Item K2 K.2
County of Monroe P W
;� w 1rJ� BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
r,�� Mayor Craig Cates,District 1
The Florida Keys Mayor Pro Tem Holly Merrill Raschein,District 5
y Michelle Lincoln,District 2
James K.Scholl,District 3
Ij David Rice,District 4
County Commission Meeting
February 15, 2023
Agenda Item Number: K.2
Agenda Item Summary #11722
BULK ITEM: No DEPARTMENT: County Attorney's Office
TIME APPROXIMATE: STAFF CONTACT: Bob Shillinger(305) 292-3470
No
AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Attorney-Client Closed Session in the matter of AshBritt, Inc. v.
Monroe County, FL and Florida Department of Transportation, Case No. CA-K-17-802, at the
February 15, 2023 BOCC regular meeting in Key West, Florida, at 9:00 a.m. or as soon thereafter as
the matter may be heard.
ITEM BACKGROUND: Per F.S. 286.011(8), the subject matter of the meeting shall be confined
to settlement negotiations or strategy sessions related to litigation expenditures. Present at the
meeting will be the Commissioners, County Administrator Roman Gastesi, County Attorney Bob
Shillinger, Assistant County Attorneys Cynthia Hall and Christine Limbert-Barrows, special
litigation counsel Jeff Hochman and a certified court reporter.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: Request approved at the 1/18/2023 meeting.
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES:
N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: N/A -- closed session.
DOCUMENTATION:
Day of Closed Session Script AshBritt 2-15-2023
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Effective Date: N/A
Expiration Date:
Total Dollar Value of Contract: N/A
Total Cost to County: Court Reporter Costs
Packet Pg. 1965
K.2
Current Year Portion:
Budgeted: Yes
Source of Funds: 67501-530330
CPI: N/A
Indirect Costs: N/A
Estimated Ongoing Costs Not Included in above dollar amounts:
Revenue Producing: If yes, amount:
Grant:
County Match:
Insurance Required:
Additional Details:
N/A
REVIEWED BY:
Cynthia Hall Completed 01/31/2023 11:54 AM
Bob Shillinger Completed 01/31/2023 11:55 AM
Lindsey Ballard Completed 01/31/2023 11:57 AM
Board of County Commissioners Pending 02/15/2023 9:00 AM
Packet Pg. 1966
K.2.a
Mayor's Script
For the Day of Closed Session
The following should be read at the appropriate point during the day of the closed session.
1. Prior to going into closed session.
A closed attorney-client session pursuant to Section 286.011(8), Florida Statutes, will now be held. It is
estimated that this meeting will take approximately thirty (30) minutes. The persons attending the meeting <0
will be the County Commissioners, County Administrator Roman Gastesi, County Attorney Bob C
Shillinger, Assistant County Attorneys Cynthia Hall and Christine Limbert-Barrows,outside counsel Jeff Hochman `7)
and a certified court reporter.
Since the law prohibits any other person from being present at the closed session, the commissioners,
the County Administrator, the attorneys for the County and the court reporter will now remain in this U
meeting room, and all other persons are required to leave the room. When the closed session is over, we will
re-convene and re-open the public meeting. This public meeting is now closed. U
2. At the beginning of the closed session.
I now call this closed session to order. For the record, this meeting is being held upon the request of the County
Attorney Bob Shillinger who announced at a prior BOCC meeting held on 1/18/2023 that he needed advice in
the matter of Ashbritt, Inc. v. Monroe County, Florida and Florida Department of Transportation, Case No.
CA-K-17-802. At that meeting, the Board approved holding a closed session and public notice was given
through public announcement of the meeting at the 1/18/2023 BOCC meeting and through publication of the
2/15/2023 BOCC meeting agenda on the County's website.
For the record, and the benefit of the court reporter, each of us will state our name and position starting
with the commission.
c�
(After all have identified themselves)—Thank you.
Just as a reminder, we will only be discussing settlement negotiations and strategy relating to litigation OW
expenditures. We cannot take any decisive action at this meeting. We can only provide information and
direction to the attorneys. Any decisions this Board makes concerning this case must be done in a meeting open
to the public. U
4-
0
Let's start our discussion with the County Attorney.
3. At the end of the closed session,prior to going into open session.
This closed session is now terminated and we will not reconvene in the public meeting.
4. After the public session has been re-opened.
The attorney—client session has been terminated, and we are now re-opening this public meeting.
Packet Pg. 1967
' W, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
County of Monroe + � Ifu�� �, Mayor Craig Cates,District 1
ti Mayor Pro Tem Holly Merrill Raschein,District 5
The Florida Keys ra Michelle Lincoln,District 2
James K.Scholl,District
Robert B.Shillinger,County Attorney** tdw David Rice,District 4
Pedro J.Mercado,Sr.Assistant County Attorney**
Cynthia L.Hall,Sr.Assistant County Attorney**
Christine Limbert-Barrows,Assistant County Attorney** Office of the County Attorney
Derek V.Howard,Assistant County Attorney** I I11 12'Street,Suite 408
Peter H.Morris,Assistant County Attorney ** Key West,FL 33040
Patricia Fables,Assistant County Attorney (305)292-3470 Office
Joseph X.DiNovo,Assistant County Attorney** (305)292-3516 Fax
Kelly Dugan,Assistant County Attorney
Christina Cory,Assistant County Attorney
Nathalia Archer,Assistant County Attorney
**Board Certified in City,County&Local Govt.Law
April 28, 2023
Kevin Madok, CPA
Clerk of the Court, 16'Judicial Circuit
500 Whitehead Street
Key West, FL 33040
In Re: Ashbritt, Inc. v. Monroe County, Case No.: 17-CA-802-K
Dear Mr.Madok:
Please find attached scans of transcripts of six (6) closed attorney-client sessions of the Monroe County Board
of County Commissioners, with regard to the above-entitled civil matter. The closed sessions occurred on:
05/16/2018; 02/20/2019; 05/08/2020; 05/25/2021; 09/12/2022; and, 02/13/2023. Under F.S. 286.011(8), these
transcripts may be made part of the public record, as the litigation has concluded.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Please contact me should you have any questions.
Sincerely
Digitally signed by Robert B.Shillinger
Robert B. Shillinger ou cn=Robert B.Shillinger, ,Monroe County BOCC,
ou=Monroe County Attorney,email=shillinger-
bob@monroecounty-fl.gov,c=uS
Date:2023.04.28 15:04:07-04'00'
Robert B. Shillinger
Monroe County Attorney
Attachments: Six closed session transcripts dated 05/16/2018;02/20/2019;05/08/2020;05/25/2021;09/12/2022,02/13/2023
1
1 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY
ATTORNEY-CLIENT CLOSED SESSION
2 WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2023
3
4 Re: AshBritt, Inc. v. Monroe County, FL and Florida
Department of Transportation, Case No . CA-K-17-802
5
6
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS:
7
Craig Cates, Mayor
8 Michelle Lincoln, County Commissioner
David P. Rice, County Commissioner
9 Jim Scholl, County Commissioner (via Zoom)
10 STAFF:
11 Robert B. Shillinger, County Attorney
Cynthia L. Hall, Senior Assistant County Attorney
12 Christine Limbert-Barrows, Assistant County Attorney
Roman Gastesi, County Administrator
13
14
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
15
Proceedings of the Board of County Commissioners of
16
Monroe County Attorney-Client Closed Session, at the
17
Harvey Government Center, 1200 Truman Avenue, Key West,
18
Monroe County, Florida, on the 13th day of February, 2023,
19
commencing at approximately 12 : 40 p.m. and concluding
20
at approximately 1 : 18 p.m. , as reported by Susan L.
21
McTaggart, Court Reporter and Notary Public, State of
22
Florida at Large.
23
24
25
2
1 P R O C E E D I N G S
2 MR. SHILLINGER: Mr. Mayor, will you call the
3 closed session to order?
4 MAYOR CATES : Yes . I call the closed session to
5 order.
6 MR. SHILLINGER: All right. So this meeting is
7 being held at my request when I announced at a prior
8 BOCC meeting held on January 18, 2023, that I needed
9 your advice in the matter of AshBritt, Inc. V. Monroe
10 County and the Florida Department of Transportation,
11 Case No. CA-K-17-802 . At that meeting the Board
12 approved holding a closed session, and public notice
13 was given through a public announcement of the meeting
14 at the January 18, 2023 BOCC meeting and
15 through publication of the February 15, 2023 BOCC
16 meeting agenda on the County' s website.
17 For the record and benefit of the court reporter,
18 each of us will state our name and position, starting
19 with the Commission.
20 COMMISSIONER LINCOLN: Michelle Lincoln, County
21 Commissioner, District 2 .
22 MAYOR CATES : Craig Cates, County Commissioner,
23 District 1 .
24 COMMISSIONER RICE: David Rice, County
25 Commissioner, District 4 .
3
1 MR. SHILLINGER: And appearing remotely due to
2 extraordinary circumstances?
3 COMMISSIONER SCHOLL: Jim Scholl, County
4 Commissioner, District 3 .
5 MR. SHILLINGER: All right. And for the record,
6 Commissioner Raschein has recused herself on advice of
7 counsel and on advice of the Ethics Commission because
8 she has a conflict of interest, a positional conflict
9 as a result of her employment with AshBritt. So just
10 so the record is clear, she is not in the room.
11 MR. GASTESI : Roman Gastesi, County Administrator.
12 MR. SHILLINGER: Bob Shillinger, County Attorney.
13 MS . HALL: Cynthia Hall, Senior Assistant County
14 Attorney.
15 MS . LIMBERT-BARROWS : Christine Limbert-Barrows,
16 Assistant County Attorney.
17 MR. SHILLINGER: All right. Just as a reminder,
18 we will only be discussing settlement negotiations and
19 the strategy relating to litigation expenditures. We
20 cannot take any decisive action at this meeting. We
21 can only provide information and direction to the
22 attorneys. Any decision you make concerning this case
23 must be at a meeting that is held and a decision made
24 at an open meeting.
25 All right. So when we last spoke to you about
4
1 this case we thought we were headed down the path of a
2 negotiated settlement whereas we would within limits
3 reinstate AshBritt on a year by year basis and they' d
4 serve as a secondary contractor, and then we got this
5 e-mail that I 've handed to you and, for the record,
6 I 've given it to the court reporter and she can make it
7 part of the transcript as, attach it as an exhibit.
8 They take issue with certain aspects of the Ethics
9 opinion that was obtained on behalf of Commissioner
10 Raschein. Again, for everybody' s background, there is
11 a state statute, a Rule of Ethics that prohibits a
12 county commissioner from being an employee of a vendor.
13 There is an exception to that if the vendor
14 relationship preceded the seating of the employee on
15 the commission. We had that circumstance, except we
16 had the additional facts of the contract had been
17 terminated for convenience by the Board and then we
18 were in litigation and the proposal from the vendor to
19 the County to settle that litigation by reinstating the
20 contract. So all of those facts that kind of fell into
21 place were complicating that settlement.
22 We took it to the Ethics Commission and got an
23 opinion, for the record, it ' s Ethics Opinion 2022-5,
24 specifically addressed this conduct with Commissioner
25 Raschein as the requester and as the addressee on it,
5
1 and the opinion essentially said that as long as you
2 were making legally required changes which were in
3 State law that weren' t really material, you know,
4 things like don' t do business with people that like
5 Cuba or don' t like Israel, that that was fine, that was
6 not a change that would vitiate the grandfather. What
7 the ethics opinion stated then was, well, because there
8 was at least some modicum of discretion on amending the
9 contract to include the FEMA terms, it wasn' t an
10 absolute requirement by FEMA that you had those terms,
11 it was just this is what you need to do to get
12 reimbursed. You can have an enforceable contract.
13 Without it the Ethics Commission was not willing to go
14 that far and say that those amendments fell within the
15 grandfather exception.
16 As you' ll read in the e-mail from Mr. Smith dated
17 February 7, 2023, they take exception to that and point
18 out some language in the RFP that said that
19 contemplated amendments and updates to the contract
20 were part of the agreement, and we don' t disagree that
21 those were part of the agreement, we thought we had
22 articulated those specifically, and the Ethics
23 Commission saw fit to draw a distinction and not grant
24 it .
25 Now, in response to this e-mail, I did flip it
6
1 over to the general counsel for the Ethics Commission,
2 Ms . Limbert and I had an extended conversation with him
3 on it yesterday and he gave us a little insight into
4 the way he was reading that some of the commissioners
5 were thinking there. Now, it was an 8-0 vote in favor
6 of the opinion that they issued, but before they did
7 that there was considerable discussion and there was at
8 least one member, former Representative Waldman, who
9 was trying to throw us a lifeline and get us to a yes
10 vote where we could make these FEMA amendments.
11 Mr. Zuilkowski, the general counsel from the Ethics
12 Commission, indicated that, you know, there tend to be
13 some voting blocs on the Ethics Commission, and he
14 thought that there was at least a chance that this
15 language as articulated by Mr. Smith might be enough,
16 how did he use the particular phrase, that it was, it
17 was --
18 MS . LIMBERT-BARROWS : More than zero.
19 MR. SHILLINGER: There was a more than zero
20 percent chance, in other words, it was not a
21 dead-on-arrival request, couldn' t give a number on it,
22 didn' t know if it would carry the day, but he couldn' t
23 dismiss it out of hand. And you have to understand his
24 perspective when he ' s giving advice to staff, giving,
25 you know, counsel as to how it ' s going, he goes by
7
1 established precedent of the Ethics Commission, and if
2 he doesn' t, then he has to defer to the Ethics
3 Commission. There isn' t established precedent. So
4 he ' s like this is so unique, maybe this is enough to
5 grab a majority of the commission to go forward, he
6 wouldn' t put odds on it, but it was greater than zero.
7 So there is a chance we might be able to structure a
8 deal that contains at least some of these elements.
9 Don' t know, haven' t had the conversation yet with
10 Mr. Smith to know if it' s everything or nothing, so I
11 needed to update you on that and let you know that
12 there is still that possibility but the deal has
13 changed somewhat. It was first Mr. Smith, the
14 conversations after we got the opinion was like yeah,
15 we can live with this, we can live with this, and then
16 a month went by and then we finally got this e-mail and
17 it was no, we can' t live with this . So he obviously
18 spoke to his client. He was very busy at the time and
19 I 'm not disparaging them for the delay in response, and
20 clients make the decision, not the lawyer, so
21 Mr. Smith' s representations were what they were and
22 then he came back with something else. He had
23 obviously gotten direction from his client.
24 So I ' d like to explore that possibility if we can,
25 but I need to at least get your buy-in to continue to
8
1 explore that. But failing that, we have a trial date
2 set for the end of March --
3 MS . HALL: March 27th.
4 MR. SHILLINGER: March 27th, a jury trial in front
5 of Judge Koenig. And again, Mr. Smith and prior
6 counsel were saying yeah, we can make an accommodation
7 to delays, and all of a sudden that story changed and
8 nope, discovery' s closed, we' re going to trial, we ' re
9 not moving anything. So something has changed at
10 AshBritt, their posture towards this case. They want
11 to litigate this . Don' t know if we ' re even going to
12 be, if this was just he included terms that were,
13 knowing that we weren' t going to be able to recommend
14 approval on all of them that this was a face-saving way
15 to throw back an offer that no, we couldn' t take.
16 So there' s a lot to digest here. That' s why I
17 asked for the second closed session next month in case
18 we can flesh some of this out while this has happened
19 in the last week or so. Ms . Hall and
20 Ms . Limbert-Barrows have been working on trial prep
21 already. I think we talked with Mr. Hochman, our trial
22 counsel, about some ideas towards alternative means of
23 settlement that we might want to throw out if we get to
24 a mediation as well as what to expect in costs if we go
25 to trial .
9
1 So, Cynthia, do you want to --
2 MS . HALL: Yes . I ' d like to address two of those
3 points, but I hope this is okay, I want to make another
4 comment about what you' re talking about. Based on all
5 of the information we have, including the conversations
6 with the Ethics Commission, it is way more likely than
7 not that even if we were able and had the time to go
8 back to the Ethics Commission and say, for example,
9 hey, can we, could we structure a change in the
10 contract to include the federal provisions as well as
11 the State, there are still some other deal points on
12 the list now from Bart that are not at all part of
13 those federal super-circular FEMA provisions. For
14 example, his desire now to go in there and say hey,
15 there' s an automatic CPI, and also hey, let' s clarify
16 the language about haul out provisions, and there' s
17 another one in there, another one not on the list, and
18 I 'm kind of waiting for that shoe to drop, and it has
19 to do with the other big issue in our case other than
20 haul out, and that is hey, how much are they entitled
21 to get, if anything, for handling what' s called
22 putrescent waste within the white goods, the yucky dead
23 stuff that gets left behind. So that' s the most
24 important thing. That is an important thing, which is,
25 even if we, you know, somehow found our way legally to
10
1 incorporate the federal super-circular provisions, we
2 still are not going to have a legal basis for
3 incorporating the other stuff. So my guess is that,
4 because he ' s very clear in there to say essentially
5 these are all deal breakers for AshBritt. Whether they
6 are or not, you know, we can find out in the future.
7 So that ' s one thing I want you to know.
8 With respect to a couple of other things, yeah, we
9 are expecting at this point to go to trial on March the
10 27th. We' re, you know, we 've got the typical pretrial
11 motions and some lawyer procedural stuff that always
12 happens at the very last minute, but at this time the
13 best way for us to go forward is for us simultaneously
14 with your permission to be able to continue the
15 settlement negotiations but also be able to prepare for
16 trial .
17 Something else Bob said, you know, in a prior
18 closed session we talked about the fact that if the
19 settlement agreement didn' t come about another option
20 here is, I 'm going to put this very bluntly, throw some
21 money at them to make this case settle, and if I may
22 I 'm going to sort of talk you through a possibility,
23 and again we ' re looking for your direction. There
24 really are really only, after all of the haggling and
25 the back-and-forth and the conversation, there are
11
1 really only two issues here. They want to be paid for
2 taking the putrescent waste out of the white goods
3 right after Hurricane Irma. So, you know, yes, they
4 transported the freezers and refrigerators, but they
5 want to be compensated, the original amount was around
6 $500, 000 for taking the leftover food, the leftover,
7 you know, bait, anything that was in the refrigerators
8 and freezers. That' s about, was about $500, 000 .
9 There ' s a second issue which has to do with hauling
10 stuff out. Their job was to pick it up in-county,
11 store it at staging areas, debris staging areas here in
12 the county, and then haul it out. They claim that we,
13 the County, told them to take it to a landfill area
14 which was a little further away than the one that we
15 wanted to. The contract said ultimately they get to
16 choose. Our point of view is hey, you asked us, we
17 gave you an answer, we never told you you had to do it,
18 but now you want to charge us $500, 000 for that as
19 well . You put those things together and you tack on a
20 whole bunch of interest and you tack on what might turn
21 out to be their attorneys' fees, and not surprisingly,
22 they've had multiple teams of attorneys working on it,
23 you've got the better part of the Smith/Hawks Law Firm
24 down here and you had the Moskowitz Law Firm from up on
25 the mainland working on it, neither sets of attorneys
12
1 come cheap, we don' t know, but we can reasonably expect
2 that there' s another $500, 000 at least in attorneys '
3 fees, or would be by the end of trial . And they know
4 that too . They know that they could be on the hook
5 just as much as we could, so there' s some impetus to
6 settle.
7 So putting all that together, 500, 000 for one
8 issue, approximately 500, 000 for another issue,
9 approximately 500, 600, $700, 000 in, in attorneys' fees
10 and the rest in interest, because interest in this
11 stuff mounts up very quickly, altogether what we ' re
12 looking at is sort of a $2 million exposure as of right
13 now, last time I crunched the numbers.
14 One option here is to say hey, listen, we ' ll talk
15 to you about settlement agreements, but we also are
16 going to consider putting an offer on the table. And
17 one way to approach that, and I 'm telling you a way
18 that we have discussed internally, not with Roman yet
19 so he ' s probably hearing it right now for the first
20 time --
21 MR. GASTESI : Yeah. I 'm curious.
22 MS . HALL: One way to approach this, I 'm going to
23 tell you my own point of view, I think we win on the
24 white goods issue. I think that the contract was
25 really explicitly clear that they take the white goods
13
1 in part and parcel and they never had a conversation
2 with us about we ' re going to charge you more. For that
3 matter, we 've come to find out that they went to the
4 City of Key West and they went to, we think, Islamorada
5 after all this came up and said oh, by the way, would
6 you like to amend your contracts to specifically add a
7 line item for putrescent waste in addition to white
8 goods . And I can tell you what the City of Key West
9 did, I don' t know about Islamorada yet, but that says
10 to me and I think it ' s going to say to a jury, gee, in
11 your head back when this contract was formed putrescent
12 waste really was part and parcel of the white goods,
13 and you only came to the point of view that maybe you
14 needed some extra money after the fact, which is why
15 you went to get the amendment from Key West and which
16 is why you turned to us in October of 2017, a month
17 after the hurricane, and said oh, by the way, we would
18 like to be compensated for this . I think we win on the
19 putrescent waste. The haul out is not as clear to me
20 because there were back-and-forth conversations between
21 the County and them with them saying hey, we want to
22 take it to the, you know, closest possible place, one
23 place that was really close that wasn' t properly
24 licensed, and then saying we want to take it to another
25 place in Homestead and we ' re literally going to take
14
1 everything that they collected, remember, that included
2 a lot of vegetative debris, and we ' re going to chop it
3 up and use it to spread on top of the landfill which
4 they owned, if I have the facts correct, and we said no
5 to that, it ' s not a proper place, we don' t believe, we
6 want you to take it to this other place, and based on
7 that they' re saying, oh, well, we think now you should
8 pay us for all that extra distance. And by the way,
9 they' re charging us from the bottom part of the
10 Unincorporated County, like Mile 6, you know, something
11 like that, they' re actually charging us top dollar.
12 So what I think is I think we win on the
13 putrescent waste, I think it' s sort of a tossup on the
14 haul out. I think that they are overcharging us . Any
15 jury that looks closely at that is going to say no, no,
16 no, you don' t get to charge basically from Stock
17 Island, you only get to charge from wherever you
18 actually picked the stuff up, and a lot of what they
19 picked up was actually in Key Largo. So one approach
20 here might be to say 500, 000, 500, 000 we think we win
21 on this one, 500, 000 for the other one, maybe we make a
22 settlement offer kind of hoping for a settlement in the
23 250 kind of range, understanding that the settlement
24 offers you, it ' s like buying a house, you don' t throw
25 your best offer out on the table right to begin with,
15
1 but maybe we ask you for authority to go up to 250, 000,
2 not inclusive of attorney' fees and basically both
3 sides bear their own attorneys' fees and costs . So
4 that ' s basically half of one of the two issues, not
5 including the attorneys' fees, not including the
6 interest.
7 One thing that I think is important to know is we,
8 if we go to trial it ' s quite likely, the number I heard
9 yesterday is that we are going to have to spend for our
10 attorneys, I think we heard 150, $150, 000 between now
11 and the end of the trial . I think that' s a little too
12 high of a figure, but that ' s the figure we heard
13 yesterday from our attorney, which is to say there
14 should be some impetus on our side for having a
15 settlement conversation one way or the other while,
16 whether it ' s see if we can whittle down the terms and
17 conditions or whether it ' s take some cash and go away,
18 I think there are a couple of reasons why AshBritt
19 ought to be motivated to have a settlement
20 conversation. One is they know that they have risk,
21 they have exposure. It' s possible they could not win.
22 They could come on down here and they could get a jury
23 which understands at the end of the day it' s the jury
24 paying the judgment, it' s not Monroe County, because
25 where do we get the money from? We get the money from
16
1 the taxpayers. So entirely possible that those jurors
2 could sit there and not like AshBritt, the interloper,
3 yes, they've got a local attorney, but AshBritt is the
4 big company from up there coming down here. That is
5 certainly a risk for them.
6 Another reason why I think they' re leaning forward
7 on a settlement conversation is that at the end of the
8 day it doesn' t really reflect well on a debris
9 contractor that wants to have contracts with other
10 cities and counties to be saying we sued the pants off
11 Monroe County, whether they win or whether they don' t .
12 What' s better for them probably at the end of the day
13 from a PR standpoint is to be able to say yeah, we had
14 our differences, it ' s a numbers thing, but we worked it
15 out. You know, there can never be truly a confidential
16 settlement because we are a public entity, but we can
17 include language in the settlement agreement, we 've
18 done it before, saying that if we reach a settlement
19 the public statement that we ' re going to release is
20 just we had a business dispute, we settled it, end of
21 story.
22 So is there anything I did not cover yet?
23 MR. SHILLINGER: No .
24 So basically you can' t give us affirmative
25 direction definite to go settle, but would this Board
17
1 be comfortable with giving us the authority to
2 negotiate a cash settlement in the $250, 000 range,
3 understanding that they may come back with a
4 counteroffer, we will have an opportunity to discuss it
5 next month, and if not, we go to trial, you know.
6 MR. GASTESI : Can we go through these five --
7 MR. SHILLINGER: Sure .
8 MR. GASTESI : -- what do you call them? Requests?
9 What do we call these?
10 MR. SHILLINGER: Demands .
11 COMMISSIONER LINCOLN: Can I just ask a question
12 before we go into these five?
13 MR. SHILLINGER: Hmm-hmm.
14 COMMISSIONER LINCOLN: Because to me I think right
15 now we have two separate things. We have do we want to
16 settle, and then afterwards if we say yes on that we
17 still have a contract that we have to figure out. Am I
18 correct with that?
19 MR. SHILLINGER: If we pay them cash the idea is
20 no . It ' s just take cash and leave. You' re done.
21 COMMISSIONER LINCOLN: And no contract?
22 MR. SHILLINGER: No contract.
23 COMMISSIONER LINCOLN: Okay.
24 MR. SHILLINGER: Or we have the five demands
25 that Bart summarized here.
18
1 COMMISSIONER LINCOLN: Okay.
2 MR. SHILLINGER: And --
3 COMMISSIONER LINCOLN: That ' s what I had to ask
4 before we talk any further.
5 MR. GASTESI : And my question is, we 've got some,
6 with the Ethics Commission, does anything they said not
7 allow any of these five things to be done?
8 MR. SHILLINGER: Yes .
9 MR. GASTESI : And that ' s the FEMA thing?
10 MR. SHILLINGER: No . The FEMA thing is where we
11 think we could go back and maybe get a yes . The making
12 substantive changes in here, number 4, I think would be
13 a nonstarter with the Ethics Commission. Number 5,
14 taking all steps necessary to ensure AshBritt is the
15 sole approved contractor, I think they would say no to
16 that.
17 MR. GASTESI : Who? The Ethics Commission?
18 MR. SHILLINGER: Yes, because that' s a business
19 opportunity not contemplated by the original agreement.
20 COMMISSIONER LINCOLN: And have we ever only had a
21 sole provider?
22 MR. SHILLINGER: We did at Irma, and one of the
23 lessons was don' t rely on one, have multiples . And the
24 contract with AshBritt did not make it exclusive to
25 them. So they' re asking for a term that was not in the
19
1 original, which is going to be a deal killer from the
2 Ethics Commission perspective.
3 MS . LIMBERT-BARROWS : The other part of that, if I
4 may, is when we 've talked in prior closed sessions we
5 talked about managing the risk. So we have a debris
6 contractor right now with DRC. When we talked about
7 the settlement offer that was proposed it was we could
8 potentially manage the risk because we have DRC and
9 only use AshBritt if we need to, and that was a way
10 that we would move forward with what they were
11 proposing then. Now with that additional condition we
12 have a lot of risk. And I ' ll remind you that when we
13 got the initial offer from AshBritt' s attorneys we went
14 to our attorneys at Baker Donaldson, they' re the
15 experts, they helped us with our base camp appeal, and
16 we said can we do this, and their letter, I went back
17 and read it, and it says if you proceed this way, be
18 careful . There is a risk. FEMA could look at this
19 contract with AshBritt as a sole source procurement and
20 you could be subject to not getting any reimbursement
21 at all for that contract. So their advice was if you
22 move forward only use them if you need to, be aware of
23 the risk. So making that particular condition is
24 something that worries me and something that I wouldn' t
25 advise my clients to do because I don' t want the County
20
1 to be in a position where we' re looking at potentially
2 $50 million if it ' s an Irma type storm and we don' t get
3 reimbursed for any of it because FEMA says no, sorry,
4 this contract isn' t compliant, it wasn' t fair with the
5 competition. So that ' s a big problem with that demand.
6 MR. GASTESI : Okay. So number 1 says
7 reinstatement. How does number 1 and number 5 differ
8 other than the five remaining years? And I ' d be the
9 first one to tell you I wouldn' t want to agree to five
10 full years, it ' s one year increments, right, so we 'd
11 address it every year? So as Administrator that' s what
12 I would recommend. But if you' re reinstating and this
13 whole sole provider thing, we 've always had sole
14 providers, and by the way, the provider we have now is
15 the only provider in my 32, 33 years that ' s walked off
16 the job.
17 MR. SHILLINGER: No, it' s not.
18 MR. GASTESI : Yeah.
19 MR. SHILLINGER: AshBritt walked off the job.
20 MR. GASTESI : AshBritt did not walk off the job.
21 They were kicked off the job by the governor. That ' s a
22 big difference. They wanted to be here, and then the
23 governor brought in another contractor, Bob. I was in
24 the middle of it .
25 MR. SHILLINGER: I was in the middle of it too.
21
1 MR. GASTESI : Right. But that' s not, you can' t
2 say that AshBritt didn' t show up. They were here in
3 Key West, they were in Islamorada, I live in
4 Islamorada, I saw the job they did. I think they did a
5 pretty good job for Key West too.
6 MR. SHILLINGER: And Reef Perkins stood there and
7 said if the governor' s going to do it for you, let them
8 do it .
9 COMMISSIONER LINCOLN: And they tried to strongarm
10 Marathon.
11 MR. GASTESI : Okay. I 'm just saying that I see a
12 conflict between number 1 and number 5, this whole sole
13 provider thing. And AshBritt, you know, for me over
14 the years I 'm probably, I 'm probably tainted, if you
15 will, in the right direction because I think they' re
16 the best, they've done the best job. As far as DRC,
17 they walked off the job in Big Pine, and that ' s
18 something that bothers me .
19 MR. SHILLINGER: They walked off the job on the
20 canals, unrelated to the debris from the land.
21 MR. GASTESI : They walked off the job, a very
22 important job, and it almost cost us a lot of money,
23 almost $35 million from the Feds . Anyways, I just, I
24 don' t see any of this, I see you guys are reading it
25 your way. I hate to disagree with you guys, but I got
22
1 to tell you this . I don' t see any problem with this,
2 especially the FEMA thing, if you think that could be
3 fixed, because that was a little worrisome, but other
4 than that give them the contract back, do one year
5 increments, not five years . But that' s my
6 recommendation. I know it goes against the attorneys.
7 MS . HALL: And that' s fine as long as, to go to
8 what Christine said, as long as the Commission
9 understands that if you just give them that whole stuff
10 there' s an extremely good chance we would never be
11 reimbursed by FEMA. But as long as --
12 MR. GASTESI : I don' t see that.
13 MS . HALL: I understand that.
14 MR. SHILLINGER: You' re disagreeing with the
15 advice given by Baker Donaldson --
16 MR. GASTESI : Which guy is that? We got, what,
17 one million dollars out of the six --
18 MR. SHILLINGER: No .
19 MR. GASTESI : -- for the base camps? What did we
20 get?
21 MR. SHILLINGER: We got 2 . 6 million because we
22 negotiated additional payments to AshBritt for
23 additional services that were outside of the contract.
24 MR. GASTESI : Listen, we joke a lot about
25 attorneys. This is a classic attorney, this guy
23
1 Hochman, and I know he ' s going to read this, he has
2 taken this and he has just strung this thing out. What
3 have we paid him so far? Half a million dollars?
4 MR. SHILLINGER: No .
5 MS . HALL: No. Not even close. It ' s about 80, I
6 believe, right now.
7 MR. GASTESI : And you' re saying another 250 if we
8 go to trial?
9 MS . HALL: 150 .
10 MR. GASTESI : So 250 altogether? Or 230-ish?
11 MS . HALL: And this litigation has been going on
12 for a long time --
13 MR. GASTESI : I know.
14 MS . HALL: -- and a lot of that has not been us .
15 A lot of that has been the other side. For example,
16 this is a classic example. You know, three months ago
17 Bart Smith is the one who instigated a conversation
18 about settlement out of the blue and said hey, County,
19 if you do A, B, and C we' ll settle, and I remember
20 having a conversation with Bob and saying man, that ' s
21 great for the County, that ' s almost too good to
22 believe, but hey, yeah, if those really are the terms,
23 you know, we ' ll live with the 2017 price and
24 nonexclusive contract, and that was it, I said hey,
25 listen, that ' s really good. Well, guess what, the shoe
24
1 has dropped. It ' s not the 2017 pricing. It ' s the 2017
2 pricing, but let ' s now amend the contract to build in
3 the CPIs and it ' s we want D, E, and F. So with due
4 respect, a lot of the delay in this case has been that.
5 And yeah, by the way, in the meantime we all went up to
6 the Third DCA and came back. Be that as it may, we are
7 where we are right now, so the question is right now
8 what conversations do we want to have, if any, about
9 the settlement while at the same time we make sure that
10 we are ready for trial .
11 MR. GASTESI : Remind me again, have we ever
12 offered a cash settlement?
13 MR. SHILLINGER: We have not offered a cash
14 settlement. At a prior board asked AshBritt to pay us
15 as a settlement. So this would be the first time we
16 would be putting money on the table.
17 MAYOR CATES : Well, my, what bothers me the most
18 of all is that, the potential of FEMA not reimbursing
19 us and they' re the sole provider and we get a really
20 strong storm that does millions of dollars, I mean, and
21 that' s possible, it ' s maybe not probable but it' s
22 possible, just like Irma, and I don' t think the risk is
23 worth it . I think we ' d be better off offering them
24 some money to get out of this thing and everybody saves
25 a little face here. That' s fine. Much as I don' t want
25
1 to .
2 COMMISSIONER SCHOLL: Mr. Mayor, I agree and,
3 yeah, sole source, single point failure, that' s not
4 good. So if there' s a way around that that gets us the
5 opportunity to make sure we have multiple contractors,
6 that' s good.
7 COMMISSIONER LINCOLN: And to that point, Roman,
8 I 'm hearing what you' re saying, and I would say that it
9 would be more likely than not that FEMA would approve
10 and reimburse a sole contractor, but to Commissioner
11 Scholl ' s point, I don' t like a single point. I see
12 that we both now have, whether we agree or disagree on
13 who walked off of what sites, it ' s not just what
14 contractor might walk off of a site, it ' s also if the
15 storm hits the entire state of Florida and all of the
16 contractors are spread thin, it makes more sense for us
17 to already have additional contractors already lined up
18 that we 've approved so that we ' ll get reimbursed, and
19 that we already have other contractors, as I said,
20 lined up.
21 MR. GASTESI : I get that, but pragmatically what
22 happens, if somebody walks off the job you can do a
23 quick RFP, you can get a meeting together and get
24 another contractor.
25 COMMISSIONER LINCOLN: We all saw how that
26
1 happened in Irma. You from the County, Craig from Key
2 West, me from Marathon, we all saw that.
3 MR. GASTESI : Right. And the biggest portion of
4 it was done by a contractor that was sent down by the
5 governor that nobody knew and had never even done that
6 work before, they were road contractors, and they came
7 down and did the whole Big Pine, the biggest chunk of
8 it . So it happens. Things happen.
9 MAYOR CATES : And we had the trash piled up on the
10 side of the roads for miles, you know. It was a horror
11 story.
12 MR. GASTESI : We did 14 years of trash in five
13 months . There' s going to be piles .
14 MAYOR CATES : No, I know that' s what it was, and
15 the governor I feel saved us, you know, and that kind
16 of messed up other things, but thank God he did send
17 the people down to clean this up. So anyway, Jim can,
18 he worked directly with AshBritt there in Key West and
19 I know sitting in the office and they come and tried to
20 muscle us for more, but they had a contract and we
21 didn' t back off. Right, Jim?
22 COMMISSIONER SCHOLL: That ' s correct.
23 MAYOR CATES : So I don' t trust them. I mean,
24 business is business, I mean, I don' t dislike them for
25 it, but they will take advantage with every opportunity
27
1 they get.
2 COMMISSIONER RICE: Well, just to put my two
3 cents ' worth in, I agree with Craig. I think that to
4 accept the possibility that we could have a major
5 hurricane and not get reimbursement, I can' t go there.
6 I just can' t.
7 MR. SHILLINGER: Okay. So what, putting the
8 number on the table, does the 250 number sound like it
9 would be reasonable to this Board? Would there be, I 'm
10 not committing you to that number, we' d have to bring
11 that back in a settlement agreement.
12 MAYOR CATES : It ' s feasible to me .
13 MR. SHILLINGER: If --
14 COMMISSIONER RICE: Under the circumstances, me
15 too.
16 MR. SHILLINGER: If we get pushback that the
17 number, you know, has to be closer to 500, is there a
18 heart failure level that I need to be aware of?
19 COMMISSIONER RICE: Yeah. The heart failure is if
20 we didn' t get reimbursed after a storm.
21 MR. SHILLINGER: Fair enough.
22 Commissioner Scholl, do you have anything to add?
23 COMMISSIONER SCHOLL: No . I agree, you know, we
24 need to protect ourselves going forward the best way we
25 can, so 250 is a good start, and then we ' ll see what we
28
1 need to do .
2 MR. SHILLINGER: Okay. Is there any other
3 direction the Board would like to give us?
4 All right. Mr. Mayor, will you declare the closed
5 session closed?
6 MAYOR CATES : The closed session is closed.
7 (Proceedings concluded at 1 : 18 p.m. )
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
29
1 C E R T I F I C A T E
2
3 STATE OF FLORIDA )
4 COUNTY OF MONROE )
5
6 I, Susan L. McTaggart, Florida Professional
7 Reporter and Notary Public, State of Florida at Large, do
8 hereby certify that I was authorized to and did report by
9 stenotype the proceedings in the above-entitled matter, and
10 that the transcript is a true record of said proceedings.
11 Dated this 3rd day of March, 2023 .
12
13
Susan L. McTaggart, FPR
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
30
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1
6 12:11,23:10 authorized[1]-29:8 build[1]-24:2
amend[z]-13:6, automatic[1]-9:15 bunch[1]-11:20
$150,000[1]-15:10 6[1]-14:10 24:2 Avenue[1]-1:17 business[5]-5:4,
$250,000[1]-17:2 600[1]-12:9 amending[1]-5:8 aware[z]-19:22, 16:20, 18:18,26:24
$35[1]-21:23 amendment[1]- 27:18 busy[1]-7:18
$50[1]-20:2 7 13:15 buy[1]-7:25
$500,000[4]-11:6, amendments[3]- B buy-in[1]-7:25
11:8, 11:18, 12:2 7[1]-5:17 5:14,5:19,6:10 buying[1]-14:24
$700,000[1]-12:9 amount[1]-11:5 back-and-forth[z]-
8 announced[1]-2:7 10:25, 13:20 C
announcement[1]- background[1]-
8-0[1]-6:5 2:13 4:10 CA-K-17-802[z]-
1[4]-2:23,20:6, 80[1]-23:5 answer[1]-11:17 bait[1]-11:7 1:4,2:11
20:7,21:12 anyway[]-26:17 Baker[z]-19:14, camp[1]-19:15
1200[1]-1:17 A Anyways[1]-21:23 22:15 camps[1]-22:19
12:40[1]-1:19 appeal[1]-19:15 Barrows[3]-1:12, canals[1]-21:20
13[1]-1:2 able[6]-7:7,8:13, appearing[1]-3:1 3:15,8:20 cannot[1]-3:20
13th[1]-1:18 9:7, 10:14, 10:15, approach[3]-12:17, BARROWS[3]- careful[1]-19:18
16:13 3:15,6:18, 19:3 14[�]-26:12 12:22, 14:19 carry[l]-6:22
15[1]-2:15 above-entitled[1]- approval[1]-8:14 Bart p]-9:12, 17:25, Case[z]-1:4,2:11
29:9 23:17 case p]-3:22,4:1,
150[z]-15:10,23:9 approve[�]-25:9
18[z]-2:8,2:14 absolute[1]-5:10 approved[3]-2:12, base[z]-19:15, 8:10,8:17,9:19,
1:18[z]-1:20,28:7 accept[1]-27:4 18:15,25:18 22:19 10:21,24:4
accommodation[1] area[1]-11:13 based[1]-14:6 cash[6]-15:17,
2
8:6 areas[z]-11:11 Based[1]-9:4 17:2, 17:19, 17:20,
action[1]-3:20 arrival[1]-6:21 basis[z]-4:3, 10:2 24:12,24:13
2[z]-2:21, 12:12 add[z]-13:6,27:22 articulated[z]-5:22, bear[1]-15:3 Cates[z]-1:7,2:22
2.6[1]-22:21 addition[1]-13:7 6:15 begin[1]-14:25 CATES[8]-2:4,
2017[4]-13:16, additional[5]-4:16, AshBritt[zo]-1:4, behalf[1]-4:9 2:22,24:17,26:9,
23:23,24:1 19:11,22:22,22:23, 2:9,3:9,4:3,8:10, behind[1]-9:23 26:14,26:23,27:12,
2022-5[1]-4:23 25:17 10:5, 15:18, 16:2, benefit[1]-2:17 28:6
2023[-7]-1:2, 1:18, address[z]-9:2, 16:3, 18:14, 18:24, best[5]-10:13, Center[1]-1:17
2:8,2:14,2:15,5:17, 20:11 19:9, 19:19,20:19, 14:25,21:16,27:24 cents'[1]-27:3
29:11 addressed[1]-4:24 20:20,21:2,21:13, better[31-11:23, certain[1]-4:8
230-ish[1]-23:10 addressee[1]-4:25 22:22 24:14,26:18 16:12,24:23 certainly[1]-16:5
250[5]-14:23,23:7, Administrator[31- AshBritt's[1]-19:13 between[3]-13:20, certify[1]-29:8
23:10,27:8,27:25 1:12,3:11,20:11 aspects[1]-4:8 15:10,21:12 chance[4]-6:14,
250,000[1]-15:1 advantage[1]- Assistant[4]-1:11, big[4]-9:19, 16:4, 6:20,7:7,22:10
27th[3]-8:3,8:4, 26:25 1:12,3:13,3:16 20:5,20:22 change[z]-5:6,9:9
10:10 advice[6]-2:9,3:6, attach[1]-4:7 Big[z]-21:17,26:7 changed[3]-7:13,
3:7,6:24, 19:21, ATTORNEY[]-1:1 biggest[z]-26:3, 8:7,8:9
3 22:15 attorney p]-15:13, 26:7 changes[z]-5:2,
advise[1]-19:25 16:3,22:25 blocs[1]-6:13 18:12
3[1]-3:4 afterwards[1]- Attorney p]-1:11, blue[1]-23:18 charge[4]-11:18,
32[1]-20:15 17:16 1:11, 1:12, 1:16,3:12, bluntly[1]-10:20 13:2, 14:16, 14:17
33[1]-20:15 agenda[1]-2:16 3:14,3:16 BOARD[1]-1:1 charging[z]-14:9,
3rd[1]-29:11 ago[1]-23:16 attorney'[1]-15:2 board[1]-24:14 14:11
agree[5]-20:9, ATTORNEY- Board[6]-1:15, cheap[1]-12:1
4 25:2,25:12,27:3, CLIENT[]-1:1 2:11,4:17, 16:25, choose[1]-11:16
27:23 Attorney-Client[1]- 27:9,28:3 chop[1]-14:2
4[z]-2:25, 18:12 agreement[6]-5:20, 1:16 Bob[4]-3:12, 10:17, Christine[3]-1:12,
5:21, 10:19, 16:17, attorneys[8]-3:22, 20:23,23:20 3:15,22:8
rj 18:19,27:11 11:22, 11:25, 15:10, BOCC[3]-2:8,2:14, chunk[1]-26:7
agreements[1]- 19:13, 19:14,22:6, 2:15 circular[z]-9:13,
5[3]-18:13,20:7, 12:15 22:25 bothers[z]-21:18, 10:1
21:12 allow[1]-18:7 attorneys'[5]- 24:17 circumstance[1]-
500[z]-12:9,27:17 almost[3]-21:22, 11:21, 12:2, 12:9, bottom[1]-14:9 4:15
500,000[5]-12:7, 21:23,23:21 15:3, 15:5 breakers[1]-10:5 circumstances[z]-
12:8, 14:20, 14:21 alternative[1]-8:22 authority[z]-15:1, bring[1]-27:10 3:2,27:14
altogether[z]- 17:1 brought[1]-20:23 cities[1]-16:10
2
City[2]-13:4, 13:8 27:10 6:1,6:11,6:25,8:6, Department[2]-1:4, 15:11, 15:23, 16:7,
claim[1]-11:12 company[1]-16:4 8:22 2:10 16:12, 16:20
clarify[1]-9:15 compensated[2]- counteroffer[1]- desire[1]-9:14 enforceable[1]-
classic[2]-22:25, 11:5, 13:18 1 17:4 differ[1]-20:7 5:12
23:16 competition[1]- counties[1]-16:10 difference[1]-20:22 ensure[1]-18:14
clean[1]-26:17 20:5 county[3]-4:12, differences[1]- entire[1]-25:15
clear[4]-3:10, 10:4, compliant[1]-20:4 11:10, 11:12 16:14 entirely[1]-16:1
12:25, 13:19 complicating[1]- COUNTY[4]-1:1, digest[1]-8:16 entitled[2]-9:20,
client[2]-7:18,7:23 4:21 1:6,29:4 direction[6]-3:21, 29:9
CLIENT[1]-1:1 concerning[1]- County po]-1:4, 7:23, 10:23, 16:25, entity[1]-16:16
Client[1]-1:16 3:22 1:8, 1:8, 1:9, 1:11, 21:15,28:3 especially[1]-22:2
clients[2]-7:20, concluded[1]-28:7 1:11, 1:12, 1:12, 1:15, directly[1]-26:18 essentially[2]-5:1,
19:25 concluding[1]-1:19 1:16, 1:18,2:10,2:20, disagree[3]-5:20, 10:4
close[2]-13:23, condition[2]-19:11, 2:22,2:24,3:3,3:11, 21:25,25:12 established[2]-7:1,
23:5 19:23 3:12,3:13,3:16,4:19, disagreeing[1]- 7:3
CLOSED[1]-1:1 conditions[1]- 11:13, 13:21, 14:10, 22:14 Ethics[18]-3:7,4:8,
closed[11]-2:3,2:4, 15:17 15:24, 16:11, 19:25, discovery s[1]-8:8 4:11,4:22,4:23,5:13,
2:12,8:8,8:17, 10:18, conduct[1]-4:24 23:18,23:21,26:1 discretion[1]-5:8 5:22,6:1,6:11,6:13,
19:4,28:4,28:5,28:6 confidential[1]- County's[1]-2:16 discuss[1]-17:4 7:1,7:2,9:6,9:8,
Closed[1]-1:16 16:15 couple[2]-10:8, discussed[1]- 18:6, 18:13, 18:17,
closely[1]-14:15 conflict[3]-3:8, 15:18 12:18 19:2
closer[1]-27:17 21:12 Court[1]-1:21 discussing[1]-3:18 ethics[1]-5:7
closest[1]-13:22 consider[1]-12:16 court[2]-2:17,4:6 discussion[1]-6:7 example[4]-9:8,
collected[1]-14:1 considerable[1]- cover[1]-16:22 dislike[1]-26:24 9:14,23:15,23:16
comfortable[1]- 6:7 CPI[1]-9:15 dismiss[1]-6:23 except[1]-4:15
17:1 contains[1]-7:8 CPIs[1]-24:3 disparaging[1]- exception p]-4:13,
coming[1]-16:4 contemplated[2]- Craig[4]-1:7,2:22, 7:19 5:15,5:17
commencing[1]- 5:19, 18:19 26:1,273 dispute[1]-16:20 exclusive[1]-18:24
1:19 continue[2]-7:25, crunched[1]-12:13 distance[1]-14:8 exhibit[1]-4:7
comment[1]-9:4 10:14 Cuba[1]-5:5 distinction[1]-5:23 expect[2]-8:24,
commission[2]- contract[21]-4:16, curious[1]-12:21 District[4]-2:21, 12:1
4:15,7:5 4:20,5:9,5:12,5:19, Cynthia[3]-1:11, 2:23,2:25,3:4 expecting[1]-10:9
Commission[17]- 9:10, 11:15, 12:24, 3:13,9:1 dollar[1]-14:11 expenditures[1]-
2:19,3:7,4:22,5:13, 13:11, 17:17, 17:21, dollars[3]-22:17, 3:19
5:23,6:1,6:12,6:13, 17:22, 18:24, 19:19, D 23:3,24:20 experts[1]-19:15
7:1,7:3,9:6,9:8, 19:21,20:4,22:4, Donaldson[2]- explicitly[1]-12:25
18:6, 18:13, 18:17, 22:23,23:24,24:2, date[1]-8:1 19:14,22:15 explore[2]-7:24,
19:2 22:8 26:20 1 dated[1]-5:16 done[6]-16:18, 8:1
Commissioner[12]- contractor[9]-4:4, Dated[1]-29:11 17:20, 18:7,21:16, exposure[2]-12:12,
1:8, 1:8, 1:9,2:21, 16:9, 18:15, 19:6, David[2]-1:8,2:24 26:4,26:5 15:21
2:22,2:25,3:4,3:6, 20:23,25:10,25:14, DCA[1]-24:6 down[8]-4:1, extended[1]-6:2
4:9,4:24,25:10, 25:24,26:4 dead[2]-6:21,9:22 11:24, 15:16, 15:22, extra[2]-13:14,
27:22 contractors[5]- dead-on-arrival[1]- 16:4,26:4,26:7, 14:8
COMMISSIONER 25:5,25:16,25:17, 6:21 26:17 extraordinary[1]-
[19]-2:20,2:24,3:3, 25:19,26:6 deal[5]-7:8,7:12, draw[1]-5:23 3:2
17:11, 17:14, 17:21, contracts[2]-13:6, 9:11, 10:5, 19:1 DRC[3]-19:6, 19:8, extremely[1]-22:10
17:23, 18:1, 18:3, 16:9 debris[5]-11:11, 21:16
18:20,21:9,25:2, convenience[1]- 14:2, 16:8, 19:5, drop[1]-9:18 F
25:7,25:25,26:22, 4:17 21:20 dropped[1]-24:1
27:2,27:14,27:19, conversation[9]- decision p]-3:22, due[2]-3:1,24:3 face[2]-8:14,24:25
27:23 6:2,7:9, 10:25, 13:1, 3:23,7:20 face-saving[1]-
commissioner[1]- 15:15, 15:20, 16:7, decisive[1]-3:20 E 8:14
4:12 23:17,23:20 declare[1]-28:4 fact[2]-10:18,
commissioners[1]- conversations[4]- defer[1]-7:2 e-mail[4]-4:5,5:16, 13:14
6:4 7:14,9:5, 13:20,24:8 definite[1]-16:25 5:25,7:16 facts p]-4:16,4:20,
COMMISSIONERS correct[3]-14:4, delay[2]-7:19,24:4 elements[1]-7:8 14:4
[2]-1:1, 1:6 17:18,26:22 delays[1]-8:7 employee[2]-4:12, failing[1]-8:1
Commissioners[1]- cost[1]-21:22 demand[1]-20:5 4:14 failure[3]-25:3,
1:15 costs[2]-8:24, 15:3 Demands[1]-17:10 employment[1]-3:9 27:18,27:19
committing[1]- counsel[6]-3:7, demands[1]-17:24 end[7]-8:2, 12:3, fair[1]-20:4
3
Fair[1]-27:21 12:21, 17:6, 17:8, heart[z]-27:18, Irma[5]-11:3, 10:11
far[3]-5:14,21:16, 18:5, 18:9, 18:17, 27:19 18:22,20:2,24:22, leaning[1]-16:6
23:3 20:6,20:18,20:20, held[3]-2:7,2:8, 26:1 least[6]-5:8,6:8,
favor[1]-6:5 21:1,21:11,21:21, 3:23 1 Islamorada[4]- 6:14,7:8,7:25, 12:2
feasible[1]-27:12 22:12,22:16,22:19, helped[1]-19:15 13:4, 13:9,21:3,21:4 leave[1]-17:20
FEBRUARY[1]-1:2 22:24,23:7,23:10, hereby[l]-29:8 Island[1]-14:17 left[]-9:23
February[3]-1:18, 23:13,24:11,25:21, herself[1]-3:6 Israel[1]-5:5 leftover[z]-11:6
2:15,5:17 26:3,26:12 high[1]-15:12 issue[6]-4:8,9:19, legal[1]-10:2
federal[3]-9:10, gee[1]-13:10 hits[1]-25:15 11:9, 12:8, 12:24 legally[z]-5:2,9:25
9:13, 10:1 general[z]-6:1, Hmm[1]-17:13 issued[1]-6:6 lessons[1]-18:23
Feds[1]-21:23 6:11 hmm[1]-17:13 issues[z]-11:1, letter[1]-19:16
fees[6]-11:21, 12:3, given[3]-2:13,4:6, Hmm-hmm[1]- 15:4 level[1]-27:18
12:9, 15:2, 15:3, 15:5 22:15 17:13 item[1]-13:7 licensed[1]-13:24
fell[z]-4:20,5:14 God[1]-26:16 Hochman[z]-8:21, lifeline[1]-6:9
FEMA[12]-5:9, goods[6]-9:22, 23:1
J likely[3]-9:6, 15:8,
5:10,6:10,9:13, 18:9, 11:2, 12:24, 12:25, holding[1]-2:12 25:9
18:10, 19:18,20:3, 13:8, 13:12 Homestead[1]- January[z]-2:8, LIMBERT[3]-3:15,
22:2,22:11,24:18, Government[]- 13:25 2:14 6:18, 19:3
25:9 1:17 hook[1]-12:4 Jim[4]-1:9,3:3, Limbert[4]-1:12,
figure[3]-15:12, governor[4]-20:21, hope[1]-9:3 26:17,26:21 3:15,6:2,8:20
17:17 20:23,26:5,26:15 hoping[1]-14:22 job[13]-11:10, LIMBERT-
finally[1]-7:16 governor's[1]-21:7 horror[1]-26:10 20:16,20:19,20:20, BARROWS[3]-3:15,
fine[3]-5:5,22:7, grab[1]-7:5 house[1]-14:24 20:21,21:4,21:5, 6:18, 19:3
24:25 grandfather[z]-5:6, Hurricane[1]-11:3 21:16,21:17,21:19, Limbert-Barrows[3]
Firm[z]-11:23, 5:15 hurricane[z]- 21:21,21:22,25:22 -1:12,3:15,8:20
11:24 grant[1]-5:23 13:17,27:5 joke[1]-22:24 limits[1]-4:2
first[4]-7:13, 12:19, great[1]-23:21 Judge[1]-8:5 LINCOLN[11]-2:20,
20:9,24:15 greater[l]-7:6 judgment[1]-15:24 17:11, 17:14, 17:21,
fit[1]-5:23 guess[z]-10:3, jurors[1]-16:1 17:23, 18:1, 18:3,
five[8]-17:6, 17:12, 23:25 idea[1]-17:19 jury[5]-8:4, 13:10, 18:20,21:9,25:7,
17:24, 18:7,20:8, guy[z]-22:16, ideas[1]-8:22 14:15, 15:22, 15:23 25:25
20:9,22:5,26:12 22:25 impetus[z]-12:5, Lincoln[z]-1:8,
fixed[1]-22:3 guys[z]-21:24, 15:14 K 2:20
FL[1]-1:4 21:25 important[4]-9:24, line[1]-13:7
flesh[1]-8:18 15:7,21:22 Key[9]-1:17, 13:4, lined[z]-25:17,
flip[1]-5:25 H in-county[1]-11:10 13:8, 13:15, 14:19, 25:20
FLORIDA[1]-29:3 Inc[z]-1:4,2:9 21:3,21:5,26:1, list[z]-9:12,9:17
Florida[7]-1:4, haggling[1]-10:24 include[3]-5:9, 26:18 listen[z]-12:14,
1:18, 1:22,2:10, half[1]-15:4 9:10, 16:17 kicked[1]-20:21 23:25
Half[1]-23:3 killer[1]-19:1
25:15,29:6,29:7 included[z]-8:12, Listen[1]-22:24
food[1]-11:6 HALL[1o]-3:13,8:3, 14:1 kind[5]-4:20,9:18, literally[1]-13:25
formed[1]-13:11 9:2, 12:22,22:7, including[3]-9:5, 14:22, 14:23,26:15 litigate[1]-8:11
former[]-6:8 22:13,23:5,23:9, 15:5 knowing[1]-8:13 litigation[4]-3:19,
forth[z]-10:25, 23:11,23:14 inclusive[1]-15:2 Koenig[1]-8:5 4:18,4:19,23:11
13:20 Hall[3]-1:11,3:13, incorporate[1]- live[5]-7:15,7:17,
forward[6]-7:5, 8:19 10:1 L 21:3,23:23
23 6[1]- :
10:13, 16:6, 19:10, handincorporating[1]- local[1]-16:3
handed[1]-4:5 land[1]-21:20
19:22,27:24 10:3 look[1]-19:18
FPR[1]-29:13 handling[1]-9:21 increments[z]- landfill[z]-11:13, looking[3]-10:23,
freezers[z]-11:4, Harvey[]-1:17 20:10,22:5 14:3
hate[1]-21:25 language[4]-5:18, 1 looks
[1]11:8 indicated[�]-6:12 looks[�]-14:15
front[1]-8:4 haul[5]-9:16,9:20, information[z]- 6:15,9:16, 16:17
full[1]-20:10 11:12, 13:19, 14:14 3:21 9:5 Large[z]-1:22,29:7 M
future[1]-10:6 hauling[1]-11:9 initial[1]-19:13 Largo[1]-14:19
head[1]-13:11 insight[1]-6:3 last[4]-3:25,8:19, mail[4]-4:5,5:16,
G headed[1]-4:1 instigated[1]-23:17 10:12, 12:13 5:25,7:16
heard[3]-15:8, law[1]-5:3
interest[s]-3:8, mainland[1]-11:25
Gastesi[z]-1:12, 15:10, 15:12 11:20 Law[z]-11:23,
, 12:10, 15:6 major[]-27:4
3:11 hearing[z]-12:19, 11:24
interloper[]-16:2 majority[]-7:5
GASTESI[24]-3:11, 25:8 internally[1]-12:18 lawyer[z]-7:20, man[1]-23:20
4
manage[1]-19:8 motivated[1]-15:19 29:7 P prep[1]-8:20
managing[1]-19:5 mounts[1]-12:11 nothing[1]-7:10 prepare[1]-10:15
Marathon[21-21:10, 1 move[z]-19:10, notice[l]-2:12 p.m[3]-1:19, 1:20, pretrial[1]-10:10
26:2 19:22 number[121-6:21, 28:7 pretty[1]-21:5
March[s]-8:2,8:3, moving[1]-8:9 15:8, 18:12,20:6, paid[21-11:1,23:3 price[1]-23:23
8:4, 10:9,29:11 MR[591-2:2,2:6, 20:7,21:12,27:8, pants[1]-16:10 pricing[z]-24:1,
material[1]-5:3 3:1,3:5,3:11,3:12, 27:10,27:17 parcel[21-13:1, 24:2
matter[31-2:9, 13:3, 3:17,6:19,8:4, 12:21, Number[1]-18:13 13:12 probable[1]-24:21
29:9 16:23, 17:6, 17:7, numbers[z]-12:13, part[9]-4:7,5:20, problem[z]-20:5,
Mayor[41-1:7,2:2, 17:8, 17:10, 17:13, 16:14 5:21,9:12, 11:23, 22:1
25:2,28:4 17:19, 17:22, 17:24, 13:1, 13:12, 14:9, procedural[1]-
MAYOR[8]-2:4, 18:2, 18:5, 18:8, 18:9, O 19:3 10:11
2:22,24:17,26:9, 18:10, 18:17, 18:18, particular[z]-6:16, proceed[1]-19:17
26:14,26:23,27:12, 18:22,20:6,20:17, obtained[1]-4:9 19:23 proceedings[21-
28:6 20:18,20:19,20:20, obviously[21-7:17, path[1]-4:1 29:9,29:10
McTaggart[31-1:21, 20:25,21:1,21:6, 7:23 pay[31-14:8, 17:19, PROCEEDINGS[1]-
29:6,29:13 21:11,21:19,21:21, October[1]-13:16 24:14 1:14
mean[31-24:20, 22:12,22:14,22:16, odds[1]-7:6 paying[1i-15:24 Proceedings[z]-
26:23,26:24 22:18,22:19,22:21, OF[51-1:1, 1:14, payments[1]-22:22 1:15,28:7
means[1]-8:22 22:24,23:4,23:7, 29:3,29:4 people[z]-5:4, procurement[l]-
meantime[1]-24:5 23:10,23:13,24:11, offer[61-8:15, 26:17 19:19
mediation[1]-8:24 24:13,25:21,26:3, 12:16, 14:22, 14:25, percent[1]-6:20 Professional[1]-
meeting[1o]-2:6, 26:12,27:7,27:13, 19:7, 19:13 Perkins[1]-21:6 29:6
2:8,2:11,2:13,2:14, 27:16,27:21,28:2 offered[z]-24:12, permission[1]- prohibits[1]-4:11
2:16,3:20,3:23,3:24, MS[13]-3:13,3:15, 24:13 10:14 proper[1]-14:5
25:23 6:18,8:3,9:2, 12:22, offering[1]-24:23 perspective[21- properly[1i-13:23
member[]-6:8 19:3,22:7,22:13, offers[1]-14:24 6:24, 19:2 proposal[1]-4:18
messed[1]-26:16 23:5,23:9,23:11, office[1]-26:19
phrase[1 6:16 proposed[1]-19:7
Michelle[21-1:8, 23:14 one[201-6:8,9:17,
pick[1]-11:10
proposing[1i-
2:20 multiple[z1-11:22, 10:7, 11:14, 12:7, picked[z]-14:18, 19:11
middle[z]-20:24, 25:5 12:17, 13:22, 14:19, 14:19 protect[1]-27:24
20:25 multiples[1]-18:23 14:21, 15:4, 15:15,
piled[1]-26:9 provide[1]-3:21
might[61-6:15,7:7, muscle[1]-26:20 18:22, 18:23,20:9,
g piles[1]-26:13 provider[e]-18:21,
8:23, 11:20, 14:20, must[1]-3:23 20:10,22:4,22:17, Pine[z]-21:17,26:7 20:13,20:14,20:15,
25:14 23:17 place[61-4:21, 21:13,24:19
Mile[1]-14:10 N One[41-12:14, 13:22, 13:23, 13:25, providers[1]-20:14
miles[1]-26:10 12:22, 15:7, 15:20 14:5, 14:6 provisions[41-9:10,
million[61-12:12, name���-2:18 open[1]-3:24
point[9]-5:17, 10:9, 9:13,9:16, 10:1
20:2,21:23,22:17, necessarypi- opinion[61-4:9, 11:16, 12:23, 13:13, Public[z]-1:21,
22:21,23:3 18:14 4:23,5:1,5:7,6:6, 25:3,25:7,25:11 29:7
need p]-5:11,7:25, 7:14
millions���-24:20 points[z]-9:3,9:11 public[4]-2:12,
minute[1]-10:12 19:9, 19:22,27:18, Opinion[1]-4:23 portion[1]-26:3 2:13, 16:16, 16:19
27:24,28:1 opportunity modicum���-5:8 pp tY[4]- position[21-2:18, publication[1]-2:15
money[71-10:21, needed[3]-2:8, 17:4, 18:19,25:5, 20:1
pushback[1]-27:16
13:14, 15:25,21:22, 7:11, 13:14 26:25
positional[1]-3:8 put[41-7:6, 10:20,
24:16,24:24 negotiate[1]-17:2 option[z]-10:19,
possibility[4]-7:12, 11:19,27:2
MONROE[21-1:1, negotiated[z]-4:2, 12:14 7:24, 10:22,27:4 putrescent[61-
22:22 order[z1-2:3,2:5
29:4 possible[s]-13:22, 9:22, 11:2, 13:7,
Monroe[61-1:4, negotiations[21- original[31-11:5, 15:21, 16:1,24:21, 13:11, 13:19, 14:13
1:16, 1:18,2:9, 15:24, 3:18, 10:15 18:19, 19:1 24:22 putting[4]-12:7,
16:11 never[51-11:17, ought[1]-15:19
posture[1]-8:10 12:16,24:16,27:7
month[41-7:16, 13:1, 16:15,22:10, ourselves 11]-27:24 potential[1]-24:18
8:17, 13:16, 17:5 26.5 outside ICI-22:23 potentially Izl-19:8, Q,
months[z]-23:16, next d-8:17, :5 overcharging[1]-
20:1
26:13 nobody���-26 14:14
PR[1]-16:13 quick[1]-25:23
Moskowitz[1]- nonexclusive[1]- own[z]-12:23, 15:3 pragmatically[1i- quickly[1]-12:11
11:24 23. n owned[1]-14:4
25:21 quite[1]-15:8
most[z]-9:23, nonstarter���- preceded[1]-4:14
24:17 18:13
Notary[z]-1:21, precedent[z]-7:1,
motions[1]-10:11 7:3
5
R reported[1]-1:20 sent[1]-26:4 sole[9]-18:15, 9:13, 10:1
Reporter[21-1:21, separate[1]-17:15 18:21, 19:19,20:13, surprisingly[1i-
range[2]-14:23, 29:7 serve[1]-4:4 21:12,24:19,25:3, 11:21
17:2 reporter[21-2:17, services[1]-22:23 25:10 Susan[31-1:20,
Raschein[31-3:6, 4:6 SESSION[1]-1:1 somewhat[1]-7:13 29:6,29:13
4:10,4:25 representations[1]- session p]-2:3, sorry[l]-20:3
Re[1]-1:4 7:21 2:4,2:12,8:17, 10:18, sort[31-10:22, T
reach[1]-16:18 Representative[1]- 28:5,28:6 12:12, 14:13
read[31-5:16, 6:8 Session[1]-1:16 sound[1]-27:8 table[41-12:16,
19:17,23:1 request[21-2:7, sessions[1]-19:4 source[21-19:19, 14:25,24:16,27:8
reading[2]-6:4, 6:21 set[1]-8:2 25:3 tack[2]-11:19,
21:24 requester[1]-4:25 sets[1]-11:25 specifically[3- 11:20
ready[1]-24:10 Requests[1]-17:8 settle[61-4:19, 4:24,5:22, 13:6 tainted[1]-21:14
really[11]-5:3, required[1]-5:2 10:21, 12:6, 16:25, spend[1]-15:9 taxpayers[1]-16:1
10:24, 11:1, 12:25, requirement[1]- 17:16,23:19 spread[21-14:3, teams[1]-11:22
13:12, 13:23, 16:8, 5:10 settled[1]-16:20 25:16 tend[1]-6:12
23:22,23:25,24:19 respect[21-10:8, settlement[241- staff[1]-6:24 term[1]-18:25
reason[1]-16:6 24:4 3:18,4:2,4:21,8:23, STAFF[1]-1:10 terminated[1]-4:17
reasonable[1]-27:9 response[2]-5:25, 10:15, 10:19, 12:15, staging[2]-11:11 terms[51-5:9,5:10,
reasonably[1]-12:1 7:19 14:22, 14:23, 15:15, standpoint[1]- 8:12, 15:16,23:22
reasons[1]-15:18 rest[1]-12:10 15:19, 16:7, 16:16, 16:13 they've[31-11:22,
recommend[21- result[1]-3:9 16:17, 16:18, 17:2, start[1]-27:25 16:3,21:16
8:13,20:12 RFP[21-5:18,25:23 19:7,23:18,24:9, starting[1]-2:18 thin[1]-25:16
recommendation[1] RICE[41-2:24,27:2, 24:12,24:14,24:15, STATE[1]-29:3 thinking[1]-6:5
-22:6 27:14,27:19 27:11 State[41-1:21,5:3, Third[1]-24:6
record[61-2:17,3:5, Rice[2]-1:8,2:24 Shillinger[21-1:11, 9:11,29:7 three[1]-23:16
3:10,4:5,4:23,29:10 risk[81-15:20, 16:5, 3:12 state p]-2:18,4:11, throw[51-6:9,8:15,
recused[1]-3:6 19:5, 19:8, 19:12, SHILLINGER[351- 25:15 8:23, 10:20, 14:24
Reef[1]-21:6 19:18, 19:23,24:22 2:2,2:6,3:1,3:5, statement[1]-16:19 together[31-11:19,
reflect[1]-16:8 road[1]-26:6 3:12,3:17,6:19,8:4, statute[1]-4:11 12:7,25:23
refrigerators[21- roads[1]-26:10 16:23, 17:7, 17:10, stenotype[1]-29:9 took[1]-4:22
11:4, 11:7 Robert[1]-1:11 17:13, 17:19, 17:22, steps[1]-18:14 top[21-14:3, 14:11
reimburse[1]- Roman[41-1:12, 17:24, 18:2, 18:8, still[41-7:12,9:11, tossup[1]-14:13
25:10 3:11, 12:18,25:7 18:10, 18:18, 18:22, 10:2, 17:17 towards[21-8:10,
reimbursed[51- room[1]-3:10 20:17,20:19,20:25, Stock[1]-14:16 8:22
5:12,20:3,22:11, Rule[1]-4:11 21:6,21:19,22:14, stood[1]-21:6 TRANSCRIPT[]-
25:18,27:20 22:18,2221,23:4, store[1]-11:11 1:14
reimbursement[2]- S 24:13,27:7,27:13, storm[41-20:2, transcript[21-4:7,
19:20,27:5 27:16,27:21,28:2 24:20,25:15,27:20 29:10
reimbursing[1]- saved[1]-26:15 shoe[21-9:18, story[3-8:7, 16:21, Transportation[21-
24:18 saves[1]-24:24 23:25 26:11 1:4,2:10
reinstate[1]-4:3 saving[1]-8:14 show[1]-21:2 strategy[l]-3:19 transported[1]-
reinstatement[1]- saw[41-5:23,21:4, side[31-15:14, strong[1]-24:20 11:4
20:7 25:25,26:2 23:15,26:10 strongarm[1]-21:9 trash[21-26:9,
reinstating[21- Scholl p]-1:9,3:3, sides[1]-15:3 structure[2]-7:71 26:12
4:19,20:12 27:22 simultaneously[1]- 9:9 trial[141-8:1,8:4,
relating[1]-3:19 SCHOLL[41-3:3, 10:13 strung[1]-23:2 8:8,820,8:21,8:25,
relationship[1]- 25:2,26:22,27:23 single[2]-25:3, stuff p]-9:23, 10:3, 10:9, 10:16, 12:3,
4:14 Scholl's[1]-25:11 25:11 10:11, 11:10, 12:11, 15:8, 15:11, 17:5,
release[1]-16:19 seating[1]-4:14 sit[1]-16:2 14:18,22:9 23:8,24:10
rely[1]-18:23 second[2]-8:17, site[1]-25:14 subject[l]-19:20 tried[21-21:9,26:19
remaining[1]-20:8 11:9 sites[1]-25:13 substantive[1]- true[1]-29:10
remember[21-14:1, secondary[1]-4:4 sitting[1]-26:19 18:12 truly[1]-16:15
23:19 see[8]-15:16, six[1]-22:17 sudden[1]-8:7 Truman[1]-1:17
Remind[1]-24:11 21:11,21:24,22:1, Smith[6]-5:16, sued[1]-16:10 trust[1]-26:23
remind[1]-19:12 22:12,25:11,27:25 6:15,7:10,7:13,8:5, summarized[1]- trying[1]-6:9
reminder[]-3:17 send[1]-26:16 23:17 17:25 turn[1]-11:20
remotely[1]-3:1 Senior[2]-1:11, Smith's[1]-7:21 super[2]-9:13, 10:1 turned[1]-13:16
report[1]-29:8 3:13 Smith/Hawks[1]- super-circular[21- two[51-9:2, 11:1,
sense[1]-25:16 11:23 15:4, 17:15,27:2
6
type[1]-20:2 26:7
typical[1]-10:10 willing[1]-5:13
win[6]-12:23,
U 13:18, 14:12, 14:20,
15:21, 16:11
ultimately[1]-11:15 words[1]-6:20
Under[1]-27:14 worries[1]-19:24
Unincorporated[1]- worrisome[1]-22:3
14:10 worth[2]-24:23,
unique[1]-7:4 27:3
unrelated[1]-21:20
Up[16]-11:10, Y
11:24, 12:11, 13:5,
14:3, 14:18, 14:19, year -4:3,20:10,
15:1, 16:4,21:2,24:5, 20:11,22:4
25:17,25:20,26:9, years[6]-20:8,
26:16,26:17 20:10,20:15,21:14,
update[1]-7:11 22:5,26:12
updates[1]14:12,
yesterday[31-6:3,
15:9, 15:13
Vyucky[1]-9:22
vegetative Z
vendor[3]-
4:13,4:18 zero[3]-6:18,6:19,
via[1]-1:9 7:6
view[3]-11:16, Zoom[1]-1:9
12:23, 13:13 Zuilkowski[1]-6:11
vitiate[1]-5:6
vote[2]-6:5,6:10
voting[1]-6:13
W
waiting[1]-9:18
Waldman[1]-6:8
walk[2]-20:20,
25:14
walked[6]-20:15,
20:19,21:17,21:19,
21:21,25:13
walks[1]-25:22
wants[1]-16:9
waste[6]-9:22,
11:2, 13:7, 13:12,
13:19, 14:13
website[1]-2:16
WEDNESDAY[1]-
1:2
week[1]-8:19
West[8]-1:17, 13:4,
13:8, 13:15,21:3,
21:5,26:2,26:18
whereas[1]-4:2
white[6]-9:22, 11:2,
12:24, 12:25, 13:7,
13:12
whittle[1]-15:16
whole[5]-11:20,
20:13,21:12,22:9,