Board of County Commissioners

Leon County, Florida

Special Meeting

FALLS CHASE DEVELOPMENT

October 12, 2005

A special meeting was conducted to consider negotiations with regard to the Fallschase Chapter 163 Development Agreement. The following were present in a publicly noticed meeting that was held on October 12, 2005, at the County Courthouse in the 5^th Floor Conference Room - Commissioner Proctor, Commissioner Rackleff, County Attorney, Herb Thiele; County Administrator, Parwez Alam; Cari Roth, Miller-Brown & Olive assisting the County Attorney; Representatives from Buck Lake Alliance; Ron Carlson, Executive Vice President A.I.G.; Andrew Lewis A.I.G.; Rick Bateman; Attorney Robert Apgar whose firm is representing A.I.G.

The Meeting was called to order at 12:30 p.m. by Commissioner Proctor, Chairman of the Special Meeting.

Commissioner Proctor indicated that Mr. Rick Bateman would be representing the Applicant; and Ms. Cari Roth would be allowed to make comment if she so desired.

Commissioner Proctor stated that an agreement would need to be reached at this meeting in order to serve Public Notice on the next day, October 13, 2005, regarding this matter being heard at the October 25^th, 2005 Regular BCC Meeting.

Mr. Bateman noted that two representatives from A.I.G. as well as their attorney, Bob Apgar with the firm of Greenberg Traurig, Ron Carlson, Vice-President A.I.G. Baker, and Andrew Lewis were present today with him. Mr. Bateman stated that unlike many 163 Agreements this Agreement has not just been a negotiation between a potential developer or a landowner and the County. AIG has had to involve the Trust for Public Land, the Florida Community Trust, the Buck Lake Alliance, and the City of Tallahassee among various other entities interested in this Development. Mr. Bateman informed the group that A.I.G. Baker has taken over from Fallschase as the Applicant in this matter

Mr. Bateman stated the purpose of this Hearing is to make sure everyone understands what “rules of conduct they will be subject to” before the developer gets involved in a project that cannot go forward. Mr. Bateman then turned the meeting over to Mr. Carlson, Executive Vice President, A.I.G.

Mr. Carlson stated that A.I.G has spent a lot of time trying to create a resolution of the entire property for this development that would be agreeable to all parties involved. One aspect of this resolution would allow for the easement of the lake bottom to be placed in public hands; and, possibly ultimately for the donation of the fee to the public.

Mr. Carlson referred to the current main site development plan during a slide presentation. Mr. Carlson detailed the plans for the site. He pointed to Hwy 90 and the intersection of Hwy 90 and Buck Lake Road. The retail commercial area is on both sides of Buck Lake Road as you enter the property. The main entrance to the remainder of the property is to the right – this is the relocation of the current Fallschase Boulevard which enters into the Development area. Additional entrances are planned that he pointed out. Most of the rest of the land he reported is a mixture of 1,514 residential units spit evenly between single family and attached housing.

Mr. Carlson indicated that A.I.G. does not foresee any apartments in the Development. The attached housing would all be ‘for sale units’. He then pointed to the upper Lafayette Lake basin and the shoreline there that is part of the property. Mr. Carlson noted a couple changes to the previous Plan submitted. The first change he discussed is an adjustment to the retail area.

Mr. Carlson pointed to Hwy 90 cutting across and Buck Lake Road entering the property. Mr. Carlson noted that A.I.G. now has 2 major anchors and 2 junior anchors facing a new circulation road that will come off of Hwy 90 at the western edge of the property. Mr. Carlson stated this road will take a significant portion of the commercial traffic off of Buck Lake and provide a signalized access point to the high density commercial uses.

Commissioner Proctor verified that this road is a new introduction in terms of access to the commercial area. Mr. Carlson confirmed that this is a ‘new introduction’ and stated this is not a ‘public’ road. This road is intended to provide better access to the area.

Mr. Carlson outlined the Development with slides. The storefront of the 1^st story faces what A.I. G. is calling “Main Street”. The second story shop is actually the back of the store. This takes care of a lot of elevation change. What Mr. Carlson is referring to as “Main Street” is actually Fallschase Boulevard. He then went on to illustrate how the ground floors would be retail; and, the second floors could be either retail, office, or residential. This look is intended to take people back to the old days, per Mr. Carlson. The interaction with the shops and cafes is important in regards to locating the proposed theatre where the plan indicates.

Commissioner Proctor asked Staff about the overview of the commercial plan. Commissioner Proctor asked if Staff saw any problems with this plan. Commissioner Proctor asked if Staff saw anything that made them want to ‘jump and shout’ right now. Cari Roth didn’t see any problems with the layout; but noted the issue that had come up before which was with the median cuts on Buck Lake Road and their proximity to the Hwy 90 Intersection and making sure those don’t interfere with the turning movement. Mr. Carlson said Fallschase Boulevard has been moved down and that existing median cut has been closed and moved it at least 600 ft.

Commissioner Proctor asked Mr. McDevitt, Public Works, if this 600 ft of space created with the new Plan is enough and verified that this new plan alleviates concerns Staff had with a connection in the previous plan. Commissioner Proctor asked what the Buck Lake Alliance’s response is to the current Plan. Mr. Carlson indicated they have not formulated their response yet. A.I.G. has shared this plan with them and while he thinks it was well-received he would be remiss to say the Alliance approves of this change. The Buck Lake Alliance is planning a public meeting that Mr. Carlson will attend on October 24^th, the day before the Commission meeting.

Commissioner Proctor again stated how helpful he felt it would be for the Commissioners to tour the site themselves. Mr. Carlson said he would be out of town next week; but could do a tour with the Commissioners on Monday, October 24^th and encouraged Staff to join them. The addition of the new street relieves a lot of tension from traffic concerns.

Andrew Lewis then detailed some of the elevations in the plan. He referenced the details of a preliminary grading scheme.

Commissioner Proctor asked Mr. Apgar about the commitment of the Right of Way on Buck Lake Road and where it is in the draft document before the Commission speaks to this issue. Mr. Apgar informed Commissioner Proctor the Right of Way is presented in paragraph 15 and that also refers to a list of improvements that will be described in an exhibit that Mr. Carlson can describe generally. Commissioner Proctor wanted the public to understand what has been negotiated so far, and just how much of the Right of Way has been rendered.

Mr. Carlson said it has always been his intention to donate this Right of Way. Mr. Carlson wanted to know if what he is presenting is consistent with the county plans and asked if the County’s plan takes the entire Right of Way out of the Fallschase side of the road. Commissioner Proctor cited the current Agreement Paragraph 15 (a) “The Applicant shall donate right-of-way to the County for improvement of Buck Lake Road pursuant to the plans previously approved by the County and the Department of Transportation”. Commissioner Proctor indicated that he does not know what plans previously approved this section is referring to.

Mr. Bateman said that there are an approved set of plans. At one point in time, that widening was approved and it was funded. That money was subsequently sent somewhere else. Those plans have been approved, stamped. Mr. Carlson asked if Staff had an approximate idea of how many feet we are talking about – in depth. Mr. Carlson said he does not have a problem with the section that goes through the location where he has both sides of the road. Staff responded they are talking about approximately 50 ft.

Cari Roth asked whether the intersection plan still works with A.I.G.’s current plans in regard to Hwy 90 and Buck Lake Road. Mr. Carlson said he had committed to do all the work on Buck Lake Road at his expense down to the main entrance to Fallschase. Commissioner Proctor asked if Mr. Carlson is referring to the ‘new’ main entrance. Mr. Carlson said that was correct. Also, A.I.G. would build the three additional turn-ins to the east in accordance with the plans already drawn for the County. A.I.G. will also install any signalization on Mahan, any accel or decel lanes required on Mahan. Mr. Carlson noted Buck Lake has 3 left turn lanes in the new plan that A.I.G. would install, as well. Also, Mahan is already constructed to receive the third left-turn lane.

Mr. Bateman wanted to point out there was still 2 or 3 million dollars left in monies that had been retained for the intersection work. Mr. Carlson said he is willing to pay for the direct impacts Fallschase is making on these contiguous roadways. Commissioner Proctor said this would be warmly regarded by the Board.

County Administrator, Parwez Alam asked if Mr. Carlson is saying that A.I.G. will pay for the intersection improvement on Buck Lake and Mahan. Mr. Carlson said yes. County

Administrator Alam noted that would help the County in regard to transferring the money budgeted for that then to the Mahan Project. County Administrator Alam spoke with Mr. Bateman the previous night regarding Commissioner Proctor’s attempt to get that project fully funded at the Board Meeting with some monies from another project; but, it didn’t go through. County Administrator Alam indicated that we need to keep trying to get this project completed. One issue, then would become how soon we could complete the Mahan Project as stated by County Administrator Alam. County Administrator Alam stated any monies we could save then on that intersection would be monies the County could spend on the Mahan Project; and, that would be one more step toward attaining that goal.

Mr. Bateman reported the County had money left for the intersection and a certain amount of money dedicated to four-laning Mahan down to I-10; but there’s a shortfall on the four-lane project. County Administrator Alam said the County is $8 million dollars short on funding for the four-lane project.

County Administrator Alam stated that $16 million dollars has been budgeted for the work on Mahan; but, the project is going to cost $24 million. As stated, County Administrator Alam pointed out that Commissioner Proctor tried to get the Board to use $8 million dollars set aside for a different project that will never happen; but, the Board did not concur. County Administrator Alam said the County needs to continue to try to find the monies to complete the Mahan Project.

Commissioner Proctor stated that what A.I.G. has put on the table is paying for a traffic impact for which the County then would not have to absorb monies; and to the extent that A.I.G. is alleviating the County’s absorption of the cost of these changes creates a strong plus for this Project. Mr. Carlson thanked Commissioner Proctor. Commissioner Proctor said this was a strong check mark for him toward approval of the Agreement.

Mr. Carlson asked if there were any more questions on the “commercial” aspect of the planned Development. David McDevitt, Public Works asked what the overall plan for Weems Road is.

Andrew Lewis pointed out a road planned to go to Weems Road to help alleviate some of the traffic onto Mahan. Commissioner Proctor asked if this was a new road. Mr. Lewis said yes. The question was raised about signalization at Weems Road. Mr. Lewis said they had not anticipated putting in a signal at Weems Road; but, they had not gotten very far with engineering studies to determine that yet.

Mr. Carlson pointed out that the entrance is awfully close to Mahan; but, if the Right of Way is there or if there’s enough room A.I.G. would do some sort of turn lane going into the property. Commissioner Proctor asked Mr. McDevitt if he was comfortable with that and he confirmed that he was.

Cari Roth asked if Mr. Carlson would go through the intersections and note which ones are full intersections, which ones are signalized and which ones are right-in and right-out. Mr. Carlson detailed these on the drawings. Mr. Carlson did say there was a median cut on Mahan that was not quite in the right alignment. Mr. Carlson went through the entrances – there are three entrances coming down the remainder of the property. Ms. Roth asked if these were right in/right out. Mr. Carlson said this would depend on whether or not there was a median in the County’s Plans.

County Administrator Parwez Alam asked about an area on the map. Mr. Carlson informed him this area represented a proposed movie theatre. Commissioner Proctor asked the Staff if there were any other questions on this area. There being none, Mr. Carlson was asked to move to the next area.

Mr. Carlson proceeded to talk about the lake bottom and a proposal that is on the table to develop and preserve the lake bottom. Commissioner Proctor asked Mr. Bateman to state what paragraph addresses the lake bottom in the Draft Agreement. Mr. Bateman said Paragraph 6 addresses this issue under “Southern Property” which has been defined as everything below the 51 ft contour. Mr. Bateman pointed out that almost all of that property A.I.G. is going to place a Conservation Easement on, with the exception of what they are about to present.

Mr. Carlson is going to explain what would go into conservation easement. This idea was just developed within the last week to ten days. A.I.G. has contracted with Mr. Bailey to acquire the lake bottom. A.I.G. has discussed various solutions with the County, the City, and nobody really wanted to step forward and commit the funds to make this work. Therefore, A.I.G. decided to buy the land and has developed a plan that is a fairly non-obtrusive plan, per Mr. Carlson. They have about 80 lake front lots, a good many of which are on what has been referred to as ‘fingers’ that have already been filled.

Andrew Lewis detailed the areas that will receive some degree of fill to address the building pads, driveways and the garage pads. If this Plan is approved by the County, A.I.G. would grant a conservation easement to Leon County on the remainder of the lake. The timing of this grant however, may be a factor in regard to the income tax considerations they would have to face.

Mr. Carlson said A.I.G. feels with the easement in public hands the lake bottom problem should be solved for everyone. A.I.G. can work it out economically with this type of plan. Therefore, Mr. Carlson said the “Master Plan”, or, the first Plan A.I.G. showed the Commission will be amended to incorporate the above detailed lots and the changes in the retail section prior to the Commission Meeting on the 25^th.

Commissioner Proctor asked County Attorney Thiele if he had any problem with the lake bottom issue. County Attorney Thiele expressed that he had no problems with the plan; obviously, he said Environmental would have to take a look at the elevations.

Mr. Carlson informed the group that A.I.G. had the Buck Lake Alliance and other neighborhoods out yesterday and they walked most of the shoreline. Mr. Carlson continued showing slides. He referred to the green circles on one drawing to point out that they represented specimen trees. A.I.G. has designed this plan to have little or no impact on these specimen trees.

A.I.G. has put house pads on each one of the lots. Mr. Carlson stated A.I.G believes this method will preserve the area. County Administrator Alam asked what the elevation of the lots would generally be. A.I.G. originally talked to Buck Lake about filling all of the property below the tree line to about the 46 ft contour. The tree line is really at 47 and above. Buck Lake’s comment was that on the lots that are not on the fingers they really don’t want a lot of fill operations going on.

Mr. Carlson pointed to the eastern side of the property involving a lot of real estate there that is between the 51 and 40 foot contour which was generally the back lot line. County Administrator Alam asked what the elevation of the houses would be. Mr. Carlson indicated that the finished full elevation of the houses would be at 53 ft. - flood level is at 51 ft. However, Mr. Carlson stated that as they walked the property yesterday there are a lot of live oak trees below the 51 feet. He also said A.I.G. is referring to the houses that would be on a finger; and, that they would put a kind of ‘sea wall’ around the finger.

Mr. Carlson didn’t know if Buck Lake Alliance could agree with this Plan; but, they have agreed with ‘that’ concept. A representative from Buck Lake spoke up from the audience to say that he would not say that the Buck Lake Alliance would go so far to say that they agree with the just-mentioned concept.

Commissioner Proctor clarified that these houses are on ‘pilings’. County Administrator Alam said he asked about the elevation because he had a concern about ‘flooding’. Mr. Carslon said the Commissioners can walk the contour. Mr. Carlson then noted that the carriage houses are at 51 ft and the road is also at 51 ft.

Commissioner Proctor spoke to the issue of the ‘lake bottom’ and how there has been reticence on the part of the County; because County as well as public outcry did not want ‘public’ dollars to be invested in this. For A.I.G. to invest in the lake bottom to the extent they are is a huge breakthrough according to Commissioner Proctor.

Commissioner Proctor complimented what the developer has achieved by agreeing to put money in the lake bottom that the County did not have to invest. The lake bottom, Commissioner Proctor noted, will now be placed in the hands of the public. This was a controversial issue Commissioner Proctor is very pleased to see resolved.

Mr. Carlson then referred to the drawings representing the type of architecture A.I.G. is going to impose on builders. He re-iterated that A.I.G. is there for the long haul.

Commissioner Proctor stated that these ‘house types’ are too reminiscent perhaps. The ‘old time south’ look did not appeal to Commissioner Proctor; and, this type of architecture was not culturally sensitive. Commissioner Proctor inquired as to whether the architectural appeal could be broadened.

Mr. Carlson said A.I.G. could certainly consider that. Mr. Carlson said he would hope these homes were not reminiscent of plantation homes. Commissioner Proctor asked what the basic square footage of these homes is.

Depending on the lot size house size will go from a low of 1250, 1500 sq. ft. on a single family home up to 4,000 to 5,000 sq. ft. per Mr. Carlson. Commissioner Proctor stated he hoped that the smaller homes would not be so prissy as to exclude our state workers from being able to afford to live there.

Commissioner Proctor reiterated that average, ordinary, working people need a place to live and would like that place to be decent, safe, and prosperous in tone. Commissioner Proctor does not want to see A.I.G. out price this county’s market. Mr. Carlson said the attached housing is an alternative that will be available to a lot of people.

Mr. Carlson then turned to the commercial renderings. Commissioner Proctor asked Mr. Carlson why this community should embrace what A.I.G. is proposing.

Mr. Bateman and Mr. Lewis spoke to a chart referring to the square footage, the appropriate value of the property, the ad valorem taxes, the payroll, and the jobs the project would create. Mr. Bateman said the chart reflects about $300,000 in ad valorem taxes, a huge amount in sales tax, with about $14 million a year in sales tax from which a lot of local money will go directly to A.I.G. and not to the State. So, A.I.G. will be able to maintain a very big payroll. A.I.G. will give those figures to the Commission this afternoon.

Mr. Carlson said several million dollars annually will come into this community, just from the commercial aspect of the development. Then, Mr. Carlson indicated that 1500 units at $250,000 average construction cost will also create a lot of money. This is not counting the money that will come to the County by way of sales tax and to the State that will flow back down. Plus, the money for the jobs created by this project will be a plus to the community. A.I.G. said there is a huge payroll associated with the retail deal.

Commissioner Proctor asked if we could get some kind of time line as to when these jobs would come into being. Mr. Carlson stated the time it takes will be dictated by the length of time it takes to get through the upcoming probating processes which he believes is between 3 – 5 months. As soon as they receive permits, A.I.G. would start site construction of the commercial and the first phase of residential.

The vertical construction on the retail would start as soon as the site was ready to accept it; probably early next year. Commissioner Proctor asked if A.I.G. would use local people – local engineers and architects – or were they going to come in with these people already in mind. A.I.G. has used local firms. Mr. Carlson said he cannot promise that the shopping center final engineering plans will be done by a local firm because they have almost a captive engineering firm that knows how they do business all over the United States so they will handle that. In regard to architecture, Mr. Carlson said he is not aware of any large scale retail architects in Tallahassee. But, they plan to use a local firm for the residential aspects. Commissioner Proctor asked if someone moves to the development and buys a lot, and decides they want to use their own architect – can they do that.

Mr. Carlson said they haven’t decided how they are going to approach that issue. A.I.G. may only have ‘approved’ builders. Of course if a lot owner had their own architect and was approved they would have to follow the architectural rules and regulations of the community that will be established along with the plats of this property.

Commissioner Proctor said he would like to see something in this Agreement that makes a reference to our County’s MBE, our County’s desire for local preference, even in regards to the lumber being bought for this project. Mr. Carlson said that concluded his presentation and he and his staff were certainly open for any questions.

Commissioner Proctor said this plan represents a considerable difference in the plans previously seen. He stated the Commission has seen some broad advancement in terms of how to complete this project. Commissioner Proctor said that the total value and good this project would bring to the community gives it a lot of weight.

Commissioner Proctor noted the County put out between $5 and $6 million dollars to a company in Canada that they did not know anything about, including their name. It seems interesting to Commissioner Proctor then, that the Board has such a problem with putting $2 to $3 million dollars into a project for a lake bottom from which we drink our water to a nationally renowned company A.I.G. Commissioner Proctor indicated the Commissioners should take note the Agreement would now give the County the lake bottom.

Commissioner Proctor stated this new aspect of the Fallschase Agreement is empowering for the County in terms of enabling them to do something with water and makes it possible for the County to work out a plan with the City in regard to Weems Pond. Commissioner Proctor also noted A.I.G. Baker is on the list of Fortune 500 companies, and has an excellent reputation throughout the country. Commissioner Proctor is impressed with A.I.G.’s background.

However, Commissioner Proctor noted there were concerns raised in regard to transportation he wanted to make sure everyone was clear on. Commissioner Proctor wanted to make sure that Staff is comfortable with any traffic issues and with what has been projected for commercial square footage. Commissioner Proctor asked if there were any questions Staff had on the 850 square ft planned for commercial use, the residential units projected, the conservation easement, and/or even the 51 ft line, the trips, and anything else.

Mr. Ezcagaghi, Environmental Review Supervisor, attending the meeting for John Kraynak, Environmental Compliance raised the question of how the stormwater treatment would be achieved and if it will meet the Lake Lafayette treatment requirement set in the code right now. Mr. Ezcagaghi also inquired as to whether there were any impacts to the wetlands around the lake.

Mr. Lewis stated that A.I.G. plans to treat the stormwater in accordance to county regulations, specifically the table in the county’s code that describes about 4 different methods to treat stormwater. One method is a 1 and 1/8 inch requirement; a dry detention, a wet detention and two others. A.I.G. plans to treat the stormwater in accordance with the methods outlined in the table in the County code.

Commissioner Proctor asked Mr. Bateman if the treatment at 1 and 1/8 inches had not already been stated in the Agreement. Mr. Bateman said yes, they are using the same language in regard to stormwater. A.I.G. stated they are open to other methods, if preferable. Mr. Ezcagaghi said he asked this question because their Director, John Kraynak questioned the language of an agreement A.I.G. proposed. The environmental regulations in effect at the time the development was originally approved were effective in 1970.

County Administrator Alam stated that in the current Agreement paragraph 10 speaks to this matter. County Administrator Alam informed Commissioner Proctor the big issue would be is A.I.G. going to follow the environmental regulations as they stand today; or, are they planning on going back to 1970 when there were no environmental regulations. County Administrator Alam said this issue would have to be dealt with once Staff reviews the plans and goes through the process. County Administrator Alam said he doesn’t think A.I.G. can answer this question because he doesn’t think they have completed their stormwater analysis to that point.

County Administrator Alam said this paragraph will obviously have to be revised based on the position the County has always taken. A.I.G. responded that they are starting to draft a set of standards that would apply to this project that come as close as they can to the current County regulations.

Mr. Bateman referred to page 14, section 13B, of the Agreement - stormwater standards: “County agrees applicant will be required to retain a maximum of the first 1 and 1/8 or the equivalent treatment of stormwater runoff from developed portions of the property. Stormwater treatment bay be provided in part, or whole, by underground stormwater treatment chambers.”

Mr. Bateman stated A.I.G. makes a general statement in this Agreement that will be revised. Commissioner Proctor asked if a ‘holding pond’ is an ‘underwater treatment chamber’. No, was the response. Commissioner Proctor asked if the term ‘underground treatment chamber’ had come up before. County Attorney Thiele said that the Walgreen’s across from the hospital is going to implement one. This is a new methodology of holding water underground, then treating the water, then moving it along.

County Administrator Alam asked when the Board is going to receive the “list” referred to by A.I.G. earlier detailing the improvements they are planning to make. County Attorney Thiele stated he knows everybody wants to put this on for a public hearing for the 25^th of October; but, he doesn’t think they can do it. County Attorney Thiele informed the group that tomorrow, Thursday, October 13th the County would have to send an advertisement to the Tallahassee Democrat to be published on Tuesday, October 18^th in order for this item to be put on the October 25^th, 2005 agenda.

County Attorney Thiele stated the County also has to send out Notices to individual homeowners and property owners within a radius of the property tomorrow, October 13^th so they can receive them ten days in advance of the Public Hearing. So, County Attorney Thiele stated presuming you are on the list of home/property owners and you received a notice about the Hearing; you would have the expectation that you could drive to the courthouse and pick up a copy of the ‘finished document’ on that day. No modifications to the document can be made at this point, in County Attorney Thiele’s opinion other than minor wording changes between that moment in time and the two public hearings that take place.

Atty. Bob Apgar stated that A.I.G. agreed with County Attorney Thiele. Mr. Apgar stated that’s why A.I.G.’s intention is to get the best draft they can to County Attorney Thiele tomorrow, October 13^th, 2005 so he can advertise in a timely manner. Mr. Apgar noted that draft will be available to any member of the public. However, at that Public Hearing what A.I.G. would like to point out is that “Notice” is a notice to the citizens that this matter will be heard. It does not say to a citizen that this will never be changed.

Mr. Apgar indicated that at the Public Hearing, through the proper procedures then, that draft could be changed. So, in the interim period, Mr. Apgar said A.I.G. will continue working with Staff, invite Buck Lake Alliance to work on refinements to the development process and other issues people want to address. Mr. Apgar reported that then any ‘agreed changes’ would be presented at the Public Hearing and hope that some member of the Commission would be willing to make the appropriate motion to insert those into the Agreement. “Notice” doesn’t guarantee people that what they see in the Clerk’s Office will never change, according to Atty. Apgar.

County Attorney Thiele said he would agree with Atty. Apgar if he added the following phrase “without further public hearings”. Discussion ensued.

Commissioner Proctor stated he thinks County Attorney Thiele is correct. The Agreement can have minor changes, but no major substance changes can be made to the Agreement.

Commissioner Proctor said County Attorney Thiele MUST have the documents he needs tomorrow in order to make the notifications he needs to make. Commissioner Proctor asked if Mr. Carlson can take responsibility for County Attorney Thiele receiving everything he needs by tomorrow. Mr. Carslon said the documents will be ready. Mr. Carlson stated he believes he has to be on the October 25^th agenda to meet the terms of the contract.

Commissioner Rackleff stated the current draft agreement continues to have most of the major problems inherent in the first draft. The Applicant wants to be vested from Caltran, wants to be exempt from all the environmental and development requirements passed since the early 1970’s, and he wants the opportunity to write his own rules. Commissioner Rackleff stated they are not protecting the public or the environment with this Agreement as drafted. Commissioner Rackleff indicated that problems like the 1 and 1/8 standard exist and that figure is inadequate. Commissioner Rackleff indicated the Board knows this.

Commissioner Rackleff stated that a lot of information has been dumped on the Staff, the Board and the public in one day. Commissioner Rackleff stated that to expect people to understand what this Agreement amounts to is unrealistic. Commissioner Rackleff indicated this matter needs more time. Commissioner Rackleff stated he is sorry about the Developer’s time problem; but, that is not the Board’s problem. The Board’s problem is how to protect the environment and the quality of life in the community.

Commissioner Proctor stated he thought the 1 and 1/8 rule was the rule; and asked County Attorney Thiele if this was correct. County Attorney Thiele indicated he thought the 1 and 1/8 is the rule for this basin. Commissioner Proctor stated that 1 and 1/8 being the standard according to the law means the Developer has agreed to meet the standard.

Commissioner Rackleff stated this project is in a lake protection zone; and, this means the County does have higher standards for developments in lake protection zones. Commissioner Rackleff argued this Agreement does not meet the kind of standards that are in place for Lake Jackson or even Lake Lafayette, for example. Commissioner Rackleff said he expected a draft development agreement forwarded by Commissioner Proctor to the Commission that represents the Commissioner’s recommendation on what the Board should adopt.

Commissioner Proctor said he is going to send his reflections and thoughts about what has been presented overall. He is merely giving his observations as a negotiator. Commissioner Proctor said he will not make a recommendation.

Commissioner Proctor accepts the date of October 24^th, 2005 as an offer to the Board members to do a walk through of the site and consider the questions Commissioner Rackleff has raised.

Commissioner Proctor stated he is very pleased and excited about this project. Commissioner Proctor thanked everyone for the spirit and the professionalism they have displayed throughout this process. Commissioner Proctor thanked Cari Roth for her ability to listen to all the diverse voices coming for Staff and thinks she has done a great job of translating these voices into something that will cut legal muster. Commissioner Proctor thanked County Attorney Thiele, County Administrator Alam, and all the Staff persons who have supported him. Commissioner Proctor thanked Mr. Bailey and his staff, Mr. Carlson, and his staff. Commissioner Proctor said he has a wonderful feeling about the integrity and character of A.I.G. as well as the character of this project that he believes will enhance our community.

Commissioner Rackleff wanted to make a final point - when the public comes to review any documents later this week, in the courthouse, all they will have are the materials that were submitted by A.I.G.-Baker. Commissioner Rackleff stated there will be nothing in there that are staff analyses of these proposals, no Staff recommendations. Commissioner Rackleff noted it will be a one-sided and incomplete body of information for people to review. That’s why Commissioner Rackleff continues to insist it is premature to have a hearing on this matter on October 25^th.

Commissioner Proctor stated the Applicant is the moving forward party in this matter and said that A.I.G. has received Staff recommendations and analyses all along the way. That is why the new road, the conservation easement, the median cut removed from the original front and moved down to the main entrance have been included in the new Agreement draft. Commissioner Proctor noted that all these new documents have been in response to Staff analysis and recommendation.

Commissioner Proctor mentioned that this negotiation has been unique and different from any negotiated settlement in the County’s history. Largely at Commissioner Rackleff’s request there will be an open process for the public. Commissioner Proctor said even though this applicant has been treated differently than any other in the past.

The process this 163 Agreement has experienced has been far more open than any other 163 Agreement. The negotiations of this Agreement have certainly been done before the public. Commissioner Proctor is proud of that. Never has another Commissioner had to carry the weight of public inspection and public introspection to negotiate something as Commissioner Proctor has been made to do with this project.

Commissioner Proctor thanked everyone involved again.

The meeting adjourned at 2:30.