CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - Jun 05, 2025

The June 5th, 2025 City Commission meeting. I'd like to call the meeting to order, and we'll start with invocation and Pledge of Allegiance. Jen, our city attorney, please. Let us begin this meeting by taking a brief moment of silence and reflection. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States, the power of America, and to the republic of which it stands. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States, the power of the United States, and to the republic of which it stands. Okay, great. So, welcome everybody. I do want to say that we have Commissioner Dugard. Here by, on Zoom, and where are you right now? Somewhere around Normandy. I'm on the Seine River. Very, very good. Very impressive. And thank you for, and what time is it there? It's 12 o'clock midnight. So, we'll just see how he does as it goes on. Okay. All right. We're going to start with our, we're glad you're here, though. We're going to start with presentations. Our first one is our Independence Day. July 4, 2025. Proclamation. I'll turn that to Commissioner Walker. Do we have members of the Daughters of the American Revolution? Come on up. Any sons of the American Revolution? Oh, welcome. Just the girls. I, you know, I love doing this proclamation, and I feel, you know, I feel like I definitely have a connection with you all. My mom's side of the family was members of the Daughters of the American Revolution. So, I know who my patriots are. And, yeah. Well, thank you. Independence Day, 2025. Whereas, 249 years ago, 56 brave men signed their names to a bold creed of freedom that set the course for our nation and changed the history of the world. And, on this anniversary, we remember the great courage and conviction of our founders, and we celebrate the enduring principles of our Declaration of Independence. And, as we celebrate our independence, Americans can take pride in our history and look to the future with confidence as we offer our gratitude to the American patriots, past and present, who have sought to advance freedom and lay the foundations of peace. And, because of their sacrifice, this country remains a beacon of hope for all who dream of liberty and a shining example to the world of what a free people can achieve. Now, therefore, I, Robert James Walker, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Mayor of the City of Dunedin, Florida, and on behalf of the entire City Commission, do hereby observe Friday, July 4, 2025, as Independence Day in Dunedin and pay special tribute to all the men and women currently serving in the Armed Forces and to our veterans. Our City is indeed grateful for their contributions, which have been critical to the defense of our country and to our freedom. Can you say a few words? Absolutely. Please do. Well, Amir Freeney, Vice Mayor, is the Vice Mayor here? Oh, there he is. Thank you. And Commissioners and staff. I'm Lori Coffey, Regent of Caledese Chapter, Daughters of the American Revolution, DAR. And this is my friend and mentor, Jane Turner, our 55-year member. I'm a five-year member. She's a 55-year member. And like me, she's a lover of history. Just before Memorial Day, like many of us, I was at Walmart when I saw a young cashier decked out in red, white, and blue. Even her face is painted with stars. And I told her how cool it looked. And I said, next year, you can really go crazy for America 250. And she said, what? What's that? And I said, it's the 250th anniversary of the birth of America. She goes, oh, me. Well, that's what we're here for. It was a reminder that we all have plenty of time to get ready. Because many people still don't realize that next year, 2026, marks America's 250th anniversary or semi-quincentennial. That means half of 500. I had to look it up. Just like the revolution, the road to 250 has been long and deliberate. Two years ago, we commemorated the Boston Tea Party and taxation without representation. Remember? And two months ago, we remembered the 250th anniversary of the battles of Lexington and Concord, where the shot heard around the world ignited the American Revolution. It wasn't a sudden outburst. Our revolution was carefully planned, building momentum with meager resources, very few, no money. Though it started in the north, it ended in the south with the most critical event. This is where it ended, period. So everyone can celebrate every year. But next year, we celebrate the day we officially became the United States of America. And we want everyone to know in plenty of time. So we even have brochures to help you spread the word. So we're going to give these to you. Great. Thank you very much. We're going to get a picture with you. You guys up front here. Right up there. Yes. And with the proclamation. Yeah, I think we do. Even better. Sure. The hat is not perfect right there. Looking here. I'm going to do a couple this way. And then do something. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay. The next presentation is the proclamation of the LGBTQ plus month proclamation. And I'm going to read that myself. And if I could have Terry and Lee. And I think, Lee, this is your son, right? Yeah. So if you guys want to come on up, Terry and Lee are the co-chairs for the chamber for the pride events for the week. And I'm doing an amazing job. And it's a lot of work. And I know Jason was the chair. And he's out of the country, just like our Commissioner DeGuard is. So anyway, so I'm going to read this. And I'll give you a chance to make some comments after I give it. Okay. LGBTQ plus pride month 2025. Whereas all are welcome in the city of Dunedin to live, work, play, and retire. Every family deserves a place to call home, where they're safe, happy, and supported by friends and neighbors. And whereas a number of LGBTQ plus historical events and people of all races have contributed to the history of equality for all people. And whereas each year, the month of June honors the 1969 Stonewall riots in Manhattan and the struggle for basic civil rights for the LGBTQ plus community to remind all cultures within our wider community of the important roles LGBTQ plus people have taken in shaping the social, historical, legal, and political worlds we live in today. And whereas pride month affords a special opportunity to become more knowledgeable about LGBTQ plus history and to honor the many LGBTQ plus American leaders who have contributed to the progress of our nation. And whereas the city of Dunedin has a strong history of honoring inclusivity, we value the contributions the LGBTQ plus citizens bring to the city and pride ourselves on diversity. And whereas the LGBTQ plus community has made great strides forward, but equality, inclusion, and acceptance have not yet been fully achieved. We must practice these values and teach them to future generations. Now, therefore, I, Maureen Mofrany, by the virtue of the authority vested in me as mayor of the city of Dunedin, Florida, and on behalf of the entire city commission, do hereby proclaim June 2025 to be LGBTQ plus pride month in Dunedin and call upon our community to respect, honor, and celebrate our diverse community and to continue building a culture of inclusiveness and acceptance of the LGBTQ plus community. Good evening, city council and Dunedin community. On behalf of the Dunedin Chamber of Commerce and the LGBTQ plus community, I want to extend our deepest gratitude to the city of Dunedin for your continued support of the community, Dunedin, of the continued support of the Dunedin Chamber of Commerce pride celebration. Your commitment to inclusion, equality, and love makes a powerful statement, not just during pride, but year round. By standing with us, you're helping create a city where everyone feels seen, valued, and safe to be exactly who they are. Thank you for being a city that leads with heart, with courage, and a true sense of community. Your support means the world to us, and we are so proud to call Dunedin our home. Thank you. Thank you, Terry. We want to get a picture. Hey, Sue, why don't you get me in this one? This one, I'm dead. I can't. Smile, Commissioner DuBarr. You are in this one. Thank you. You're very much. Great. Thanks a lot. And you guys did a great job with that afternoon Sunday event. We all were just amazed. It was packed there, so family friendly. Right. Yeah, we're just getting dried off from the dunk tank, so yeah. Awesome. Great. Okay, so we're going to go now to citizens' input. So does anyone in the audience wish to speak on a topic that is not on the agenda? This would be the time to come forward. Okay, come in. And it's name and address for the record, and three minutes. Hello, my name's Joanne Holiday, and my address is 952 Virginia Street, Dunedin, Florida. And I wanted to just thank Jennifer and all the other people that might be working with her for changing some of the hours at the pickleball court. It's nice. It's a blessing to wake up in the morning and to have a cup of coffee and not be woken up by the pickleball court. But I could just have that moment of solitude, and in the evening, I don't have to wait to go to bed. I know, and I am a champion for aging well. I know how important it is for those that are able and active citizens and younger people to maintain that lifestyle. And I appreciate all the consideration that you've been giving us, but I do have a little more concern. At the meeting the other night, you mentioned amount that might have been allocated or is allocated towards a resolution to the several other problems that we have, like noise and lights. And I know you're working on the lights, so we're going to wait until you get those blinds to see how effective they are. And, but you have to remember when you're assessing it, each level of the building, the first floor sees the full cam, all the lights on the bottom. So, there's a different perspective and a different amount of light that is emanated into each dwelling. And the other thing with the funding that I know the garden people were there on our behalf as well as their own. And so, I don't know what amount of money and will we be considered in the allocations or percentages of how it's going to be spent and how it's going to affect the noise. Because my biggest concern now is the noise and lights. And again, I want to thank you all for your consideration. Thank you very much. It's, it's, it's, it's moving the meter, but it, it's a big impact on my situation and I'm sure others as well. Thank you so much. Thank you, Julie. All of you. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? So, yeah, we're, we don't do the clapping, but thank you. We get it. So, but thank you. Once we start, we'll have half the time clapping. So, we appreciate it. But, so three minutes, name and address. Yes, Vicki Stevens, 952 Virginia, Heather Lakes, next to Eagle Scout Park. I just want to say the hours are absolutely amazing, thrilling, and bliss. We love it. I have been able to use my patio, something I haven't done in months. So, happy, happy. So, thank you for that. And I'm looking forward to some of the light shields coming in. Happy to give feedback and testing. I hope they all work. And looking forward to steps moving forward and resolving, you know, more on our agenda. My next thing is, is I would like to bring up Jocelyn at Parks and Rec. And I understand she's been with the city for 25 years. And in that time frame, that is amazing. Longer than a prison sentence for some people. So, she's obviously very happy with the city. So, that's, it's amazing. So, I just want to say with reaching out to her with issues and identifying, she identifies and understands the needs of the city and the residents. She is working with Jennifer, our city manager, to find common ground and solutions for Eagle Scout Park, which we so much appreciate. So, I believe, my opinion, she is professional, courteous. She listens. She investigates solutions. She is following through. And in my opinion, I think her title should not be interim director. It should be director. Thank you. Thank you very much. There you go. Unsolicited recommendation back there, Jocelyn. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak to an item that's not on the agenda? Name, address, and three minutes. Good evening, Mayor and Commissioners. My name is Deborah Rowe. And I live in Curlew Trails, which is part of Dunedin. It's 19 independent homes, townhomes, right along Curlew Creek. We have three other homeowners from that organization, that homeowners association, with us tonight. I am the newest member of our board of directors, so I'm still learning things. But I moved here to Dunedin four years ago, fell in love with everything Dunedin. I particularly loved the bridge that led right from my property over to the Weybridge Woods estates and Fairway estates. Weybridge Woods and Fairway estates. I literally walked that bridge or rode my bike over that bridge every single day. And it was wonderful because it was the pandemic. I needed exercise. And I met wonderful members of our community because it's a friendly community. Unfortunately, approximately two years ago, that bridge had to be closed because it fell into disrepair. And we met with the city manager and, I think, the planning commission about what was the possibility of fixing that bridge. And we learned that our homeowners association has to grant an easement across our property to get to the bridge, public easement. And we took an informal survey, and 90 percent of the homeowners want to do that. That's how much we love that bridge. And it's not just us. I have a ring camera, and I can tell you that there were lots of people that came across that bridge both ways, people going to the Publix, Walgreens, people going down into Dunedin, including me. I regularly went to the Hammock Park and walked. It's just wonderful. We understand there are a lot of competing initiatives that you need to fund, especially with the two hurricanes, but we are really hopeful that you can figure out some money to be spent on preparing the paperwork for us to sign, granting that easement, and then hopefully along the way getting the funds to rebuild that beautiful wooden bridge that many, many, many people use. Thank you. Thank you very much, Debra. Anyone else wish to come forward and speak to an item that's not on the agenda? Okay. I am glad you guys voted that way at the trail, at Curly Trails. I think a lot of people will be happy by that. So, okay, we're going to go ahead and move on to consent agenda. So, on the consent agenda will be the approval of the minutes for the May 6, 2025 work session. The second item, request approval to issue a purchase order via piggybacking a PAEC agreement with Precision Sidewalk Safety Corporation for the City Sidewalk Inspection and Maintenance Program repairs in the amount of $125,000 for fiscal year 2025 and award of RFQ for 2503 for well pump removal and installation services for the Water Division's well field maintenance to Southeast Drilling Services, Inc. of Tampa, Florida, in the amount of $51,610. So, I wonder if I could have a motion to approve the—well, first of all, are there any items that anybody wants to pull? Mayor, 2B, just for some questions. 2B, okay. We're going to pull 2B. So, any other items? Okay. So, seeing none. So, for 2A and 2C, if I have a motion for approval? So moved. Second. Okay. Okay. And is there any public input on this, on any of the agenda items, the consent agenda? Anyone wishing to come forward? Okay. Seeing no one, I will close the public input. And I will go to all in favor for the 2A and 2C. Aye. Aye. Aye. And that motion passes unanimously. Okay. Then we'll go back to 2B. Commissioner, did you want presentation or just have some questions or— No presentation needed. Just a few questions to clarify. Okay. For Trevor and Sue. All right. You know, as I was reading through this Panhandle Area Educational Consortium, does that mean it's been competitively priced, bid, they did the work for us? Are we—you feel comfortable going forward with that? Sue Bartlett, Public Works Director with Trevor Bacon, our public services manager. And yes, it does. I mean, it was competitively bid, which is why we're allowed to use it. And it also has a clause allowing that. And the city attorney has reviewed that to form and prepared the agreement accordingly. You know, I guess for everybody else sitting in this room, for $125,000, they're going to inspect all the sidewalks? It looked like that map was on the north side. So could you maybe clarify that? Yeah. They do not inspect all of the sidewalk in the city. It's a portion that we select each year in the attachment for the agenda item on page eight of their report, that last attachment E. There is a summary of each year, what has been accomplished. And we also have locations for each of those years, what part of the city has been inspected. Okay. In that presentation, they talked about that quarter inch to a two inch variance. Could you clarify exactly what that means? That means when the sidewalk is in excess, when the two pieces do not match up more than a quarter of an inch, there's displacement of a quarter inch or more than this process is used. When it gets above that larger number, we have to remove the sidewalk and replace it. Okay. And that would come back to our crew, not these guys? Presently, yes. It can be contracted out, but we don't have a current contract for that. So yes, it would come back to our resources. Okay. Just a couple more. If they come across something that's not ADA compliant, will they notify us or what would we do? The inspection is actually done cooperatively with Trevor, with our public services staff. And the contractor, they walk through and identify them together, what pieces will actually have to come out and not be eligible for this, and which pieces get repaired. They're marked. And they are looking for ADA compliance. That's primarily what this is. Okay. And I have two more. So the sidewalk cuts across someone's driveway. Will they, if the driveway's cracked or there's imbalance, will they address that? By definition, the sidewalk goes through the driveway. It is not part of the driveway. So that pathway, that's, even if it's not separated out, it is the sidewalk. And that is the portion they're looking at. And yes, they will address that there. They will not fix other parts of the driveway that are cracked or displaced because those belong to the homeowner. Okay. That's a great answer. And last, so if there is like that quarter inch to two inch. Deviation. Deviation. Do they shave it or grind it? I mean. Yeah. Okay. Yes, they do. Shave it. Okay. Trevor, that's all I had. Yeah, that's their process. They'll use a grinder and a vacuum. Thank you. They'll use a grinder and a vacuum to keep the dust at bay so that way it doesn't cause a disturbance to the residents. And they come through with their carts and different equipment and they're pretty unseen unless you're living in that neighborhood. Okay. That is all that I had. Thank you. Well, great. Actually, I have a question. Sure. Go ahead, Commissioner Walker. So, and I noticed in here that this pertains to the inspection and repair. There are several areas in the downtown Dunedin where it's, the sidewalks are, you know, constructive of pavers or bricks. And, you know, as those bricks shift, they do present a tripping hazard. Does this particular process identify those types of things? No, it does not. This is for concrete sidewalks and the standard for concrete sidewalks. Is there any plan to start addressing those issues? There's a lot of them. We do address, when we get calls in, we will address those areas that are identified. If we see something that is a displacement, we will address that. But we don't have a proactive program like we do with these sidewalks and concrete. We don't have those resources at this time. Thank you. If I may tag on, though, I do think we need to do that, though, in some form. I'm looking at you, City Manager. And because, you know, obviously, that's the most walked areas we have. And I see it, too. And I think we've talked about it at CRA. But just to, you know, kind of load on a little bit that I think it's important for us to inspect some of that. So let me confer with staff, obviously, since the timing is right, because we are in our full budget cycle right now with a workshop coming up. Okay. Any other questions, Vice Mayor? Commissioner Dugard, did you have anything? Oh, I do not. Thank you for asking. Okay. Great. Okay. So I need a motion to approve 2B. So moved. Second. Third. Okay. Sam Bergen and Walker, I'll go with. Okay. And any public input on 2A? Now that you've had a full explanation of what it's all about, or 2B, I guess it is. 2B. Or not 2B. Yeah, exactly. So, okay. Seeing none, I'll close public input. And I will go to all in favor of the motion. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. And that motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Okay. We're going to go to our first action item. is a second reading of Ordinance 25-01, approving and authorizing the execution of a development agreement between the City of Dunedin and the Flats on Main Street, LLC, for the Flats on Main Street affordable housing project at 1422 Carnation Drive. Jen, could you read Ordinance 25-01 by title only? Certainly. Ordinance 25-01, an ordinance of the City of Dunedin, Florida, approving and authorizing execution of a development agreement between the City of Dunedin and the Flats on Main Street, LLC, and providing for an effective date. That was Ordinance 25-01, read by title only. Okay. I need a motion. So moved. Second. Okay. I think I've got Commissioner Walker. Commissioner DeGuard might have got in there before you. Is that right? Okay. Right here. Speaking from above, we've got to give it to him, right? Okay. So we'll go to staff presentation. George and Bob. Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners, thank you. George Kinney on behalf of the Community Development Department. And seated to my right is Bob Ironsmith with the Economic Development Department. As you probably recall from the first reading, this is a request from the applicant, which is Archway Partners, requesting to enter into a development agreement with the City of Dunedin for the Flats on Main Street project, located at 1422 Carnation Drive. As the Commission may recall, this is a project that is intending to introduce housing serving individual and families with income levels ranging anywhere from 30% to 80% of the area median income. I just kind of want to repeat from last, the first reading as well, that procedurally, it's very important to understand that this is a two-step process, and this is the first step, that development agreement, if you will. The second step to follow will be the full design review, which will go through the LPA and on to the Commission for two reads. This agreement really includes basically two requests, the first being a density bonus of 50% pursuant to Section 105-27.2 of the Land Development Code, and a public art exemption of 50% pursuant to Section 110-21 of the Land Development Code. It has been recommended to you by the local planning agency, and staff is recommending approval of the development agreement as it is before you this evening, and I'm sure Bob will want to follow with a few comments on his own. Yes, certainly. Good job, George. No, this is, again, 78 units, affordable, attainable housing. It's been a high priority that we've heard from the Commission and from the public and from even city employees that we need some type of affordable housing in the city. We've searched for many years. We've been before the Commission for the last four to five years trying to put together a various deal structure that would work, and on this one, we were able to get it put together with the state and also with Pinellas County Housing Authority. We have a very successful developer that's done numerous projects, and we certainly are very supportive and excited about this project. It's something that's needed for the city, and we certainly don't have, really, a lot of vacant properties in the city. We're a built-out community, so our opportunities to put something together are pretty slim. So this is a property that seems to work very well for us. So I'm here to answer any questions, as you might have, relative to the development agreement, as George outlined, or the project itself. Okay. I'm going to start with the Vice Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. Bob, what kind of thought process goes into choosing the property? Yeah, you certainly need to get a certain acreage size. You know, certainly the ones that have been successful to get through to get some funding from the state are really 100-unit type projects. This one, obviously, is 78, but we need at least three, three-and-a-half acres to really make something worthwhile. There are really, if you go through the property appraisal records, we just don't have that type of vacant land in the city to make things work. We have looked at some other sites, but for various characteristics, this didn't work. But very, very few, Vice Mayor. Why does it have to be that size? I mean, smaller lots. You need to get some type of volume, really, because affordable housing is such a main focus throughout the Tampa Bay in the state that it's really to try to do something of a very small size, just won't receive grant funding, nor is it really economical for a developer to even look to pursue an affordable housing-type project. Vice Mayor, may I add something? Yes, ma'am. Actually, proximity to a major arterial with transportation is very important for affordable housing as well. Thank you for that. Okay. That's a great point. Mass transit, grocery store, a hospital, all those things that Jennifer kind of alluded to are very important. So an affordable housing project can't just go, even if land is available, it could be that it's just not the right location for a project of this sort. Right. Various characteristics, as the city manager mentioned, is it near grocery, hospital, mass transit, is the price going to work, all those other factors certainly limit other opportunities. Do we have any other affordable housing projects in Dunedin? We do. I mean, we have several. We have Eco Village, which was ahead of its time off of Lorraine Leland or Martin Luther King there. It also has some really energy aspects to it. We had also across the street, we had Habitat for Humanity, they did townhomes. And then we've done various infill with Habitat just north of Salon. So we've kind of been working hard over time. There's also some apartments off of St. Christopher that are also affordable. And so this will be another part of the, another piece, if you will. We have Palm Village as well, that's by the county. Yeah, I'm sorry, Palm Lake Village. Yeah, Palm Lake Village. Thank you, thank you. Palm Lake Village off of County Road 1, a very large apartment-type project that's very important to the city. It was built in the 80s. So while we don't have a lot of these projects, an affordable housing project isn't new to Dunedin? It's not. It's not. We've had a few years where we've just done the infill lots. This will be the first one where we get some decent-sized apartments, other than what the city manager mentioned at Palm Lake Village. Okay, okay. That's all that I have right now. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Commissioner Sandbergen? It's a zone MF 12.5. Correct. Can you make sure that everyone understands what that is? Sure, sure. And George can add to it if I miss something here. But it's multifamily, 12.5 units breaker. So it was always going to be some type of multifamily project that was out there. And, of course, with a little bit of the density bonus that happens to make this thing more feasible for affordable housing. But it is multifamily. Right. So the developer received a density bonus, right? Correct. How many units did they receive because of the bonus? I'm going to defer to George here real quickly. I don't want to give a quick number off the top of my head. But, you know, 12.5, three and a quarter acres, probably, George, somewhere around 40 units. It's an additional 21 units. Okay. Thank you. Wow. Okay. Yeah. And this would be a couple for you, Bob. There was referenced $10 million in rental vouchers. Yeah. The Pinellas County Housing Authority stepped up and is offering $10 million over, I think it's a 10-year time period, to reduce rent for people that qualify. So they're called credit vouchers. So that is also being brought to the table to allow people that, you know, service workers and different aspects of the market to be able to afford these apartments. We as a city put in $610,000. Where did that money originate from? Yeah. The $610,000 came through ARPA. So it came from the federal government on this one. City and the city manager can allude to it more. We got obviously, I can't remember the exact numbers. Was it $10 million? $18 million. $18 million. $18 million of ARPA money. And we certainly wanted to make sure that some of it went towards something that was a real community need. Okay. And just a couple of, like the waiver of the ART impact fees. I mean, and there's something else that's come up a couple of times, gray water system credit bonus. Could you clarify specifically, did this complex receive gray water credit? And what exactly they had to do to deserve it if they did? Did. I might ask Clay to come to the table, too. I'll talk about the, you know. It's really hard for Clay. I can, before he gets there, I can tell you Florida Statute 403.892 offers this incentive for multifamily home developers. It's adopted for solutions for treating and reusing the drain water for baths, showers, bathrooms, sinks, and the laundry. The primary aim of the statute is to promote reuse of this water for non-potable purposes such as toilet flushing and irrigation. So that's the purpose behind it. And they are taking advantage of that state statute. That's not an incentive they're taking advantage of from the city's perspective. But this is a state-allowable incentive. Sustainability, resiliency type aspect. Well, like. No, I think that definition pretty much took care of it. Yeah. So they'll do a little bit of on-site treatment to somewhat not quite be a reclaim water. But if it's able to work back into the system to, like I said, for different aspects of it, it's a little bit a step above a reclaim. But it's usable. It's not potable. It's not. And it will not be used for drinking. And then we have some regulations to make sure there is an actual air gap between the two systems so we don't have a cross-contamination. So they are doing the right thing and trying to. Yeah. Okay. Yes. And I realize tonight's not design review. It was just. So that's all my questions. Thanks. You three. Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Walker. Thank you, Mayor. So when we did the first reading, there were a couple of things that basically were noted with regards to retention ponds and those sorts of things, as well as the ingress and egress of the property. How do we track those particular items when we go into design review? Is it built into the RFP or to specifically address these issues? Because, you know, I think there's some things that definitely need to be tracked here as we go forward. So I'm just curious how that process works. Certainly, Commissioner. As staff heard, we listened. We've talked with the city manager. There were various items off the top of my head, parking, ingress, egress, the one way in, the fire aspect, the drainage, all of those. We've already, George and I have met with staff. We've spent some time with engineering. They're actually for the development instead of going toward the – and Clay can articulate more on this. Instead of doing it for a 25-year storm event, they're actually doing 100 years. So they're storing even more water. So we want to make sure when this comes to you for the design aspect that we've answered all those questions to satisfaction or at least, you know, information for the commission. So we've already been working on it. So we get the minutes from Rebecca, we took our own notes, and we're now tackling those items that were mentioned. I would just add, Commissioner, very quickly, though, that is part of the design review process. So all of those things that you're mentioning, stormwater review, traffic impacts, all of that is part of our embedded design review process. So we're actually taking it a little bit further with this one because we're kind of getting into the weeds, if you will, before we get to the full design review. But we know those issues are important to the residents and to the commission, so we're going to – we're hitting them head on as quickly as we can. Yeah, we're working on it right now. The other issue, if I may add, was the fire and the fire circulation of apparatus. And we have sat down with the fire department to go over it more than once. Absolutely. And they can circulate and provide the fire suppression that they need for the site as it's drawn now. And we'll do a deeper dive during design review as well. But we wanted to ensure, before we proceeded, that it wouldn't be a problem. And they're very happy that the buildings are being sprinkled, too. But, yes, we've met with all the different departments for those questions that came up. Yeah, thank you for that. Yeah, I took a drive over there a week ago or so and just kind of – to check it out. And, I mean, there would be nothing specifically that would prevent us from establishing an ingress and egress. I mean, from – and I'm just going to throw it like zoning or traffic study or whatever. No, there's nothing precluded. I'm going to let George talk a little bit here. But as far as – DOT has not given us any negative comments. And I know George is looking at – I'll let George talk here a little bit. Yeah, no, I think that's a great point. So, DOT was involved in some of the initial reviews of the plans. They had no comments at this point. We did take their traffic impact analysis, which is required as part of the design review. And we sent that out to – for a third-party review. So, we're expecting some feedback from that third-party review prior to design review. So, we'll be able to share that with you when we come next time. We're trying to check all the boxes, really. Oh, yeah, of course. No, I just – it was – it's – and I know it's not developed yet. But it's just – it's very crowded back there or enclosed or something to that effect. Yeah, I think we also have to understand it's going to be peak times, off-peak times. You know, Lukan's Liquor is closed, obviously, in the morning when a lot of people go to work. So, there's definitely some offset there, too. Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Degard. Thank you, Mayor. I'd like a little history on this particular piece of property. What is – what has this property been doing for the last 15 years, and how were we lucky enough to have it upon? Certainly, Commissioner. It's about three and a quarter acres. It's got some single-family homes that have just been rental – rental homes for, geez, the last – you know, quite a bit of time. We happen to know the owner of the property, which is Mario Constantine, who has a Country Boy restaurant, that plaza right there. He's actually been patient with us. We had a couple attempts for the affordable housing that did not come to fruition. But to answer your question, it's been a rental, a single-family rental-type situation for him. And he's looked at development over the years, but never went to that development stage. Excellent. Thank you. I just wanted a little bit of background. Finally, I'd like to know a little bit more about how we came to three floors. I know there was some discussion of four, and some people have promoted two. Give me some background, please. Yeah, certainly. And George might be able to add, too. I think as a right, they could go to four – okay, George corrected me here. They could go to five-story in this zoning. We know that is not something that would be very compatible, nor something that would be very attractive. We even thought four was kind of pushing it. So we felt three stories kind of hit the sweet spot to get the number of units that we needed in order to pursue grant funding. So that's how we came up with the three. And the architecture, we felt, was a pretty nice product. That's all I have. Thank you. Okay. Well, one of my questions was about stories, so got that out of the way. So traffic, buffering the site, potential of more internalizing the building of the building as a kind of a potential to buffer. That's all part of design review. Yeah, and the developer is here. Brett Green is here, too. He certainly has committed to doing the buffering where needed around this project to make it look good. So he is committed to that. Well, and at least be thinking about internalizing it a little bit more, too. Oh, yeah. So at least I want to understand that. Let's see. I guess those are my biggest questions. So I guess the comment that just got made, 78 units. So obviously they would have had the ability by right to have 57 units. We gave them a density bonus to another 78 units. And the whole issue of it being crowded. Can you respond to it being crowded? I mean, do you feel like it's crowded? What's your sense of it compared to other things? Yeah, I am comfortable with it. And I certainly could ask Brett to come in or George. He's actually done some studies based on his other projects. And actually, it's less than two persons per unit. So, no, I don't see this as being a crowded situation. So we've been looking at that data both from a parking and an occupancy perspective. And what he is showing, I don't know, Brett, you got a second? Here, he's right here. Brett Green, developer, owner of Archways Partners. And we've gone over the various items that have come up that we want to make sure that we're on target on and can check the boxes. And one of them was how many people are going to be living in these units and what's going to be the actual number. And Brett is going to share with you, he has some interesting information on other projects he's done and what the occupancy count is. Brett, could you just give your full name and your title? That would be good. Yeah, Brett Green, president of Archway Partners. So, yeah, as Bob mentioned, we've built many of these affordable, attainable housing developments throughout Pinellas County. And so we have real data as far as the number of people that actually live in the community and the number of cars that are parked there. As of this morning, following the last meeting, we went ahead and commissioned a parking study based on real-time data as far as how many cars are actually being parked at other attainable housing communities. One of ours, one of an unaffiliated attainable housing community. And what we found was even though the parking code requires about 1.5 parking spaces per unit, what's actually ended up being utilized is about 0.75 to one space per unit. So even though we are going to be building about 1.5 spaces per unit, only about one space per unit ends up getting utilized. And that's because, as Bob mentioned before, it's important to be near public transit, close to the city, with amenities nearby, the utilization rate on parking and cars, as I think Commissioner Gao mentioned last time, is they really do take advantage of that. Brett, you mentioned the occupancy that you think there are going to be in the units based on your… Yeah, if you give me a minute to look at my numbers, I want to say there's 175 people we currently have living at a 96-unit development. That includes adults and minors in the community, and that actually has a little bit of a larger bedroom count unit mix. That one's 50% ones and 50% twos. This one, I believe, has a bit more one-bedroom units than two-bedroom units. So, you know, although more people could live in the unit, when you have, you know, a good amount of one-bedroom apartments, you typically just don't have that many occupants. It's a lot of, you know, single-income residents that ultimately end up living in these communities. Okay. Anybody else have a question for Brett while he's up there? I just want to make sure. Vice Mayor, did you? I did real quickly. Yes, you just… Brett, can you tell us with affordable housing projects or workforce housing, at the different income levels, right, between 30% and 80%, right, area median income, who is that? Can we put a face on the people who are living there? I mean, it's people that you interact with on a daily basis. It could be the cashier at Publix when you go to get groceries or city staff members or nurses, school teachers. When you look at the area median income, in Pinellas County, the 100% four-person area median income is about $104,000. So, at 80% of that, you're talking about someone that's making, you know, approximately $80,000 a year. I mean, that's… I don't think anyone would think that's a low-income person. I mean, that's a working… That's an everyday working person that's looking for housing that they can actually afford. You know, if you were going to rent the same units that we're going to be building here, you would be paying upwards of over $2,000, in some cases, for a one-bedroom apartment. So, you know, other types of occupations we have are, you know, service workers. We have, like I mentioned, there's teachers. We have a lot of first responders that live in our community. So, I mean, it's… Like I said, it's people that you'll interact with on a daily basis. Okay. Thank you. That's all. Commissioner Sandberg, you had something? I just want to, I guess, for some of the folks in the audience listening, these units require at least a 12-month lease, am I correct? Yes, sir. And a standard lease means that each occupant, whether it be an adult or a minor, are named on the lease so that there's control of who's in and out of there? That's exactly correct. Okay. You've heard a little bit about this. So, it's highly regulated. We have to go through quarterly audits with the servicer, the state of Florida, and their assigned loan servicer to review. They randomly select leases to make sure they're all in compliance. It's going to be a professionally run outfit. This is not, you know, mom-and-pop outfit where, you know, we hire someone off the street to be our property manager and we, you know, use QuickBooks. Nothing against that. But it has to use, you know, high levels of regulations and systems to ensure that we comply with all the different rules and requirements of these federal funds. And not really relating to your question, but just one point I wanted to add that Bob mentioned earlier is the amount of resources that we've brought into this development. Like we've mentioned, we've been working on this three or four years. The federal government is putting $27 million of funding and economic development into this project. You know, we've went after this several times and the only reason we are successful is because of the city's contribution and the willingness to partner with us to go after these funds for several years. So, I think that part shouldn't be overlooked as far as the economic impact and what we're going to be doing in the neighborhood and bringing, you know, construction jobs and permanent jobs to this area. I mean, you're going to have to hire a landscaper. You're going to have to hire a cleaning crew. You're going to have to hire pest control. All these different, you know, impactful, you know, jobs that are going to be generated by this, I think, is important as well. Okay. Now, I would have no more questions tonight. Everything will come up at design review. I mean, I realize what we're here for tonight. So, thank you, sir. Sure. And anyone else have a Commissioner Walker or Commissioner DeGuard? Anything else? Okay. Thank you. Thank you for coming up. We put a good team together. We really did. Thank you, Bob. Okay. I'm going to open it up for public input. So, if anyone – yeah, I actually do have one. So, I'll start with that one. This will be anyone who wants to speak to this item. But I do have Speaker Peggy Fast who's going to be speaking on behalf – she'll have a longer period of time because she'll be speaking on behalf of – maybe you could raise your hand and have a longer period of time. So, I'm going to open it up for you. Okay. So, I'm going to open it up for you. I'm going to open it up for you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Sorry. Thomas Hulley. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks for the record. That'd be awesome. My name is Peggy Fast. I live at 1310 Powderpuff Drive, unit number two in Dunedin, the St. Christopher Villas. And I'm here tonight to speak on behalf of the people that live at St. Christopher Villas. They wanted me to be the spokesperson, so here I am. And I'm talking about our concerns that we're having about the proposed affordable housing units on the flats on Main Street. Affordable housing is needed in Dunedin, and the owners in St. Christopher Villas have some concerns in regards to the flats on Main Street. Excuse me. Building height and light pollution is our first concern. The proposed three-storey buildings will cause light pollution to our complex east of the flats, as it is not harmonious with the development and architectural preference of the area. There's no three-storey units in our area that we have seen, and I think we'd be able to see that. Our question to the city is, will you consider two-storey buildings instead of three? The second is increased traffic and intersection safety. Main Street is already heavily trafficked. Adding this development will only increase congestion and safety risks. We asked whether the city is planning to install a traffic light at the intersection of Carnation Drive and Main Street. Next concern is water intrusion and drainage failures. Since the Twin Villa Wake property was constructed, which is the northeast section of our property, San Christopher Villas has experienced significant flooding and water intrusion in units, particularly on the east side of our community. These problems did not exist prior to that development. To date, our association has spent $23,000 addressing water-related damages, and additional remediation is still needed and is in the works right now. The City of Dunedin, prior to being built, assured our association that there would not be a water impact on us, but it has, very significant. Now you want to approve building on the west side, two three-storey units. What is the assurance that we will not be flooded from these buildings? The Flats of Dunedin. And the fourth concern, the loss of natural buffer zone and environmental impact to the west and south of our property, which is the Flats. Where you plan to build is a wooded area that also serves as a critical buffer for stormwater runoff, wildlife, and the privacy and noise protection of nearby homes. Eliminating this buffer could worsen existing drainage problems and potentially increase the risk of property damage or structural instability for adjacent homes. These natural features provide essential erosion control, water absorption, and slope support. Given these risks, we urge the City to require a comprehensive geotechnical and environmental assessment of the property before proceeding. And a few questions we have for the City beyond those is, what stormwater management systems are being implemented to protect neighboring properties from flooding from runoff? What pervious drainage systems are being put in place, such as true grid, instead of paving, swales, tree wells, etc. How will the City ensure that water is diverted safely away from San Cristofilus and surrounding areas, including Heather Drive, which is right adjacent? What is our recourse with the City of Dunedin if flooding occurs of our property? How soon will our questions be answered and in what form? A new development we feel is an opportunity for the City of Dunedin to not only increase affordable housing units, but also lead in implementing sustainable green stormwater infrastructure for Dunedin. Thank you. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Okay. Does anyone else here wish to speak to this issue? Come forward. Name and address in three minutes, please. Good evening. Renee Chia, 1229 Royal Oak Drive. Nice to see everyone this evening. I come before you tonight with a tale of two cities. Everyone knows San Francisco is the Silicon Valley, right? So as it started becoming more and more expensive there, the people who worked there got pushed out of San Francisco and couldn't work there and had to move further out in the Bay Area. That pattern kept going and going and going until it got to the point where people were commuting one and in some cases two hours one direction to go into work into that city. So what was decided to try and address that is that they would gentrify Oakland, which historically was always a ghetto. So they started gentrifying that with a lot of affordable housing projects. You probably remember this, Rob. And what happened there with the exact same formula that's being talked about here, this exact same policy was applied with the 30 to 80 percent of the median income. But as the yuppies started moving in there because it was closer to work and they really liked it and their median incomes were much higher. What happened? Up and up and up. So then what do you do? You subsidize the rents. Well, that's just taxing the people of the state more. California has some of the highest taxes in the union because they had to keep increasing taxes to pay for all of these different subsidies. So then what happened when that didn't work? They allowed tent cities and homelessness to be okay because it was too expensive for even the folks who lived in ghettos for their whole life in Oakland to stay there anymore. So now they're just going to let them be on the street and we're going to make that okay because it's our fault that we got where we are. So now where are they? Taxpayer money is used to help pay for housing for health care because the people that have been on the street all this time now in poop town are now getting sick and they're realizing that they need to have housing in order to be healthy. So now they're using taxpayer money to house people to try and make them healthy again. Their infrastructure is overtaxed throughout the entire state. They're having wildfires, floods, everything else. This is the same policy that we're talking about implementing here. And this is why I'm bringing my concerns to you. As that affordable housing median income keeps going up, then your math isn't going to work so great anymore. And the subsidies are going to have to be greater and greater. Houses on my block, when I moved here, we paid under $400,000 for our home. Houses on my block, smaller than ours, are going for three quarters of a million dollars. And they're getting cash deals in the first day that they have an open house. So who's moving in? How long is this affordable housing going to be affordable? And I'm wondering why it sounds like there's a lot of affordable housing projects that have been here in the past. How much were the rents there compared to the rents now at a non-subsidized level? What's the increase in the last 5, 10 years or however long those projects have been there? Because I think that's an important number to be looking at and expect that that's probably going to get exponentially worse. Thank you, Renee. You're welcome. I appreciate your input. I have more comments on the other section, the water section. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Anyone else wish to come forward and speak on this issue? Please come forward. Name and address for the record in three minutes. Hi. My name is Kevin Griffin and I live at 1415 Heather Drive and I just inherited 1421 Heather Drive from the woman who passed away. I live right behind Lukens, which is adjacent to the property. Okay. Originally, Lukens was going to be a smaller thing than it turned out to be. Okay. At one point, I went and asked the housing, whatever, code enforcement to see the changes. Well, from the start to the finish, there were 6,000 changes to that building. It kept changing and changing and changing. Okay. Lukens is two feet away from my fence, my property line. There's no area for the telephone people, whoever needs to work on the wires. It's just unbelievably small back there. Okay. And with the recent rains, my front yard was over my mailbox, which is about four feet high. Okay. That's right next to the, there was St. Francis Lake and then it went four feet high above that. And it went all the way up to my house, about two feet away from my house. There is no retention back there. You put a 40,000 square foot building, Lukens, and all that drainage is gone. Okay. It can't, the ground cannot hold it, period. And let's talk about fire. Let's talk about the last fire they had back there. Okay. There was a slumlord who owns that property. Okay. And he had some shacks, including a pigeon coop that he rented out to two guys. It went on fire one night. Guess what? Fire trucks could not get back there. Okay. The property is not designed to travel on. It's a Lukens driveway, which is right there. The overflow from the driveway, from their parking, goes to the back. And as soon as you pass the driveway, it's a dirt road. This is not a good plan. I would like to see affordable housing. I'd like to see it across from Meese, where you can fit it. Okay. There's a tunnel land, three acres, possibly 200 cars, sharing it with a liquor store. It's not the site. Yeah. Yeah. Like I said, I mean, my concern is you're overbuilding back there. There are other places to put it. I mean, affordable housing, I believe you do need, but I also believe you need to keep nature because the whole Heather Drive is flooded last time. And what is the city going to do when those houses are totally underwater? Make a canal? That's all I have to say. Thank you, Kevin. Uh, no, please, we're not gonna, we're not gonna start clapping. Um, can, uh, is there anyone else in the audience that wishes to speak on this issue? Hi. I do have to give my name. Name and address and three minutes. Yes. All right. Rob, last name Refo. I live at 1341 Azalea Drive in the St. Christopher Villa community. Um, I will say a lot of the points that Peggy took up, the first speaker, she did a great job. That was, she echoed some of the things I was gonna bring up. So I will mention one thing, because Bob had stated that the occupancy is 1.5 per unit. I don't know if something's changed, but in Florida, the general guideline for affordable housing occupancy is two people per bedroom with an allowance for an additional person, even if that means exceeding two people per bedroom. So unless the developer put a, um, a limit on it, which he did say he could at a meeting, then that's the correct datum is 2.5. It's up, up to 2.5 people per bedroom. That's, that's my understanding. So, and there's a total of 114 bedrooms in this, um, facility. I, I, it's already been brought up twice, but I do wanna echo, and, and also there was another point too about the, the developer was asked for information, and it's the developer that was the source of information about the amount of cars there are and the parking. I do think that's not necessarily the best source of information on this. It should be probably an outside unbiased source. I think that's a pretty reasonable point to make, um, not that, that it's untruthful, but that's kind of an odd person to ask that source of information from when you could get someone else to do it. The, the, the point I was gonna make, it's already been made twice, but I think it's worth making again, which is concerns that I've heard from other citizens, is this aspect of the flooding. And Peggy brought up a great point, which is that demonstrably there had been these, the houses, the San Cristobal Villas and the houses on Heather Drive, been there for almost 40 years. Suddenly you have an instance where you have flooding of a property and houses that haven't flooded for 40 years. But then if the city is called upon, all it takes is an engineer coming out and saying it meets code. And instantly it seems to be like an act of God. It's just like, well, that's how it is. Even though there can be a pretty obvious cause and effect that's going on there. So I think she summed it up and it is a genuine question and perhaps a naive one, but I think it's worth answering. What guarantee will the city and or developer give that if there is this development goes in place and there's flooding on properties and homes that never existed before, who's going to take responsibility for that? It can't just be that an engineer comes out and says it meets code. I'm sorry. Because then you have it where the irony being that the citizens who already live there, their homes will become unaffordable. That's it. Thank you. Is there anyone else? Please, everybody, if you don't mind. The whole reason we don't allow clapping on issues of controversy is because if somebody, there might be one person out here who wants to speak opposite that and it becomes an intimidation. So I appreciate it and I know you're enthusiastic. I think we see the support on the one side, but if you don't mind, we'd appreciate it. Is there anyone else in the audience that wishes to come forward to speak on this issue? Hi. Jamie Zank at 1320 Daffodil in San Christopher. And I just had a couple questions after reading the contract that was attached to the meeting tonight. One of the issues came up that I specifically read that if there is an issue that the property has 24 hours to respond. I don't think 24 hours is probably significant enough if we're having issues with any kind of noise, light, any water that's flooding into our backyard. So I do think that that should be changed in the contract if that's what the discussion is today, not about the way it looks. The other thing I read a lot in the contract about the gray water and about how the different, I mean, you're obviously concerned about it because you covered a lot in the contract. But one thing that all of us in this area of Pinellas know is our sewer systems aren't up to date. We are getting more water, more rain, more runoff. So, it's great, this is a new system, I'm happy about that, but is it going to be able to handle? You basically are putting two three-story dams in between Main Street and San Christopher. You're wedging it in there. So, there's going to be issues with water. We already know that and we've already heard that today. So, I understand that's design review, but before we sign a contract, I do believe that needs to be clear and addressed before our city agrees to this building. And the other concern is the 25-year flood rule for the runoff. Well, I think we all know we've been living with 100-year-old floods and then we've been doing it year after year. So, again, it sounds like some of the data being used maybe isn't covering what's actually happening. And also, I agree that with affordable housing, you need to have transportation and access to all these great sites. But I do have to say, and I know this has been brought up, but that Coke facility is by the bike path. So, these people that don't have cars, and I am talking to people who work at restaurants and work at the grocery stores. Who ride their bikes to work. So, you're putting them out on Main Street. Probably the worst place. And kids on bikes. You are putting them on Main Street. So, it just seems like you're trying to wedge this into two streets and you don't have a chance for these kids to even ride their bike on a weekend. Whereas, we have other empty property that could put them in a safer place. Thank you. Thank you very much. Is there anyone else wish to speak on this issue? Okay. I'm going to pull it back in then. And so, I know some of this is going to be handled during design review, but let's handle a few of these questions. So, traffic light at intersection of Carnation and 580. So, there has been no indication from FDOT to this point that a traffic light would be needed. But, however, as I mentioned, we are going to send their traffic impact analysis out for a peer review. And we will get a third-party unbiased review. Okay. And again, as this thing moves forward, if there is a need for traffic light, that's again an FDOT. They do studies. They look at whether that makes sense or not. Okay. But we'll get a lot of insight from our traffic study. Correct? Yeah. That will come back during design review. Okay. Okay. The whole issue of, and there's a couple things that touched on this, the whole, you know, is our sewer system not up to date? Is it able to handle all this? Why don't we start with that? Well, so first off, I think there needs to be some clarification on the sewer system and stormwater system. We have, we do not have a combined system, mostly in the state of Florida or in the city of Deneen. We have the wastewater system, which is what comes out of your house. That system is separate from your stormwater system, which is your rainwater. So, sanitary sewer-wise, we are fine. I mean, we're obviously making improvements as we go along and other things like that. The graywater system is an alternative water source for other uses, other than drinking water, to basically offset their use of potable water when it comes to washing clothes, showers, and whatnot. That's, there's three different systems that we're talking about here. That's the one thing to understand. The graywater system is basically recycled water that comes from your sinks and showers and stuff like that, that is cleaned in manners. It's a little bit less than what we would do at the treatment plant. And then they use that for that. There will be a separation between the potable water system and the graywater system. Then there's the wastewater system that comes from toilets and then other stuff. That's another separate system that they'll have to size to make sure it handles their flows. Our system is completely capable of taking any additional, you know, wastewater we're not worried about. And then the stormwater is a third separate system. And that, the land development code, is what we have to, for them to design to. I cannot ask them to do anything else. And that in our code states that you have to do the, it's the pre-post development runoff from the 25-year storm event. That's all I can ask them to do. They do have to be able to, like the way they're supposed to grade their site, is supposed to contain all of that runoff on their site. We've had some preliminary discussions with them on the stormwater. They are leaning towards, because it's a question mark of really where the current discharge of that site goes to, that they are looking to probably act as this is an enclosed system. So they would, they're looking, I haven't, again, we haven't seen this, but there's been discussions where they may be looking at no discharge until you get out of the 100-year storm event, which is well past what I have right here. Applicant indicated they will retain the site to a 100-year storm event, which is significantly more than required by city ordinance. That's correct. And again, that'll all be cleared out in the process of the design review. Yeah, that's correct. But they're looking to take care of it. It's really quite a bit more what Clay mentioned. Yeah, unfortunately, our code is all I can allow them to do. Sure. And that is technically a pre-post discharge at the 25-year storm event. That's what it says. And they are willing to go up above and treat it as basically a closed system. And they'll retain up to the 100-year storm event, which is, also follows SWIFT MUD's guidelines also for a closed system. And so based on that, I mean, you know, obviously we just lived through a storm that, you know, nobody can plan for. But based on that, there's really no reason to think there'd be flooding coming off that site because of the building. Based on that, they would not have discharged. And the only time they would have a discharge would be if it's more than 12 to 12 and a half inches of rain in a 24-hour period. Right. Which Milton was, but again, very extremely rare issue so that you can't build for. Correct. Okay. Let's see. I think there was discussion, and I know this is totally going to be covered during design review, but the whole environmental impact and what kind of buffering will be used and the thinking of, you know, just, you know, true buffering, because I think the other gentleman, you know, suggested that with Lukens there wasn't really a great buffering happening. So any response to that or just basically it'll be covered? No, we certainly have had discussions with Brett Green, and he's committed to doing, you know, landscaping buffering on the site. Yeah. And I would just add a green space plan is required as part of design review, and the City Arborist is fully involved in that process. Yeah. I think one of the things that's important to know here is they're going to own this. This is not going to be a flip. He owns it. He's going to have to manage it. This is going to be a situation where he certainly recognizes it needs to be a good part of the community. Okay. Let me just, can you clarify the whole 1.5 per unit and the 2.5 per bedroom and how that fits into how we feel confident with? Yeah. I'm going to ask Brett to come back up. Because I don't know. He was ready to jump up. There he is. Okay. He knows this very well. Yeah. Thank you. So, as the other gentleman mentioned, I'm not sure of that regulation or assumption of how many people per bedroom are allowed. But what we see in our current communities, not some, you know, think tank that came up with something. We have a 96 unit development, and there's 175 people there, which is about 1.8 people per bedroom. If you look at that, as far as this community is concerned, there will be about 130 people, more or less. My math's probably not right exactly. But, you know, that's a reasonable amount of folks to be living in a 78 unit community. Okay. Let me ask you two, just with the issues of traffic, parking, per unit. I mean, those things are all things you guys will do your due diligence to validate as it comes back to us, correct? Yeah, that's right. I think that's what's been coming up. Yeah, George. I'll let George and his staff do a thorough review as far as the design and what's needed for code. And go ahead, George. No, there's not much to add there, Mayor. We will obviously evaluate all of those against our current codes, and we'll assure that they are meeting or exceeding those code provisions. Yeah, I think we certainly understand there's a lot of scrutiny, and there's a lot of check the boxes, so that's why we're trying to get ahead of this, whether we're dealing with clay, or we're dealing with the developer, or we're dealing with fire, and so on and so forth, so. Okay. This is an important issue. I just want to make sure. Does anybody else have any follow-up questions before we go into comments? Commissioner Degard, you're good, too? Okay. So, we're actually closed. The public comment site has been closed. So, no, we've already closed it, so we have to stop. So, sorry. Again, we're just going to come back for two readings and design review. Okay. I'm going to go to commission comments. Commissioner Walker, as the maker of the motion. Thank you, Mayor. So, every citizen survey that I have seen and that I've been involved with both as a resident and as a commissioner, the top two priorities for this city were affordable housing and parking, and it's pretty telling when you have that kind of consistency that goes back 10 years. And so, you know, we have a fairly significant service industry here that really makes our downtown a destination for people who want to see Dunedin. We have a very, in my opinion, one of the best fire and rescue teams in Florida. And the problem is, is the service industry, they can't afford to live here now. And they're having to make these commutes that are just absolutely, you know, horrendous. That also includes our first responders. And so, as we've gone through this process and this being the second reading, this is, in my opinion, this is something we have to do because that's what our citizens want. And I will say, the design, you know, when we get to the design review here, I want to make sure that we are tracking these concerns and these issues. And each and every one of those needs to go into that design because otherwise, you know, we're doing the residents a disservice. And so, I am in favor of this. I, a lot of work went into this, Bob. And, you know, I think that's commendable. And that's, those are my comments. Okay, thank you. And Commissioner Dugard? I think you were the seconder, am I right? Yes, seconder. That's correct. Thank you, Mayor. This is, this is a situation where the people that are being most impacted by this are the ones that are before us tonight. And I, I understand that they have a wonderful community over there. And they want to preserve it. That's understandable. But within the last five years, we've put up fewer than 60 affordable housing units. While we have had some tragic events relative to housing, many houses are off the market because of the storms. We're having trouble housing, particularly those people that are middle or lower income. We can't ignore that. I really regret that these individuals will have to make some degree of accommodation. But that's what you do in a community. A community is not about what you want all the time. It's about what we need as a community. And that means from time to time, sacrifices have to be made. Otherwise, you don't have a community. So I share my colleague's point of view, Commissioner Walker. I'll be supporting this. Thank you. Okay. Vice Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. We need the affordable housing. We need the workforce housing. You know, I was listening to, listening, I was reading. It was on Facebook chat. It was a bunch of service workers downtown. And the conversation was about transportation and how they get home after working at night. And it was about, do they ride on the trail, which is closed? So do we break the law there? Or do we risk riding on the roads? And so it was just the challenges of our food service workers in a downtown that we all take pride and joy over. And so they're having to do all that because they don't live in Dunedin, right? And if we really are that community, we do have to make room. And this isn't just a challenge and a struggle for Dunedin, not even just the county. It's a region. It's a state issue that there's affordable housing issues all over. And when you're the most developed county in the state, there's little land to work with. And it is a number one priority for our residents. We hear over and over again, we have worked really hard on this. And so but we've also heard from you. And so hopefully you heard some of those comments tonight as far as the design of the project and the drainage goes. And if you can, Bob, I don't know how that would work. But the gentleman did have a point on independent just car counts or whatever, how many vehicles, just so we can make an unbiased judgment call on that. We'd appreciate that. But I am in favor of this project. So thank you, Mayor. Okay, Commissioner Sandbergen. You know, I said before, I believe that because Dunedin's put so much skin in the game, that you need to be a Dunedin resident to live here. I live in this in this complex. And that was off limits. So I amended it to say you need to be employed in Dunedin. That was off limits. I think we need to take a look at I recently drove into that Lukens parking lot. And there's a lot of parking on the east side that's going to interfere with the in and out of this complex. And I'm not sure if some of that's close to the right of way. That's for people who understand that a lot more than I do. The other thing I brought up was about names on the leases. I understand there's a concern about how many people and you neighbors are, you know, they're obviously entitled. I mean, if this goes through, they're entitled to know not only how many, but who they are. I think that, you know, we've talked, we've thought about that. I know we've talked about on-site management, proper security for whatever, you know, if it goes forward. That's the kind of things that I'm going to be concerned about. I know the guy was going to talk about the history. I've lived here 40 plus years and I remember the history of this property. So that's all the comments I have going forward. It's nothing else to add. Thank you, Commissioner. I'm, you know, and I hear everybody. And I feel like from your point of view, you probably think, oh, well, you know, they're doing what they're going to do. But we hear you. We hear you and there'll be a chance in design review to do the best we can to address all your concerns and make you feel comfortable. But I think also what you hear up here is, you know, we've worked hard to do affordable housing projects and they're few and far between. I mean, even this, which is probably the biggest one we've done in a long time, is a drop in the bucket to the need. And it is always one of the top three demands, desires of our Dunnean residents. And we know it's a huge national problem. And I'm not going to compare us to any other community, but I can say, like, this is how it's done right. You know, everybody's working as a team to try to provide true workforce housing. It's really going to help people and keep our workers close to where they work. So again, during design review, I think you all have heard what all the concerns are. And we just really need to work hard to make sure we address every single one of them. And so that when we come back here, you know, it'll be understood, you know, that we're going to minimize this impact as much as we can. So I'm also in favor. So I think we go to a roll call vote. Vice Mayor Gow. Aye. Commissioner Sandbergen. Aye. Commissioner Dugard. Aye. Commissioner Walker. Aye. Mayor Franey. Aye. And that motion passes unanimously. Thank you. And thank you, everyone. And we'll work hard to address your concerns. I promise you that. Okay. We are going to go to 3B, second reading of Ordinance 25-03 to contract approximately .70 acres of real property located at 2201 Main Street, identified as Pinellas County Tax Parcel number 30-28-16-0000-320-0200, and generally located at the intersection of Belcher Road and State Road 580. And, Jen, could you read that Ordinance 25-03 by title only? Ordinance 25-03, an ordinance of the City of Dunedin, Florida, for the voluntary contraction of the city boundary by contracting approximately .7 acres of real property identified as Pinellas County Tax Parcel 30-28-16-0000-320-0200, and generally located at the intersection of North Belcher Road and State Road 580, as more particularly and legally described in this ordinance, providing for the amendment of the city's boundaries to contract the subject parcel, providing for notice to appropriate agencies, providing for severability, providing for conflict, and providing for an effective date. That was Ordinance 25-03, read by title only. Okay. Thank you. And could I have a motion? So moved. Second. Okay. Staff presentation. George? Thank you, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners. I'm not, I'm going to keep this one brief because I think you got most of it in the first read. I agree with you. But the Largo Medical Center, as you probably have seen if you've gone by it, is already under construction, and is intending to construct a new emergency care medical facility at the southeast corner of Main Street and Belcher Road. As you may recall, there's two contiguous parcels, one in the city of Clearwater and one in the city of Dunedin. This is a request to contract the Dunedin parcel in accordance with Florida statute 171051. And really, just to kind of briefly summarize the reasons for that, we, the contraction is being requested to permit the unified development of the overall site. If you'll recall, Clearwater is in a better position to serve the site with all the required facilities a little bit more efficiently than the city could do. And if you recall, we went over some of the tax implications. They were fairly minimal. And I know the applicant's here and has also, at first read, made a, made a promise to make a payment in terms of some past work that was done on the site. So with that, I'm going to kind of stop there, Mayor. And if you have any questions, staff is obviously in support of this. But we do have the $18,000 check, correct? Okay, good. All right, well. I believe it's already in your hands. Oh, okay. It's not in my hands. So I'm just asking. It's in our hands? Staff's hands. City Manager, it's in our hands? Yes. Okay. Okay. Okay, I will, questions for staff. Commissioner Walker, start with you this time. No, we, I think we covered this in sufficient detail the last time. So I have no questions. Okay, Commissioner Dugard. No questions. Thank you. Okay, and Vice Mayor. No questions. And Commissioner Sandbergen. No questions, Mayor. And I don't have any either, but I will open it to public input if anyone in the audience wishes to come forward and speak to this issue. I'm seeing no one, so I will close public input and go to Commissioner Comments, starting with maker of the motion, Commissioner Walker. No, I really don't have any comments. You know, this is just, this just makes way too much sense. So thank you for the check. Okay. And I go to the seconder, which was Commissioner Sandbergen. You're right. That building is under construction, looking good, and I have nothing else to add. Okay. And we'll go, Vice Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. Yeah, there's something about just letting go of that revenue that just is in my craw, but not enough to, it's not a hill I want to die on, but I just wanted to make that acknowledgement. So thank you, Mayor. Okay. Commissioner Dugard. Thank you, Mayor. I have no major questions except one. Can we get the balloon guy that waves his arms back on the lot? No, I have no questions. I'm in favor. Okay, and my only comment is there are so many enclaves in this county, and if you look at a map and you say to yourself, so inefficient, so crazy, and unfortunately it always comes down to the revenue, and this is good government. This is doing what makes sense to make it seamless for the user, and I am completely in favor of it. So, okay, so we need to roll call vote. Commissioner Dugard. Aye. Vice Mayor Gow. Aye. Commissioner Sandbergen. Aye. Commissioner Walker. Aye. Mayor Franey. Aye, and that motion passes unanimously. There you go. Bring us money any time, okay? Thank you. Okay, I think we'll take a short break before we start into the water sewer rates. Okay. Okay, we'll restart the meeting, and our next item is 3C, second reading of Ordinance 25-04, Water Sewer Rate Increase Intended to Stabilize the Utility Water Sewer Enterprise Fund. Jen, if you could please read Ordinance 25-04 by title only. Ordinance 25-04, and Ordinance of the City of Dunedin, Florida, amending the Code of Ordinance for the City of Dunedin to increase water and sewer rates, providing for publication, providing for severability, and providing for an effective date. That was Ordinance 25-04, read by title only. Great. Okay, I need, if I could have a motion to adopt Ordinance 25-04. So moved. Second. Okay. Okay. Staff presentation, we have Clay. I don't know. Clay and multiple others. Yeah, we have a new cast today, so. Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Commissioners, Clayton Watkins Utilities and Engineering. With me today, I have Tristan Towson with Raftalis, Alex Gonzalez with Engineering, and Megan Cerisi, I'm sorry, I'm sure I produced that wrong, who is our water production manager. Unfortunately, we have Nan and Terry could not make it tonight. They are both on vacation, so you get me. Okay, we're happy with you. All right. So item 3C is the second reading of Ordinance 25-04, which is the water rate increase intended to stabilize the Utility Water and Wastewater Enterprise Fund. This item has been presented to the Finance Commission on April 16th with their approval. We also did a workshop on May 6th, and then a commission meeting. The first reading was May 22nd. Since the workshop, and during the first reading, the utility staff has worked to try to address a couple of comments regarding conservation and then, you know, this increase in how it affects some of our users who may not have difficulty trying to afford that. With that, utility staff is working with communications and with the sustainability group to come up with some programs and campaigns that'll help, you know, try to let our users come up with ideas for them to not use as much water, whether it's some kind of fun thing or, you know, any stuff that works with different types of plants and irrigation that'll help kind of try to lower our use. We have also been looking into different programs to help assist those that have been having difficulty. And actually, there is also, or if there are people out there that are having today, we, our utility building does have partners that they work with today with different organizations, such as, you know, I think, I forget some of it, there's some of them are certain churches and a few other places that, generally speaking, are always there to help. And I know there was also some questions regarding the tier system and possibly looking at that first tier and should we lower that qualification. A lot of our discussion has been around keeping that one to, that zero to, or 1,000 to 5,000 use. That is the vast majority of our users who just use water inside the house. So whether that's a larger family or not. So a lot of our concern is if we start dipping that number down to hit the larger number for people overusing, that we might sort of dip into some families who are just trying to, you know, do their day-to-day, their day-to-day processes. So that's where we're kind of, we're going to keep the same tier structure that we had before with the zero to five, six to 20, and then over 20 on this rate. We'll still keep the reclaim. The reclaim will come to you actually as a different item because it is, it was established by a, I can't think of the word, resolution. Thank you. Resolution and not ordinance. So we'll be bringing that from you probably in either July or August. So we'll just to establish what we are talking about, what we've been talking about over the last few months with the new rate increase on, on reclaim. And so with that, that's sort of a, just our brief overview. For the most part, we're all just here to answer any questions that you might have between the studies. Okay. Thank you, Clay. Thank you. So questions for staff and Clay. I'm going to start with Vice Mayor this time. Thank you, Mayor. Clay, can you just kind of hit on the, the few main reasons why we need to address this increase? So a few of the main reasons are our internal costs and our regular day-to-day production and everything like, and all our maintenance costs and all that have, and staff time have been increasing to a level where we also, and our debt service have been increasing to a level where we're not able to do our capital projects. In order to do the capital projects, we, that helps lower the cost of maintenance because we have new projects, new mains, new systems, and where we have older stuff that is causing multiple repairs and spending more money in repairing than providing a new column. Okay. Well, there's been some concern that, not that this caught us by surprise, but we're in a period now where we have to play catch up. Yes. And why? What was, what was lost there? What's the reason for that? And I know we've discussed all this during first reading. I just think it's important for the residents to kind of hear it again, how we got here. Yeah, absolutely. I can bring up the previous presentation, but a lot of that is we've had issues such as, you know, we, we had a pay and rent study for, for everybody throughout the city. We've had a 22% roughly increase in construction costs. We've had, sorry, I'm trying to also catch up to where those, the slides are. I apologize. What was that percentage increase in? Roughly 22%. 22%. Yeah. And then actually, as of April, we had a letter from one of our suppliers that told us that anything that has brass in it is going to go up 65%. So we've had a lot of industry costs and labor costs that are just starting to catch up with us at this point in time. I didn't, I didn't hear what you said that, say that again. Which one? The, the brass one? Vendor. Yeah, we actually had a, we had a vendor in April actually was, we got it the day we were presenting to the finance board that they told us that any of the products that have brass in it, which a lot of our fittings and valves have, is going to go up 65%. And are any of the increases in these construction costs have to do with the tariffs yet? There's a, there's a, I mean, that there's the, we don't know the impact. In the letter to us, the 65% was cost because of that. Okay. Okay. Sure. Mayor, and I think that, that one of the, the, you know, typically we do a rate study every five years. And, and over the last couple of rate studies, there's, there's a new model now, if you will, that we really should do it every three years. Because the, you know, the environment is so dynamic right now as far as, as the cost of doing business. And it's every bit of business, not just the business of government, but the business of, of retail and, and, and on and on. We really, it was over a year and a half ago when we started putting these projects out to bid and the bid started coming in high and then higher. And then we'd put it back out and we'd, we'd, you know, value engineer, put it back out and it came higher. And then, you know, that's what happened with an item on your agenda for this evening. When you're dealing with essential infrastructure like this, that, that is a very difficult position to be in. So we had labor supply issues. We had supply, labor issues, supply issues, inflation. And it all really rolled out of, of COVID in the pandemic. We are facing some tariff issues that we know about moving forward. So a year and a half ago, when we looked at this fund and said, you know, and you know, last year that the, the board of finance said, you've got to start spending this capital money you have. And we did, and we did. And we've done a lot of, a lot of good projects. But the point is, you know, we don't have a crystal ball. We didn't have a crystal ball in 2021 to anticipate exactly how much those costs would increase. And I don't think anybody really did. And so as soon as you recognize that, we started the rate study, uh, with Raftelis, uh, to start really analyzing what we're going to need in the next five years in order to realize these capital projects that have been really sitting on our books for a long, long period of time. So thank you. Yeah, we had a, we had a, we were short-staffed a few years ago. And, and Alex has done a very good job of bringing stuff in front of you that have, have been sitting there for years. We've had another project that was a filter at our wastewater treatment plant that we had to reject. We're, we're currently going back and trying to shave the scope down to get closer to the numbers that we can do. And then in addition, electricity has, has gone up 30 percent since that, the time also. So, and we all know Duke got another percentage rate increase that started in like March. So all that stuff is hitting us at once. And have prices settled down, or are we still in an environment of instability? Well, if I may. Yeah. Let me help. He's a city engineer, but we do a lot of purchasing outside of that, that as well. The, we've put some projects out for a bit and they're starting to come in, uh, within what we estimated. Others, not so much. But I think that it has smoothed out a little bit, in my opinion, for some of the, uh, RFPs that we've put out for services. Um, and, and, um, the, the, uh, electrical system upgrade finally came in at a price that, that, that we can pay. So I think that it is smoothing out a little bit. Um, I'm more encouraged now than I was at this same time last year. Thank you. Thank you. That's all that I have. Thank you. All right. Uh, Commissioner Sandberg. I know it's a tough one. So you maybe want to get ready on this 20, 26, 15%, 20, 27, 15, and then three years of three. That's roughly 40%. Could we live with 8% a year for five years, rather than hitting the citizens so hard with 15%? Unfortunately, no. It's, it's, it's front loaded. Um, there are capital projects, again, identified by the Board of Finance that, that we need to, to, uh, get under construction. And so in order to do that, we need to have the funding in place in order to issue the debt and repay the debt in, in, in a timely fashion. So, um, there are all sorts of ways to do it and to smooth it out, but we're not going to be able to do the projects that we need to do. Okay. Yes. And I'll add a little bit to that. Yeah. And a lot of this is, we've also based it on the actual spend that we will, we will be doing it, such as the one later on today. You know, it's a three, three and a half year project. So we're not going to, we have to have the money on the books and the, when we started. Right. But we're not going to, we'll be spending money throughout. That spend is a three year process. Okay. So that's why it, it's a little bit front loaded, but instead of having like one big jump now, we're able to try to feather it out a little bit better. So, so just to elaborate, we cannot enter into a contract unless we have the funding. Okay. Yeah. Okay. The, so looking at that, there's a copy of the, of, of a bill, I think it was a city's bill. If water goes up, that means your sewer goes up, your trash goes up, you're reclaimed. So your, every, every, every entry on that will go up also? Am I right? So on, on, on the, on the sample bill, we added the, the, the wastewater, excuse me, the stormwater increase that will take an effect. And then we added this specific user used reclaim. So we would, this would put in all of the proposed, the water and the wastewater increase that we're proposing. And then the reclaim rate, rate that is also in this is because it's a part of our funding source, but it will come from you in front of you as a, as a resolution instead of this ordinance. It's, it was approved separately from this. Okay. Someone just hypothetically says my water bill, I understand there was a rate increase, but it seems really significant. I mean, can, can that citizen feel secure and confident? Call the city. Someone, I mean, we have a service where our employees can go out there, check for a leak. Okay. And if it's determined there was a leak, I, we do make it good, right? I mean, we credit accordingly. Yeah, we actually spent somewhere in the neighborhood of over $200,000 crediting folks last year. How much? 200,000. 200,000. And with that, our meters are cellular data and send back. So if we, if our billing department sees a high rate for one, they will actually be proactive and call people also. Okay. Okay. I didn't realize that. That's okay. Yeah. And then, and then I'm going to just go ahead and take a pitch for we have, you can sign up for what's eye on water, like your eye, that you can see your water usage down to the 15 in increment. So you could see where if you started to have a problem when that happened. So the Dunedin resident can actually monitor their water every day within. Yes. I have, I have the app on my phone. I think some, most of us do. So you can get lost. I didn't know it existed. You can get lost in it. Yeah. Most of the engineers do. Yeah. So, no, I mean, I, I appreciate it. I'm, and I'm glad that was sent into that microphone because hundreds of people heard it. So that's all I had. Clay. We also, Mayor, for me, we do have a forgiveness program too. If they've had a leak, and it's a one-time forgiveness program, but we will work because a lot of times the bill is, is very large. So we will work with them to forgive. Okay. Commissioner Walker. Thank you, Mayor. So, you know, with the, the obvious question would be, you know, with we're, you know, we're talking about raising the rates. I'm just curious as to, you know, what measures did we take to reduce our expenses? I mean, I think we try to, we try to operate as efficiently as we possibly can. I mean, there's stuff that unseen, we don't know when there's going to be a water main break or any type of failures at our pump stations or lifts this year, our lift stations or anything along the line. And that's one of the reasons why we look at trying to, if, if there's been a line that we're having issues with, that's when it, you know, we look into the capital program to replace that length of line. We've got two or three of those are active today. We're, we, we try to reduce our costs as much as possible. I think if I may, Mayor, I keep on pitching you. That's okay. I, I, a lot of this is labor as well. So we, we started the clear, uh, laddering program, um, in the utilities division. Uh, we were, um, as you know, uh, having a hard time, uh, retaining our employees, uh, in the central services. And so we, we instituted the career, career laddering program, and it has been successful in my mind. Um, but it was, it was expensive. And I think it's, it's something that we absolutely had to invest in. Sorry about that. Microphone jail. Um, go all the way back from your, no. Um, the, the one capital project that comes to mind was the, um, the installation and implementation of the reverse osmosis, um, system, right? Um, was there any part of our study that just because showed what sort of cost savings we had as a result of doing that? And the reason I'm asking the question is, it seems to me during the workshop, there was a figure that was brought up with regards to what that capital project did for us in reducing some of our cost. I don't, did we, I don't know if we looked at how the plant itself, the only thing we have is, is the slide where we talked about the, the, what the city has sort of used as an investment in the, in the, the capital and in the spike that you'll see in there in the 1990s, that's when the, the plants went on, went online. But I don't necessarily know that we looked at that specifically as how that system is different from any other and how it would affect the, the rates. Um, but to add to that, um, to, to go also to our, the rate comparison, I know we had several different cities in here, but really to get better to apples to apples. Olds, the city of Oldsmar, the city of Tarpon Springs are, operate the same way that we do with a reverse osmos plant and a water treatment. And then the city of Clearwater has three treatment, water treatment plants, two of those are RRO plants. So those are really like, if you look at the apples and apples that who have similar system, those are the three, um, municipalities that operate a similar system. Yeah, that, this is what I was thinking about. Yeah. So, you know, I, I think it's apparent here that there were significant efficiencies gained as a result of the implementation of reverse osmosis. Yeah. Okay. And we, and you do get, we get a better water product. And, and we did a little bit of digging and researching and roughly when those timeframes and when these, these rates were adopted, um, for the city of Clearwater, that was for the fiscal year 23 and 27, the same time period for Oldsmar. And then Tarpon Springs are, are from fiscal year 24 to 28. So they could be looking at doing studies soon also. Yeah. And the, I bring this up only just really more for, for clarification because, um, you know, I, in my opinion that capital project was money very well spent. And, uh, so, um, do you know if we're still servicing the debt on, on that? Yes. The, is, um, yes, the estate revolving fund that funded the, uh, water plant RO project is going on for a few more years, about four more years, maybe three. Um, I can definitely find out for you later. Mayor? What, Lance? Lance Tyler, the finance director. Yeah. The, the, the loan for the, the water plant was a SRF loan, a 20 year loan. So it's 20 year loan to pay that back. Okay. All right. So that's on the rebuild, not the original. That's the rebuild. Yeah. Yeah. Excuse me. Yeah. The water, the water plant project, it was the new water plant project. It was an SRF loan for 29, 30 million. And that's a 20 year loan. Yeah. So I have, thank you. Okay. Commissioner to guard questions. Thank you, mayor. Um, I was, um, digging a little bit into this particular question because it is so important to all of our citizens. Um, and I was told that there were three things that were driving our, our cost factors here, inflation, regulation, and system life. And we're at the end of the system life. So we have to replace, we can't run that any further. Inflation is something that, uh, I think the manager did a great job of illustrating a minute ago, but the one on regulation kind of confused me a little bit. So I wanted to understand what that regulation was. So I went back and I looked up Senate bill 64 that was passed. Oh gosh, about two, three, maybe four years ago at the behest of uh, Hillsborough that was about using, uh, reclaimed water, uh, in the circulation for the main water. Um, and it appears to be a driver of high costs inside the higher, the whole state right now. Everyone's beginning to be asked to do, um, more with that particular aspect of the water cycle. Um, I've also been told that there's such pushback on this that there may be some, uh, forgiveness on that particular piece of legislation. Uh, I don't know if this is true or not. I'm just trying to dig into the facts. I'd like somebody to give me some insights on this. Alex, Alex looks like he has an answer. Uh, thank you, Commissioner Dugan. Uh, that was very well put. Uh, standard bill 64 is on the front of everybody's mind right now. You say your name and title just for everybody watching. Alex Gonzalez, uh, uh, project engineer with, with the city. Um, I deal with the utilities, um, everything at the wastewater plant and water plant and everything in between. Uh, Senate bill 64 is a, uh, is a piece of legislation that you have to stop your surface water discharges, uh, from your wastewater plant. So the wastewater plant that we have and we employ does, uh, what we do not directly send out as reclaimed water. Uh, the water leftover does discharge into the, to the sound or the intercoastal. So that must stop in the year 2032. Uh, our wastewater plant managers in, in the audience today. Um, so by 2032, we have to figure out a alternative to surfwater discharge and, uh, and a deep well injection is the, uh, primary method that we're going with. And, uh, that is, comes with a significant cost. And to be finished by 2032, we are stretching it out and it is slated for 28, 29. And then in addition, and with that one too, we are also looking as the item that's not now on the agenda is, is when we do, if we do ever figure out the, the Coke parcel trade, we want to put an additional reclaimed storage tank on there. Okay. You look like you're in answer. We haven't, on Senate bill 64, we hadn't heard that there's significant pushback or that there's any wiggle room there. So we have got to plan. Brian is saying no, he would've heard first probably. Um, so, so we've got the plan for that deep well injection in, in, within the rate study. First thing, reclaim storage, then deep well injection. My question is how much of this additional cost is based on this particular, um, change in regulation? What are we looking at here? Yeah. Um, hi, Tristan Townsend. I'm a consultant at Reptelus. Um, for that specific regulation, there's about, um, 16 million budgeted in the capital program to address the reclaimed storage tank and also the ejection well. So that's about 20% of the CIP. Thank you. That's all I have. Great. Thank you. Um, you had comparison bills up there for a minute. Just want to make sure I understood them. Right. Yeah. You just passed it. That's, yeah, that one. So, um, is this, this is the same house and the summary of new, so most of that looks like reclaimed, like analyze this for me, because most of that increase looks like reclaimed increase. Yeah. So for this user, they're using about three mil, 3,000 gallons of water, potable water inside of their house. So their previous rate would be $17.46. That'll go up to $20.27. Um, their big jump is their use, reclaim goes from $7.50 to $31.55. Um, we would, because this user that we have, we have allotted amounts that each home should be using. Um, so if you're over that amount, that's what that surcharge fee is that you see the $10. Uh, then there is the sewage usage charge that when it goes from $25.05 to $28.80. And then the other increase is the water and sewer unit charge that every meter gets charged, whether it's being used or not. And that number goes from $23.53 to $27.06. And how could they help themselves in this particular case to get that bill down? And I assume most of that would be in the reclaimed area. Yes. Most of that in this specific bill is reclaimed. We have another. So first they not go over their allotted amount, correct? Mm-hmm. And then, well, they could, they could try to control more of the reclaimed, but I would assume, again, if that was, if that $31.50 for reclaimed was, um, potable water, what would that be? Um, actually we had an, the, the item that we added last, um, meeting where we gave you the addendum to the, is this is a comparison bill with someone who uses potable water for irrigation. Right. So it's hugely different. You can see where the jump between the 6,000 gallons and 20,000 gallons is where there's a larger jump in this bill. Okay. You know, I, this is comment and question, and maybe it's more to you, um, city manager. So I had a, um, citizen email me, um, about the rate increase. When we actually pulled the bill in order to respond, we looked at the bill and the person had a relatively nominal impact of every increase except reclaimed. And it's an $85 bill consistently. $18 was a penalty because of twice the amount of usage of reclaimed. So I, I guess, so my question comes back to, I think as we move through this and, and try to educate people on the increase and the way you can potentially control your own destiny, um, are the, it, it seems to me the utility billing clerks are pretty educated on this to help people to see, here's how you bring your bill down. You know, here's what you can do. So our citizens can clearly call in, I think that got brought up, can call in and, and actually say, Hey, is there something I can do to help myself? Right. Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. And, um, and I think they're doing that now. Yeah. Like you said, that they, they really are professionals and they answer all sorts of questions all day long. But Kate brought it up to me and she readily said, this is how they help themselves. And so, you know, having that ability to, to help people help themselves is a part of this, I think. And I think a lot of people don't realize they don't, they don't mean to overwater. They don't mean to, they, they just really don't realize. Put their timer on and just let it, yeah. Right. And let it go. And so, um, we are working, um, you know, Nan is, uh, Clay mentioned is on vacation, but, uh, she has a couple of really good ideas for, uh, programs that we can put in place to help not only those who can't pay their bill, but also to, uh, recommend and encourage ways to conserve. Um, so, uh, and we're going to work with super Ness. Um, and actually everybody's pretty excited about it. You know, we have sustainability in on it. We have, you know, everybody's got all sorts of wonderful ideas. Um, we won the Macintosh award for the rebate program, um, for sustainability. And now we're looking at what about if we, um, we offer, um, uh, funding or grants for, um, zero escaping. What if we, you know, and on and on. So all sorts of things are happening, um, and, uh, we'll bring you the program, um, as soon as we've hatched it in, in its entirety, as well as, as the communications plan. So we really see it as an opportunity to, um, to forward our, our, our, you know, sustainability practices, uh, and incorporate, uh, some conservation in that sustainability as well. Great. And, uh, my other question is, um, I know we have a lot of, you know, we have some bigger users of reclaimed, but if I understood correct, about 30% of our residential homes have reclaimed. That is correct. Okay. So, so my question is why do, why do we run out of reclaimed and, um, other communities are not running out of reclaimed city manager? I'll let you take that because we've talked about it and I, but I want people to understand why it is we have. And so, and the, the reclaimed water system is really, it's, it's part of our, um, our DNA, if you will. And when it was first developed, the, uh, the intent was to, um, get as many folks as possible on board, um, as we could. And so, um, so what we did was that we developed as part of the reclaimed water program, the storage and where we would store it, how much we would store. And we made it really cheap in order for people to, to, to, uh, um, tap into reclaimed water. Their neighborhood had to agree. And then we would extend, um, the, the infrastructure to them. And then we would also allow them to pay it incrementally off in their water bill. So we did an excellent job of marketing the reclaimed water program. It was part, we thought of our, of our, uh, sustainability, you know, early on. Um, and we have all the storage that, that, uh, I wouldn't say that we need, we don't have enough storage in order to, to service our reclaimed water accounts. Uh, and that's why we're looking at the Coca-Cola donation, which is later on in your agenda here. Um, we're going to actually continue that, um, searching for ways to add, uh, additional storage, but it's a very robust reclaimed water program as far as how we, we've been able to extend it to our residents. But unfortunately we don't have enough water when we get into the dry season for them. And I, I, reclaimed water. I bring it up because the neighboring community that I talked to, which large community, by the way, larger than us, 10% of their homeowners actually have reclaimed. We, 30% of our homes have reclaimed. I mean, it's a success story. And because of it, that's that many people that are going to have cheaper way to take care of their lawns, et cetera. I'm not one of them, but no, too late for me and too late for a lot of the neighbors. But again, it's, we have, we have really gotten a lot of residents on it and it's, and it's a success story because it, in the long run, it helps the environment and it helps our residents. So, um, okay. So those were my main questions. Um, I am going to go to open it to public input. So if anyone would like to speak to this issue, please come forward. So name, address in three minutes. Renee Chia, 1229 Royal Oak Drive. Hello. Um, I just wanted to let you know that there is a petition on the affordable housing thing that's gained over 600 signatures. And I have a social media post that's on this water issue that has had about a thousand views in the last two weeks. So people are listening and paying attention. Um, and I heard a lot of excuses tonight as to why you're totally disregarding people that are showing up to talk to you about these issues. Mainly the two points you brought up was that survey that the two highest scores on the survey. The survey was problematic. I took that survey. So is this, is this about water sewer or affordable? It is. Okay, good. It's tied together. Yes. Um, so the, um, uh, survey issue is there were questions on that that are loaded questions. If you have a loaded question, I have academic experience in writing survey questions. If you have a loaded question, if you stopped beating your wife, the data you get from that question becomes then invalid because someone taking that doesn't know exactly how to answer that if that's not a reality for them. Right. So the two main points were people wanted you to make living more affordable. They didn't say you want, they wanted you to build a bunch of affordable housing. So I, my point is you're, you need to look at your policies and how you're addressing things rather than exactly just driving forward with what you're doing. Um, people want higher quality of life. People downtown don't want people parking in front of their homes, the ones that live close to there. They didn't say build another parking lot when the parking lot that we have isn't being completely used. So it is the what you're doing. It's the how you're doing it. Um, and now you want to pass on the, the problem with the infrastructure and fees to the people. You talk about subsidizing things and vouchers from the county. And I've talked to Brian Scott about this issue as well with affordable housing. All of those are a form of tax that's going to continue to drive up tax. You won't be able to drop tax on the people because you need the money to subsidize all of this development and building and the other things that you're doing. They're tied together. So it's a domino effect that's going to come down on this county and on the city. And that's what I am trying to warn you about. It hurts everyone, especially the people that you're trying to help the most, because as things get gentrified and as things get ridiculously expensive, including people's taxes and everything else, that's going to hurt the people at the bottom more than it's going to hurt the people at the top coming in that are driving up the cost of living for everyone. Additionally, if you're going to go ahead with this development anyway, I don't understand why you don't have these developers pay for the capital improvement plans on the infrastructure that they're then going to impact. I heard tonight that they're building a whole different system for the water for that project. That seems ridiculous. They should just fix the existing system with the capital improvement with their money from the development. Thank you, Renee. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else in the audience who wishes to speak to this issue? Okay. Seeing no one, I will close public input. I will go to commission comments, starting with the maker of the motion, Commissioner Zandbergen. I have nothing more to add, Mayor. Okay. And seconder was Commissioner Walker. Thank you, Mayor. So this is the second reading, and basically I'm going to say the same thing that I said during the first reading. You know, there are things we can control and there are things we can't. And we've just, in the last three years, and I appreciate the clarification between every five years and having to do it every three, I think three years is exactly the right answer. But in the last three years, we went through a significant inflationary period. And it, you know, it hurt. And so, and we can't control that. We need to stay competitive in this industry. And as a result of that, we're paying higher labor cost. Supply chain, you know, to me, that's still a very big variable. And then, of course, we're also impacted by the increasing, increases in utilities. So, you know, we, we have some responsibilities here. And first and foremost is to maintain financial solvency of our enterprise fund. This, it's a business. And we also have a responsibility to the public specific to maintaining our infrastructure. And we also have a responsibility to treat our wastewater. We have also have a responsibility to deliver clean, sustainable drinking water. So, at the end of the day, and, you know, the question I asked was, was, okay, well, if we're going to be raising the rates, increasing our revenue, you know, what cost cutting measures have we done? And, you know, I, and I, and I certainly, I certainly don't know the answer to that. But I do point to a capital project that significantly increased the efficiency of how we, how we treat our, our drinking water. And I think that's money well spent. So, at the end of the day, we have to be good stewards of the, that this, the money that we're going to be raising as a result of this rate increase. So, you know, I don't, I don't like raising rates. But in this case, I really don't see that we have a lot of options here. So, thank you. All right. Commissioner Dugard. Mayor. Final comments? Yes. I have several. First of all, it is, it is now understandable to see why our rates are going up so much. Uh, the answer, it was regulations, uh, in prior meetings was a little, uh, it was accurate, but it wasn't precise. Um, and I'm having a problem with that because I'm well aware that this is happening all across the state because these, the same Senate bill is affecting everybody. It's affecting Miami. It's affecting Hillsborough, who, by the way, promoted it. Um, and it's 18, it's $16 million of our increase. If you were to not have that, we'd have a much more palatable increase. I've been told that there is pushback on this and that it might change. The manager's exactly right. You can't, um, set a rate on, uh, a hope. And so I don't have exception with that, but I do want to know, and this is a question, and I know this is not the right time for that, but I have information I didn't have earlier. And that is, if in fact this does not have to go into effect, what happens to our rates? And I don't know. And if it doesn't change, that means our enterprise fund will be overfunded at the expense of our citizens. So I have, I have some concerns here and I'm putting them out there. And by the way, I realize I have enough information just to be dangerous, but it's enough information for me to have questions. Thank you, Mayor. Did you want that answered, uh, Clay? Yeah, we can, we can address that. Those, so I would tell you that that was something that we wouldn't look at in that three-year plan when we come back and look at it, because all of those projects are scheduled at the back end of the, of the, of this rate study. So when we come back in, if they're not there, that'll help with, with looking at those. I mean, I think what we're addressing today with the front end of this is the capital projects that we have on the books right now. And, and then trying to play catch up, not catch up, excuse me, trying to properly fund for those projects that we were talking about that are, that are Senate Bill 64 in, in the next, I think like you said, by both, all those are 28 and 30 projects. I will say, Mayor, if I may, that we would be delighted to be able to come back to you and, and lower the rate if that, those huge capital projects are set aside. Right. Yeah. Uh, sounds good. And trust me, if that bill got pulled back, we'll be asking for it, all of us up here. So, uh, okay. Uh, I think, uh, Vice Mayor, final comments. Thank you, Mayor. You know, this is critical infrastructure. It's what we do. Uh, I'm, I'm, I would hesitate to say, if we don't do this, what's the end result? You know, where does that take us? And I know nobody wants to pay higher rates. We don't want to give higher rates. Uh, but we, but we have to maintain our, our critical infrastructure. It has to be sustainable. Um, I, I know this is painful for everybody. It's painful for me. Uh, but there's a lot of other things that are, are putting the squeeze on everybody. And I talk about it all the time. Uh, our property insurance rates are insane. Crisis level. Uh, inflation has gone on way too long. The price of eggs is, is, is crazy. So we're hurting everywhere we turn. And I think that's kind of what we're hearing now. Uh, but the last thing I want to do is end up on the front page because of discharge and things breaking and things of that nature, I will not apologize for paying our staff what they need to be paid. Um, and we need to be ahead of the game. Um, we don't have gold-plated pipes in, in machinery. I, we, we do what we need to do, uh, to, to get by. Now, if something does happen to this bill, I actually, I don't like the structure of it. And I love, wish there would be some, uh, assistance from the state on this. But I like the idea that the state is asking all the cities to do something so they're not discharging in, into our, our bay. Cause so the quality of our water is important to us. And it was nice that that was recognized. Um, so if it gets pulled back, it'll be an interesting conversation here on the dais. Uh, but I am in favor of this, but it is an insanely reluctant, um, uh, support of this. Uh, it's something we didn't see coming or it came up on us real quick. I mean, COVID wasn't that long ago. And by the time you see something, and then by the time you recognize, Hey, this is a problem. And then you do a rate study in it and it takes a while to get to the point where we are. And so the idea that we didn't have our eye on the ball is a misstatement. I think staff does a great job. And so this is just unfortunate to be where we are. So thank you, mayor, very much. Okay. Well, um, I'll start by saying when people get their bills, they think of it. I think we have to market it this way too, in terms of, you know, I mean, marketing in a negative spin way, but just educating, you know, clean water, flushing your toilet. And what happens after that? Trash recycling, stormwater dranger, all that in the bill. My bill runs when I'm actually in my house, which I'm soon to be hopefully back in my house, uh, runs about $130, $135 for all those things. Um, I don't, I'm not one that uses much potable water for my lawn. And interesting. I just have to share this one story. I was, uh, as we're getting closer to getting back in our house, of course, there's a huge half of my lawn. Okay. That's, um, been brown because it had all the debris on it, all my furniture. And I went today and after all the rain we just got, wow, it looks like it's coming back. And, um, so, uh, I say that because I haven't been at my house for nine months, uh, to live and lawn looks pretty, it hadn't been watered. It looks pretty doggone good. And now the part that was seemed to be dead is coming back and I never used any water. So I just, I say that because I'm not trying to minimize the rest of the bill, but there are definitely pieces of this that we can work towards. Um, and maybe, you know, be careful how much water we actually do use. So, um, so I will repeat a couple of things I said, uh, before our number one job is infrastructure. We've got to take care of our infrastructure. Um, I think we've heard a lot about what's driving these increases, labor regulation, inflation. Um, and, uh, and we've looked at the grants and we've looked at a lot of different things. I think his staff has worked pretty hard to do well. Our citizen advisory board, um, the finance board, um, you know, kind of the board because it's the only board in the charter look at this and recommended it as well. And, and again, I mean, again, you guys have heard this a million times. It's embedded in my brain, late eighties, early nineties crisis, both the water and sewer plan had to be rebuilt at the completely rebuilt, uh, brand new and lots of water pipe issues in the ground. I am never going to be on the commission that puts it off and it gets to a crisis. So I think we, we just need to do this and we need to make sure that we've got our, our utility building people who are very good, helping people to understand how they might be able to also help themselves, um, and try to be as user-friendly as we can. So, um, okay. I, I guess that's it. So we'll be roll call vote. Commissioner Dugard. Pardon me. Just a second. Aye. Vice Mayor Gow. Aye. Commissioner Walker. Aye. Commissioner Sandberg. Aye. Mayor Franey. Aye. And that motion passes unanimously. Okay. All right. Thank you everybody. And we're going to move to 3D. Mayor, if I may, for just one moment. I'm sorry. Go ahead. Um, sorry. I, I, I just want to thank all of you. Um, uh, we're, this is a very important evening, I think, uh, for our utilities and the investment in our infrastructure, um, in ensuring that we're still, we're able to, to deliver the quality service and, um, the levels of service to, to our communities, uh, number one task. And, uh, I want to thank staff as well. It was a very, uh, thorough review and analysis of the rate study of every factor, everything that influences what the rate should be, um, with, with an eye toward the impact on, on our residents and our business owners. Um, so again, thank you for this evening. Um, there was a lot of discussion, a lot of comment. It wasn't just this evening. It was the one-on-one meetings with all of you, um, to give you the background of the rate study. Of course, during sunshine, we can't talk to you, you know, this is the only time you can talk to each other about it. So there are lots and lots of questions, lots of comments, and a lot of time spent on this. So, uh, we're, we're very grateful to all of you. Thank you. And again, yeah, thank you to all of the staff. I know you worked very hard and, and also the consultant. I think you guys did a great job as well. I really do. So thank you. Uh, this isn't easy and, and it will have an impact on our residents, but you know, I think it's something we have to do. So, okay. We'll go to 3D. Agreement to donate real estate between the Coca-Cola company and the city of Dunedin for approximately 1.6 acres of vacant land located at 427 St. Christopher Drive, Dunedin, Florida. And staff is requesting to postpone this item till July 3rd, 2025. And could I hear a motion to postpone? So moved. Second. And so all in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Um, motion passes unanimously. Okay. That is postponed till July 3rd. And hopefully we will absolutely see it then. Yes. Oh, okay. Good. Okay. 3E. Award of bid, uh, 25-2520 for construction of the wastewater treatment plant electrical system upgrades project to TLC Diversified Inc. of Palmetto, Florida, in the total amount of 16 million, 116563. And we'll turn to, uh, Clay. That's a big number, Clay. You better be talking good here. That is a big number. Um, unfortunately that number has come down over the, the last few years with us being able to reduce the scope. So again, good evening, uh, Mayor and Vice Mayor Clayton Watkins, Utilities and Engineering. Um, we're happy to, I don't know if we're happy to bring this, but it's, we're, it's, it's a project that we know that needs to be done. And we're excited, um, that we can actually finally have brought this into a, at least a budgetary number that we can work with. And then I'm going to turn it over to let Alex give the full presentation. Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commission and Staff. I'm Alex Gonzalez, Project Engineer. And with me today, with, uh, Brian Antonian, Wastewater Plant Manager. And I'm here to, today to present the recommendation of Bid 252520 for the construction of wastewater treatment plant electrical system upgrades to TLC diversified, uh, incorporated of Palmetto, Florida in the total amount of $16,116,563. The Dunedin, the, the Dunedin wastewater treatment plant was built in 1990, close to 35 years ago. And most of the electrical equipment is original to that time. Due to the ex-, excellent operation staff and regular preventative maintenance activities, such as annual infrared testing of every circuit in the whole entire plant, the electrical equipment has performed as attended. However, most of the equipment has exceeded its predicted service time. A third review of both the water and wastewater treatment plant were completed in a master plan study, in which it was recommended to immediately pursue the replacement of the aging electrical equipment. The electrical system upgrades will provide resiliency to the plant's electrical supply, modernize the electrical equipment to current standards of safety, which provides arc-flash mitigation, reliability and efficiency to improve the parts and to approve parts availability for maintenance purposes. This project generally consists of replacement of the wastewater treatment plants, all motor control centers, breakers, control panels, disconnects, electrical conduits, junction boxes, transformers, electrical appurtenances, and the construction of a new electrical building with the new 4,000 amp switchgear. In April 2025, the project was competitively advertised as bid 25-2520. The city staff reviewed the two bids that were received with additive alternatives and determined that TOC Diversified Inc. of Palmetto, Florida was the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. The base bid and the additive alternatives, 2.4, which is the facility number 8 motor control center, 2.5, the facility number 16 motor control center, and 2.6, which is the emergency generator buildings MCC and switchboard, were selected in a total amount of $16,16563. As such, the staff hereby recommends the award for the wastewater treatment plant electrical system upgrades to TOC Diversified for the base bid of $14,691,563, plus all the additive alternatives, 2.4, 2.5, and 2.6, for an additional $1,425,000, for the motor control center replacements at facility 8, facility 16, and the generator building, and a total grand amount of $16,160,563, as presented today. Okay. Questions for staff. I will start with Commissioner Walker. Thank you, Mayor. So, you know, the first question that we, well, at least I know I ask when I see a number this large is, is it in the budget? And the good news is, is that I typically get a yes answer in that. Yes, it's been in the budget for a long time. But I do see that we are using SRF funding. Can you just kind of, you know, you know, a high-level overview of how this is actually financed? I wish Les was still downstairs. He could probably give the, the full financial and technical terms, but the SRF is short for State Revolving Fund, which is a program which the state will help you provide financial assistance to a project. But you do have to provide and encumber the money. Then the state will loan you the money. And then at a very, very low interest rate, you could pay that back. It, I believe the interest rate for this one is less than one percent. Les might know, but it, I, we can get you that number later, but it is a very low interest rate, which makes it hard to say no. No, I, I, that's why I asked the question, because I, I think it's important that, you know, the, our, our residents understand how these things work. And, you know, I, the State Revolving Fund, I, you know, is, is an amazing program. I mean, it, it really is. So, those are all the questions I have. Okay. Um, Commissioner Dugard. Thank you, Mayor. I have no questions at this time. Okay. Vice Mayor. Now, did you mention that we had dropped the price on this? That we couldn't? Long story short. So, the project was, uh, most recently bid two years ago. And it was over our allotted SRF, uh, fund. So, we went back and we valued, engineered different ways, particularly using eight, eight different additive alternatives, which are, uh, optional scopes of work added to the bid. So, you have your base bid, which was the fundamentals of the project, which is mostly electricals. And then we had some areas of the plant where we decided that they were optional, they could or could not be done. And we called them additive alternatives. And you get a price point for each of those. And then you get to pick and choose, a la carte, which ones you want to do. So, that helped reduce. So, we did value engineer it down. And then we worked our way up to what our lot of budget was, which is 16 and a half million dollars for the SRF budget. And we came in at low 16 million. Okay. The value engineering, does that ever put the project at risk as far as the quality of the project? Uh, if, if it did, uh, Brian wouldn't, uh, allow me to work for the city anymore. He is, the plant is his baby. Uh, and we made sure that we met with, uh, Brian regularly and, uh, Nan Bennett regularly, and to make sure that the project still succeeded in delivering the fundamental scope of the project without sacrificing anything. Yeah. A lot of times we just look at the overall scope of what we're asking for and try to find out is there little things that are half to halves and then just get those and not get, well, this would be really nice if we could, and we'll just do that later. There were other alternatives in the bid that we did not go with that were for some backup generators throughout different portions of the plant, but we realized that we were not going to be able to, we couldn't afford those. So, we did not take those alternatives also. Okay. All right. And in the reason I ask is I know that it's been in some of the comments and correspondence we got from residents that to keep costs low, especially for the rate increase, that maybe we should be value engineering and just want to show the residents we actually do that. And we do that on a regular basis. And the, and the fact that that first bid isn't, you know, the golden ticket, it's just what we really think will work with that project. And if we can't get the funding for it, or it's not in the budget, what can we afford? And we knock it down from there. So I just wanted to show the residents that 16 million and it's hard to swallow in it. Jeez. Um, but, uh, it's infrastructure. Thank you. Commissioner Sandbergen. I think in the workshop, um, I know it came up. Do we have a final answer if there's any grant money available to help us? Beyond the SRF? No. Okay. And a project like this will need some kind of specific permitting, uh, federal state who, how will we, or who will we need to apply for permits or is it do it ourselves? This, this, uh, the wastewater treatment plant is completely permitted to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. This particular project is replacing in kind all electrical equipment. So you do not need to go through a new permitting process to do this. This is considered replacement in kind and a maintenance project. Okay. Uh, this is an electrical only, right? Is it, that's correct. Okay. I did have a, um, a couple of, uh, one of the slides. And I mean, when this is all done, will it improve the efficiency? Will it just, is it, will be safer, more efficient? What, you know, what are we going to get out of this? We were going to get out, uh, definitely newer electrical equipment is more efficient. Um, I don't think, to be honest with you, I don't think our power bill is going to go down drastically, but it is going to be more efficient. It is going to be more reliable. And we're also going to save money in other ways, um, because the newer equipment, it's easier to get the parts for the equipment instead of, on some instances, we literally have to go to eBay to get replacement parts for electrical equipment. It is very tough to sometimes find this electrical, uh, replacement parts that are 10, 20 years old. I, I can imagine that I was going to go with that. So I, I won't come back to that question. Uh, on the breakdown on this bid, I just had a couple of questions, what these were proposed switch gear building, what over $3 million. Uh, so Brian, what we'd like to talk to you about what a switch gear is. Uh, good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners, Brian Antonio, wastewater treatment plant manager. Yes, the new proposed switch gear building is a building that will house where all the Duke Energy main electric feed comes in and where it's crossed, uh, where it's crossed up with the emergency plant generator. So we're either coming from Duke Energy or the plant. So that'll be a brand new building that we'll be constructing on the south side of our building. Originally, right now, the original is 35 years old and isn't, there's no spare parts. It's in need of replacement. So there is currently a building and this will replace that. Yes. Okay. Uh, and the other one, a couple that just jumped out at me is as simple as you can explain it. New conduits and feeders for a little over $6 million is a big chunk of this whole thing. Correct. You're going to have a lot of feeders, all the electrical that's going to every, um, motor control center and every facility will be dug up and new condoms we put in because they're all leaking right now. And the original electrical in the line is 35 years old. Okay. A lot of, you know, so it's going to be a, it's going to be a, it's going to be better, better reliability. We're going to have a more sustainable class one reliability with this electrical upgrade. If this is approved, when would this project start? Uh, that's, that's the, that's the good question. Uh, I'm hoping next year. Okay. More likely, uh, are you talking about shovels in the ground? Probably right after the new year's, but, but there is a lot of, uh, prep work to be done. We take into consideration storm season. I mean, I know this, there's a lot of, uh, it is going to be a two and a half year long project. So at some point in time, storm season is going to be an issue, but, uh, we feel very comfortable with the contractor that is recommended to award TOC Diversified. They do great work, uh, across treatment plants and facilities all across the state of Florida. And, uh, we feel very comfortable with their work. I've seen that many, many times and good. That's all I had. Thank you. Great. Thank you, commissioner. Um, so Brian, from your point of view, this fits the needs that you feel you need to get this, the plant on the right track. Mayor, correct. Yes. This is the, this is the correct direction that the city needs to go in. Great. Okay. Doing a great job over there too, by the way. Um, I don't really have any other questions. Um, so I guess we'll go to open public input. Uh, anyone in the audience wish to come forward to speak on this issue? Seeing no one, I will close public input and I will ask for a maker of the motion. So moved second. I didn't think it was complicated, but okay. Okay. Did I ask a different way or? Somehow. Okay. I thought we'd already done it. So I thought we did too. Yeah. I am going to read this one because it's a little different than what we've talked about. Award bid 25-2520 for the construction of the wastewater treatment plant electrical system upgrades project to TLC diversified Inc. of Palmetto, Florida for the base bid 14 million six nine one five six three plus additive alternates for electrical upgrades facility number eight of 573 facility number 16 of 472,000 and the emergency backup generator building 380,000 in the total amount of 16 million one one six five six three. And so I will turn to commission comments beginning with the, you know, slow to say maker of the motion. Commissioner Walker. Yeah. Well, you know, I, uh, um, you know, I, we've said this probably at least four or five times during this meeting, but infrastructure, infrastructure, infrastructure. And, uh, you know, um, you know, having spent a significant portion of my career on, on things that float in, in some cases, some that submerge, um, you know, I, I, I know what, what maintenance, I know that, you know, what the, the importance of this. And, uh, the last thing we want to do is, is obviously, um, have a major piece of equipment go down and create a whole ripple effect of, uh, literally ripple effect of just, um, bad things. So anyway, I'm, I'm obviously in favor of it. So. Okay. Uh, Commissioner Sandbergen. I have a tough time getting past that $16 million number, but I know that this is, this is the right thing to do. We don't want to be responsible for, um, uh, breakdown and the catastrophe caused by it. So yeah, 100% support it. Okay. Vice mayor. Oh, thank you. Uh, you know, I know I've said it and I think everybody up here has, has said it, you know, when we ever talk about the state of the city, you know, somehow our toilets are flushing is always part of that conversation. And, uh, certainly that needs to continue, uh, even with, uh, uh, precious price tag of this, but it is part of our infrastructure and it needs to get done. Okay. Commissioner Dugard. I'm in favor of this. This one looks as, uh, well run as it can be. Okay. And I'll just say infrastructure. Number one, 1990, 35 years old, whole electrical system of the wastewater treatment plant. When I flush my toilet, I want stuff to go down. I want it to get treated. I don't want there to be electrical problems. So I think we have to do it. So I'm in favor of that. All in favor. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Uh, motion passes unanimously. Okay. Um, three F award of the, thank you gentlemen. Appreciate it. Award of the fiscal year 25 stormwater pipelining project to vortex services, LLC via a piggyback agreement of the city of Vito contract with vortex services, LLC in an amount not to exceed 636,709.30. That's still a big number, but a lot less than the last one. So staff presentation. Um, I have clay, but obviously it's Sue. So Sue Bartlett. Good evening again. Sue Bartlett, public works director. Um, we're asking for the commission to consider award for this project. This is, this program is an annual program for, um, pipe rehab and repair. And this particular treatment is lining. So rather than dig up everyone's yard and try to work within these confined spaces, um, this method actually goes from manhole to manhole, puts a liner in, puts a liner in, in a process to heat it up and it, it becomes the inside of the pipe. So, um, it saves us very, uh, a lot of money in, in restoration, in construction, as well as, um, not having to dig up citizens yards, pipes between houses and, or even roadways, um, where the cost would be, um, a lot more to do the restoration. Um, the commission, when we brought the stormwater study, rate study to you, we brought that with a capital plan. This is part of that plan so that we can methodically go through, identify and assess the pipes that need this treatment and bring you a proposal each year with, uh, a list of pipes which is attached and the locations, um, that are in critical need of this, um, treatment and so that the stormwater pipes don't fail and fall in and then you have a nice hole. And so, um, we're asking for approval of this, um, piggyback agreement which is, um, a competitively bid agreement that is, um, reviewed by legal and purchasing for, um, the criteria to meet our city of Dundee needs. This one is city of Ovita, um, bid ITB 24-20, contract number 2420, and the amount is not to exceed $636,709.30. I think an engineer wrote that. Um, we, we have, uh, worked collaborative, collaboratively with engineering, um, since I've been here and it's, it's really fantastic to see the progress we're making, um, in both, in all utilities but in stormwater as well and public works to be able to identify these and get them, um, excuse me, Commissioner Degard, you might want to have your camera off. No, say hello. No, no. Say hello. Commissioner Degard. Commissioner Degard. Hello. Commissioner Degard. Do we cut that? Yeah, we might just want to cut it. Yes, cut the feed. Thank you. Thank you. Um, and attached to the proposal, um, here, the, the funding is from the stormwater fund, utility fund. It does have a project number. We track this so we can come back to report to you the progress that we've made on our plan and, um, the proposal is attached as well as I said the lining, uh, details the agreement that has been reviewed and the quote. Okay. Um, I'm going to go to questions and I'll start with, uh, Commissioner Walker. Uh, thank you, Mayor. So for that, uh, and I remember this from last year. So, um, and I actually went to YouTube to check out how this is done and it's pretty cool. Um, I have to think that doing it this way is a lot less expensive than going and digging the pipe out and replacing it. Is that about right? Yes, it is. How many pipes does $636,000 get us? It's nine locations, um, and they vary in length. The length is a little bit different than the actual pipe length because you come up the manhole, but they're all verified. And, um, so that ranges from, um, 125 feet long to I think 514 is the longest run, um, that we have in here. And you can see it's very detailed, the itemized estimate for, um, and this bid, it actually has quite a few options to deliver from. So, uh, that we can choose from, you know, so we have a lot of options for ours. We, we did pick, we actually had a much larger list and we did have to go back and prioritize and put some on next year. And how does that prioritize, the list of priorities, how does that work? So, the, it, it's based on a certain criteria. First of all, the condition of the pipe, but is it, is it, is it a, it going to impact a roadway? How many citizens are around that? And the, where does the water flow to? So it's really about impact first, well, actually condition first, and then who it is going to impact and how many people. And, um, Clay, we have like, we have a list of criteria that we weigh it against. And we have engineering also look to say, what's feasible out here? And when it's really tight conditions and we can get it done. So the, there's the actual criteria that we bounce it up against. Got it. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. That's all I've got. Okay. Um, so I'll go to vice mayor. Thank you, mayor. And it really is cool to watch. And this is kind of standard. This is every year we do this. It is. It is. It, we do have a, a pretty long list, but you can see like some of the locations are locations that we've been talking about with our citizens. We just want to make sure we're, um, having a good strong sound, um, storm water system. And when we're, we have a weak connection like this, it, it might be a small pipe, but we don't want it to impact our citizens when it really counts either. It carries water every day, but when we start having these storms and all, it starts to erode the, um, outside. So you can see a lot of these locations are right in the storm affected areas. And it's just the whole concept of this is so, just so cool to me. And what it can do as far as extending the useful life of the pipe is just amazing. Uh, but that's more comments than questions. So I'm, I'm good. Thank you. Oh, commissioner. I just want you to know. That's the best guy to police. I love that. Self-policing is good. Um, uh, commissioner Sandbergen. I think it may have been answered, but how are these locations determined? Did you answer that already? We, well, we, they, again, it's a big long list. As we identify a pipe that it has, either is failing or will fail, um, then we bounce it up against different criteria and we prioritize. So how many people it affects? Is it under a roadway? What's the, um, ability to get in there and service it? Can we, can we extend the life? It's really kind of renewing the life in this case. It's actually kind of like replacing the pipe. Okay. And when we participate in a piggyback, do we get charged for that? Or is that, is it? No, there's, they do not charge anything extra. It's just utilizing the existing contract language and pricing that was competitively bid and getting, um, then they honor it. So there's not extra charges. Good. That's all I had. Thank you, mayor. So my only question is like, I don't know, maybe it's older than I think it is, but Dunlow's circle just seems like it's not that old. It's about condition. It's not necessarily age. So, um, also the material type, um, does have an impact as to how quickly, um, some of these materials decay. Um, you see most of these materials in here is reinforced concrete pipe, but there's one CMP, which is corrugated metal. That's because last year, if you look at the list, it was mostly corrugated metal and we're moved on now to reinforce concrete, but it's really, does the pipe, even if it's leaking at the joints, say the condition is relatively secure, but if three leaking at all those points and we're getting water and filtration, we're losing soil. If there's a road on top of that, we could lose the road. So it's about the integrity of the whole run. Gotcha. Okay. Um, all right. I will, uh, open it up for public input. Anybody in the audience wish to come forward to speak on this? Seeing no one, I'll close public input and I will ask for a motion. So moved. A second. That's more like it. Okay. Commissioner Walker and Commissioner Sandbergen. Commission comments, starting with commissioner Walker. Thank you, mayor. Uh, you know, it's, uh, one of the sites that have been selected is actually a neighbor. And when this thing manifested itself, the problem with the pipe, um, there was fairly significant concern that it was the beginning of a sinkhole. And, uh, so the, the, you know, it's great that we're able to efficiently fix this problem. It's really great. It wasn't a sinkhole. Um, but anyway, uh, yeah, let's just get this passed and move on. Thank you. Great. Uh, vice mayor. Uh, no comments. Okay. Commissioner Sandberg. I'm sorry. Yeah. It should have been commissioner Sandberg. I'm sorry, but yeah, I'm familiar with these addresses and, you know, it's again, the continuation of doing the right thing for everybody. And I appreciate that. Okay. And I don't really have any comments. I think this is a important thing to do and it's an efficient way to do it. Um, so, um, all in favor of the motion. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Uh, motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Thank you, Sue. Okay. Uh, next one. Award the construction of fiscal year 25 lift station rehabilitations to TLC Diversified Inc. Palmetto, Florida, in the amount of $888,309.08. And staff is actually requesting to table this item to a date certain uncertain. Sorry. I misread that. Okay. It's getting late. Um, date uncertain. So, okay. So motion to table this item. So moved. Second. Okay. Okay. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. And that motion passed unanimously. That was your best presentation yet, Clay. There you go. Make way. Not too bad. It's nine o'clock. Okay. Um, the proposed agenda for July 3rd, 2025 commission meeting. Um, and anything to be added or pulled? Yes. I have a couple of things actually, um, Mayor, if you don't mind. Um, we want to remove, um, 25-05, the ordinance that is 3B. So that will be taken off of that proposed agenda. And then we will obviously add the Coca-Cola item that you just removed from, um, this, uh, agenda. Okay. So, you're adding the Coke one and you're removing 3B? Correct. Okay. Um, that seemed like an easy one. So I guess we're just not ready yet, huh? Okay. Um. I'm excited about 3C. Huh? The ACFER and the financial statement. Yeah. There we go. That, that, that's always exciting. It's gonna be stunningly interesting. Uh, okay. Uh, anything else on it? Are we good? Okay. So I just need a, um, motion to approve the July 3rd agenda with changes. Okay. Okay. Okay. So all in favor of the motion? Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Okay. Okay. Commission discussion and comments. Any items, uh, anybody wants to discuss? I'll start with the Vice Mayor. Any items or? Yeah. Yeah. This is our normal comment period. Oh, just things going on? Anything going on? Anything going on? Yeah. Uh, I guess, right, it might be, we talked a little bit about it on Tuesday, but just, uh, and one more opportunity to talk about, uh, uh, Klein Elliott and the meeting I had with, um, um, Lady Margaret Elliott, uh, was, uh, she was just as charming and just as charming as you think her title deserves her to be. It was, uh, I remind me a lot of talking with, uh, Colin. When you talk to Colin, there's this properness about him. Uh, and there was with her as well, but it was, uh, a lovely meeting, uh, a lot of support and, uh, we did get a yes on our ability. And so, uh, they're going to have two, uh, state commissioners of Klein Elliott come before the mission at a date to be determined to give us the proper. Yes. But there was a verbal given. So. Good. That's awesome. Mm-hmm. Cool. Good. Um, anything else? You good? Commissioner Sanberry? I did. I had just a couple of things. Um, I've been thinking about that survey since we went over all that. And, uh, did we kind of determine we're going to try to get in a couple of years? I can't remember how that went. Was it, is it the employee survey? Yes. So, uh, I think that, that the cadence for a survey like that is every other year. Every other year? Mm-hmm. Because I, the next time I'd really like to see us try to improve the percentage of response. Mm-hmm. And even if it meant implementing us to come out and help, you know, some kind of a video, something, I really, I've given a lot of thought. And, you know, 45% participation, you know, they were saying, oh, that's, that's, that's average, that's good. But I think we'd have got a lot better sense if we had tried to increase that. And I'm not just saying you, but I'm talking all of us, you know, work a little harder together to see if we can, you know, we can, we get more participation. Secondly, every week I take my golf cart and I drive, I drive around the marina, and there was action today. There was action every day. Yes. And, uh, and there's, it's moving along. And that was very encouraging to see. Those guys were down there re-driving those pilings, I guess they were doing. And I, I stopped and told them who I was and how much we as a commission appreciate seeing him. And, uh, we've been, you know, waiting a long time to see him. So it was March Marine and, uh, Docs B and Docs C are, are now ready. Uh, the south wall and the west wall is ready. The peninsula should be ready. Um, we're doing it ourselves in house. So that should be, uh, in the next couple of weeks. I don't want to over promise on that. Um, so, uh, yeah, the stadium lights are up and running two out of the three and, um, yeah, we're marching along. Yeah. It was great to see those guys down there. Thank you. That's all I had, Mayor. I'm sure the slip runners are excited just to see any progress. Yeah. It's exciting. You're good at the marina board too. Um, commissioner Walker. Um, you know, so related to the marina and I, I, you know, I got the sense that the Marine advisory committee, that that was a good meeting. Um, you know, I think, and, uh, I also want to say that, you know, in terms of the dates that were published in, uh, February, um, you know, we're, uh, we're, we're, we're tracking to most of them. The only one would be the pedestals. And I, I think just, you know, as a matter of just kind of establishing a cadence, um, you know, I would like to, you know, maybe nothing that we would have to, to vote on, but maybe, you know, talk about the progress and, you know, because I honestly, you know, in terms of, you know, the, the questions that I get from the constituents and the residents, um, is, you know, I think there's, there's people forget the dates that were published in February. So anyway, I, I think there's a, there's, there's a good story here. And, uh, I just want to make sure we take advantage of that. So, um, one of the things that we talked about, as you know, at the end of the, um, of the, uh, MAC meeting, and I actually sent the email to staff the next day to, to remind them is by early next week to send out, um, you know, a complete description of the reopening, how it's going to work, um, who, what, where, why, when is it? And, and also our technical memo from Tetra Tech, um, our consultant about where we are in the bidding process and, and looking at that timeline, uh, as well. And, and we are hitting our milestones, um, with the exception of the, of the, uh, pedestals. So, uh, we'll have something out to you. We have been communicating with the Marina, uh, slip renters on regular basis. We'll make sure that we copy all of you, uh, to every bit of correspondence that goes out to them. Because right now we're working on the boat owner, um, um, agreements. And Jennifer had a big part of that as well. So, so, you know, the progress has been, um, you know, there's been a tremendous amount of paperwork progress, as you know, um, and, and physical progress, fire suppression. I think we pressurized yesterday, right? Under pressure except for eight right now for fire suppression. So, um, yeah. Yeah. And, and that was in line with what, what we were hoping. So we will definitely send you that correspondence. That's all you got. Mayor, may I add one? Sure, go ahead. John, I went online today and I wanted to find, um, the, the, the new agreement. Did you just say that that's the one I found was like from 2022? Is the new one not available yet? So the new one is available. We actually just finished it. All of the comments today. Okay. Uh, between, uh, Jennifer, Lori and myself. Um, and we are sending it out to the, uh, the slip renters or the, the boat owners. Uh, so we made it available to the Marine Advisory Committee, um, a month ago, actually. Okay. And we solicited their comments, which is something that they felt hadn't really happened before. And we got really good comments from them. Uh, we incorporated some of them, some we didn't. Most we did. Yeah. Yeah. So, um, uh, and then we can, we can send to all of you what that, what that agreement is. Okay. Thank you, Mayor. That's all I had. I'm sorry. Awesome. Uh, just a couple of things. I was going to say, um, you know, the whole, the, the issue of the Weybridge bridge crossover between Curlew Trails and, and, um, and actually Fairway. Um, obviously the big reason we never looked to see what we could really do there was because of the easement. But now if they're allowing for the easement, which I think is great, um, I'd at least like to understand what that looks like because we've kind of been all over the place with it. One, for a long time, it was like, you know, once it, once it's in disrepair, we just need to tear it out, um, to, um, actually, no, we can't tear it out because it's got pipes on it, uh, to basically, it's actually the walkway. That's the only bad part in disrepair. The other is like solid as a rock. And, um, I know we're going to have challenging budget times, obviously, but it would be good to get, at least understand what that figure looks like, um, for the potential of getting it in, in the plan somewhere, wherever it can be. So if we could do that, that'd be great. Um, and then, uh, two things I just kind of wanted, I think we have to make sure we're, you know, big time putting it out there that July 4th is the city fireworks night since it's normally, I know we've, we've done it a couple of times on July 4th, but we normally do it on the third. So I just think we need to like, you know, plaster it out there and, uh, and make sure we're getting the word out on that. Um, you know, there'll, there'll be a game the night before and that'll have fireworks too. So somebody could go both nights nights. And then the other thing, and I, I say this, um, to the commission, but, and, and, uh, Commissioner Sandberg and kind of with you, since your delays on that next year is our 50th anniversary year when partnership with the Toronto Blue Jays. Um, so I just think we really need to, you know, we need to make that a big deal. So I just, you know, so just think about that and you in particular, and maybe even, you know, I didn't realize it was a 50th year, but yes, I will definitely make note of that. Yes. And I think, you know, and maybe that's something that we both can bring up when we're in Toronto. So maybe as a team, both with commitment from the city and commitment from them, we really want to celebrate that partnership. So, um, that's all I got. And good job with Lady Margaret. All right. Very good. Okay. And, uh, I think, uh, let's see, we got city clerk update. Um, I don't have anything, mayor. Thank you. Okay. And city manager's update. Uh, just on the golf course. Sure. Yeah. So I, um, did have the opportunity to play, um, earlier this week. It broke my heart to have to do that for, for the city, but, um, I did it. It's a struggle. It was, it was a real struggle, but, but we got out there. Um, so, uh, uh, the, you know, the condition of the golf course, there are definitely some areas that are pretty crunchy, um, brown and crunchy. We did, um, work with, um, the down to earth, which is the, um, the maintenance, uh, company and of course our, our general manager of operations, uh, Blair Klein to provide them with as much, um, uh, water as we could. Meanwhile, ensuring that we were, um, meeting all of our other obligations as well. And we did, we, we increased it by a bit. Um, and the direction to, to, to Blair Klein was to use it in the most efficient way. And he felt that he had enough at that point to keep those fairways alive. Um, and it is greening up. It really is. It's greening up by quite a bit. Um, I went over, I, I did play with Blair, which was nice. So we could talk a little bit about the tee boxes and the fairways and, and that type of a thing. And so he could actually, um, help my team win. But anyway, so, um, but he, uh, he's happy with the progress and I think, you know, we're going to get there because we've got some, we had some good rain. The good news is I think it was switched back to reclaim water today, which is very good. He can use as much reclaim, um, as, as he needs. So, uh, we're on the right course at this point. It, um, you know, I know that there was somewhat of a letter writing campaign from the members they're obviously very concerned about the course. I don't blame them. They, they, they, they carried it through when it was closed. They paid their membership dues and they wanted to be maintained in the best way possible. But we do have many different competing, uh, priorities throughout the city as far as water, wastewater. And, and when we get, excuse me, reclaim water. And when we get to the really dry season, which is at the same time, every single year, obviously last year at this time, we, you may recall, we were trying to water it in, you know, so which was even more stressful than this was this time. But, um, you know, I, I appreciate what they, what, what they were, their concern. And I, I believe that we addressed it to the best of our ability. And so, uh, but the good news is it's greening up and, um, and, um, um, we've got several different recognitions, very high recognitions from golf Inc. and golf now, I believe. Um, the course is getting very recognized at this point. So, um, uh, we should have good play over the summer. We're hoping all depends on the weather, obviously, and then getting into the, uh, season again, I can't, you know, it's going to be exciting. Thank you. Yeah. Great recognitions. Is that what you, did you say that? Yeah. That, that, that, that, the awards, that was best renovation. Oh my God, that was awesome. I couldn't believe it. And then from, I think it was the, um, Tampa Bay times top pick or whatever, best golf club too, which is awesome. It really is. Because there are some pretty good golf clubs in Pinellas County. You know, what makes it feel good is that like, um, and I really have to give Kevin a lot of credit for that, for continuing to push us to do it right. Yes, absolutely. The vision. And, um, having the vision because at the time we had so many demands. It was like, come on, we can't do this, you know, but we did it right. And it's, it's, I think it's going to pay off. Um, okay. What else we got? Um, city attorney, I'm sorry, I'm ready to hot rock and roll and I'm forgetting about the city attorney. City attorney update. No update. So you can rock and roll. Okay. Sounds good. Okay. So nothing else good for the order. We are adjourning this meeting.