Good afternoon.

Welcome to the special investigative committee on JEA.

Let's begin by introductions to my far left.

Colleen Hamsey, Council of Research.

Mary Stefopoulos, Office of General Counsel.

Brian Parks, Council Auditor's Office.

Billy Peterson, Council Auditor's Office.

Jason Teal, City Council Legislative Council.

Good afternoon, Rory Diamond, District 13, the beach.

Ron Salem, group two at large.

Jacobi Pittman, District 10.

Rockman Johnson, District 14.

I'm just visiting today.

Is the meeting being streamed?

Do we know that?

Oh, I understand Channel 4.

It or are it is being streamed.

You can see it.

Okay.

If you can't see it, text me.

And we'll see what we need to do.

Thank you.

Okay.

Moving through the agenda.

Update on the JEA employee survey, Mr.

Teal.

Can you and I'll jump in after you if I need to?

Sure.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Through the chair of the committee.

So this is on the council's agenda for uh for next, or sorry, for tomorrow night for final action of the council.

I believe it was amended in committees uh to uh require that the uh the survey company make a presentation to the JEA board if the JEA board is willing to take um such a presentation, and for us to send it to JEA upon receipt as well.

Correct, and I believe that was always the intent of the CIC is to share that uh information with JEA.

So um I don't believe that substantially alters the JEA or I'm sorry, the SIC's um uh commitment to this.

And Mr.

Thiel and I will be meeting with uh the firm uh assuming it's passed tomorrow night uh the Wednesday, Thursday to begin finalizing the questions and hopefully get that survey out in the next uh seven to ten days, would be my hope.

Okay.

Uh update on capacity fees.

Mr.

Parks.

Yes, uh, through the chair to the committee.

Uh first off, there's not a lot of that's moved between the last one.

This I was out for an extended period of time.

Our staff has also been doing conducting the quarterly summary review that we normally do in this this period.

But we have could kind of completed our initial research portion of this.

We are starting to pull that some of the data and everything else on the flows and on some of the amounts paid to validate.

We have a series of questions and requests for data out to JA as well that we sent right before I was out.

I'll be following up on that later today.

Um, and so that's what we're working through at this point.

We're kind of past the fact-finding piece and kind of into the starting to recalculate different things.

Uh Mr.

Parks, how are you determining which entities that you're gonna pull data on?

Companies, whatever, whatever it may be.

The the ultimate goal will be to look at overall so is to get the mass data pool on the commercial side, and so we'll go through that and pull samples to validate different pieces of information that we get from them.

Um on this initial piece.

You know, there was an initial listing that kind of got out there, and we are kind of pulling some stuff on a lower level on those ones right now, is what we're working through.

Those uh I think 10 inch and larger meters and stuff like that that had been out previously.

I'm gonna ask you the question I ask at every meeting.

Do you have a time line when you might have some information such as uh the scope of this problem, dollars that may be involved, number of companies that may be involved from a big picture standpoint?

Um that is always a very difficult thing to state because it's what issues do we run into that causes the time delays.

If if the data, you know, and they've spent a lot of time over the past year on their end kind of validating things, and so what do we run into there will kind of impact if we're able to validate and things look pretty smooth, that'll be a much smoother process.

If we run into things and we have a lot of validation issues and we have to go through those, that is going to take a lot more time.

And so we just need to make sure we get it right, and so there may be times and we'll have to kind of see from our standpoint.

We'll just be looking at what should have been done and not necessarily all the other legal things that may go with that piece, and so because of that, we may be able at certain times to provide certain pieces of the information, you know what I mean, in a smaller scale.

So whenever we're able to do that and provide some examples, we will do so.

But to give the overall piece in that it's a little too early for us to really give a good date on that.

Okay, thank you.

I know y'all are working extremely hard and we appreciate it.

We just uh uh want to get to the bottom of this as soon as we can because there's a lot of um people looking at us, and I in no way, shape, or form want to extend this committee any longer than we have to.

Thank you.

Uh number four update on six requests for attorney client privilege.

We understand that the JEA board uh uh voted that down.

Um I received an email this morning from MG Orinder because I guess he saw that Miss Ross was appearing today, reminding me of that.

I I clearly understand that, and I've responded to him in that way.

Um, but we have some other uh items we're gonna bring up in regard to Miss Ross later.

Um other items.

I did want to touch on a uh uh committee members you have in front of you the chronological emails that have been shared between uh me, Mr.

Teal, and various members of the JEA executive team.

I just want to summarize that.

I'm gonna read this, which summarizes all that communication because I think it's important we get this on the record.

Several weeks ago I asked uh Mr.

Teal to reach out to Vicky Cavey and Joey Brooks to schedule a time for their testimony before this committee.

On April 14th, Jody Brooks was invited to attend the meeting on April 27th, and Diane Moser on May 11th.

Due to a scheduling conflict, Miss Moser asked to switch the two dates with Jody's testimony instead being on May 11th.

Jody's assistant confirmed that Jody was available on May 11th, and Jody was copied on the email.

After Mr.

Fackler indicated that Regina Ross would be able to would be able to present some material to the sick, I scheduled Regina Ross to testify immediately following Jody's testimony on May 11th.

However, Miss Ross wanted to check with the Florida Bar to see what limitations there might be on her testimony based on the attorney client privilege issue.

Diane Moser appeared on April 27th is scheduled.

However, on May 6th, I was contacted by Miss Brooks, who now said she was unavailable until June 8th, nearly a month later.

Additionally, she indicated that the combined cycle presentation that was scheduled uh for today this morning would not be available until June 8th.

And let me just touch on that for a second because that's one of the more frustrating parts about this process.

Um the JEA board has approved the combined cycle program.

The JEA administration people are meeting with individual council members on the combined cycle.

I have a meeting scheduled myself, I think tomorrow or Wednesday, and yet they could not come today to present the combined cycle.

Very frustrating.

Furthermore, on April 6th, Jason contacted Miss Cave to request her attendance at the sick meeting on April 27th.

Miss KB never responded.

On April 13th, Jason followed up on the April 27th request.

Again, there was no response.

Finally, on April 29th, Jason requested Miss Cave's attendance at the sixth meeting on May 26.

On May 6th, I was finally informed, I was by Jody Brooks that Miss Cavey was unavailable on May 26th.

I finally heard from Miss Cave that on May 7th that she her first opportunity to appear before us is June 22nd.

And we'll we'll discuss that in a few minutes.

So roughly six weeks from now.

So Ms.

Brooks indicated she was available on June 8th, and Miss Cave indicated she was available on June 22nd.

I believe Miss Brooks also indicated the combined cycle presentation could occur on the morning of June 8th with her testimony in the afternoon.

So that's the that's a summary of where we are and the communication we've had that's reflected in this packet.

Any questions?

Mr.

Diamond.

I don't have a question, but I want to share my frustration with you, Mr.

Chair.

First of all, I totally understand them, Ms.

Ross needed to talk to the Florida Bar, uh protecting your bar license, number one job of every lawyer uh without question.

But this other stuff is ridiculous to me.

It looks terrible.

It's delay, delay, delay, stonewall, refuse to appear, refuse to appear, failure to waive attorney client privilege, failure to answer questions.

I mean, what do you have to hide?

What could have been said between the attorney and a member of the board that can't be public?

Nothing.

This is a public entity.

They're owned by the people of Jacksonville and they refuse to testify.

They refuse to show up here.

They're slow walking documents, they're slow walking witnesses.

I've seen this game before.

I saw this in 2019.

This is what Aaron Zond did to us.

This is what Aaron Zond did to the um to the council auditors.

So much so that I had to write a bill that says if this council auditors ask you a question, you have to answer it within four to eight hours.

So look, I know JEA's plan, the executives over there was to try and just wait out the clock with Kevin Carico being council president.

If you read quotes from Nick Howland, who no doubt will be the next council president, he's gonna continue this on.

He said it publicly.

So you can't wait out the clock.

This is going to happen.

You're gonna have to answer the questions.

We're gonna get to the truth.

I this is just so frustrating.

If I'm somebody sitting at home watching this, I'd be like, what?

What's so hard?

It looks terrible.

Thank you, Mr.

Diamond.

Okay.

I'm gonna turn this over to Mr.

Teal at this point.

And uh Ms.

Ross, if you could come forward and have a seat.

No, I was swearing it as well.

I'm told.

Is that not correct?

I'm told that we do not swear in attorneys.

I like this role of it as well.

Can someone help me?

Through the chair of the committee, normally we don't swear in attorneys.

Um typically their obligation as a member of the Florida bar is it has a duty uh in and of itself in order to uh to appear and Ms.

Ross is actually uh uh uh the city council's attorney as well as the consolidated government.

So um I believe that she also has an obligation there uh to uh to answer questions truthfully, so I don't think there's a need to swear her in.

Okay, thank thank you.

Mr.

Teal?

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um Ms.

Ross, I understand your your limitations uh as far as your ability to provide a complete um testimony today, and so really the purpose of of uh I think our the the questions that I have for you today is is directed by the chair is to kind of get into what those limitations are as well as uh identify, you know, potentially for the board a potential path forward uh in terms of your ability to participate in this process.

So um, if we could, I would just kind of like to kind of just lay the table uh for it.

So if you could just kind of just um talk about uh, well, let me just ask you the question.

You're an attorney with the office of general counsel, correct?

That's correct.

And when were you hired with OGC?

Um late summer of 2021.

And where were you assigned?

And what was your title at JEA?

Chief legal officer.

And how long were you chief legal officer at JEA?

Uh roughly four and a half years, close to five.

Okay, and during your Ms.

Ross, could you pull that microphone a little closer?

Sure.

Thank you.

And during your four and a half, almost five years as chief legal officer at JEA, did you have an opportunity to work regularly with uh senior staff at JEA?

That's correct.

And that included, I guess initially um the CEO was who?

Uh initially, uh the CEO was Chase Dow.

Okay, and then eventually um uh Vicky Cavey took over.

Correct.

And you worked, uh you worked quite a bit with her.

Correct.

And then did you also work with her uh senior staff?

Correct.

Um, and you were physically housed at JEA, correct?

That's correct.

Okay, and when you were physically housed at JEA, were you on the seventh floor?

That's correct.

Yeah, and that's the same floor as all of the other senior staff.

Well, initially we were in the old building on the old JEA building.

So I think we were on the 16th floor, uh, relocated and then in the new building, I think it's the seventh floor.

Okay, but with uh Vicky Kavey and her staff, you've been housed on the seventh floor with them.

And is it part of your duties?

Uh or was well, let me ask you this.

Um, are you currently holding that role?

I am not.

And when did you stop being chief Legal Officer for JEA?

Uh roughly October of last year.

Okay.

And while you were Chief Legal Officer of JEA, was it part of your duties to advise JEA on legal matters?

Correct.

And it was also part of your duties to interact with um both senior staff members as well as lower level employees at JEA?

Correct.

And while you were there, did you have a regular opportunity to personally observe the working climate on the seventh floor and around JEA?

So at this point, I probably should go into the information that I did receive from the bar.

I did have an opportunity to speak, and I do want to address the committee.

I'm here today to cooperate with committees proceedings as required by the city code of ordinances.

And I take my representation of JEA and as my former client very seriously, as well as my professional and ethical obligations.

So I did do a lot of research as well as had multiple conversations with the bar seeking guidance from um regarding the scope of testimony and things that I could reveal.

And I was advised that as the former chief legal officer of JEA, I'm bound by a duty of confidentiality, which prevents me from disclosing information related to my representation of the agency, except as authorized by the Florida Bar rules by law and by JEA.

The confidentiality rule not only applies to matters communicated in confidence, but also all information related to my representation of JEA, regardless of its source, including information that's already been publicly disclosed.

So I just want to make sure in answering your questions, if I have to uh pass on a question, make sure you understand the scope of the confidentiality.

And so let's skip to that issue.

Did the Florida Bar advise you in terms of the difference between appearing uh at a proceeding such as this voluntarily versus being compelled uh to appear at a proceeding?

Yes.

And what was their advice to you in terms of the distinction between uh how you appear at a proceeding such as this?

So the rule applies into instances where there is a judicial proceeding, which the rules of evidence take precedent and it deals with confidentiality or how confidentiality is handled.

In that case, you're dealing with the attorney client privilege in a second scenario such as this where I voluntarily appear, there's a duty of confidentiality, which is a very broad anything that has any information related to my representation of JEA, I cannot testify about.

And so if this body were to exercise its authority to subpoena you uh to provide testimony to it, would that uh would your restriction at that point in time only be limited to privileged information as opposed to confidential information?

It would be privileged information.

And so by subpoenaeing you, you would actually be uh able to to talk about uh more things than if you appear voluntarily, is that correct?

Correct.

If I am um if it's a compulsory appearance, yes.

And let me ask you this.

So are you aware that there's an ordinance code provision that requires all city employees to participate in investigations such as this?

I am aware.

And did you have that part of the discussion with the Florida bar in terms of compulsory versus voluntary?

I did.

Okay, and what was their response to that uh ordinance obligation uh as a city employee?

Well, as you're aware, when you reach out to the Florida bar, they will not opine on local rules, um, so that would be something I'd have to research a little bit further, but um certainly they were clear on certain examples such as being required to appear.

Okay, so the cleanest approach uh would be to to have you be subpoenaed uh to appear before this body?

Correct.

Okay.

Now understanding that you can't answer these questions at this point in time, but I think it's important to uh for this body to understand whether uh it's important to issue a subpoena to you.

Um I want to ask you some questions that you probably aren't gonna be able to answer today, but what I want you to do is opine on whether or not if you're subpoenaed to talk about them, whether you would be able to address some of these issues.

Okay.

So again, let me uh the initial question as that's sparked all of this conversation is have you had a a regular opportunity to personally observe working conditions on the seventh floor around JEA?

Yes, okay, and if you were subpoenaed, uh then you would be able to um uh expand on your ability to talk about specific examples for your personal observations uh while you are stationed over at JEA?

Any information that is not privileged.

Okay.

And uh second question is have you personally advised JEA board members on the capacity fee issue?

That's something I'd rather take under advisement.

Okay, and if you were subpoenaed uh to testify to this body, would you be able to talk about more of um simply not not advice what advice you gave them, but simply whether or not those conversations occurred?

We'll be able to answer questions that don't fall under privilege.

Okay.

Uh and with regard to legal advice and guidance concerning the combined cycle projects, is it same answer is that if you were subpoenaed, you could talk about unprivileged uh non-privileged um aspects of that or advice, uh not advice, I'm sorry, but discussions that you've had with JEA?

Information that does not fall within the privilege, correct?

And um, same question with regard to the JEA board and whether or not uh you have advised them or have had conversations uh with them about the uh potential of a toxic work environment.

Any information that falls that does not fall within the privilege.

So if you were subpoenaed to testify in front of this body, you feel like that would that would allow you under the Florida Bar rules and all the other JSON laws and and uh restrictions to provide this this body with information that may be confidential, but would not be privileged on all of those topics that I just laid out.

Based on the uh consultation I've had with the bar now that I've had additional information regarding the scope of your question, I would like to consult with the bar once again, but as of right now, any information that doesn't fall within the privilege, I should be able to speak to.

Okay, do you feel like the board has been adequately advised and informed on those issues?

I can't answer that question.

I'm probably not the best person to answer that question.

Okay.

When the board voted to your with when you say the issues, you're talking about the combined cycle and the capacity issue?

The toxic work uh culture, the combined cycle, basically the charge of the sick.

Okay.

I just want to make sure we're all thinking the same thing.

And yeah, let me just preface all of this with all of my questions are are going to be geared towards what's in the the jurisdiction of the SIC.

And so are you are you familiar with what's in the jurisdiction of the SIC?

I am.

Okay.

Um when the vote the board, and this is gonna ask you to speculate, um, because I know you weren't involved in in uh in any of these discussions, but when the board voted to deny the SIC's request for a waiver of the attorney client privilege, uh do you feel like they were fully informed on all of these issues sufficiently to make an informed decision?

I I can't answer that question.

I wasn't privy to any of that.

Do you think it would be helpful for you to sit down and advise individual board members on on your experiences with JEA and their advice your advice to them?

I can't answer that question directly or or or specifically.

Um is there is there anything in the Florida Bar rules or in any other law that would prevent you from sitting down with individual board members to talk about your time at JEA?

Um I'm an attorney for the city for the consolidated government.

I'm also their former uh advisor, legal advisor, so there's nothing that precludes nothing in the rules that precludes board members from reaching out or asking questions or for me talking to them.

Okay.

So the rules of confidentiality and the rules of privilege would not apply if you had conversations with your former client, JEA.

The privilege belongs to the agency.

Is there anything knowing what the charge of the of the city council is or the SIC is there anything any other topics that you feel like you can discuss today or provide testimony to the SIC.

Not within the charge no.

Okay.

That's all the questions thank you sir.

Hang on a second.

I'm gonna make a motion well I'll tell you what.

Mr.

Chair, you might want to see if anybody else has yeah I'm gonna let Mr.

Diamond make it.

Sure.

Uh first of all Ms.

Ross.

Sorry you have to go through all this it's no fun being in a crosshairs no fun being in that thing you've been a delight to chat with and so professionals through this whole thing.

So uh thank you for your service to the city.

I mean that genuinely it means a lot to everybody when people sit in that chair and they do the best they can uh and I absolutely respect you protecting your bar card and trying to live by our very strict rules of professionalism so thank you for that too.

I make a motion that the committee um uh endorse a subpoena for Ms.

Ross to appear back before this committee and I would recommend that we go to the finance committee to issue it.

I have a second from um Ms.

Pittman can I can I suggest something as a part of that labor.

That that I would include that she do meet with individual JEA board members about her experience at JEA and through that uh through those discussions there's there's the possibility that the that uh she might convince people that the privilege part of this could be removed if you want to restate that if you agree with me.

Yeah, let me just try to understand the idea um because uh if we if we ask uh separate aside from a subpoena this is I guess a request from the committee right I don't I don't think we can do that as far as a subpoena okay but my my question is uh to the chair is the idea to talk to individual board members assuming that they pick up the phone right and say hey uh we have a one-on-one attorney client privilege on the stuff that we discussed and then to see if they'll waive it individually as opposed to the board as a whole I'm just trying to understand where that goes that makes sense to me I'm just trying to understand if that's the if that's what we're asking because I I just want to make sure that when you leave here today you you've got good instructions.

Mr.

Teal um through the chair and council member I think the privilege applies to the board itself so I think the board itself would have to make a motion and vote to waive the privilege it doesn't in as a collegial body you're one member of a collegial body so therefore the privilege applies to the client which is the board itself so I think the I don't think individual board members could agree to waive the privilege for the the rest of the board.

Okay then through the chair so we're just saying to have this conversation to see if maybe they want to take it up as a board.

Correct well I think it is dual purpose right one is because in all honesty the the way we have heard uh it went down with uh Regina um getting replaced as as their legal counsel I don't think that she has had an adequate time to be able to sit down with individual board members to tell them what she knows and so I think that's the the idea here is the sick encourages um you know I think that it you may actually even have the ability to to require because remember she's in a unique spot as your lawyer too.

Um as part of your investigation that she educate the board members because we don't know that they know about the Mayo deal.

We don't know that they know anything about the toxic work culture.

We don't know that they know you know anything about um uh you know the what's happened in in the investigation or who knew what when you know those kinds of things I think that would be helpful for them to be educated on that point.

I I I don't think there's any question that the level of knowledge of individual board members and the briefing is substantially less than what I think people are assuming it is.

I agree with you wholeheartedly.

So I guess the question would be if I might through the chair to Ms.

Ross is there anything preventing you from doing that is there any reason you can't do that and I understand that your boss is right behind you.

So what is no no no let's let's just get it out let's figure it out can you do it there's no or Mr.

Fackler can she do it and if if not why not sure and and I've had conversations and emails to the board about offering that type of thing and then I will follow up after this meeting with an invitation to make sure all the questions are answered as I do with all my clients.

Okay is it possible to include Ms.

Ross?

I mean I mean she's got all that background right I mean she was there in the trenches.

That's the so it it sounds like if I can jump in it would be you miss Ross and the individual board member the three of you I the that's my concept that's my invitation I I cannot force board members of course to take a meeting but that's that that will be an offer that makes sense to make sure that all of our clients are fully informed.

I'm I I'm just optimistic that if they receive this information they may reconsider some of the decisions they've made and take that to the board.

Maybe I'm being overly optimistic but but uh I think that's a possibility I hear you loud and clear the whole country was so happy my microphone is muted um so uh so I guess the question would be uh can you report back who uh took you up on the invitation and who didn't and uh that would be the only kind of feedback I would need we have learned a lot about confidentiality and that that might fall into that confidential area necessarily you that'd be easier there are public records potentially about that who takes the meeting and so forth.

To the extent there's a public record there's a public record um I we've been so educated now I'm incredibly pedantic.

No I'm tracking uh well Mr.

Chair I I mean so long as they they make this offer I I do believe that there's certain board members who did not get briefed on especially some of these more and and that's not uh any reflection on Mr.

Fackler just to be clear I think this is just before they were kept in the dark in part and I would love that at least have a public opportunity to get into the light with everything that went on.

That that's all I want I will if the boards are full if the board members are fully informed of all the facts that's all that I'm looking for and then they can make any decision they wish to make so that's so we're directing Miss Ross to do that.

Mr.

Chair of the motion on the floor is I'm gonna get back to the motion.

Okay.

I'm sorry.

I we we we kind of I mixed up two things probably inappropriately so let's go back to Mr.

Mr.

Diamond would you restate your original motion?

Sure so my motion would be that the the sick request essentially uh stand behind a um a uh a subpoena for Ms.

Ross to appear back before this committee and we refer it uh to be uh taken up by the finance committee did you have a date which you wanted her to reappear uh I I would like to see her come back in two weeks if if that's ample time Mr.

Teal to the chair to Council Member Diamond you may want to since we've got at least on paper uh right now uh that Ms.

Brooks is available on June 8th and Ms.

Kavey's available on June 22nd is to have the subpoena direct um Ms.

Ross to appear on June 8th and if necessary on June 22nd in case June 8th and and and if if necessary uh what was that June June 22nd 22nd that works for me I'm fine with that we just need a second.

I I think Ms.

Pittman seconded it okay any any further discussion on on the motion Ms.

Pittman not on the motion okay all those in favor, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, please say nay.

Motion passes.

Okay, separately from that.

Obviously, we'd like you to meet, make the effort to meet with all seven board members between now is as quickly as you can so we have some idea of uh where we're moving in terms of uh those meetings.

Okay.

Yeah you you want to do the next one?

Sure, please.

Um, and so look, I I think that Ms.

Brooks should have appeared today.

Um, you want to excuse the witness?

Well, let's keep it because we might come to you.

Yeah, yeah, fair enough.

Um I think Ms.

Brooks should have been here today.

I don't think there's any good reason that she's not in that chair right now.

It just drives me crazy.

This is a public body, a public entity.

And so I would make a motion uh that we stand behind a subpoena uh issued uh and refer to the finance committee for Ms.

Brooks to show on June 8th.

And I'm fine with it's contingent subpoena, like she shows up.

Um, you know that that's the date.

Um we'd only have to look up.

Well, contingent is not the right word.

We'd only have to look at enforcement if she doesn't show up, but I I do think it makes sense since we're having these issues, just go ahead and issue the subpoena.

And uh, and since it already works and she already says she can come on that date, there shouldn't be any issue with both issuing it and complying.

Can I add something to that?

There may be some documents we want her to bring to that.

Sure.

So so we can do what's called a subpoena deuces teacum and say um we can go ahead and issue a subpoena, that means you have to show up.

Deuces Tum means you have to show up with these documents.

And so I'm fine if we want to come up with a list of documents that we'd also like her to show with on June 8th or before.

Most people most people like send them ahead of time, but if she shows up, you know, with some photocopies that we could deal with that way also.

Mr.

Teal.

One thing I also wanted to mention, too, is this is that even though that both Ms.

Brooks and Ms.

Kavey have indicated they're available on these two dates, since we're scheduling a witness contingent uh on on that as far as issuing a subpoena.

There's separate grounds for Ms.

Brooks, or sorry, Miss Ms.

Ross getting a subpoena.

But for scheduling purposes, you probably want to lock in.

Um it's helpful that they've already committed that these dates are available to them, uh, so it shouldn't be putting them out.

But I think that it's it's important that the subpoena gets issued because we have these other witnesses contingent on them.

Okay, I'm looking for a second, a second from Ms.

Pittman.

Uh further uh well, let me go to Mary.

She's in the queue.

Thank you.

Uh Mr.

Chair, I would recommend that if you're going to include a request that records be produced as part of the subpoena.

If you can't articulate a list that you would be looking for today, because the subpoena needs to travel to the finance committee with what it is that the SIC is looking for that you would potentially want to authorize Mr.

Teal to generate that list, or that Mr.

Chair for you to generate that list, um, and so that the committee can extend that authority so that that can be developed between now and the finance committee meeting.

We'll have Mr.

Teal work with you and the committee members individually to come up with a list of documents we want her to bring.

And is that the would you consider that part of the motion, or do you want to make an amendment to the motion, Mr.

Lyman?

I consider that part of the motion.

And Ms.

Pittman seconds it.

So the motion on the floor is that the SIC is going to request from the finance committee issuance of a subpoena to Jody Brooks to appear on June 8th to include a list of documents that Mr.

Teal is authorized to provide in the subpoena for her to produce.

That is correct.

Sure.

Now we're in the discussion.

Ms.

Pittman.

I just want to make sure I'm in the right posture because I'd like to send questions that I have because I feel like today we're handcuffed and we're not able to speak in terms of in-depth and questions and about things that I want to know about when it comes to management and staff.

And so I want to be able to do that.

And I hope I I guess just like we did before, um, there were questions that we had, and of course, we were able to get um those questions back, but I also think that we should be able to be open to ask beyond those questions that we submit.

Um, so you know, I just feel like today I would love.

First of all, love talking um and meeting, but of course, there's not much information um that um we were able to share other than putting a a face with a name in and so um based on the testimony um from uh Mrs.

Mosier, I I really want to dig a little bit deeper and and and also to be able to ask um miss cavey some questions and miss brooks as well so i just feel like we're you know i i don't want us to be meeting just to be meeting right um but i want us to be able to at least get some work done or have some closure um to move forward and the information that we're trying to find out so um i i do have some additional questions one that i would love to ask miss ross and um some other questions about staff you know um regarding um their background and how how did we get here okay we've got a motion on the floor on the subpoena i i'm afraid miss ross is not gonna be able to answer a whole lot today um on june 8th and the day and uh later in june for miss cavey you'll be free to ask any questions that you want my suggestion would be that you accumulate those questions work with mr teal and get all those ready for those two days okay okay all those in favor of the motion please indicate by saying aye aye all those opposed nay motion passes mr diamond uh thank you this you know I have to say I'm really unhappy that I'm having to make this next motion because I think whoever the CEO of JEA is should be very comfortable just showing up without a subpoena but because of the games that we're seeing we have to do this and it's just so disappointing.

But it's too important to get wrong and it's JEA is too important to Jacksonville just to ignore and so my motion is that we subpoena uh Vicky Cave to come before this council of this committee for June uh 28th or me 22nd thank you um the only caveat have that's my motion and to do it as a deuces teacum also with Jason uh coming up with a list of documents uh to the extent we need more that Jody Brooks can't provide the only wrinkle I have Mr.

uh chair is that there's an off chance that I might be on orders on the 27th so I'm a little worried about missing it.

Yeah of June um yeah yeah so the whole back end of June I'm worried about being put on on order so is there any way that we can just add like some room or within 30 days of that or something like that if I have to come back to the chair like I'd like to have that be a date certain I'm just trying to figure out is there any way we can fit in any flexibility on that.

So through the chair to council member diamond so I do apply just before you go Mary I do apologize like but there's like I know like training's coming so I would like to be here for that.

So we are looking for an extension of what type of just some flexibility in the in the subpoena such that it's look it's for the 22nd uh or 27 22nd 20 yeah 22nd or within 30 days of that or something like that well so that so June 30th this committee expires unless extended by the next council president so let's do this I have a better idea let's just do the 22nd if I need to come back because I have new information I'll come to the chair and we can we can talk to the council president and perhaps the next council president.

So I'll just stick with that motion.

Okay.

Yes so Ms.

KV also authorizes the 22nd 23rd 24th or 26th are you out okay 20 seconds are regular Mondays the reason identified that one is probably the most appropriate one.

Okay motion on the floor do we have a second we have a second further discussion.

Let me mention that uh council president Kevin Carico has joined us um I see no one in the queue all those in favor please indicate by saying aye.

All those opposed please say nay motion passes.

Okay.

That's all I you look like you want to say oh yeah you're in the queue.

Mr.

Chair if I could, and you you may be able to articulate this, or Mr.

Teal may be able to assist.

I had a conversation with you and with council member diamond individually with respect to the subpoenas that you're requesting the finance committee issue, and this is also some information that would probably be helpful to the finance committee that you may address with them when the items are put on the agenda.

We've discussed that the council's authority to investigate matters of the consolidated government is a very broad authority, but it is to an extent ancillary to your legislative powers or your legislative authority.

And so to the extent that you think that the compelling of this testimony is in furtherance of this committee's charge or in furtherance of an ultimate legislative act or aim of this committee and the council, I would encourage you to articulate that so that it's clear to the finance committee when they take this up for consideration, how you believe this testimony would be in furtherance of that aim or that goal.

Do you want to go first?

Yeah, I'm uh through the chair to Mary, and for the record here, I'm happy to add some buckets here.

First of all, we're sending this to the finance committee, um, which is gonna be looking at the budgets for the next several years.

So the number one issue I have is how is JEA and JEA's future, the combined cycle plan and some of these other issues going to affect uh uh risks to our budget and our approval of whatever they provide.

So that's number one.

Uh two, we have authority uh as the city council to write the ethics legislation for the city of Jacksonville, including um employees and officers of JEA.

Uh the last time we did a sit committee, I myself wrote several pieces of ethics-related legislation trying to avoid conflicts of interest, responding to council auditors and many other things, and uh what came out of that committee was a long list of of ethics changes.

So I think we'll be looking at that again.

Did we miss anything?

Is there something else we need to do as far as ethics with the OIG or or council auditors or anything else like that?

Um the third bucket I think is is highly relevant, is it just from our purposes beyond um with the stuff that that's in the charge, whether it's combined cycle plan or whether it's the uh the perhaps improper um uh use of authority affecting contracts and things like that, like there's a litany of legislative fixes to problems like that, but importantly, we have the authority to rewrite the charter for JEA, and that's what we did five years ago.

This is not one where we have to go to referendum, we actually have more authority with JEA than we do any other entity, and so to the extent that we missed something, the last go round, that would be where we would plug in our new rules or new law, and so those are the three big ones that I would uh recommend is our legislative purpose for the for the sick.

Yeah, I if I can just reinforce one of those, it's the JEA charter.

We left it open that we can modify their charter without going to the public as was completed for the JEA board member change.

So if we find out things that need to change, the charter would be the place that we could go, so um, and I couldn't reinforce more the financial implications of some of this, um, particularly when we've got a combined cycle that's well over a billion dollars that we need that that I want to understand, and I know the council wants to understand fully to make sure um that we're comfortable with the decision that the uh JEA board board has already made, um, but we still need to understand it.

Okay.

Ms.

Pip, did you want to add anything?

So the chair can answer this.

Um, the number of board members that have been informed, you know what I mean.

We we took this on and didn't really know how much the board was even um aware of what was going on, and so as uh we as you request the information, is would that be a one-on-one that can be done, or would it be an entire board meeting?

How how would that work or can it can it work as a group or can you do it as as one one-on-one?

Mr.

Teal, through the chair to council member Pittman.

So as you're aware of the JEA board is a is a sunshine body.

Right.

Uh, and so obviously, you know, meetings with um with multiple board members at the same time would require a noticed meeting.

Um as far as advising them on uh specific aspects of all of this, I think you've got a lot of flexibility.

Now, you can't compel the board to place something on their agenda, you know, as far as the presentations we discussed at the committee meetings on the um employee uh satisfaction survey and the reporting of that.

But you know, to the extent that they're open to, you know, you you have dual school board and city council meetings.

Um, you know, there that you you have the the flexibility to do that, you have the flexibility to meet just because you are each part of a sunshine body doesn't meet doesn't mean that you can't meet with one of them individually, uh and so you always have the ability to do that.

Um so uh you know if you feel that there is a strong desire to to meet with individual board members to discuss what did you know, what didn't you know?

Uh as a city council member, you have all the right to be able to do that that you want.

Uh there's no no restrictions on that.

Well it just you know it just occurs to me, just like we have notice meetings, and if everybody is hearing the same thing when you're asking the same thing, um, even though this happened um we we really don't know exactly who knew what.

And you know, having a notice meeting gives everybody uh even you know level feel um and it gives us that opportunity to know that we ask the right questions and or instead of just kind of dragging this on, you know.

I I really want to um finish the work that we're charged um to do, because you know, Chair, I don't want to just keep this on and on and on.

We we need to get it finished.

Ms.

Pittman, was my goal to finish this by June 30th, and uh and I had a plan for that.

You might remember I had a plan for the stadium deal, and we got that done uh by June 24th, a day that I'll never forget.

I had a plan to finish this up until um Miss Kavey and Miss Brooks changed the dates.

So I I I can't uh I'm doing my best, and I agree with you 200% that I don't want this to drag on a day longer than it has to, but what we need everybody in the in the soup, so to say, to cooperate.

And uh, but but I agree with you, we will finish this as quickly as we can.

Okay, um, and I am your liaison to the board, and if if we need to have a notice meeting uh to to object no.

No, not at all.

All right, um, I think the the present board chair will be much more interested in hearing my point of view, and he's indicated that to me.

We I appointed him.

We have a great relationship, and I think he'll be very open to hearing the views of the city council through through their liaison.

Okay, any other so it sounds like the meeting two weeks from now will be we probably won't have a meeting unless we need to meet on the capacity issue.

Mr.

Teal, do you agree with that?

Yes, uh sir.

I think that the only uh next step, unless something changes, obviously, uh, is to to get the survey up and rolling.

Right.

Um, and just to remind the sick, uh we structured the legislation for that is it's it's executable by the council president.

Uh and so, you know, this isn't the normal turnaround time for waiting on the mayor and and veto and all of that stuff.

So uh that should be quickly uh assuming that it gets the votes tomorrow, that should be quickly uh up and running.

Um I don't know if you want to have uh think about having a full committee meeting to talk about the individual questions on the questionnaire, or once we get into that process, maybe wait and see what we come up with as far as the survey company selection link um to decide whether or not you think it would be beneficial.

Well, what why don't we do this?

Let's hold that meeting two weeks from Monday until you and I get more information on the survey, and just a reminder it's Tuesday because of the holiday.

Right, right.

Thank you for reminding us of that.

So uh we will uh we will hold that date and determine at a later time if we're gonna meet.

Okay.

Any other business, Mr.

President.

Did you have anything to add?

Dr.

Johnson, did you want to add anything?

Okay.

Then we are adjourned.

Thank you.