September 18th meeting of the Planning Commission, Lachor County Call to order Do I have a mission for approval of the tonight's agenda? Motion is second all in favor. So I'm just saying aye aye I'll post I'm sure I move approval of the minutes from August 19th or 17th. I'm sorry. What is it? 21st. 21st. Thank you. We have a mission for approval of the minutes. Second. And a second. All those in favour? It's saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? Fantastic. And our first item tonight is a repeat of our last meeting with legislative item Z24, 0005, County Initiative Text and Limit to Lachric County Comprehensive Plan. Capitol Improence, Elma, to clarify the low of service guidelines for supplier service response times. Good evening commissioners, Ben Chumley, planner with growth management. I will briefly recap the item from last time just to refresh the commission's memory. Item Z24-00005 is a county initiated text amendment to the Electric County Comprehensive Plan to revise and clarify fire level of service guidelines in the capital improvements element. The just a bit of background the capital improvements element identifies level of service standards and guidelines for various county services, including fire, policy 1.2.5A identifies the level of service guidelines for fire response. So those standards or guidelines I should say are within the urban cluster, six minutes for 80% of all emergency responses within a 12 month period, and for the rural area that standard is 12 minutes for 80% of all emergency responses within a 12-month period. And for the rural area, that standard is 12 minutes for 80% of all emergency responses within the 12-month period. So these guidelines are not concurrency level of service standards. They're primarily used to identify capital improvement needs such as fire stations that would need to be considered as part of the county's capital improvements planning. The National Fire Protection Association publishes standards for objectives, for emergency unit response for fire and EMS. Standard 1710 is the particular one that's applicable to this, and I should point out that fire rescue chief Thias is here tonight who can address some of those questions that we had last time. Those emergency unit responses are broken down into three main areas, including the alarm handling time, turnout time, and travel time. Currently the adopted policy and the comprehensive plan does not recognize or distinguish between these different travel or these different time increments that are in the NFPA standards. However in practice the county has used travel time for the purpose of implementing this comprehensive plan policy. So this is the proposed language change. The key points are highlighted in yellow. This would simply add the term travel time to both the level of service guideline for the urban cluster and for the rural area. And the staff recommendation for the Planning Commission is to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve transmittal of Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Z24, 00005, to the state land planning agency and other required agencies for expedited state review pursuant to section 163-31-84 Florida statutes. And I'm happy to answer questions and chief theas is also available to answer questions. Thank you, Mr. Chenley. Chief theas, would you like to say anything to the board? If you just would like some background perhaps maybe on how we got here the years ago we had three levels in there. We had urban, urban cluster and rural and while I was still the deputy chief probably six, seven years ago we took the urban out because we're really a lot of county fire rescue is not set up to be an urban fire department. We respond to the rural clusters. We have some urban areas. But we wanted this plan to really match what was realistic for us and what we do. And so what we've done here is just made a minor adjustment to really specify its travel time that we're looking at. When you're thinking about a station location and having a growth in an area where we identified that there's a potential need for a fire station, we want to look at what we can control, which is that travel time. And so our hope is, is that you'll adopt this. The board can use it just as a guiding document for consideration of when fire stations need to be added in a particular area. Thank you. Appreciate it. I'll entertain questions from the commission. Start from the end. Work it way down. How does that travel time align with 1710? What's the requirements? Yeah, so NFPA 1710 specifically has four minutes for the first arriving engine and six minutes for the second arriving engine But NFPA 1710 really is just addressing a urban environment for an ideal response time or an ideal travel time. The NFPA 1710 has never been adopted by the state of Florida as statute. It is a recommendation. Now some NFPA standards are adopted by Florida State Statute. The Life Safety Code is certainly adopted by Florida State Statute. But really it's intended to be a guiding document and what you see happening in different communities that outline this in a growth plan. There's all types of times that they put in there. They try to put in the times that are reflective of their community, their road conditions, of their density and population and things like that. So specifically, NFPA 10 to answer your question is four minutes for the first arriving engine, six minutes for the second arriving engine. Currently the recommendation is six and 12 and how do you guys line up with that? Do you do you meet those now? We do not meet the urban cluster time of six minutes. We are about half the time reaching that about 50 or 60% of the time for the urban cluster. For the rural of 12 minutes our goal is 80% and we're right around that. 78 to 80% is where we are for the for the urban for the rural response. All right. Mr. Washier, we'll finish your questions. Okay. Mr. Aidenberg. My questions have to do with, and it may not be applicable, is sending this for transmittal without understanding what the funding implications will be. And I understand that you have to start somewhere, but I'm also concerned about the definition of rural areas will have to have water. If you're outside the urban service boundary, you have to connect, but you're not allowed to connect to GRU. Even if it's right there, which maybe that needs to be looked at by somebody. Because it seems silly to have to put in all the infrastructure when you can tap into it adjacent to the on a property line. The second component of mine is that I'm concerned with the necessity of having a water source, you know, on each home that's to be built and some of the cost implications is not laid out well enough for me to say it's good, but what I'm hearing from you is that the only thing that we're really changing is the definition of the level of service and not the rest of it. That is correct. We are just what we have focused on as just the travel time. The other language, to my understanding, is language that has always been contained in that plan. And I guess I'm always I've been concerned with it. At some point we will have to deal with it. I have very supportive of the fire department and the people who serve who help and said, I had a good friend of mine. We lost them on travel time, but it wasn't your fault. It was just too far out. And there are risks when you do that. When you live that far away from infrastructure, it's a known risk. And it came back to hurt us all. So on that basis, I have no problems with changing it to the travel time. I think that makes sense. And it's got very difficult, if you said six-minute standard and you have to include everything else. I don't know how you do it. Yeah, it's just a cleanup of the language. The call processing time is not something we can control. Our turnout time, we can control, but we want it to be focused on the travel time specifically. I'm in agreement with that. I'm still very concerned about how do we, there are language in this that says we have to look at things in the future as to how to how to fund the infrastructure outside the urban service line. And I think that needs to be considered. So I believe tonight we're only concentrated on the change in the language. That's why I was backing myself out of here. Okay. All right. Yes. I thank you. Any more questions for Chief Leeus? Hi. You do? It's a nice. I think you any more questions for a cheaply is. Hi. You did it so much. I'm Sam Much and I want to thank you for everything that is fire and rescue services of both the county and the city of Gainesville provide. Within the remainder of the county outside of Gainesville are all the small cities now covered by a electoral county fire rescue. No sir, you still have the city of high springs has their own fire department, Newberry and LaCross. Those are three municipalities that still maintain control of their own fire departments. But Mika notepi, Waldo, Archer, Archer, and Hawthorne. And Alachua. Folded there into yours. So they will have to meet these requirements as much as, because they're in the same fire department now. Well, we have to meet those requirements and we currently do within those areas and keep in mind for us, this is a guiding document. It's not a document that we come back to the board of county commissioners and say, you know, we are failing in the six minute response time. And so we're mandating that there are two or three stations need to be added to address it. It's a guiding document to give the board of county commissioners just a little bit of guidance on, hey, this is one more reason perhaps that we may need to fire station in this area. How much of a national county and your coverage area, let me put it that way, can meet the six minute response time? Well, the urban cluster is really the hardest area for us to meet the response times. And part of that reason why is if you think about when we identified the urban cluster, we're really identifying the area around the city of Gainesville and we have an automatic aid agreement with the city of Gainesville that the quickest unit responds regardless of jurisdictional boundaries as it pertains to any type of emergency call that takes place and there's some critical criteria on those emergency calls. For example if someone someone calls 911, they've had abdominal pain for a couple of days, that is not going to get the quickest responding unit. It's going to get a county fire apparatus if it's outside the city limits and it's going to get a city fire apparatus if it's inside. Those are the occasions when really we do not meet this standard. There are areas around the city of Gainesville that have not been annexed within the City of Gainesville that take us some time to get there, sometimes driving through the city to get to those locations. But we do that by using statistical data to know that the prevalence of this being an emergency is very low. So it's a very low risk. And that's a lot of what Fire Rescue Serviceers are based upon, right, is risk analysis. And so when we look at those situations, those times, sometimes response times, maybe 10, 11, 12 minutes within the urban cluster. And so that really kind of destroys our idea of the six minutes. I think what we really focus on when we think of urban cluster and trying to match this time is that if we were to use this to try to justify building a station, we would look at a specific area in the urban cluster, the location of our fire stations, and pinpoint what are the response times to that area. When that development starts to grow within that area, and it's outside of a six minute travel time, that may be when we suggested. A prime example of that may be that teoga area that is continuing to grow very quickly southwest 8th Avenue. We have a fire station located on southwest 24th Avenue near Queen of Peace about the 10,000 block. And we have another fire station located on northwest 143rd Street in Jonesville right near the soccer fields. As congestion continues in that area and as Tioga continues to develop and grow to the south it's going to be harder and harder for us to get there in a six minute response a six minute travel time. So that's when we would really use this as a guiding document as one more piece of evidence that we should consider building a fire station in this area. I do have a question about the difference between you have the handling of the call. You've got the turnout. And then after the turnout stops, you're on travel. And only you only use travel time in meeting these requirements, correct? That's correct. That's our desire. That's our desire. That's our desire. Yes. Thank you. What but I do want to go on with this. What is the usual handling time and then what's the usual turnout time? I actually have a note here that has that. Off the top of my head, it's 60 seconds for turnout time. Call processing time for a fire, I believe, is 30 seconds, but let me believe I don't have that note. There are different guidelines. The dispatch center has a set of guidelines that they follow for their call processing time, depending on what type of call it is, the criticality of that call. When someone calls in and says that my house is on fire, that's an immediate dispatch. It's an immediate response of a transfer of that call over to the dispatch to where they start sending units. So the call processing time on that is much more strict than it is for someone who I used the example earlier has had abdominal pain for a couple of days. Our turnout time is 60 seconds. So by the time when the danger goes off in a station, the crew has 60 seconds to get themselves dressed in a truck and moving. That is the goal standard that we have. How about for the ambulance? For a medical emergency? It's the same. But they would have a priority in the handling of the call. Would they not? Correct. But that is a time that we don't control. That is controlled by the Combined Communication Center. It is. Okay. And do you have a couple other questions? Okay. I share the concern that Mr. Ruttenberg has that it says development will provide adequate water supply for fire suppression and protection and fire service compliant fire connections required through land development regulations. It's my understanding that for residential fires, the vast majority of fires are put out with the amount of water that is brought by the engine. And it's very rare I understand for a residential fire to hook up to a hydrant. Is that correct? I would, as that has not been my experience. My experience is that a fire engine contains 750 gallons of water. But oftentimes we use a lot more than that to a fully extinguished fire. If you're talking about something that we're going to knock down a fire quickly, if it's room in contents or if it's a kitchen fire, something like that, I think that oftentimes we can achieve a knockdown with the tank water that's there. But our standard is any time that there is a house fire, the second arriving, sometimes the first arriving engine, but the second arriving engine will always hook to a hydrogen and connect water to the fire engine. Okay. But if it's in a rural area and they don't have a hydrogen, then they have to depend upon the water that's carried by the first, or the second engine, is that correct? It is correct. In our rural areas, we have water tenders, tankers, that carry 4,000 and 5,000 gallons of water that are delivered with that first arriving fire engine company. And so we make it a point to try to bring the water out to the development or to the house fire. But I think we also have to understand that our goal, our objective is to limit the fire to where the origin is and to limit the fire when we get there. The biggest hazard that we have is when we run out of water and especially in a situation of a development when there's other homes that are near that home and we have the concern of spread, a fire spread. So I think that the requirement for developments to have water in those areas is for that reason. It's not only to extinguish the home that is burning, but also to reduce any risk of fire spreading to other homes. When a report of a fire is in a development with water supply or without water supply. Is that made? Yes. So, our crews have an awareness of what developments are in their territories. They do a drive around in territory, quite frequently, to make sure that they understand what developments are in their territories. They do a drive around in territory quite frequently to make sure that they understand what developments are in there. We have layers on our mapping system. Every fire engine and rescue unit has a computer that's in their truck that shows them streets and also shows them hydrant layers. They can even go much like a Google Maps. They can even go to an aerial view and see what's around the home whenever that aerial view was taken. So they generally have a very good idea as the call is being dispatched, what the development is, where the home is, where the closest hydrants are, whether or not they'll need to have a water tanker or not. Dispatch does automatically dispatch water tankers on areas that are non-hydrant in areas. That is an automatic dispatch. They know that through GIS and through the CAD data. Okay. Hi. Is that your question Mr. Much? Excuse me, let me go go through okay. I'm gonna ask that we bring back our conversation to focus on the response and travel time that we have for tonight So if you have any more questions regarding that mr. Beas please proceed. I'm chair I believe that my questions to go to the the time because mr. Much please I'm sick to the travel timers for that time that were asked to vote on tonight. Chief excuse me. If you have a fire in an area that needs to have a tanker dispatched. Is the time still based upon the first engine that arrives, or would it be when the tanker arrives? It will be the first arriving engine, as what's recorded is the time. Okay. What is the at the present time? What is the size of a lot in a development that requires a public water system. Mr. Much, I'm going to ask for consideration for what's time tonight that you'll limit your questions to what's in front of it. This goes to the time issue, ma'am. That's this is a planning. Please complete your question. How what size lot requires a public water system? Madam Chair. Our land development regulations don't identify a requirement for water based on lot size. What we generally kind of defer to and this is something that our fire rescue reviewers work with us on is that anything that's a subdivision which is three or more new lots will require some sort of mitigation. That could be that it's within a particular drive distance of a tanker, so that's been a possibility, depending on where a station is located. It could be that homes are individually sprinklered. That's one mitigation measure, and it could be that there is some sort of water supply provided on site. That could be a swimming pool potentially. It could be a tank that's installed every situation is a little bit different. But it's not necessarily determined by the size of a lot. It's really the number of lots where some sort of mitigation measure. It's not always providing a water supply. Sometimes there are other measures that can be implemented. And that's something that our fire rescue, Fire Marshal's office works with development applications on. When the Fire Marshal looks at an application, does the fire marshal determine what the mitigation, what mitigation will be needed, or is that in consultation between the DR, the development or U board and the applicant or whoever? Madam Chair, that's usually, it doesn't make its way to a discussion with the DRC. There's no specific standard in our land development regulations. So that's generally the fire marshal working with an applicant to find a solution that meets the needs. Both of the department as far as a permitting agency and also of an applicant who's doing a development plan. Commissioner much I'm gonna ask that will allow time for other members of the commission ask questions we can come back to you when you have further questions. Yes ma'am. Are there any other commissioner's questions for our chief? Yes I have a question. What brought about the review of this section to request the change tonight? I think it was a discussion with growth management. Every once in a while we review this planning process, this document, and take a look at it. We are entering into a master plan. And so we have a consultant that's been hired on that's conducting that master plan. And so they certainly use this as a reference point also. The document calls for us to use the master plan in consultation with this and so we are expecting that report within the next three or four months and we will also use that master plan as a guiding document for future to show future needs whether there's areas that need fire stations or not. So the other concerns that came up tonight about lot size and water and other emergency response combined communications, the public will have opportunity to comment on the fire master plan. Is that correct and asks those questions? Yeah, the master plan will be a public document and our plan will be to bring that back before the Board of County Commissioners for their review, their consideration whether to adopt the master plan or not. And so certainly the public is welcome to have discussions, though. We actually had a public forum that we advertised so that the citizen could come out and discuss what they desired for a fire department for their community. I believe that was last month, right? Correct. Thank you. I will make the comment. This is in the capital and permits element is used for a plan. It's part of planning. What we're being asked for tonight is to modify a few words in the document from response time to travel time as a part of the planning process of the county. So before for a possible mission, are there any other questions for staff or for chief? Commissioner much. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I don't know who needs to answer this planning staff or the fire staff. How much with these response times? How much of the county is covered by a six minute, or I'm sorry, it's four minutes for the first engine, right? Madam Chair, we do not go by, we are not using NFPA 1710 in the four minutes that they have in there. In our growth plan we've adopted six minutes in the urban cluster. Okay, six minutes I'm a little confused but now in the rural areas it's six minutes? Well, it's 12 minutes. Okay, thank you very much. The is there percentage of both the urban area and the rural area that are covered by the six minute and the 12 minute response times? The urban cluster is defined, I believe, in the growth plan. Yep. Madam Chair, the urban cluster is the urbanized area, sort of right around the city of Gainesville. You kind of say on the west side goes out to about 104, 143rd, generally north up to 39th south down to southwest 8th Avenue and 122nd back into the city along Williston Road, generally. And then on the east side sort of out towards Newton's Lake. So that's the areas that are defined as the urban cluster and would be generally, and then on the east side sort of out towards Newton's Lake. So that's the areas that are defined as the urban cluster and would be subject to the six minute response time. Outside of that is the rural area of the county, and that's the area that would be defined by that 12 minute response time. One part of that that I wanted to sort of peek at from an earlier question is that the county's comp plan where the CIE is adopted is only applicable within the unincorporated portion of the county. So while the fire department may in fact use those numbers as a planning tool for the outlying municipalities, they're not really regulated and development is not sort of wanting to meet those when you're in those outlying municipalities. That doesn't answer my question. Okay. My question is, what percentage of the each of those areas? I don't know the percentage of the, all of the urban cluster would be subject to the six-minute standard all of the rural area would. No, I know it's subject to, but how much is covered by how much can they know that every time they. Madam Chair, I think what I heard the chief say earlier was that it's it's not always an area that doesn't meet a response time. It might be a particular call type. So it really, it's not as easy as just saying 90% of the cluster has a station within a certain distance and so can meet it. It may be that certain calls or during congestion that time is slower. So I don't know that it's possible to say a percentage of a piece of the area, whether it be the rural area or the urban cluster meets that standard because the standard could, the response time could be different in the same area. It could be different depending on the type of call. And the time of day. Could be. OK. But that's what I was wondering. Are there any areas that you know of that don't meet the required Standard of six within the urban area and 12 minutes in the rural area Uh, I would say that there are areas of a lot of accounting County, whether those areas are developed or not, I guess it's another question, long Monioca I believe is still Monioca Road is would be in that urban cluster area parts of it would be probably where the racetrack area is that is not a six-minute response time. Southwest 441 near 13th Street. 13th Street, Williston Road, I'm sorry, Williston Road in 441. There are the city does not, that is not within city limits. It's in the urban cluster of the county. That's an area that we struggle to meet with. We're actually moving the McIntyre Opie Station to Cusco Willent to try to help address some of that area because we believe that area is gonna grow farther south, it's already growing now. And so there are pockets like that throughout the county. I think maybe the best way to describe this is that if the city is the 70 square miles or so and right in the center of a Lachua County, the urban cluster is the ring around that. It's very hard to guard a ring, right? It's very hard to put stations and locations that address the outside of a ring like that. And so there are pockets all throughout that urban cluster that are difficult for us to achieve that six minute response time. It's one reason why you see the six minute trial time for us is in the 50% tile while the rule is in the 12% or the 80% tile. We have locations in the rural area in key populated areas that we normally respond to. It's hard to do that around this ring of the city of Gainesville. So for us, this is a guiding document. I want to emphasize that. This is a guiding document for us. And so we use it almost to try to achieve goals of travel time. There has to be some type of travel time in this document that you can measure and have a benchmark from. And that's really how we use this. I don't know of a time in our history where I have used this or previous chiefs have used this to the Board of County Commissioner in saying you have to build a station here because we're not meeting the travel times. It's a it's a benchmark of something for us to track over a period of time and establish and study those trends. If it starts to fall greatly then I think it's something we need to look at. It's just one more piece of the puzzle for us to show how we're doing in response times in our areas. Madam Chair, I have a question for planning. If I have a client who wants to build in a certain area. And they meet the criteria for having a public water system. And this is a, say, a subdivision of 100 units. And I say, well, you're going to have to, I'm outside of the 12-minute rural standard. And it calls for a 12-minute response time, according to your comprehensive plan and the capital improvement element and I'm going to say that in order for me to use my land appropriately, the county is going to have to build a fire station within that area. Now, and I have a great, I think I'm getting a response here, but and I'm glad because I would use that as a means to try to force the county into putting a planned or putting in a fire station where I can get a 12 minute response time. So Madam Chair, I think my answer to that is that these are guidelines and not standards. We don't require an individual development to meet a standard. That they're identified as guidelines and they're identified as a planning tool for the county. We do have some level of service standards in our comprehensive plan that are required for an individual's development to meet. But these are guidelines that are a planning tool for the county to use to enforce really on itself, not even in force. Like I said, it's a planning tool, but it's a standard that we aim to meet. It's not a standard that we require an individual development to meet. We don't say you can't do a development if you're not within a 12 minute travel time of a station or something like that. That's not a standard that we enforce. We have clarification on the planning, the purpose of this guideline in the planning document. Mr. Chenley, did you have another comment? Sorry, I thought there was a question. Okay, did you have a question for me? Okay. Okay. Did you have a question for me? Okay. Well, Mr. Chattano, you look like you were going to respond to my question. Madam Chair, I was essentially going to say the same thing that Mr. Dawson said. The language and the comprehensive plan for fire, it's not a traditional concurrency standard where you review it on a development by development basis and where it could potentially stop or delay a development. It's, as Mr. Dawson said, it's a guideline. We use it for capital improvements, planning purposes. And the language itself talks about measuring that the 12 minutes for 80% over a 12-month period. So we're looking at a 12-month period. It's not really development by development necessarily. Thank you. I appreciate that. And just a clear question. Chief Theos, response times are not always the houses. chief theus response times they're not always the houses a lot of times they're traffic correct. Oh sure yeah so that response time is outside of planning and absolutely okay. Wilson wrote it five-thirty in the afternoon absolutely. Okay so I believe we have grilled chief theus a lot tonight are there any other questions about what we have in front of us? Their quest for changes in the capital improvements element? If not, is anyone prepared to make a motion? So what was to transmit as written? Seconded chair. We have a motion in a second to transmit as written which was staff's recommendation. This is we are recommending to the County Commission that's our recommendation. So members of the public here tonight for comments. So we will get ready for vote. All those in favor of the motion signify? No, I'm sorry. I have some comments to make. Okay, Mr. Commissioner Much. I'm Annemar Cher. I can't support this motion as written, because I think that this motion will present a portion of the capital improvements program that I think could be used to force the county into building additional fire stations or stopping the development because it doesn't meet the criteria here. I don't think the language is written in such a format that it could be interpreted by a court in the way in which I suggested that it might. Also, I disagree with the effect of the amendment on affordable housing. The clarification, you have in here, that the clarification would have no relationship to the cost of housing. That's not correct. If someone had to place a fire suppression system within their house in order to meet the criteria to have fire extinguishing facilities at your home, that would be a tremendous additional cost. I think that the way in which it is written at the present time, it does a disservice to our fire service because at our fire service is excellent. They've saved my wife twice in the past five years and I appreciate that. I want you to have the best fire service in the state. I don't think this, in the background and summary of the proposed amendment, would do that and I suggest that a recommendation be made to the County Commission that this be rejected and sent back to the staff to come up with better language. Okay, and since we do have new members in the Commission, I want to remind everyone what we're seeing in front of us. The underlying language is what is being proposed as a change and the strike through language is what's being proposed as being removed. The rest of the language is what is already in the comp plan, just as a clarification. So any more comments about the floor to take a vote? Can I make a comment after the vote? Yes. All right. I will take the vote. Now all those in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. All those opposed? No. We have one, nay, the motion passes. Thank you chief leas are taking time out of your data come and speak with us and move on after. Would you stay for a moment? It's a quick. Okay. It is very quick. I've built a lot of homes in our community, both inside the urban area and outside. And as always, two observations has always been true for me that the people who are going further away from the cities know that there is a diminishing level of service. That is true. It's an expectation. They try and compensate as much as we can but that doesn't mean that they aren't taking some chance and I think there's some recognition of that and we try and make that less less of a risk is what it's being done so I'm looking forward to seeing the results of the master plan that you're working on. I hope that we get to see that sometime. That would be a good thing to do. And it's safe. If it comes for us, but it will come before the county commission. It could be an FYI. That's, you know, I don't need a hearing on it. I just, just an FYI since we've been here, it'd be a good thing for us to know for our background material. And the second thing I would suggest is, in the time I spent in my car, which is a lot, that emergency equipment does not slow down. They are going as fast as they can given their weight. You know, when you're carrying the tankers, you know, there's only so much. I served a little bit on equipment, on equipment with in Dallas County, excuse me, and I have an appreciation for what is done and the service and it's good. But there is, they're working hard to do with what they have. I'm interested in the master plan and people understand as they move out further into the rural areas that there is a risk. And then we try and make it a reasonable risk. I'm not sure I have a question for the chief. Since we've moved on, can you make it a brief question that requires a brief answer? Chief, who's preparing the fire-masking plan? Company called ESCI. And they specialize in doing capital improving programs and fire plans? They are experts in fire and EMS services throughout the United States. They understand requirement of state statutes in each individual state. They certainly have a very broad depth of NFPA standards. And so they make recommendations based upon that. Is there any citizen group in the natural county that works with you on that plan? We had a community involvement that we had an open imitation to that was publicized as much as we could in preparation of the master plan. Sadly, we had two citizens that came. And then there will be optioning for public comment when it comes to for the County Commission as well. And it will come multiple times if we're in the County Commission, I assume. Yep. I think you chief, yes, I appreciate your time. Thank you. Any, oh is that? Thank you. All. Oh, is that. Thank you. Okay. So you are moving on to the next item on our agenda and that is election of officers. I am the current Vice Chair of the Planning Commission. Our previous chair has to rotate it off the board. So we will and then we'll just feel both tonight anyway. We do that yearly, is that right? Ms. McHallister? A yearly election of officers. So I guess we'll entertain nominations or comments about officers. About the chair, I'd like to do some recommendations for. But um, Mr. Vinson? Yes. At this time, I would like to do some recommendations. Yes. At this time I would like to recommend Commissioner Raymond Walsh for the chair and Melissa Norman for the vice chair. Who are these people? Oh, yes. Mr. Walsh, Commissioner Walsh is on the end. And Commissioner Norman is directly beside you. Is that something that these two members would appreciate taking on? I'd be willing to do the vice chair. Mr. Watts, would you like to be chair? There's no one else that I think. Is there any other nominees? No, they're nominations from the commissioners. I'm not sure if it's a question. Is there any other other. The other nominations from the commissioners. I move the. I move that we select these people by an acclimation. Second. The nomination was the motion is that correct? Yeah. So we need a second from the nomination is that what you were seconding Mr. Commissioner Metsch. Yeah. That's fine. Anyway. So we're voting on the election officers for the chair would be Commissioner Walsh and for the Vice Chair, Commissioner Norman. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed. Congratulations and should I pass the gavel now? No. Okay. It's in its reports that's included in your pocket from the Calister. Please make sure that they're up to date because there is a Level of it is you have to meet to remain on the board and The next be commissioners comments before you click tonight? No, Madam Chair, I don't have any. We do have items for the October, October planning commission. We'll get out information on those in a couple of weeks. All right. Fantastic. I thank you for the meeting tonight and we'll see you next month. All right.