Finance Committee - May 05, 2026

All right. All righty. We are going to go ahead and get started. Welcome to the Finance Committee meeting. It is May 5th at 1 o'clock. We're going to go ahead and start with introductions to the left. Brittany Norris for the administration. Colleen Hampsey, Council Research. Mary Stifopoulos, Office of General Counsel. Phillip Peterson, Councilor's Office. Kim Taylor, Council Auditor. Good afternoon. Rory Diamond, District 13 of Beaches. Ron Salem, Group 2 at large. Nick Howland, at large, Group 3. Joe Carlucci, District 5. Rawe Aries, District 11. Will Lennon, District 3. Jacoby Pittman, District 10. Rory Peluso, District 7, just visiting. Rahman Johnson, District 14, visiting. Good afternoon, Michael Boylan, District 6, just here to visit. All right. Council Member Arias wanted to go ahead and make a quick announcement before we get started, go through the agenda, and so on. So go ahead, Council Member Arias. Thank you, Chair and colleagues. Yesterday, we had a public notice meeting to talk about House Bill 1134, as well as the funding of the Asian American, Black Chamber, and Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. It was a great meeting. Had a lot of participation from Council Members to add value to this meeting. We did have a question for the administration, and Ms. Norris was there to answer it. And I'm just going to ask you now in a more public setting with more individuals here. Is the administration going to do good on their part to honor our commitment as a city council to fund these chambers effective immediately? And that's the question I have for you right now. Thank you, Council Member. Through the chair, to the committee, we have finalized the term sheets, the contract with the entities. That'll be going to the NBRC, and they'll be looking to move it very quickly through council. So I'll actually probably be coming to you, Council Member Arias, to talk about that. All right. Well, thank you so much. That's all I want to hear. And thank you, Eric, for joining us yesterday, because honestly, it was because of all the input that we all had to move the city forward. And just FYI, the bill comes in place January 1st, 2027, House Bill 1134. However, moving forward, we could still fund these entities. So if you feel you want to help out our community, don't feel like you can't because of 1134. You can. We just got to make sure that these entities are following proper guidelines set in place by the state. And so I'm going to be working with Senator Yarbrough to get that checklist of guidelines to make sure that we give all these entities to make sure that they meet the criteria. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. All right. No problem. So committee members, we have two presentations today. But before we go to the presentations and before we go to public comment, we're just going to go through the agenda since we're moving like one or two things around. Item number one is deferred. Two is deferred. Three is deferred. Four is deferred. Five is deferred. I don't know if that's marked on y'all's agendas. It probably should be or is, but five is deferred. Six is up for action. Seven is up for action. Eight is action item. Number nine is there's an amendment and then we will move that bill. Ten has rules amendment and then we will move. Eleven has two amendments that we will be reviewing and then 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22 are all on second reading and we will get those officially read into the record after we take up all of our action items. Item number 23 on page 13. We are going to be taking that up first. That's going to be our first action item. There's three potential amendments on that. And then, yeah, everything else is also on second reading. So with that, we will go ahead. Oh, what? Oh, go ahead. Council Member Salem, you're recognized. Thank you, Chair. Through the chair to Ms. Norris on the chamber stuff, it was in the budget. Why does it have to come back to the council? Through the chair to the committee. Council Member Salem, what you guys authorized was the funding in the budget, but there was no term sheet or contract attached to that. So that's what's taken this amount of time is going back. I understand, but why does that still have to come back to the council? We've been advised that it needs council approval, but Mary can elaborate. Through the chair to Council Member Salem. I wasn't part of the discussion. I imagine it was had with somebody in John Sawyer's group, but because it's, originally it was discussed as a membership or dues, but if they're utilizing the funds to provide a service that's not in the line of just the city paying a membership fee, then that's a direct appropriation contract. And that's why it has to come back for council approval. That's consistent with what we've done in the past. We haven't contracted with some of these chambers before. So we do have a contract that gets approved with, for example, with the Jacksonville Chamber of Commerce. And so it's in line with how we've treated that, that that does come back to council with a contract for approval, the funding being handled in the budget. So it's consistent with how we've handled that one. Thank you for clarifying that. All right. We have no one, no one else in the queue. So now we'll go ahead and do our first presentation from Mr. Freeman, Dustin Freeman. There we go. Dustin Freeman, procurement. Good day, Mr. Chair, committee members. This report in front of you is your second quarterly single source report for FY26. The report reflects all single sources over 50,000 and the using agency's justification is attached behind each single source. In Q2, there are a total of 21 single source purchase orders totaling a little over 2.9 million and two purchase order agreements totaling a little over 255,000. There are five purchase order single sources that I would consider unique. Item one, or excuse me, item 12, sports and entertainment, 155,000. Item 13, natural and marine resources, a little over 62,000. Item 16, risk management, a little over 425,000. Item 18, JSO jails, 99,000. Item 21, public buildings, a little over 52,000. Pending questions, this will conclude my report. Happy to answer any questions you got in regards to the process of single sourcing, but we'll defer to the using agencies to speak to the actual requirement itself. Okay, great. And committee members, just a reminder for everyone, obviously our council auditors get a copy of this and they kind of vet it and then we hear the presentation, so for whatever that's worth. But we have Council Vice President Hallin, you're recognized. I just want to reiterate, I say this almost every time, but Dustin, thanks for producing this report. It gives us something to deep dive into if we need to. You highlighted five that you would say are unique and you've given us the backup on it and for any of my fellow committee members or anyone else on Council, you can always reach out to Dustin with questions on any of those five. And this way we do our job of oversight and ensuring every single dollar of taxpayer money is spent the most wise. Thank you. All right. We have no other speakers in the queue. We'll go on now to our next presentation. Ms. Taylor. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Through the chair to the committee, we issued the purchasing card or your P-card audit report number 904. Overall, P-cards are used generally for travel training, dues and memberships. There are different instances where it is used, for example, for food for animals out of animal care and protective services. You have your treasury division, accounting division, and procurement division that oversee these cards. During the time frame we looked at, which was the calendar year 24, there were 111 active P-cards across 33 departments. And of those, two of those are department level. So, for example, for JFRD for emergencies and such. So, overall, our conclusion was that P-card transactions were appropriate, sufficiently documented, properly approved, accurately recorded in accordance with laws and policies. However, we did find significant issues with timeliness and then several internal control weaknesses and findings. And I'll just briefly go through these. Overall, some of the items we had, a lack of written policies and procedures for important P-card tasks within the accounting division, which they are going to address. There was a lack of reconciliation between P-card expenses to the bank reimbursements. So, just like where we would want bank reconciliations, bank statement reconciliations to occur, we want those reconciliations to occur because that's going to detect fraudulent transactions, things that aren't recorded in the financial system. So, it's very important to reconcile those two things. There were 22 additional merchant category codes that should have been blocked. So, they have a list out of all the merchants to try to prevent on the front end as a control. Certain types of purchases, we did identify those that also need to be added and blocked. Out of the 200, there were 202 transactions totaling over $94,000 that were not fully recorded in the financial system. We looked at those again when we were completing our testing and there were still over 45 transactions totaling $10,000 that lacked the adequate support needed to really legitimize what the purchase was for. We also found that P-cards for former employees were not canceled timely in a couple of situations and we also found that timeliness, as I mentioned, was one of the bigger issues. 75 out of 206 transactions were not submitted within the seven working day requirement and there are also requirements for the manager to approve it and then finally for the accounting division to approve it with their expense auditors. All of those areas had timeliness issues. checking those and then there were some transactions tested, a couple of them related to travel of just not having the proper authorization in place and then a couple immaterial but paying for sales tax, again, don't want that to occur and then some credit card fees being paid but the city is revising their policy to allow transactions to occur even if they do have credit card fees as they will be going into a new bank provider that will provide rebates that they feel will offset those costs. And then we did find a couple of transactions that appear to be split based on the limit per transaction, the dollar limit, within two departments, within Mosquito Control and Mayor's Office, that to kind of, to circumvent the controls that are in place for those transaction limits because it was same day, same card holder, same items. So we want to make sure. So we want to make sure and they do have an analytical software now to hopefully pick up on and flag things like that as well as inappropriate purchases that don't fall within the guidelines. So those kind of, that gives you an overview of our report and I'm happy to answer any questions. All right. Everyone in the queue, no questions. So we will save the five minutes. Good job. Oh, House Member Diamond. Recognize. Just, I said this at Doge, but one thing that's possible is simply to have a policy or a program in place that does not allow P cards, but instead has City of Jacksonville cards issued by a private issuer like these or MasterCard or whatever, but that then the person is on the hook for and they get reimbursed within the window. So that's the 100% fix. That's what they do in the Army for all Army travel and all Army stuff. I think the other branches do the same thing. And it definitely makes you very aware of the money you're spending. And that's one way to ironclad fix this problem. All right. Thank you for that. And now we'll go to the public comments. So we have first Reverend Dr. R. Leroy Gundy. Yes, sir. Good. My name is Reverend Dr. R. Leroy Gundy. I do have my address on file with you. I come before you to address the issue concerning Winn-Dixie for a moment. Winn-Dixie has always been a store of goodwill and good faith in the community. I've been working with them way back before interview, even thought about running for office on City Council. But what is happening on 48th and Main, they are closing that store. And with $65 million, $12 million going to corporate office, I'm asking you to relook that because you're creating, we're creating another food desert. That could be fixed now as we're moving through that. Because what happened if we didn't see the plan? Maybe they plan on putting a store there. Maybe they plan on remodeling or rebuilding it. We don't know. But we're trying to get some things squared away because they just put two new four-story senior buildings directly in front of the store where it exists right now. A few blocks down the road, there's another senior living facility. And the demographics, which I've sent to all of you up here on the desk, up on the desk here, that shows the demographics that it can support it, has always been supporting it. And we need your help. We have pharmacy deserts. We have food deserts. And we don't need to go back and recreate another desert. Even Mr. Salem's family a long time ago on Kings Road always had fresh fruit, always had fresh vegetables. Because I used to go there and buy it when I was coming up as a child. So I'm just saying to you, you can help us out. You can help the community out. We have some people here who came to support this. But I'm asking you to relook this $65 million, $12 million just to do the corporate office. And you close the store and you don't have a plan that says exactly what you're going to do with that area. And if they're going to put another store there, remodel it or rebuild it, that's great. But I think that's something that we ask you to take a look at. Okay? That's my comment concerning Winn-Dixie and the amount of money that we're doing. So basically, I'm asking you to ensure that Winn-Dixie, first of all, if they're going to close the store, they put another one there. Or they remodel the store that they have. And because it's always been, and they make money. The median income is anywhere from $35,000 to $50,000. There's a school directly across the street from the facility. A thriving community is always crowded. A thriving mall, their anchor store. And we just need you to take another look at that. We certainly would appreciate that. Thank you very much. All right. Thank you. Next, we have Reverend Aaron Flagg. Good evening. My name is Reverend Aaron Flagg. My address is on file. I'm representing the Baptist Ministries Conference of Duval and adjacent counties. Also asking that we could try and not create another food desert. We got a lot of them. And instead of creating deserts, let's create oases. Let's do something that's positive. Winn-Dixie has been doing a lot of good things for Jacksonville since Dr. Gundy and I were in high school. They were giving scholarships, Winn-Dixie was. And that's a great thing. We've always been a staple in this community. And we're just asking that we don't create another desert. I look at a lot of westerns. And when you've got to cross a desert, that's a long way to go. And when you've got to leave Fort 8th and Main and go to Gateway to get groceries and you don't have a car, it's difficult. I know there's also developing in this city pharmacy deserts. They're closing Walgreens in our communities. And when one Walgreens closed, all of the business goes to another Walgreens. And they've got two times the load with the same amount of people still working there. Something's wrong with that. You've got Family Dollars and Dollar Generals closing in our communities. And it's making a hardship for those who don't have transportation to get to these things. So what we're actually doing here in Jacksonville from an overall point of view is creating problems instead of solving problems. So let's get back to solving them for everybody, the rich and the poor. Thank you. God bless you. I love you. Hope I don't have to come back. Amen. All right. Thank you, sir. Next, we have Carnell Oliver. My name is Carnell Oliver. Address is on file. There's a difference between me and my elders. I'm more nuts and bolts. And I'm all about actually trying to fix the problem. And this is how I'm going to look at it. There's a failing business model. And just like any other investment this city has put in place, are we strategically focused on the interests of a particular neighborhood? Are we in line in the pockets of where contributions from donations reach back in the hands of our local politicians? Now, I want to highlight something Miss Taylor said. There's a lot of financial gray areas in the city budget. And I've said this before. We need to put the whole entire city budget on the blockchain so I can see clearly dollar for dollar where all that money is going and how we get in in this community. And what they don't know that the farm bill is going to get ready to get finalized in Congress right now. I know your lobbyists up there in D.C. keep you up to date what's going on. Their problems are going to be solved. But instead of giving Winn-Dixie $65 million, if they shut down that grocery store, allow black American entrepreneurs get access to cap to serve the interests of their own people in their own community. That's a real return on investment. Or if they shut that property down, they donate it to the city. And we allow vendors to come in, open up a meat shop of farmers. If you're going to put money in the hands of big corporations, put it back in the hands of little people. And the thing about it is the problem with the issue right now that we have is that most communities, especially black American communities are not well represented. And the issue with that is that most council seats are so big. There's a Supreme Court ruling that came down that I support. No race based district. Then that means we need to reduce the council district seats, bring the power back to the people. These are common sense talking points for a conservative, especially if they embody Frederick Douglass and Abraham Lincoln or James Madison. I believe in the power of the people, especially my own. These investments should empower the small work hard value based black America. If you put sixty five million dollars out there, break that money down and support the interests of black American communities that have been neglected. And I yield my time. OK, next we have Leo Dawson. My name is Leo Dawson. My address is on file. Everybody knows about Preacher Dawson. But just listen to my brother just a minute ago, I was ready to come down and talk about 48th and Main and the store and making sure that store stay open for the community. But I like the idea about reinvesting in the black community and entrepreneurs. I like that idea better. We see a lot of money flying out to different organizations, different tax entries. We see money flying in other areas instead of in our community. So we would like to see that on another level instead of nonprofits getting money. We get invested in entrepreneurs within our communities that have business ideas on the black farmer that was mentioned earlier. That would be something else that we'd be investing in. I'm talking about something that's going to be practical for our communities. So, again, where I'm really going at I have some mess I was going to talk about. But where I'm going on about it, I need more investment in our communities instead of people rich in their pockets. And I noticed one other thing about the money that's going into pockets of councilmen and all that kind of stuff on that level. I noticed that as well with these investors in our communities. So I needed to go into entrepreneurs that's within our community that are going to make a difference. So that's why I'm going to go over that. I had some mess I was going to talk about, but I'm going to go on that part. Let's put that money into entrepreneurs within our communities, farmers, black community-owned entrepreneurs in general. That's why I'm going to go. I need my time. All right. Thank you, sir. Next we have James Matchett. James Matchett address on file. The evidence has already been said about the Winn-Dixie closing or potential closing. When we, the community, are advocating and telling you about infrastructure, these are the kind of things that we're talking about. When on the books and in the city there's a zale to raise the density in our communities without bringing the resources. They just, they are under construction right now, a senior facility within walking distance of that Winn-Dixie. Typically, that was brilliant. To close it down and to reduce those folks to having to go across town to do their shopping. Use the same conscience as we build these workplace communities in our areas. Let's have that same thing for Brentwood. Let's have that work play community. Let's have that walkable community. Moving this Winn-Dixie is kind of production to that you say. If you say the investment is to build these communities, why can't we structure these communities all over Jacksonville? Why can't we make Brentwood a walk, play community? Why can't we bring the pharmacies back? Why can't, and we're investing money. I heard a phrase, passive language, unintentional consequences. There's a lot of passive language that goes into these things. Affordable housing, things that makes a strong argument. How can you argue against somebody wanting to make affordable housing? Well, it's affordable to the city, but not the communities that they're building. It makes good sense to partner with Winn-Dixie, who has been a good community partner. And I just think this project has fell short because it showed up as a number on the balance sheet. I don't think nobody took a real deep dive and saw what the impact of removing that out of the community might be. And I guess what we're here to ask is to say, hey, compelling to take a second look. And if they got a plan, tell the community about the plan, and that reduces the anxiety. All we're asking for is that the dollars that we have to pay in taxes do as much work for us as they do for everybody else in Jacksonville. Have a great day. Thank you, sir. Next we have Lydia Bell. Good evening, Lydia Bell. Address is on file. Our side is a no man's, woman's, no man, woman, no man's, no woman's island. It's as if we don't even exist. Everything that come over in our area, we have no planning hearing. You have a drive-through liquor store, 300-body morgue, forensic lab, 100 homeless units, not one planning hearing. Now we have Winn-Dixie leaving out. We didn't know anything about that either. Also, this senior citizen building, we had to run around like we do, like Chicken Little. The sky's falling. What's going on? No notices, no zoning notices of any kind to let us know that that was going to be a double senior citizen building. But I question if you're building this building for seniors and you have a store right there that would be convenient for the senior citizens, it's disappearing. Why is that? And then you have so many other things. It's like our tax dollars go everywhere else besides our neighborhood. So maybe it's time for the Brentwood residents to start boycotting these businesses so our tax dollars is not going to everybody else. I think someone said that there's been no structure in Brentwood since maybe Gateway Shopping Center was built. We have no representation in District 10 because no one tell us anything. We have to find out when we see it happening. And it is not right. When I'm coming to city council, I've been coming to city council for three years. And when I'm coming to city council, I look at all of downtown, almost every corner is being built. Communities are being enriched because the purpose is for people to enjoy their communities. But we don't get that on the north side. All we get is the worst of the worst, what any other community wouldn't want, nor would they be imposed upon like that. So we can use that building to come back and be a store and make things comfortable because Brentwood is basically a senior community. And if we could have things in our community that's going to benefit the residents because we are taxpayers, but our money is not going to us. And we got to change that. We got to change that. We need our council people to know what's going on. We need our council people to let us know what's going on. But it is time for a change. It's time for the old to get out and the new to come in. We need people that's going to do something for the citizens of Brentwood. Thank you. Okay. Thank you so much. And we have no other public comment cards. So committee members, we're going to go through the first five items, which are all marked as deferred. And then we're going to go back to page 13 to take up that bill. So item number one, 2024-627 is deferred. Item number two, 2024-966 is deferred. Item number three, 2025-361 is deferred. Item number four, 2025-775 is deferred. Item number five, 2026-227 is deferred. So now we will go ahead to item number 23, 2026-326. All right, we have a motion and a second on the first amendment. Can someone please explain the first amendment? Through the chair of the committee, the first amendment is all technical, correcting the number of grocery store locations to 13 within the bill to match the RDA, correcting various scrivener's errors, placing a revised agreement on file to do a number of things. First, correcting the headquarters to a level one economically distressed area, correcting the job creation schedule to reflect a total of 90 new jobs created in years four and five, clarifying the city is not obligated to pay the headquarter retention grant if the required affidavits are not provided, correcting the final year of the REV grant payment to fiscal year 46-47, clarifying the timing of the headquarter retention grant disbursements after they have reported on the required number of jobs to be created, correcting the oversight department to OED, revising Exhibit A to correct various things related to the headquarter parcels, RRE numbers, zip codes, et cetera, revising Exhibit F to allow for the base year values to be put into the agreement once they're finalized by the property appraiser, and then correcting scrivener's errors in the agreement itself. All right. Thank you so much for that explanation. Is everyone in the queue on the amendment? Okay, if you're not on the bill, or if you're not on the amendment, then please get out of the queue because we've got three amendments that are coming, and we're not going to be speaking to the bill until then. All right. Council Member Arias, you're on the amendment? Okay. You're recognized. All right. Thank you, Chair. Mr. Peterson, I'm looking at 3B, 90 new jobs in year four and five. Is that correct? In or by year four and five? Are they not going to start hiring now, or are they going to wait until year four for them to start hiring 90 new positions? Through the Chair to Council Member Arias. The table that was in the RDA was mislabeled. And so it was supposed to be 90 jobs by year five. So in years four and five, there would be 90 new jobs. Council Member Lainon has a separate amendment that's going to restructure that table. Perfect. I'll wait on that one. All right. Anyone else? Ms. Pittman on the amendment? Yes, ma'am. You're recognized. Chair, I just was curious. I know the number of grocery stores location changed to 13. I just was wondering, are they all over the city or in certain neighborhoods? Can anyone address that for me, please? Yes, ma'am. I think Mr. Peterson. Through the Chair to Council Member Pittman, I have the addresses. I can read out the streets to you. They're on Bay Meadows Road, Sago Avenue, University Boulevard, Norwood Avenue, Roosevelt Boulevard, Normandy Boulevard, Argyle Forest Boulevard, West University Boulevard, another one on Normandy Boulevard, Beach Boulevard, another on University Boulevard, Moncrief Road, and one on San Jose Boulevard. So I would say across the city. I was curious how many was in my district. Thank you. All right. We have no other speakers in the queue. All in favor of the amendment signified by saying aye. Any opposed? The first amendment carries. Now we're looking for a motion on the auditor's recommended amendment. Motion and second on the auditor's recommended amendment. Mr. Peterson, can you please explain the amendment? Through the Chair to the committee. So this agreement is different from the majority of agreements we see in that the Rev Grant can start being paid out prior to their full implementation of their capital investment. In most agreements, the Rev Grant doesn't kick in until they have done their full investment. And so this one, the Rev Grant can begin paying out in 2028, and at which point they're required to create a certain number of jobs. But if they don't invest the full 65 million as is proposed, there's a proportionate reduction in the Rev Grant as it relates to also with the number of jobs being created. So the Rev Grant will pay out 100% in years one, two, three, four, five, as long as they've met their jobs requirement. But when the full Rev Grant kicks in, it could be a proportionate reduction of which the city, there's no recoupment for the first five years payout of the Rev Grant. So our recommended amendment would be to recoup any proportionate reduction in the first five years of the payout to the entity to then match up how all other Rev Grants would be treated. Okay, understood. And is someone from, do we have an agreement from Winn-Dixie on that? Can someone from Winn-Dixie come down and put it on the record, please? Okay. Let the record reflect. They gave a thumbs up, and they're good with it. So, no speakers in the queue. All in favor of the auditor's recommended amendment. Signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? The amendment carries. So now we have Mr. Lanin's amendment. You're recognized. Thank you, Chair. I have an amendment that's been passed out before everyone. Before I go through it all, I guess I'll ask for a second first for discussion. Okay, so Chair, with the motion of the second amendment, it does a number of things here. First, if you know section 3.1, that was the job creation schedule. Here on the sheet that Mr. Peterson passed out, this is how I want it to look like. Previously, in year one, it had 10 jobs created. I'm asking for 15, and the simple math on that is they would get the first retention grant that year. And I kind of want the guarantee that, hey, they're supposed to average $100,000 or better average jobs. I want to know that they've at least created $1.5 million of payroll for the city before we give them $1.3 million. The second part this does is the previous display had years basically one, two, three, and then five. It lumped together the last two years into I believe the number was 90. This breaks it out to where there's a goal for each year. So instead of getting paid out year three, and Council Member Arias, I believe you were asking a similar question of the concern I had. This is giving them distinct yearly goals to get to on that ramp up to 200. Otherwise, we could have conceivably given them the grant on year three, year four got around. They didn't have to meet anything because the next step up wasn't until year five. So this is just ensuring we see meaningful progress each year of the grants that we're giving out on the retention side. The second part here, this is a little bit more complicated. This is revising Section 10.2, Part D. The way it worked, this was if they did not retain the 200 jobs. There essentially was no downside risk on their part unless they got to below 100 jobs. In other words, by the time all the retention grants were paid out on year seven, they could have reduced their new jobs from 200 to 100 and have no financial penalty. What this does, it does now have a penalty starting if you go down to 175 jobs, and then it kind of scales it all the way back to where if you drop below 100 jobs as well. So the reason it says 700 is 675 because that's adding the 500 retained jobs to the newly created jobs by this. So again, you all know how I feel about cash grants, but at least this does two things. It's ensuring they're creating more payroll dollars for Jacksonville before we give the first cash payment down the road. And then on the back end, if they don't keep those retained jobs that the grants were based on, I'm sorry, if they don't keep the new jobs that the grants were tied to, there's a financial penalty on the back end as well. All right. We have one speaker in the queue, Council Vice President Howland. Fantastic protection of taxpayers, Councilman Landon. Did Winn-Dixie and OED agree with the amendment? All right. I see thumbs up. Terrific. Before we vote on, I do have a question for Mr. Peterson. I know that the headquarters cash grant and the REV tax rebate grant are, or tax discount grant, are kind of a cocktail. But does the headquarters completion grant, the way I'm looking at it, that is supposed to be a reward for job retention and maintenance of the headquarters here? And the REV grant is supposed to be a reward for the capital investment of 65 million plus jobs? Is that how it is, or is it just an altogether one cocktail of incentives? Through the chair to Council Vice President Howland, that's correct. So the REV grant is tied to the investment and the jobs. The headquarter retention is tied to the jobs. I don't think there is a... It's tied to retain jobs. It is also tied to capital investment, the headquarter retention. They have to invest at least 25 million to be able to keep the headquarter retention. If under 25, they would owe back the city everything that we paid them. Okay. And technically, with Mr. Landon's new schedule there of how that headquarters completion grant, cash grant, would pay out, it also ties to the new jobs. So basically, they both tie to everything we want to do. Keep Winn-Dixie's headquarters, retain the jobs. Yeah. Do 65 million of CapEx and create 200 new jobs. Okay. Thank you. All right. Councilmember Salem, you're recognized. Thank you, Chair. I think Councilmember Landon's much more persuasive than I am. I had recommended some changes here. I had gone to 40, 40, 40, 40, 40 in terms of the jobs and got quite a bit of pushback. You obviously were more persuasive than I was. But I agree with you. The year four blank gave me real heartburn. I think this clearly is better for the city. And if they're agreeing to it, that makes it even better for my vote. Thank you so much. All right. So we have no one else in the queue. No further discussion. All in favor of the Landon Amendment signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? The amendment carries. Let's roll that up and do a finance amendment. All right. We're moving the bill as one or three times amended rolled up in the finance. Now we have everybody coming back in the queue for a bite of the apple. All right. Councilmember Diamond, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I cannot vote no with more glee today than any vote I've had in I can't remember how long. This is the extortion of the people of Jacksonville. Okay. If any company, and this isn't picking on Winn-Dixie, Publix got $50 million to build a Publix in downtown Jacksonville the other day. I mean, this is such a waste of taxpayer money. We are literally picking and choosing winners. What about Safeway? What about Kroger? What about every other person who's got a headquarters in downtown Jacksonville? When do they get to come up here and stick their nose in the trough and take the hard-working taxpayers' money? No one who is a conservative, no one who is a Republican, no one who says they're a steward of the taxpayer dollars can vote for this and honestly keep their face straight when they say it. This is extortion. If you want to go, go. Don't beg for the money of the people of Jacksonville and say this to us if they're going to go. I find this so outrageous. This is what people get so frustrated about. This is why people don't like politicians. This is corruption. Shame on the mayor for proposing it. Shame on Winn-Dixie for asking for it. And shame on us if it passes. All right. Councilmember Aries, recognized. I have to go after him? All right. Okay. Thank you, Chair. So, I do have a question for Winn-Dixie. Obviously, we heard some of the constituents and their concerns regarding 40th and Main. If anybody, Chair, if anybody could come from Winn-Dixie or who represents Winn-Dixie, I want to know more about what's happening not only in that area but also across our city. If we potentially pass this and you guys get your $65 million investment from the city of Jacksonville, how do we safeguard our neighborhoods to make sure that, A, we don't have any food deserts, and, B, that we maintain a high level of excellence within our stores? Because what I heard today was a little bit disheartening to hear that potentially you guys may be closing that store. So, what's going to happen? So, we could give them an answer, number one. And, number two, what are we doing to mitigate any of these issues happening across our city of closing stores? And just name and address and title. Yeah. Zach Bingham, 5050 Edgewood Court, 32254. To the committee chair, through the committee chair, to the council member, Arias. We take the concerns and questions we've received today in great seriousness. These are not concerns that we take lightly. We have been part of this community for nearly 100 years and understand that those in the community depend upon us. In terms of our assurances for the concessions or the incentives that are being offered to us as part of this proposed legislation, we feel that there are very reasonable and certainly incentives and stipulations that will hold us to account and that we willingly accept those. We have a very long tradition of partnering with the community and we intend to continue with that commitment. Every year, we provide approximately $750,000 of charitable value to Duval County on average. And that comes through a variety of ways. Through charitable donations, through food donations, and certainly through volunteerism. Last year alone, we donated over 70 tons of food to Feeding Northeast Florida. We understand and absolutely empathize with those who are food insecure in our communities. We go to great lengths to ameliorate those concerns. Sorry, sir. I do appreciate what you're educating with us on, but my question was specifically 48th and Main. We have people right now in the audience that want to know what's happening with that store. That store is cited for closure. Okay. So, we are investing into you guys. And in return, we're getting stores being closed. That's the problem that's happening right now. So, I appreciate your $700,000 plus in investments for charitable contributions to our city. But at the end of the day, the facts are the facts. We're giving you guys money. You guys are closing a store. That's the problem I'm having. Now, we're going to have a food desert in that part of town. I don't know if that's Mr. Peluso's or Ms. Pittman's district. That's a serious issue because she continues to have food deserts in her district. So, I don't know what's going to happen today. But what you just told me is not good, number one. Number two, if you do indeed do 70 tons of Feeding Northeast Florida plus $700,000 in contributions, you need to look at your map, look at your stores that you're closing, and focus those dollars to those areas. And not on the south side. I don't need your money on the south side. We need those monies in those parts of town where you guys are closing stores. So, I'll let the committee continue having the conversations. But I want you to know that we take, I know I, for a fact, and everybody here takes this very seriously, the fact that we don't want any food deserts. We're constantly fighting that. And these are examples of what we're fighting against. So, I'll leave it at that, and I'll let the rest of the committee continue their conversations. Thank you. All right. Council Vice President Howland, you're recognized. Thank you. And, gentlemen, if you don't mind staying up here, and Mr. Anderson may want to come up, but I'm not sure. Your choice, sir. You don't need to. I have a whole bunch of questions. The first one is, I know you recently had a change of control. I want to say it was about a year ago that a bunch of investors bought Winn-Dixie from Aldi. Is that correct? That's correct. Okay. Was the corporate relocation factored into that buy case when you did that? No, it was not. It was only recognized that, approximately, at some point within the next year, we would need to find a long-term, sustainable location for our corporate headquarters. Did you consider other locations, aside from Jacksonville, then, for the corporate headquarters? Yes, we did. Did any of those offer you incentives? Yes, they did. Okay. Did you find lease rates or utility rates or labor rates cheaper in some of those other locations? We've been in this community for a long time, and we've found that the business conditions here are very favorable, which has ultimately led us to the decision that we would like to remain within Jacksonville and Duval County. Fantastic. So, that's glad to hear, because my next question is, have you found the cost of doing business is more expensive here in Jacksonville than other locations? It sounds like you think the conditions in the business climate is more favorable here in Jacksonville. We prefer to stay, very clearly, we prefer to stay in Jacksonville, in Duval County, in Jacksonville. Okay. I had already asked a question of Mr. Peterson that I was going to ask of you, but I do have one question on, you are closing one store in your grand plan. How many employees do you have per store, and what is the average wage? I'm sorry, sir. I'd have to get back to you in terms of the average wage. The number of average employees would be distinct for the store, but let's say somewhere between 65 and 85 on average. Per store? Okay. Yes, sir. All right. You know, Winn-Dixie is a part of the fabric of Jacksonville. They've been here forever. That's why I'm inclined to support it, but I'm also inclined to support this for several other reasons. I don't like that they're closing the store that folks just were upset about on the north side, but I very much do like the fact that they're going to be adding 200 more jobs at its location in Lackawanna, right there at the Cassette and Edgewood area. I used to work, run a business about a five-minute walk from there. That area is desperately in need of more employment, and these are average $100,000 wage jobs. I also am in favor of the $65 million increase in CapEx, which is what was behind my question to Mr. Peterson of what part of this REV grant slash completion grant cocktail supports the 200 new jobs or the $65 million in investment. Because of that, I'm never inclined to incentivize companies who are already here to not move away from here. And I certainly was very much against Everbank trying to ask for $10 million cash grant to move from one part of here to another part of here. But this not only retains the corporate headquarters of Winn-Dixie and Jacksonville, it also brings 200 more high-paying jobs in an area of the city that is needed most and $65 million more of capital investment, which we can tax commercial property and TPP. So, thank you to OED and to the Chamber for doing what you can to not only retain them, but more importantly, to help support and incentivize Winn-Dixie's further growth in Jacksonville. Thanks. All right. We have two. We have Ms. Pittman, Mr. Salem, Mr. Peluso, and Mr. Johnson. So, first, we will go to Councilwoman Pittman. You're recognized. To the chair. And I just want to say, I know I just met you all today, but very disappointed that the store is closing. I had several other residents call me. I actually shopped at that store as well, and I found out about you all closing with one of the customers. I was in there shopping one day, and I also asked the manager that day, why are you all closing? He couldn't give me an answer. And I am very disappointed because, again, I have probably one of the largest districts. I have four districts into one. And between the pharmacist closing and now another store, Winn-Dixie, who have been a partner in District 7 or District 8, that used to be, for several years. But for someone to not contact me and me finding out when I was actually in the store, I was a little bit taken back. The residents are concerned because there is not another place other than Gateway. And the Main Street area is an older district. You have Panama Park. You have East Side. And a lot of those residents depend on, one, bus transportation to get there. And then, of course, we have new apartment complexes that are coming in that area. So, you know, I must share my frustration. I'm not really sure how did you access what store to close. And I also want to know, is that the only store that you're going to close within the next year or the next two years since we're getting upgrades in the other areas? I know that there was some upgrades that was made to Winn-Dixie a few years ago, as well as the one that you mentioned in Norwood. That's probably, and I shop there too. So I try to shop in all of the areas that are in proximity so I can just see, you know, how the business work, what products and produce that are in the area. But I got to tell you, that's going to be a really, really big loss in that area. So I guess my question to you is, how did you assess on closing that store? And what were some of the reasonings why? Through the chair to Council Member Pittman, there are a variety of considerations that are made in terms of closing a store, leaving a store open, investing in a store. Those are market specific. It's a highly competitive business in which we participate. There are a lot of macro economic factors outside of our concern. Another factor that certainly weighs into our decisions is our ability to strategically and reasonably negotiate lease rates with the landlords. And all of those things factor into current decisions and certainly have factored in decisions made in the past and will continue to do so in the future. One more question in terms of, was the store making money or losing money? The store had a reasonably strong performance, ma'am. Okay. So if it had a strong performance, and I'm almost over, why would we close the store? There are a lot of people, not only that, who live in that community, work in that community. Those are jobs. So if the store was making money, I'm very disappointed to know now that you're closing the store. And that is unacceptable. I don't know if you're closing any other stores, but I'd like for you to reconsider if the store is making money or maybe, you know, you mentioned also about the lease agreement for that area to talk to the person that owns it. But what you're telling me now, I'm not happy with what you're saying to me right now, because we're losing a store. I completely understand the concern, Council Member Pittman, and we are absolutely willing to hold conversation, not only with you, but with community leaders, to see how we may help alleviate the situation moving forward. Well, I'll be happy, because I am a community leader that represents that area. So I'll be happy, I think, really more important in meeting with the people in the community. Because I think what matters to the people should also matter to you and myself. And if you all have had a long history in that community, if you think about it, when you close it, we don't have any other store from Main Street, where MLK is, all the way down to one of my other council members' district. So we really need to look at it, you're talking about thousands of people who live in that area, and now won't have access to a grocery store. Thank you. Thank you. Likewise, thank you. All right, we have Council Member Salem, and then we'll go to Council Member Peluso, Council Member Johnson, Council Member Arias for the second time. Council Member Salem, you're recognized. Thank you, Chair. Tough vote, really is. Not crazy about paying money to keep someone here, as we went through with every bank that I think my colleague mentioned earlier. But emotionally, this is a tough one. As I think I've told some of my colleagues, my very first job was at Winn-Dixie in 1972. At the corner of I-10 and Cassett, the store is no longer there, next to the Krispy Kreme. And spent many summers, home from college, going from store to store, cutting meat, bagging produce, running the cash register. So I have great memories of my time with Winn-Dixie. And y'all have a long, long history in this city. And it would really bother me to see Winn-Dixie leave when I had a chance to hopefully stop that. So I have great compassion for Council Member Pittman and that community. I hope you're serious about that. And we'll have meetings with Herd and the community about trying to save that. I grew up in the grocery business. My dad had a small grocery store on Kings Road. So it's in my blood, frankly. And I hope we can save that store. But I'll be supporting it today. But I hope you're serious about trying to help out Council Member Pittman. Thank you. Thank you. All right. We're going to go to Council Member Peluso and then Council Member Johnson. And then we're going to go to Council Member Landon for the first time. And then Council Member Arias. And then Council Member Pittman, just to give everyone a little heads up. Thank you, Chair. And I know there's probably going to be a lot of conversation on this, and there should be. I'm grateful to you guys for having your headquarters here in Jacksonville and for you being here today. But I think, and I hate to even admit it, Council Member Diamond makes a pretty damn good point sometimes. And he actually made a pretty good point today. I, too, am not enthused to be supportive. I mean, Winn-Dixie is incredibly important in the Jacksonville community. The Davis family is here in Jacksonville. They still are in many ways and do a lot of good work, and we love them for it. But I've spent a lot of time in Lakeland and Winter Haven, and I can't envision Publix ever doing this to Lakeland. And it makes me a little upset that the grocer that's supposed to be the hometown hero of Jacksonville would come to us with such a large incentive deal. I'm not going to lie to you. I don't know how I'm going to vote when this does come before Council. But hearing about this closure is concerning to me for a lot of reasons, especially now that I hear that it's a relatively productive grocery store. I spoke to Pastor Gundy and spoke to a number of individuals that have been in the crowd and spoke today. It's a little jarring to think that we would even be discussing the closure of grocery stores while giving an incentive of this size. I would almost rather, this is going to sound terrible to finance me, I would even rather give more if it meant we got to keep all the stores open and expanded some of these stores. All right. So as I look at the deal, it says that, and perhaps Mr. Randolph can actually answer this one. So what is the definition of the economically distressed areas? Sorry. And just for, because I'm seeing the queue continue to light up, let's go ahead and start the clock, if we can, down there. You can put it on four minutes and, yeah. Through the, Ed Randolph OED, through the chair to Councilman Peluso. I don't have the definition in front of me, but roughly I think it's within that census tract, it is done by census tract. Each, the average household income is less than 60%. I'm sorry, do we define it by the HUD, or did the HUD targeted areas? Yeah, again, I don't have that definition in front of me, sorry, Councilman. I have them in front of me. I just want to make sure that we assign them to the same thing. All right, so effectively that is a lot of 3209, some parts of Brentwood and kind of north and northwest. So if a store does get closed, there needs to be another store opening of a similar size within 18 months. Through the chair to Councilman Peluso, yes. Yes, we stress that, and I think, broadly speaking, for this deal, going back to some of the comments earlier, the headquarters element, which is 500 existing employees, adding 200 at an average wage of $100,000 in an economically distressed area. That is key, and that is sacrosanct, and then making sure that any stores that are existing and are going to stay open, especially in an economically distressed area, that if they were to close in an economically distressed area within 18 months, the company has agreed to reopen another store within that, within an economically distressed area to address the food desert. To our friends at Winn-Dixie, does that include this store right now in Brentwood? Through the chair, no, it does not because that was already planned to be closed. So going into this agreement, that was already slated to be closed, but there are a few other stores on the list that fall in that bucket. To committee members who have the ability to make an amendment, I might encourage an amendment similar to that. I also, and I brought this up before, I'd be also fine deferring this bill for another cycle to kind of discuss this a little bit more. I feel like it did kind of, we've got a lot of questions coming up. There's a lot of food deserts in our city, a lot, and they're only getting worse. And my personal concern is, I've got no problem doing an incentive. I've got no problem keeping a great business here in Jacksonville. But if it's going to be a grocer and one of such prestige, well, let's make sure we all win a lot on this one and make sure that if we could open up even more grocery stores, and they don't even need to be of such large square footage. Because that's something else that I even noticed in here where, well, do they need to be the similar size? Because we all know people do need to make money, I understand that. Like if it's a, do they all need to be 100,000 square feet? I don't know, probably a lot smaller. I know Deb's store is a much smaller footprint in the Eastside community and it's doing quite well. Point being is to the body. I'd be fine with seeing a deferral. I'd be fine seeing some more amendments. I just want to make sure that Winn-Dixie agrees with them. Is there a major timetable on this? Is that why one of the reasons for the speed? I'm sorry. Is there a timetable that you guys need to know if this gets voted on? Like does it need to be this month? Can it be in five months? Yeah, what's motivating our sense of urgency on this, Councilman Lusso, is that we would like to give certainty to the hundreds of people that count on our corporate headquarters to reside at their primary? And that is a point to be made, right? There are a number of Jacksonville residents right now who might not know if they're going to be staying here in Jacksonville long term. So I understand that. I fully recognize that. But I do think if we could chew on this a little bit longer as a body and take a look at these stores and give ourselves a much better idea of what does the next five years look like of Winn-Dixie here in Jacksonville, I would have no problem with that. I would think that'd be great and wise. I'd love to have a notice meeting sometime this week if the bill does come out of finance to discuss this a little bit more, hopefully with some members of the community. If you guys would be willing to do that, I'm hoping Councilwoman Pittman would join me and maybe others. But, you know, we spoke on the phone. You've been very gracious to me. It's just a matter of, you know, we do need to make sure if we're spending taxpayer dollars on this kind of stuff that it really is a win-win-win for everybody. And I just, I don't know if I'm 100% there yet. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Johnson, you're recognized. Thank you so much through the chair, and I appreciate everything that everyone said. I must say, I remember Mr. Davis and Ms. Flo, and when I was a student at Edward Waters University, the Davises invited us as students into their home and Winn-Dixie was an integral part of the Jacksonville community. So I could not imagine them, if they were here today, being okay with the fact that we were closing down stores in the community because they were so community-centric and focused. And that's not something I heard. That's something I saw with the work that Mr. Davis and Ms. Flo did. Let me ask you a couple questions. First, and I know Councilman Paloussa started down an area talking about a smaller footprint. Is there a possibility in this space to have maybe a, I noticed that there's some smaller footprint stores that you have. Would that be a possibility for that space, at least so the people that are in that immediate community have the option and opportunity to get those fresh fruits and vegetables that was spoken about earlier? We remain open to conversation and ultimately the store footprint should be a reflection of what the particular members of that community require. So as I've stated previously, we remain open to conversation. So that is a possibility. And maybe that's something that as if the bill is deferred, we could work to maybe having a smaller footprint and working with that community. I know, of course, I do have a couple of indexes in my district. I'm on the complete opposite side of town, but I know the people in my district want to make sure that everybody's taken care of. So that's why it's important. Second question. If these incentives do not come through from the council, does that mean the immediate movement of would you then take Jacksonville off the list and start looking at other cities? Or would you do something else? What happens if you don't get these funds? As I've stated several times here today, it is our very clear aspiration and our hope that we remain in Duval County and in the city of Jacksonville. If this incentive package does not pass, then yes, we would be forced to reconsider our options. Thank you. That's all I have for now, Mr. Chair. All right. We will go to Councilmember Landon for the first time. Thank you, Chair. And I'll be real quick with this. First off, on the deferral, I don't want to defer. And the reason for that is I had questions. And I think Friday, Saturday and Sunday, they answered my questions. So we've had time to research this, ask the needed questions. I mean, speaking to the entire deal, I don't like how this leads with the word retention, because most of my questions were on these 200 new jobs. And that's $20 million in annualized present value that's coming into our city. Forget the 500 they're keeping, it's 200 new. And then with the amendment that was passed, I didn't like some of the back end protections on what would happen after those jobs were here. What if they went away? Now we've got financial protection on the back end as well. But I will say, probably the most surprising thing I've heard today is that we're potentially closing a strong performing store in my colleague's district. So I think we need to figure this out. Why would we be closing a strong performing store? Because if I understand correctly, we're basically creating a food desert if that store closes. So again, very far away from the part of town I represent, but I would like to see more conversation on that. Because again, when Ms. Pittman asked that question, I was not expecting to say it was a strong performing store. So I just don't understand why we would not just keep open a strong performing store in a part of town that really needs it. Thank you. Councilmember Arias, you're recognized. Okay. All right, Chair. Thank you. Gentlemen, I want to support this. I really do want to support this. But as it states right now, if we have to take a vote today, I'll be voting it down. Tell you right now. And I could count right now, and I could probably count three more voting it down. You're taking a gamble right now. You have a business decision to make. Number one, I'm going to request a deferral, Chair. Yes, Mr. Holland, we've had time to have conversations, but new news has actually broken right now, right? We're looking at a potential food desert, an additional one. I don't take that lightly. You guys have a decision to make, all right? Very simple. This is a negotiating table. You guys want $65 million from us? We want you guys to keep a store open. Outweigh what makes more sense for you guys. I'm not going to support this if you guys are closing the store. I like Mr. Johnson's idea about possibly creating a micro store. The problem that I have is that, and I'm not saying that I don't trust your word or your judgment, but for us to say, yeah, we'll vote it up now, and you'll have the conversation with Ms. Pittman two weeks, a month later, that's it. The vote is done. We can't do anything else about it. Right now, we have the leverage. I never want to be without the leverage. So until you have the conversation with Ms. Pittman, I will request respectfully to defer this so I can feel better about the decision. You guys are talking about retention, creating 200 new jobs, but within five years, the way I see it, you're starting out at a net negative 85 lost jobs right now. You're closing a store that you said had 65 to 85 employees. You're starting with losing 85 jobs. You're not creating 200 new jobs. You're actually creating 115 new jobs by the time you count in the 85 jobs that you're losing. So let's be real about the numbers. Once again, I want to support you all, but I also want to support my colleague and I want to support our community because at the end of the day, these are taxpayer dollars. And if we're losing jobs, we're not doing it right by our taxpayers. So I request to defer this, Chair. Thank you. All right. I will give my answer on the deferral after we hear from Ms. Pittman. I'd like to know if I could make an amendment to develop a bill to prevent store closure because as of today, I can't support you. But I feel like if we can do an amendment and we can have the conversation, I'll feel a whole lot better about it. So, you know. I think that's kind of going to be the main crux for a few people. I don't know if that's an amendment we can workshop here on the floor, but I would support that amendment, but I don't know if we can do that. Okay. Right here. Ms. DeFopolis, can you speak to that? Just kind of put me in the right place, Ms. Mary. Sure. Through the Chair to Councilmember Pittman and the committee. So I think if you're talking about adding an amendment that would address not having that store close as part of this incentive package, that's something I would think that needs to be taken up and to see if they can reach an agreement and produce a modified economic development agreement for consideration. So that would be a reason for a deferral potentially to allow them to do that over the next couple of weeks and bring it back. And then you would move an amendment to incorporate those changes if they're able to reach an agreement. If they can't reach an agreement, then the Council has to decide whether they approve it without that additional change or not. So Chair, what I would say, if that's the case, I don't want to, you know, workshop this in the meeting, but to defer it because as of today, I can't support this. And I really appreciate you all because you know how much I fight for the community and not knowing and knowing the inequities already in District 10. So I'd like to defer this if possible. Okay. All right. So this is what we're going to do because I think that's new information for me at least. I'm very supportive of, you know, all the structure or anything. I was very taken back when I heard what we all heard, which was it's a well-performing store, and it's going to make such a negative impact in a community that already has a lot of negative impacts. That is unacceptable. We are not going to approve anything here with y'all standing there telling us you're closing a store that's profitable in one of our most least fortunate areas. Like that's not going to happen. We are deferring this bill. We are going to keep the leverage on our side of the table so that you can work with Ms. Pittman to hopefully come up with some type of new arrangement. I think this is a small ask. I think this is a very small ask. So with that, this bill is deferred. We don't make it quick. One minute. Council Member Salem and then Council Member Landon. If negotiations can occur between now and Tuesday, the bill could be discharged and we could still vote on it Tuesday night. That would be my recommendation. No. I mean, this is going to happen all again at Council. I want it to happen here. It could. On paper, that could happen. It's an opportunity. If they could get their heads together, meet with Ms. Pittman, come to a conclusion on that store before Tuesday night. That's the main sticking point. Yeah. And then the bill could be discharged and we could vote on it Tuesday night as an option. Yep. I'm just putting it out there on the table. And I'll put that on the record for me. If this store stays open, I will support the bill. So with that scenario, yeah, that's fine if that's a simple amendment to get done between now and then. For sure. Council Member Landon. Thank you, Chair. Just a point of clarification. Is it being deferred but with the amendments we already approved? Yes. That was why I was in the queue, Mr. Chair, was to ask if you still wanted us to file the finance amendment of the items that were approved today. Yep. Thank you. File the finance amendment. And then if there's any other amendments, we can do that. Yeah. Yes, sir. Go ahead. Did you see him say something? I saw him talking. Oh, okay. So are y'all comfortable with everything that you understand from where we're coming from as far as what the goal is? Excuse me. Josh Ehrenfeld, 1 Independence Drive, Jacksonville, Florida. I'm with Foley and Larger. Just to clarify, Council Member Arias' question on the jobs. The jobs that are counted in the package don't include store jobs. It only includes headquarter jobs. So the 200 that are being created are specifically at the store support center. The jobs that are created and maintained among the 13 stores aren't included at all in the package and aren't referenced anywhere. So just comparing apples to apples, keep in mind where the jobs sit. All right. There's no other speakers in the queue. I think everyone has their marching orders. All right. We're going to go back to page number what? Ms. Pittman? Oh. Oh, you want to go? Oh, gentlemen, OED, everybody. If y'all can meet Ms. Pittman in the green room, that would be great. All right. Number seven, 2026-260. Looking for a motion on the bill. Sorry. We're on page four. Oh, wait. We are on page four. We're actually going to item number six. 2026-259. We have a motion and second on the bill. No one in the queue. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Six J's, zero A's. By your action, you've approved 2026-259. Item number seven, 2026-260. All right. We have a motion and second on the bill. No speakers in the queue. Councilman Johnson, if you'd like to share anything, you can. Questions only. Great. Open the ballot. Court of votes. Okay. We're standing by. No. You said questions only? Oh, okay. Man. Howland's 0 for 2 today. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Peterson, will you clarify where this funding is coming from? Because it says general operating reserves, which I think is true. But it's not new funding, correct? It was supposed to be funded last year, fell into the reserves, and now we're pulling it out. Can you clarify? Thank you, Chair, to Council Vice President Howland. That's correct. These dollars were previously appropriated, carried over into fiscal year 24-25, fell to reserves on September 30th of 25, so this is just pulling them back out. Sounds good. It's got my support. All right. Okay. We have no one else in the queue. All right. How's the ballot looking down there? Still a little hunky-dory. There we go. Five yays, one nay. By ration, you've approved 2026-260. Item number 8, 2026-264. We have a motion and a second on the bill. No discussion. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Five yays, one nay. By ration, you've approved 2026-264. All right, guys. Thanks for coming to run your bills. Appreciate it. All right. 2026-265. Motion on the amendment. All right. We have a motion and a second on the neighborhood's amendment. Mr. Peterson, can you explain the neighborhood's amendment? Through the chair to the committee, the neighborhood's amendment will extend the term of the contract to September 30th of 28, require reporting on the enrollees into the program, and also provide for a clawback for any of the enrollees who drop out where the city would be reimbursed at the amount that was contributed to the entity for each enrollee. All right. Great. Thank you for that explanation. We have no discussion. All in favor of the amendment, signify by saying aye. Any opposed? The amendment carries. Move. Motion and second on the bill as amended. Council Member Arias, you're recognized. Thank you, Chair. Mr. Peterson, or Ms. Tafopolis, or Ms. Taylor. Sorry, Mr. Peterson. The 675, is this coming from the $15 million that I allocated towards the workforce? Yes. Through the chair to Council Member Arias, that's correct. Now, my question to Ms. Norris. This will complete the full $15 million package that I submitted, and we support it here in Council. I want to know, where are we at with everybody else? Because I'm hearing from a lot of people that they haven't gotten funded yet, and I feel we're having the same issue that we're having with the chambers right now. Funding is being held up. What's going on with that? Obviously, this has nothing to do with that, but this is part of that $15 million package. So, where are we at with everybody else? EWU, let's go in order. EWU, NEFPA, WIT, this one, as well as the other entities, FSCJ and UNF. Good questions. Through the chair to the committee. So, EWU was just filed. So, it's in your legislative flow right now. I don't remember where it lands as far as, it was just this last week. So, I think we'll be taking up a committee and another yes. As UNF and the other, and FSCJ, I believe we are in term, or contract negotiations right now, figuring out terms for all of these. We do have to identify a public purpose. And then for NEFPA, I would have to double check to see where they are, but I imagine that's what is happening. It's just going back and forth to create terms. Because NEFPA just opened up, or they're about to open. And so, obviously, the money has been needed months ago, not later. So, we need to be more reactive. What about the last one, WIT, Workforce Industrial Training Center? I imagine it's also caught up in contract negotiations, but I will confirm for each of these and get back to you. Thank you. I just want to make sure that, obviously, this is regarding workforce. And so, this bill is part of that. So, that's what we take seriously here. And if you guys could just be a little bit more expeditious in that manner, it would be ideal. So, thank you for that. All right. We have a… Did we get… Are we all queued up for the… All right. All right. Great. Seven yays. Zero nays. By your action, you've approved 2026-265. Item number 10, 2026-268. All right. We have a motion and a second on the rules amendment. All right. Mr. Peterson, can you explain the rules amendment? The chair of the committee, the rules amendment removes the emergency language, corrects Scribner's, and then the rules added revised language to reflect one presentation be given to the JEA board upon completion of the survey. Okay. Excellent. Are the speakers in the queue for the amendment? Yes. Okay. Council, Vice President Howland, you're recognized. Thank you, sir. Mr. Boylan, thanks for being here today. I think you introduced the amendment. I would love it if you could explain your reasoning for it, sir. Thank you. Through the chair to Councilman, Vice President Howland. Yeah. I really wanted to, and I appreciate Council Member Salem's accommodation to this process here. I made it quite clear throughout this process that Article 21 clearly stipulates that management, personnel, et cetera, regarding JEA is in the hands, solely in responsibility of the JEA board. The fact that we have a concern about mismanagement and or racial issues, et cetera, I think, I understand the rationale for the survey. My thought process was, let's go ahead and execute the survey, but put it in the hands of the JEA board to take actions as they deemed warranted. It just seemed consistent with the Article 21, which is very detailed as it speaks to that. So that was my point in pushing it forward. In principle, I didn't support it, but recognizing the reality is probably going to get passed. I want to at least put it in the situation we made clear that it is the JEA board who has the responsibility of acting upon whatever comes out of that survey. Mr. Boylan, I guess I still have the floor here. Thank you for that. That's a productive amendment. I'll support it. Thank you. All right. Council Member Salem, you're recognized. Thank you. And I was very supportive of it. It's not my goal to get into the personnel decision of the JEA board and their leadership. That's their responsibility. I've said that from the very beginning. But to Ms. Mary, did we direct the JEA board to have that presentation? I just have a concern that we can't direct the board to do something. Are we making available? Are we making available that one presentation? Can you just read the language that's there so we make sure we're clear on that? There's one presentation allotted to us by the firm. And the amendment was for it to go to the JEA board to have that, which is fine with me. But I just want to make sure we use the right language. Thank you. Let me, Mr. Peterson's pulling up the notes from the rules committee and I can't log in to get to the legislation itself for whatever reason the credentials aren't working. So, you can't require that they receive the report. You can put in the language of this bill that the entity will provide the report to the board, but they have to be willing to put it on their agenda to hear it. And make available the presentation? Correct. Okay. If the board wants to hear it or consider it at a meeting, that is at the discretion of the board. That's the language I think we all would be more comfortable with. If that meets, it sounds like it does. Okay. So, because the language of the rules amendment was relatively general with respect to what was on your agenda, I'm happy to add that level of detail based on this discussion and the initial proposer being in agreement with that. That's perfectly fine. Okay. We have no other speakers in the queue. All in favor of the amendment, signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? The amendment carries. Second. We have a motion and a second on the bill as amended. Council member Landon, you're recognized. Thank you, Chair. My question, I know we have all three members of the JEA special committee. My understanding, this is actually a lot's been talked about. There's two separate surveys. This is going to a different subset though, if I understand it correctly, right? A smaller subset. I guess the chair, Mr. Salem, go ahead. I was going to try not to make the hour and a half presentation that we had in neighborhoods, but to answer your question, I'd be happy to answer any questions. This is going to management people and above that work in the JEA building, and there'll be a question whether they interact with Ms. Cavey as a part of their responsibility. The JEA survey that they're doing is going to all employees, and as it's been described to me, it's more of a temperature check on JEA and all the employees, 2,200, 2,300. This is a narrow scope of a hundred and roughly 45 employees. So through the chair to the JEA special committee chair, this is more of a almost an upper management type, not a rank and file 2,200 employee survey. That is absolutely correct. We're trying to identify those people that work, direct, interact with the leadership. Thank you. Council Vice President Howell. Thank you. I also have questions for Dr. Salem. Is Selection Link a company that the city's worked with before? Do we know? Selection Link is one of, I think, three companies, Mr. Teal can jump up, that HR within the city has used. Awesome. And that's why we selected them. Perfect. And then do we know how quickly they'll be able to get going and how long it'll take? We've had preliminary discussions with them, but we kind of got to a roadblock until we got this thing approved. I can just assure you if this passes at the council level, Mr. Teal and I will be back on the phone with them later next week to finalize the survey and try to get it out. Mr. Teal, by the end of May, would you think, or roughly? Yeah. Go ahead. Council Member Salem. Yeah. What they said in their proposal was that they would roll the survey out in June and hopefully have the full response done by the end of June. They couldn't guarantee that they would be able to do the presentation by the end of June, but they did indicate that it should be done by the end of June. All right. Thank you. All right. Council Member Salem, you're in the queue. Did you want to speak or anything? Questions? No, we already passed the amendment. Yeah. Yeah, we already passed the amendment. Oh, the amendment passes. Okay. Yeah. There's no one else in the queue, but I was able to attend. I don't remember which committee it was yesterday. It was rules. So I got all my questions answered there pretty much. You know, I think this is going to be a great resource for the board just for them to make a decision, because at the end of the day, it is going to be the board's decision. And I think this is just going to be a resource for them to use. And, you know, let's be honest, the decision that they're making is going to be, we need to make changes or we don't need to make changes. And I think either one of those decisions is going to be a very big one. And I would like for them to have as much clarity as possible. So, yeah, we will send, with the Boylan amendment, we'll send them the results of the survey, and they will evaluate it, and they'll make their determinations. So, with that, I think we are all lined up and ready to take a vote. So open the ballot. Record your votes. Seven yays, zero nays. By your action, you've approved 2026-268 as amended. Okay. All right. Number, did we do 11 or are we on 11? All right. Item number 11, 2026-288. Motion and second on the amendment. All in favor of the amendment, signify by saying aye. Any opposed? The amendment carries. Wait. We have another auditor recommended amendment. I'm sorry. All right. We have a motion and a second for the auditor recommended amendment. Mr. Peterson, can you explain? Through the chair to the committee, the two items for the auditor recommended amendment are an attempt to avoid kind of technical waivers that are included in the opioids bill each year. The first is that the annual appropriation can be included in a separate piece of legislation. It's required to be included in the mayor's proposed budget, but due to conflicts, we have a separate bill. And the other item is related to the annual determination of funding that is going into the grants each year. The way the dollars roll in from the settlement funds varies each year. The ordinance is very specific that has to be calculated on a calendar year basis. Opioids, the group, they calculate it based on the time from their last calculation. So just updating that language to reflect the practice that they currently perform. Thank you. All right. All in favor of the auditor. Oh, wait. Ms. Pittman, are you on the auditor amendment? Yes, ma'am. You recognize. The chair and I need to make sure I check with Ms. Mary out of caution. You should be abstaining on these votes. You should be abstaining on these votes. Abstaining. Yes, I just wanted to make sure. Thank you. You need to put your abstention on the record, please. Yes, ma'am. For now? Yes, because. Okay. For the amendment? For all of the votes on this bill. So you need to just, like you do at council, go ahead and state the nature of your abstention. With caution, I just wanted to make sure that I don't vote on this because Clara White Mission, which is my employer, will probably put an application in for this. Okay. And we've already put the paperwork, it's already on file. Okay. Okay. Got it. So let the record reflect. Council Member Pittman is abstaining from the statement she just made. So all in favor of the auditor's recommended amendment, signify by saying aye. Any opposed? Do I need to, or any abstaining? Any abstain? Any abstain? One abstention. All right. The auditor's recommended amendment passes. Let's roll those up into one finance amendment. Motion and a second on the bill as amended. Open the ballot. Record your vote. While you're voting, I just want to clarify for the record that while you didn't call for abstentions on the first amendment that was moved, I did not see her, I did not see Ms. Pittman vote on that item, so. Understood. Recognized her abstention throughout. Correct. Six yays. Zero days. One abstention. By your action, you've approved 2026-288. All right. We are pretty much wrapped up. Let me just read the second reading bills here. The following bills are on second reading. 2026-312-313-314-315-316-318-320-321-322-323-324-327-331-332-333-334-335-336-337-353-353-354-356-362. The next meeting is going to be quite long. This meeting is adjourned.