you want

1:00:36draft maps, how many you want. If you

1:00:39don't like them, you can send the map

1:00:41drawer back. We can keep coming back.

1:00:44But our target date is January of next

1:00:46year. Um, just so that we can be sure to

1:00:50be well in front of any election cycle,

1:00:53get information to the board of

1:00:55elections. And um, that's that's sort of

1:00:59the big picture. So, um, you don't have

1:01:02a template resolution for this one just

1:01:04because this is a little bit more

1:01:07open-ended. Um, typically the

1:01:09jurisdictions that I've worked with have

1:01:11not had resolutions about the process,

1:01:14but it may be helpful here just to help

1:01:16guide um, you know, how you want that

1:01:18public input, when you want to see draft

1:01:21maps, um, that sort of thing. So, with

1:01:25that, I'm happy to answer questions

1:01:27about process. I'm happy to open it up

1:01:30to discussion

1:01:33>> questions.

1:01:35>> So basically you're going to do the

1:01:37draft maps

1:01:39uh based upon that criteria, bring them

1:01:42back for us to look at and then open it

1:01:45for public comment and that's your

1:01:48suggestion.

1:01:49>> Those are the things that sort of have

1:01:50to happen in order to have a resolution

1:01:53to um implement new words. I think it's

1:01:57important that the public get eyes on

1:01:59those maps and have time to look at them

1:02:01and the different shapes that they take

1:02:02and what they are and options available.

1:02:05Um, it's pretty hard to get people to

1:02:06give you input on something they can't

1:02:08see yet. So, the public hearings

1:02:10happening definitely they're legally

1:02:13required, but I think they're very

1:02:14important. People need to see what the

1:02:16potential maps look like and give us

1:02:17their input.

1:02:19>> Can we agree like on a number of maps?

1:02:21Like I don't think we need 30 of them. I

1:02:23mean, I think four or so is fair enough,

1:02:25you know, to kind of at least look at.

1:02:27I'm not saying we're agreeing. I'm just

1:02:28saying that way we can say, "Hey, here's

1:02:30four to be like a through whatever." You

1:02:32know what I mean? And that way I think

1:02:35if we go to a crazy amount like 30 maps

1:02:38or whatever, then that might make it way

1:02:39too hard to, you know,

1:02:41>> to figure it out.

1:02:42>> Agree. In my experience, it's better to

1:02:44keep that initial number on the lower

1:02:46end. um because some of these criteria

1:02:49may sort of rub up against one another,

1:02:53you may want, you know, four to five

1:02:55different options just so you can see

1:02:57kind of how these work um based on some

1:03:00of the discussion we were having earlier

1:03:03and and then um typically what I have

1:03:06seen is we would come back with about

1:03:09three maps, maybe there would be some

1:03:11changes to a few of them and then

1:03:13council would decide, okay, let's take

1:03:15these two to public hearing and then get

1:03:18public input on those two. But you can

1:03:20also you can have a website available

1:03:23that has all of them for a set period of

1:03:25time so that the public can weigh in on

1:03:27that. I think in 2021 you all had kind

1:03:31of a drop in session with big maps and

1:03:34members of the community could come in

1:03:36and and look at them and mingle and ask

1:03:38questions. And so all of that is sort of

1:03:40up for you all to decide. And I'm sorry,

1:03:44who did you say was going to draw the

1:03:45maps again?

1:03:47>> So that is up to you all. It It's not

1:03:50me, but um Angelia Haggobian within the

1:03:54city GIS she drew last time. She's

1:03:58prepared to do it again.

1:04:02>> But you'll be advising her on the

1:04:03criteria on how to

1:04:05>> correct

1:04:05>> how to draw those maps.

1:04:06>> Correct.

1:04:08Seems efficient.

1:04:11But she didn't draw those maps alone.

1:04:13She had the committee that helped her

1:04:14with that.

1:04:15>> That's right.

1:04:26>> A decision needs to be made about

1:04:28whether we're going to have is that what

1:04:30I'm hearing?

1:04:30>> Yeah. We need direction on whether we're

1:04:32going to go with a with Angelia drawing

1:04:35the maps and council reviewing them or a

1:04:37citizen committee.

1:04:39>> Correct. Correct. And then sort of when

1:04:41you want to see maps and how many.

1:04:44>> What about council? Can council draw

1:04:46maps?

1:04:46>> Yes.

1:04:48>> Yes. Um members of the community can

1:04:51draw maps and somebody can come and

1:04:54present it. I I've worked with another

1:04:56city in the state that the map that was

1:04:59ultimately adopted was not the one that

1:05:01the demographer drew with my assistance.

1:05:03It was a community map. And that's

1:05:07>> is there a way that they could be

1:05:09submitted electronically so that

1:05:13>> I think you do that you're going to have

1:05:14a whole bunch of options. You know

1:05:16there's

1:05:16>> be 27 reps

1:05:17>> there'll be I think since she's done

1:05:20four we at least start there let her do

1:05:22it get four whatever you recommend and

1:05:25then after we get that then we look at

1:05:27them and then we go from there. It's not

1:05:29saying that we're that set in stone. I'm

1:05:31just saying that's a starting point.

1:05:32Right. Is that what you're kind of

1:05:33saying? Yeah, that that would be

1:05:36>> a starting point.

1:05:37>> But then we look at them and we like at

1:05:39least two of them and then we can take

1:05:40them to public comment and get

1:05:42everybody's feedback and then go back to

1:05:43the drawing board from there. I mean,

1:05:47>> I'm fine with that. Nothing.

1:05:53>> You had an inquisitive look on your face

1:05:55about what he just said. Is

1:05:58>> No, no, I'm just listening.

1:06:03Mayor rather informally or formally if m

1:06:05if that was a motion then you'd still

1:06:06need to go through the process that a

1:06:08motion

1:06:09>> yeah that'll be a motion just to start

1:06:10that process that

1:06:12>> second it motion second discussion

1:06:17>> hearing none all in favor signify by

1:06:19saying I

1:06:20>> all opposed

1:06:23>> did I have was there opposition to that

1:06:26I'm not I'm not even sure what the

1:06:27motion is

1:06:28>> I see a hand I'm I'm just not sure what

1:06:31>> my motion was basically to Start out

1:06:32with four maps. Let the lady that drew

1:06:34it before draw it again. Give us the

1:06:37four options and then we can look at we

1:06:39can look at those four options and then

1:06:40we can take say two and present them and

1:06:42then that's what the public we we get

1:06:44and start in that direction.

1:06:45>> So the motion is for this company to

1:06:48draw the man for our senior GIS analyst

1:06:52>> with the lady that's already done it

1:06:53>> under that's why I just wanted to make

1:06:55sure I understood who was doing it.

1:06:57Yeah, but it's already done before

1:06:59>> GIS the GIS person and Caroline

1:07:02>> and and input from staff

1:07:05local so

1:07:05>> input from staff

1:07:07>> from the city manager's office and from

1:07:10your city attorney

1:07:12>> who's specifically in the city manager's

1:07:14office

1:07:15>> any direction from staff comes from me

1:07:17>> okay

1:07:18>> so we will we won't know who those

1:07:20individuals are

1:07:23>> mayor I I'm going to talk to Caroline

1:07:26about what the needs are and and work

1:07:28with Angelique and so we're going to

1:07:31develop those maps based on those

1:07:33criteria.

1:07:35Don't know what else in terms of

1:07:37direction.

1:07:38>> The council has final say so on what map

1:07:40gets approved.

1:07:43Mayor, if this were approved, we're

1:07:45going to bring you four maps and based

1:07:47on the 11 items and whatever council

1:07:52says, we'll either go back at any point

1:07:54if council were to say this map process

1:07:56was not efficient or effective and we do

1:07:58not like this, you could always pivot

1:08:00from this direction and do something

1:08:02else. So, the only thing that wasn't in

1:08:04the motion was the date by which you

1:08:06would want to have the maps and that's

1:08:08the only item that wasn't included in

1:08:10>> I don't know how long that takes to do.

1:08:11What's a what's a realistic time frame?

1:08:13Talk about 2 weeks, 30 days, 60 days.

1:08:16>> Mayor, where we've been at now is that

1:08:19we come back at every meeting where

1:08:21we've been now. The worst case scenario

1:08:23is if if you say we'd like to have this

1:08:26at the next council meeting, we shoot

1:08:28for that. And if we're not successful,

1:08:30then we let you know prior to that

1:08:32meeting. We failed in getting four maps

1:08:35together for you to review, but we've

1:08:37been using every meeting. So I would

1:08:38recommend using the next council meeting

1:08:40on looks like 10:23.

1:08:43>> So I'm hearing you say the date needs to

1:08:44have a comma to the extent possible.

1:08:47Period.

1:08:47>> To the extent possible, but if we don't

1:08:49get it, we'll tell you we could workshop

1:08:52meeting, right?

1:08:52>> That's the next council meeting.

1:08:54>> That's the 20th.

1:08:57>> If it doesn't work, then you said it.

1:08:58No, we're

1:08:59>> after that.

1:09:01>> Okay. 20th motion.

1:09:05>> Okay.

1:09:06>> Still second.

1:09:07>> That's the motion. You still second it.

1:09:09>> All right. Further discussion.

1:09:11All in favor signify by saying I. I.

1:09:14>> All opposed. Opposed.

1:09:17>> Everybody's good. Okay.

1:09:20>> You have it, sir.

1:09:21>> Thank you.

1:09:24>> All right, Caroline. Thank you very

1:09:25much. Do you have anything further?

1:09:27>> I I will see you in two weeks with board

1:09:30maps or you will have an update that we

1:09:32need more time and I will see you in

1:09:33four weeks with board maps.

1:09:37Thank you.

1:09:38>> Thank you all.

1:09:39>> Right, we're going to move on to our

1:09:40fire chief home

1:09:44fire department apparatus replacement

1:09:46plan.

1:10:03Mayor and Castle, good evening. Thank

1:10:05you again for allowing me to talk about

1:10:08the replacement of fire apparatus. This

1:10:11is something that we talked about before

1:10:12in the workshop session back in August

1:10:16of 2024

1:10:18and February of 2025.

1:10:21Ever since CO due to the exponentially

1:10:24rise in cost and the delays of getting

1:10:27these apparatus replaced, we wanted to

1:10:30look instead of scheduling it to make it

1:10:32part of a replacement plan. Kind of like

1:10:36the city has the capital improvement

1:10:38plan or the equipment replacement plan

1:10:41so we can factor in those things because

1:10:43these apparatus they last for decades

1:10:47and they're extremely expensive. We're

1:10:50looking at over a million plus dollars

1:10:51for these apparatus.

1:10:54So what are I'm talking about when I

1:10:56mention a fire apparatus. We have a

1:10:58fleet of vehicles. We have admin

1:11:01vehicles. We have service vehicles. But

1:11:03what I'm talking about right now is our

1:11:06fire engines, our ladder trucks, and our

1:11:09rescue trucks. That's what I talk about

1:11:11when I mention apparatus

1:11:15and our operational readiness. These are

1:11:18the backbone of the services we provide.

1:11:22These are the pieces of equipment that

1:11:24are uh staffed 247

1:11:28365.

1:11:30This is part of our effective response

1:11:33force. These are the people that show up

1:11:34to the fires, the first responder calls,

1:11:37the technical rescues, whatever 911

1:11:39calls in. We make sure that we have the

1:11:42adequate people on scene to help

1:11:43mitigate those emergencies.

1:11:46This also is a tremendous factor in our

1:11:49ISO rating and also accreditation

1:11:52criteria.

1:11:54What else is important about this is the

1:11:56safe and reliable apparatus.

1:11:59It's just not for our personnel. It's

1:12:02also for our customers. We share the

1:12:05road with everybody. We have to drive

1:12:06these vehicles in emergency situations.

1:12:09>> So, we need safe and practical apparatus

1:12:13and also it's efficient and effective

1:12:15operations. So we like to keep these

1:12:16apparatus similar because no matter who

1:12:18shows up on scene, they can locate

1:12:21things in a timely manner. They can

1:12:23deploy these things as quickly as

1:12:25possible and whatever we can do to make

1:12:27them deploy quickly where we can reduce

1:12:29injuries and things like that. Also

1:12:33those uh cancer prevention, that's a big

1:12:36thing you hear about in the fire service

1:12:37is the prevalence of cancer. So what

1:12:40we've done is we've worked to change to

1:12:42a clean cab concept where we get rid of

1:12:45the cloth seats. We've gone to metal

1:12:48floors. We've gone to vinyl seats so

1:12:50they can be easily deconned when we get

1:12:53done at a fire scene. Another thing

1:12:55we've done too is our newer specs is

1:12:58we've eliminated the onboard foam tanks.

1:13:01We've gone back to the inductors. So

1:13:03we're not storing class B foam intanks

1:13:06on the trucks. We keep them in the pales

1:13:08like we buy them.

1:13:10And then another important thing of this

1:13:13plan would be strategic budgeting.

1:13:16We talk about this all the time. Having

1:13:19that strategy because things change

1:13:22quickly, not just here, happens at the

1:13:24county, it happens in the state. We have

1:13:26to be flexible and to have the ability

1:13:29to adapt. Uh the conditions change. You

1:13:32look at where we were a few years ago.

1:13:34the county decided they wanted to

1:13:36purchase station 4. So we had to pivot.

1:13:40We had to find land and we had to build

1:13:41the station, provide a temporary station

1:13:44in just a short turnaround time. So

1:13:46having that flexibility when those

1:13:48circumstances arrive. Another thing too

1:13:51is where our pier trucks are

1:13:53manufactured back in April, they had a

1:13:56class four or five tornado hit up there.

1:13:59It didn't affect the plant, but it also

1:14:02affected where those people that work

1:14:04there at that plant, where they live.

1:14:06So, there's weather events that happen

1:14:08far away from Jacksonville that could

1:14:10affect this.

1:14:13The second thing is the challenges,

1:14:17the aging apparatus.

1:14:20The older they get, the preventative

1:14:22maintenance, the longer it takes, the

1:14:24more the wear and tear. Then finding the

1:14:27parts when it's time to fix them. Our

1:14:30ladder truck is 20 years old. We had a

1:14:34crack in the radiator. We're looking at

1:14:36a month right now.

1:14:39Ever since CO 2, having parts on stock

1:14:43is not happening like they used to. They

1:14:45basically had to make a radiator to go

1:14:48into this ladder truck. So it's been out

1:14:50of service for almost a month.

1:14:52>> So what do you do in that case? You have

1:14:53to depend on county or the base or

1:14:56something of that nature.

1:14:56>> Our automatic aid agreements. We have

1:14:58Quint 4 which provides a backup. We

1:15:01rotate apparatus to make sure this is

1:15:03available most of the time. But we also

1:15:06are in close contact with the base. They

1:15:08keep us advised of what ladders they

1:15:10have up and they'll actually move

1:15:12ladders closer to the city to help

1:15:15provide coverage if we need to at

1:15:16another station. So that excellent

1:15:18partnership. We try to hedge everything

1:15:20we can when it comes to these

1:15:22situations.

1:15:25Um you see in the picture right here,

1:15:27that's actually a engine company crew.

1:15:29They were riding that truck. They had a

1:15:31hose bust. The good thing about Captain

1:15:33Brown is is he keeps a lot of that stuff

1:15:35on stock. Having the same type of

1:15:38equipment that's specked out the same.

1:15:40He could have those parts standing by.

1:15:42he was able to talk him through that to

1:15:44get that uh part replaced and to get

1:15:47that truck back in service as quickly as

1:15:49possible.

1:15:51The increasing and evolving service

1:15:53demand

1:15:56talk about it. Jacksonville's growing,

1:15:58the county is growing. That leads to

1:16:01more calls, that leads to more

1:16:02inspections, that leads to more fire

1:16:04prevention. Also too with the base

1:16:06expansion, we've expanded where we

1:16:09provide coverage on base, but also to

1:16:12they've uh provided coverage expanded

1:16:15expanded coverage in the city. Another

1:16:18thing we do is the automatic aid

1:16:20agreements with our county volunteer

1:16:21fire department.

1:16:23Those partnerships has increased

1:16:26exponentially.

1:16:27We have one with Southwest right now and

1:16:29Pumpkin Center and coming before y'all

1:16:32in the next month or two, we'll have

1:16:34ones for Half Moon and Piney Green. So

1:16:37that way the city will be completely

1:16:40covered by our neighbors for automatic

1:16:41aid agreements and we can help provide

1:16:43coverage to them.

1:16:44>> When when you talk about aging

1:16:46apparatus, what is the age of your uh

1:16:49reserve trucks? Now

1:16:51>> we have a reserve truck that is 34 years

1:16:55old. Mhm.

1:16:56>> We have a reserve truck that is 24 years

1:16:59old and we have a reserve truck that is

1:17:03uh right at

1:17:06>> 16 years old.

1:17:09>> So new that one's getting grandpa age.

1:17:14>> It's a great truck. It doesn't have all

1:17:16the computers on it like the new ones do

1:17:18nowadays. It was simple and it's

1:17:20effective. So that's why we still have

1:17:22>> keep that one in case of an EMP. Right.

1:17:24>> That's right. Yes, ma'am.

1:17:25>> G uh how many manufacturers are there of

1:17:30fire apparatus now as far as trucks are

1:17:32concerned?

1:17:34>> I don't have an exact number in my uh

1:17:36head, mayor, but they have been

1:17:38consolidated. A lot of the smaller truck

1:17:40companies have been bought up by these

1:17:42larger conglomerates and absorb those

1:17:45smaller truck companies. There's

1:17:46probably only three. Sir,

1:17:48>> has that driven the cost up?

1:17:49>> It has. It has. As a matter of fact,

1:17:52they've been before Congress talking

1:17:54about the rising cost of uh the fire

1:17:57apparatus and the consolidation of a lot

1:18:00of these companies. You know, I was at

1:18:02the the league uh um legislative

1:18:07uh conference and uh I was surprised by

1:18:11that this came up about uh about the

1:18:15issues and there were a lot of city

1:18:17managers and mayors and council people

1:18:20talking about, you know, the fact that

1:18:22it's difficult to get these trucks. It's

1:18:25it's uh you know you have to do

1:18:27pre-planning

1:18:29um that uh that the one company that

1:18:34basically builds all those trucks is

1:18:36holding a lot of municipalities hostage

1:18:39and saying we're this is this is the way

1:18:42you have to do it and it's the only way.

1:18:45>> Yes sir. It's been a tremendous

1:18:46challenge ever since co

1:18:48>> they ask for that truck today and we'll

1:18:49deliver it in three and a half years.

1:18:51>> That's right. Well, I got a slide here

1:18:53coming up that talks about how long

1:18:54we've been waiting on our ladder truck.

1:18:56Um, but the manufacturer times have

1:19:00stabilized recently. They have not been

1:19:01reduced, but the length of those times

1:19:04have stabilized here.

1:19:06>> Does the warranty begin on delivery or

1:19:08>> on delivery? Yes, sir. When we accepted

1:19:12>> and that year goes quickly,

1:19:17>> one year. Some of the things we've done

1:19:19as a department to extend the life cycle

1:19:22of these larger apparatus is the

1:19:24utilation utilization of our squads. If

1:19:27you look in the picture here, this is

1:19:28squad one. We have a squad at each

1:19:31station. Uh this squad is set up with a

1:19:34skid unit for brush fires, but the other

1:19:36ones are set up with more equipment uh

1:19:38with a camper style shell to provide as

1:19:40a service company. Some of the other

1:19:42things we've done with that too as well

1:19:44is um

1:19:46we've modified our job descriptions

1:19:49where we've lowered where our

1:19:52firefighter twos can start getting

1:19:54checked off to drive squads to provide

1:19:56that first responder component to help

1:19:58take some of the burden off of the

1:20:00engines. Also too, this last hiring

1:20:03process, we actually advertised to have

1:20:05lateral hires for drivers. So, we're

1:20:08looking at other places too to find

1:20:10people that can drive these apparatus.

1:20:13We also monitor call trends and we

1:20:15rotate these apparatus if need be. If

1:20:18you remember a few years ago, we

1:20:20switched the ladder in the rescue based

1:20:22on these types of demands, but we

1:20:24continue to monitor the call trends.

1:20:26It's still consistent. Station 3 is the

1:20:30busiest station with one, two, and four

1:20:32being neck and neck every year.

1:20:34I was actually reviewing the stats

1:20:37today. Um it was kind of fascinating our

1:20:39quick stats from 2425 the fiscal year we

1:20:43administered as a fire department 188

1:20:46doses of

1:20:47>> Narcan.

1:20:49In 2526

1:20:52we administered 31.

1:20:54>> Would you say that the majority of your

1:20:56calls for service are medical related?

1:20:58>> Yes sir.

1:21:00>> We answered 5,300 emergency calls this

1:21:02past f this year. 3,600 of them were

1:21:05medical costs.

1:21:06>> What kind of apparatus rolls on those?

1:21:08>> Um, depending on what's staffed, it's

1:21:11the engine. If if we have the staffing,

1:21:14we staff the squads up as much as

1:21:16possible. So, right now, we have squad 4

1:21:19staffed to make sure that Quint 4 stays

1:21:22available as much as possible since our

1:21:25our ladder's down. But that's why we

1:21:26have that redundancy.

1:21:28>> Do you think like the increase of like

1:21:29building codes and stuff has decreased

1:21:31fires and stuff? Would would you say

1:21:32that cuz I mean every year they keep

1:21:34adding more and more stuff to building

1:21:36codes to you know make things a safer

1:21:37and you know less fire. I didn't know if

1:21:40you see that which helps you you know on

1:21:43your end. Do you see that at all or no?

1:21:45>> No sir. The uh the amount of fires are

1:21:47staying about the same.

1:21:48>> Okay. I didn't know if anything's

1:21:50decreased or

1:21:51>> but the structures the severity. Yes

1:21:54sir. the codes have I mean you look at

1:21:55the one we had uh Sunday in the uh the

1:21:59tire place they actually had a sprinkler

1:22:02system it actually the fire started in

1:22:04the rack of tires the sprinkler system

1:22:07kept it in check they were able to get

1:22:09in locate the seat of the fire and they

1:22:11were able to extinguish it quickly so

1:22:13that's where those codes have come in uh

1:22:16if those tires would have got to cooking

1:22:19>> what you think about if that you know

1:22:20tire shop was an older building that did

1:22:21not have that stuff I mean obviously

1:22:23probably a lot worse.

1:22:24>> Yep. No, the sprinkler system did

1:22:26exactly what it was designed to do. It

1:22:28kept that fire in check so we could come

1:22:30in there and take care of the problem.

1:22:32And another thing we've done to extend

1:22:34the life cycle is repowering and the

1:22:36potential to rebuild these. Our Quant 4,

1:22:39which is a 2014,

1:22:42uh, two years ago, we had to put a brand

1:22:43new motor in it.

1:22:46So, that could potentially extend the

1:22:48life cycle of that truck. Engine two.

1:22:51Uh, a year ago, we had to have the

1:22:53engine rebuilt.

1:22:54>> What does that cost?

1:22:56>> Uh, the replacement engine was $75,000

1:23:00and the rebuild, I believe, is right

1:23:02around 35 to 40.

1:23:03>> Did we do our own rebuild?

1:23:05>> No, ma'am. We

1:23:07>> short answer, an arm, a leg, and a left

1:23:09kidney.

1:23:09>> Yeah.

1:23:14>> Good news. Re recent purchases. Uh,

1:23:16ladder one. We ordered that in winter of

1:23:192023.

1:23:20Chief Hayes and our spec committee will

1:23:23be going to Wisconsin in December.

1:23:32>> You going to pick it up?

1:23:33>> No. No. They're just going for the

1:23:35pre-build.

1:23:44>> But they're going for the pre-build. and

1:23:45we expect that truck to be delivered uh

1:23:47in the summer the spring summer of 2027.

1:23:50So we've been waiting 4 years

1:23:54just now start

1:23:56>> that's how far the backlog has been

1:23:59since co

1:24:01>> on the bright side you're paying 2023

1:24:03price instead of 2027 price but that's

1:24:05about the only advantage.

1:24:07>> Yes ma'am council made that took that

1:24:09action and you paid that amount so that

1:24:11was a decision by the council. So, and

1:24:14then engine one, we just ordered it. Um,

1:24:18we expect that early in 2029.

1:24:22So, we actually used a different option

1:24:24that is available to us now with Pierce

1:24:27that we were able to spec almost exactly

1:24:31the same truck as engine 3, just a

1:24:33little bit change in the pump panel and

1:24:35we're able to just about cut the time in

1:24:37half to get that truck in service than

1:24:41if we would would have went with the

1:24:42custom option. And that's another one

1:24:45like we did with ladder one where we

1:24:47prepaid

1:24:49that provided a lot of savings

1:24:53talking about reducing the cost and

1:24:54delivery time. The prepayment with

1:24:58ladder one since we paid for it all back

1:25:00in 2023.

1:25:01The city saved almost $300,000

1:25:05with that prepayment with the new engine

1:25:08one. U the prepayment on that we saved

1:25:11almost $90,000. No, just over $90,000

1:25:14with that prepayment. There's different

1:25:16options. You can pay for the cab and

1:25:18chassis or you can pay a percentage of

1:25:21it, but your biggest bang for your buck

1:25:24is when you do the 100% prepayment on

1:25:27it. I talked about the build options.

1:25:30You have the stock truck that they just

1:25:33kind of spit out every once in a while

1:25:35that uh comes online. You get a chance

1:25:38to buy it. You have to be available in a

1:25:40few minutes to get that done. It really

1:25:42doesn't work with the city's purchasing,

1:25:45but uh they're really not designed

1:25:48for what we do. They really don't meet

1:25:50what we need. They're more for a

1:25:52volunteer or smaller department. Uh we

1:25:56use the build by Pierce option like I

1:25:59said with the new engine one that

1:26:02they basic they have a set amount of

1:26:05components 300 300 plus components that

1:26:08you can go and pick. Like I said, we

1:26:11basically designed the same truck we

1:26:13have as engine 3 and we were able to cut

1:26:15the delivery time in half and it also

1:26:17cut the cost of that truck by a couple

1:26:19hundred,000.

1:26:23Another thing too is having this

1:26:25apparatus or a potential for apparatus

1:26:28replacement plan or schedule so we can

1:26:30go ahead and factor these things out

1:26:32ahead of time and go ahead and having

1:26:34them designed and ready to go if the

1:26:36times or the time is right.

1:26:40One of the things we're looking at to

1:26:42help pay for this is the funding

1:26:44strategy. Uh you know the county the

1:26:47past three years they have set aside 3

1:26:49cents of the property tax to go to the

1:26:52fire service. Um every fire department

1:26:55within the county gets this 3 cents. Uh

1:26:59we've got it the last four years. Now

1:27:01these prices that you see on here is an

1:27:05estimate based on what they've allocated

1:27:08in the past. the 3 cents based on what

1:27:11today's current property taxes are.

1:27:15So, uh, you know, now I know that has

1:27:17been delayed. There's a chance for the

1:27:19property values to increase. We don't

1:27:21know what's going to happen this year.

1:27:22This is factored in as it is today, but

1:27:25it has increased every year.

1:27:29It's also important to talk about too

1:27:31that, you know, we provide a first

1:27:33responder service to our citizens, city

1:27:36of Jacksonville, the people that visit

1:27:38Jacksonville.

1:27:39It's also helped supplement the EMS

1:27:42system for the county. And we've talked

1:27:45about where we're providing those

1:27:47automatic aid agreements to those

1:27:50volunteer departments.

1:27:52It helps the county out tremendously,

1:27:55especially with their ISO rating in

1:27:57those districts too as well. So, it's a

1:27:59benefit to both. Excuse me. And we'll

1:28:02continue to in explore the grant

1:28:04opportunities.

1:28:06You know, the latter one was made

1:28:08available from a grant from Senator

1:28:10Lazar in the state of North Carolina.

1:28:12So, it helped pay for that apparatus.

1:28:17This is the proposed replacement plan.

1:28:20Next on the list right now would be our

1:28:22rescue one, which is our big equipment

1:28:25truck. Uh it's like the garage. It's uh

1:28:28it has everything that we need to help

1:28:30supplement the calls that we go on,

1:28:33fires, extrications, technical rescues,

1:28:36first responder calls. It carries a

1:28:39generator on it where we can light the

1:28:41scene up. We also can fill our uh SCBA

1:28:45bottles on scene with the cascade system

1:28:47that's on it. and it carries the extra

1:28:49extra equipment we need for those types

1:28:52of events.

1:28:54You can see it's looking at 14 years old

1:28:56as it stands right now with over 110,000

1:29:00miles. If we were to order it next uh

1:29:03FY28, we probably wouldn't get it until

1:29:062029.

1:29:08So, having this planned out where we can

1:29:10look at it and schedule this stuff and

1:29:12have it ready to go on the 1st of July,

1:29:14the 2nd of July would be a tremendous

1:29:16benefit.

1:29:18It also goes with quint four engine two.

1:29:21Engine three you see is a 2021. That

1:29:23would be in the near future. But that

1:29:25factors in keeping that truck at a

1:29:28minimum of 15 years is a frontline

1:29:30apparatus.

1:29:32And then utilizing it as a reserve to

1:29:35take the place when we need to switch

1:29:36them in and out. So those trucks, those

1:29:38apparatus would have a a 20 25 year

1:29:42service life.

1:29:45>> When they get to that point, what do you

1:29:46all do with them? I mean, I know you

1:29:47have reserves, but do you end up selling

1:29:49those or what?

1:29:50>> We have the opportunity to sell them.

1:29:51Uh, the last one we donated to the

1:29:53college for their firefighter program.

1:29:56So, we have the opportunity to do

1:29:58whatever.

1:29:59>> That was like volunteer fire departments

1:30:01to help them on, you know, their cost on

1:30:03obviously the same budget. So, I didn't

1:30:05know if that's what y'all did with them

1:30:06or not.

1:30:07>> Yes, sir. That that option is out there.

1:30:09It would entirely be up to council what

1:30:11they would like to do with the surplus

1:30:13equipment. Um the annual price increase

1:30:16is still we're estimating that 5 to 6%.

1:30:20Um there's some predictions that it

1:30:22might decrease a little bit. Uh it's not

1:30:24going to go to zero and it's not going

1:30:25to go down, but they're saying it may go

1:30:28to 3 or 4%, but we're still factoring in

1:30:30with that five to 6% increase.

1:30:33>> Going back to the revenue side of it, um

1:30:36you say the county does do that 3% on on

1:30:39property tax is dedicated. How do how do

1:30:42they distribute that again to the

1:30:44municipalities? What do they base that

1:30:46distribution on?

1:30:47>> On the property values

1:30:49of the municipality

1:30:50>> of the municipality

1:30:51>> or the district that the volunteer fire

1:30:53department serves.

1:30:56>> Chief Tolman, I had a quick question. So

1:30:59for our surplus, do we ever donate to

1:31:03municipalities that have been um

1:31:06devastated by natural disasters?

1:31:10Uh

1:31:12well, speaking of surplus, you know, we

1:31:13had the the temporary trailers where

1:31:15station 4 was. Uh after Helalem, we were

1:31:18able to take council donated those uh

1:31:20those campers to a department in the

1:31:23western part of the state, Fair View

1:31:24Fire Department, because their station

1:31:26got destroyed. So, it allowed them to

1:31:28continue responding and have a place to

1:31:30stay. So, council made that option. Uh

1:31:34hopefully the circumstances never arise,

1:31:36but that would be entirely up to

1:31:37council. Feel like rescue one is going

1:31:40to be 2028. It's got 109,000 miles on it

1:31:43now. It's going to be well used by the

1:31:47time it gets ready to be changed out.

1:31:50Isn't it?

1:31:50>> Yes, sir. That's entirely up to the

1:31:53department, but it could be a donation.

1:31:55Our old squad that rescue one replaced

1:31:57Richland still has it and utilizes it.

1:32:00So,

1:32:05you just get started. It's about 8,000

1:32:07miles a year.

1:32:10>> That's a good 8,000 miles a year.

1:32:12>> Yeah. I mean, it's a big apparatus, but

1:32:14it's 8,000 miles a year on a 16 year

1:32:17>> there. So, that's the number. They

1:32:20average anywhere from 600 to 900 miles a

1:32:22month.

1:32:25Uh the benefits of the replacement plan

1:32:28obviously is the predictability the uh

1:32:31purchasing and operationally for our

1:32:33department and to provide the service we

1:32:36have. You know uh city may grow, there

1:32:39may be a fifth station in the near

1:32:41future and there may not be. It just

1:32:43depends on how the winds change. Um, we

1:32:46could take advantage of those prepaid

1:32:49discounts to save the city a lot of

1:32:51money when it comes time to purchase

1:32:53these apparatus, but we can also secure

1:32:55our place in line for ordering. And it

1:32:58goes back to that strategic budgeting so

1:33:00we can go ahead and factor this stuff in

1:33:01for the future.

1:33:05I'll go ahead and answer one question if

1:33:07you'll allow me, but uh, everything but

1:33:10the rescue or excuse me, ladder one and

1:33:12four will have a tailboard. So,

1:33:16before Mr.

1:33:19>> Do y'all recognize the man in the

1:33:20picture

1:33:23you

1:33:27>> can ride the tail board.

1:33:30>> Do we have a dalmatation?

1:33:33>> We can assign one for Mr. Yiro if you'd

1:33:36like to Washington.

1:33:39>> I appreciate y'all allowing me that

1:33:40latitude.

1:33:42>> That's a good one.

1:33:44This is not related to the replacement

1:33:46plan, which by the way, I think is

1:33:47really smart to plan ahead. This is just

1:33:49good business to be prepared and, you

1:33:51know, know the numbers that are coming.

1:33:52I saw a little optimism on the time

1:33:54frames improving over time on your

1:33:56delivery dates. They were getting a

1:33:57little bit better. Hopefully that rings

1:33:58true in the industry. Um, Representative

1:34:02Gable was here recently, just for the

1:34:03public's knowledge. He was here recently

1:34:05and presented the fire department with a

1:34:07check from um from the state. And would

1:34:10you mind telling us and sharing with the

1:34:11public what those funds are going to be

1:34:13used for?

1:34:13>> Yes, ma'am. Um, we're going to use those

1:34:16to replace our boat one and buy some

1:34:19other water rescue equipment. Um, as a

1:34:22matter of fact, we just got a

1:34:23notification from the county that the

1:34:24state with this storm coming up through

1:34:26the Gulf is looked at activating uh

1:34:29teams to go help respond to the middle

1:34:31of the state potentially later in the

1:34:33week. And they've actually reached out

1:34:34to Jacksonville to see if we could help

1:34:36provide people. So we told them we would

1:34:38work with them and try to provide people

1:34:40if we can. So this would be an asset

1:34:41that would be used in the city of

1:34:44Jacksonville and also with our

1:34:46partnerships with the county and camp.

1:34:48So we've actually worked in coordination

1:34:51with them so we're not duplicating

1:34:53equipment and it's stuff that everybody

1:34:55can utilize too as well.

1:34:58Let me commend your staff of of putting

1:35:00this together because I think,

1:35:02>> you know, with the fact that the the

1:35:04build times, you know, obviously we want

1:35:08our our folks to have the most upto-date

1:35:10and and safest equipment we can.

1:35:14And I think this this plan and again I

1:35:17commend your staff for coming up with it

1:35:20is going to be an important strategic

1:35:23uh part of making sure that we can

1:35:26provide optimal service to our citizens.

1:35:29So thank you very much.

1:35:30>> Thank you sir. I'll be sure to share

1:35:32that.

1:35:39>> Good resation. Thank you.

1:35:41>> Sounds good. Man, this will come back in

1:35:43the budgeting process through our

1:35:45equipment replacement plan, and that's

1:35:47where Chief Sat getting this to this

1:35:48point gives council the long-term

1:35:50planning ability to factor these items

1:35:52in with the other equipment. So, that's

1:35:54where you'll see it next, mayor.

1:35:57>> Thank you.

1:35:59>> Thank you,

1:36:00Mr. W.

1:36:02>> I do, Mayor. And I think we should just

1:36:04let that picture up

1:36:08because that happened to be the best

1:36:09find ever.

1:36:11I don't know where you

1:36:14>> I'd like to have the stuff that photo

1:36:15with the driver took off.

1:36:19>> I emailed council earlier, Mr.

1:36:21Willingham's slides. I apologize for not

1:36:23getting them up on the screen, but I'll

1:36:24get that picture and send that out to

1:36:26you as well. Mayor, let me start out. We

1:36:27just received a public service

1:36:29announcement for there will be planned

1:36:33exercises at Camp Lune Air Station New

1:36:36River and Naval Medical Center October

1:36:397th and 8th. They're going to test

1:36:40security, emergency response, and

1:36:42readiness procedures. The reason I say

1:36:44it now is because you should expect

1:36:45significant delays at all of the gates.

1:36:49And so they some gates are going to have

1:36:51enhanced force protection measures.

1:36:53That'll be at Wilson Boulevard. And this

1:36:55needs fairing gates during those times.

1:36:57So October 7th and 8th, we will put this

1:36:59out on our um social medias uh so that

1:37:04people know between 9:00 a.m. and and

1:37:06300 p.m. Um two gates they say to avoid

1:37:09if possible are in the French Creek

1:37:12area. So French Creek area, it says

1:37:15avoid this area between 8:00 a.m. and

1:37:175:00 p.m. on October 8th. So if you do

1:37:20not want to get caught up in that

1:37:21traffic, do not go into that area. Uh

1:37:24motors should expect significant traffic

1:37:26delays at entry points on Marine Corps

1:37:29Air Station New River during peak hours

1:37:31both dates. And what they will be doing

1:37:34is they'll have an active exercise area

1:37:37um throughout the installation to alert

1:37:39motorists to personnel for what's going

1:37:41on. So there are a couple of things. Uh

1:37:43the Camp Johnson and TT gates will be

1:37:46closed 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. on the

1:37:497th. So don't try those gates at all. uh

1:37:53they're you're encouraged to use the

1:37:54Hulcom Boulevard and Piney Green Gates

1:37:56when possible. So, we just say that for

1:37:58our citizens so that it's aware. Uh we

1:38:01will share this on social. If anybody

1:38:02has any questions, let me know. If you

1:38:03want to take a picture of this after the

1:38:04meeting so that you can share it, I'll

1:38:06give you a copy of that one.

1:38:09Mayor, we have three things that I'd

1:38:11like to share with council from this

1:38:13past week. Uh we did have bells across

1:38:15America that visited the uh the Carolina

1:38:20Museum of the Marine. first time they've

1:38:22been there, but not the first time

1:38:24they've been in our community. You're

1:38:25going to see Colonel Pace here talking

1:38:27to uh the members of the ceremony at the

1:38:31museum. The Bells Across America is part

1:38:33of the US Navy Gold Star program. We had

1:38:36the Navy Gold Star coordinator, uh

1:38:38Alicia McCoy. She came and she spoke to

1:38:41the families. She read the names of all

1:38:44the service members that have fallen

1:38:46this year and presented the families

1:38:48present with their uh yellow rose. Uh

1:38:51this is a significant event for our

1:38:53community um every year. So when we can

1:38:55welcome in the gold star uh program

1:38:59through the bells across America, uh

1:39:01it's it's a nice honor to have the

1:39:03Carolina Museum of the Marine now so

1:39:04that we can have the ceremony inside or

1:39:07outside. And so, uh, anytime this

1:39:10opportunity is afforded to us, we want

1:39:12to welcome them back into Jacksonville

1:39:15as part of our remembrance for any

1:39:18military personnel who have passed away

1:39:21this year. And the fire department

1:39:23volunteered their bell so that they

1:39:26could ring the bell um, in honor of each

1:39:29fallen service member from the year.

1:39:34Right down around the corner, the Lune

1:39:37Memorial Gardens restroom facility has

1:39:40finally opened up. This is a great joint

1:39:43project that had multiple entities who

1:39:46were involved between the city of

1:39:47Jacksonville, Enslo County, and the

1:39:49state of North Carolina. You now have

1:39:51this excellent facility located inside

1:39:55of the Memorial Gardens. So for all of

1:39:58our events now, we have permanent

1:40:00restrooms and they will be part of our

1:40:04parks department will maintain these

1:40:06facilities as part of maintenance of the

1:40:10Lune Memorial Gardens. Uh it's great to

1:40:13have uh the process over. It has taken

1:40:16us quite a significant amount of time to

1:40:19get to this point, but the restrooms are

1:40:21open, active, and we officially cut a

1:40:23ribbon for the restrooms. That's how big

1:40:26of a deal they are uh in the community.

1:40:28I think it's an excellent ad. And then

1:40:30the last thing that I have, mayor, is

1:40:32you're going to see Pat Donovan

1:40:34Brandenburgg here on the left. She

1:40:35traveled with the uh North Carolina

1:40:39Coastal Federation for the Restoring

1:40:41America's Estuaries Conference. Pat went

1:40:45to tell our story. I say this, it's a

1:40:47it's a really big deal for Pat to talk

1:40:49about river restoration

1:40:51over and over again. We're one of the

1:40:54only places in the world that have

1:40:56effectively restored the

1:40:59river after it being completely

1:41:01devastated. So for Pat to be invited and

1:41:04for her to attend to tell the story,

1:41:06what she was talking about is not the

1:41:08standard methods that other people think

1:41:09about, but she was talking about the

1:41:11oyster highway and how effective the

1:41:13oyster has been the lead actor in river

1:41:17restoration. Uh so for anyone that

1:41:19doesn't know the story, I encourage you

1:41:21to talk to Pat. She will gladly talk to

1:41:24you about the history, talk to you about

1:41:26the effectiveness and and talk about

1:41:28things that we considered throughout our

1:41:30history. You know, we did this a couple

1:41:32years ago with for the All-America City

1:41:35award, but for Pat to be able to have

1:41:38this opportunity to travel with the

1:41:40North Carolina Coastal Federation. uh

1:41:42they call her uh as often as possible

1:41:44because people want to know how do we

1:41:46recreate what you've done in

1:41:47Jacksonville and this is one of those

1:41:49things that is unique to us that it's

1:41:52great for us to be able to tell our

1:41:54story. So to have the professional staff

1:41:56and for the council to allow Pat to be

1:42:00able to go and to tell this story is uh

1:42:03it's something that we're thankful for

1:42:05to be able to share how we do business

1:42:07here in our community.

1:42:10>> Thank you, Mayor. Thank you.

1:42:14Motion to go into close session.

1:42:20Thank

1:42:22you so much tonight.

```*