Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to the Tuesday, October 6th meeting of the Finance Committee. Let's start off with introductions, starting with Ms. Norris. Brittany Norris for the administration. Colleen Hampsey, Council Research. Mary Stiflopoulos, Office of General Counsel. Heather Reber, Council Auditor's Office. Philip Peterson, Council Auditor. Good afternoon, Rory Diamond, District 13, The Beaches. Good afternoon, Chris Miller, At-Large Group 5. Will Lane in District 3. White Gay, District 2. Randy White, District 12. Afternoon, Michael Boylan, District 6. Nick Howland, At-Large Group 3. All right. Welcome, everyone. Welcome, Council President. So just to give you the order of how we're going to do today's meeting, we'll start off with public comment, if we have any. And then we have our auditors from Carr, Riggs, and Ingram here to talk about the 24-25 audit results. Then we're going to go to JTA with their presentation. I believe Council Member Johnson is the only one on finance who has not seen the JTA presentation. He is not currently here. And if he is not, Mr. Barnes, I'm going to let you skip the presentation because we have all seen that presentation so far. Then item number 12, that's a JSO-related bill. We'll go to JSO. And then because JEA has been at pretty much every committee meeting and sat through the presentations and other bills, I will move JEA up to go right after the JSO bill. So JEA item 13, you'll go after the JSO bill, and then we'll go to the top of the agenda and go in order from that. So with that, do I have any comment cards? I have three. Go ahead and walk on down. Let's see. Carnell Oliver, Eric Adler, and Jim Emery. It's to support and to protect the interests of all citizens, no matter who you are. And the issue in itself is very clear. The system is racist. And it's not racist to just anybody because right now, dealing with the Census Bureau, they're trying to eliminate our history in this country. They're trying to lump us all in together as all Americans. But the significant history of American freedmen in this country, especially in a community like this, underneath the 1866 Civil Rights Act, we have economic protections. And when is this city going to actually recognize who we are? You took a solemn, sworn oath of office to protect, defend liberties. And if this project is to move forward, what are the conditions of those same civil rights? Because the rights of the land belongs to one set of people, and that's us, right along with white Americans. If you take your job seriously, you'll take my words very seriously, and you'll stop this another amount of money and try to push this project forward. Thank you, Mr. Oliver. Eric Adler. Good afternoon, Chairman Lannan, Vice Chair Miller, and the remaining members of the Finance Committee. My name is Eric Adler. I'm the owner of The Raven. I'm the owner of The Raven, based in La Villa, and hopefully soon its accompanying restaurant, The Jenny. My address is on file. I live in historic Springfield. I just wanted to say that this is in support of the Gateway Jaxx's Publix development, just east of La Villa in the north core portion of downtown Jacksonville. I can say that from a personal perspective, hearing about the forthcoming Publix development filled me with excitement because we'd have a top-tier grocery store in downtown Jacksonville. In large part because of that announcement quite a while ago, I made the decision, instead of leasing my restaurant space to a third party, I would start up my first restaurant myself. Now, as you all know, starting a restaurant is not an easy business. I've had a lot of people tell me, what the heck are you thinking? And frankly, 100%, that's probably valid feedback. With that being said, a large part as to why I made that decision as a small business owner located in historic Springfield and operating in downtown Jacksonville was because of the energy associated with the Publix coming to downtown Jacksonville. I'm looking to create five to ten jobs at this property a few blocks west of Publix because in large part of this development, along with Gateway Jaxx's development in the area. I completely understand the concerns of this committee and other members on the City Council about public funds being used to help with this development. 100% understand y'all's sentiment. With that being said, I ask you to also consider the other small business owners and the knock-on effects that this development will have for downtown businesses, downtown residents, and Jacksonville in general. I completely understand that not everybody here represents the urban core and the inner Jacksonville area, but I just want to get your thoughts and hopefully support for this measure. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Adler. The final card is, does not wish to speak, questions only, Mr. Jim Emery on the Volunteer Life Saving Corps bill that we will also take up. So with that, welcome to Dr. Johnson. Dr. Johnson, I believe you're the only one that has not seen the JTA presentation because it's been in all the other committees. Are you familiar with it or do you want Mr. Barnes to get it up and present it? You've seen it. All right, so good news for you, Mr. Barnes. Mr. Johnson was able to see the presentation in a different committee. So with that, I believe we're able to go straight to item 28, which is 2026-0780. And, of course, if there are questions as we go through this. Oh, my goodness, I forgot the auditors. I was so excited about JTA. All right, let's just back up a little bit then. Our audit team, our external audit team of Carr, Riggs, and Ingram, they're here to talk about the Fistler 24-25 audit results. Sorry for skipping ahead already. Good afternoon. My name is Amy Miller, 7411 Fullerton Street, Jacksonville. Thank you for having us today. I'm an audit partner with Carr, Riggs, and Ingram. And I'm also joined today with one of our audit team, Michelle Hamm, who is a supervising senior and also oversaw the single audit portion of the audit for this year. We are pleased to be able to present to you the results of the audit for the city's financial statements for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2025, which also includes an audit of the federal and state awards, as well as certain examinations that are required by the Florida statutes. The audit was completed timely this year and met the statutory deadlines for this year. Before I go over the results, I would like to remind you that the objectives of our audit is to give an opinion as to whether the city's financial statements are fairly presented in all material respects in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles and to report on internal controls over financial reporting and compliance. That could have a material effect on the financial statements or on the major federal and state award programs. On page 219 of the audit book, you would have received electronically. That's a summary page of the fiscal year 2025 audit results. It includes all the results on that page. And it includes the opinions of our audit reports. For the financial statements and the major federal programs and state grant projects, we have issued all unmodified or clean opinions. For the financial statement opinions, this includes the opinions on the city's governmental activities, business type activities, and each of the eight major funds and the aggregate remaining funds. Also, in the summary page, we reported that there were no material weaknesses, no significant deficiencies, and no noncompliance identified for the federal and state awards. There were no significant deficiencies and no noncompliance identified for the financial statements. And there was one material weakness identified for the financial statements and is included in the report as finding number 2025-001. That finding relates to certain material adjusting entries found as a result of our audit procedures and were necessary to record in order to present the financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Those material adjustments included four areas of correction. Correction to the allowance for receivables of charges for services in the Solid Waste Disposal Fund. Correction to revenue cutoff in the other federal, state, and local grants fund. Correction to move a certain debt payable and related contributions to the proper fund. And corrections for certain capital asset balances. We have discussed these adjustments with management, and management has already implemented an action plan to ensure the necessary corrections are made before we begin our audit procedures for the next fiscal year. We also reported that the two findings reported in prior year were corrected and not repeated. The city is also required by state statute to obtain certain compliance examinations as part of the audit. These examinations require us to test the city's compliance over the local government investment policies, compliance over expenditures and uses of the E-911 funds, compliance under the clerks of court performance standards and budgets, and compliance over the alimony and child support payments. Based on our tests, we have reported that the city complied in all material respects with these statutes. There was no noncompliance reported there. This concludes the summary of the results of the audit for the fiscal year 2025. I do want to offer a special thank you to the city's finance department team and also the council auditors team for their collaboration and assistance throughout the audit. We really appreciate their help and assistance. It's been a pleasure working with them and such a dedicated group of professionals, and I really appreciate the opportunity to continue to serve as the city's auditors. I'm happy to take questions or comments at this time, if there are any. Thank you, and thank you for the CRI team and all the work you do on our external audit. I have no one in the queue, so the only thing, just to summarize, another year with a clean audit opinion, no material weaknesses, no deficiencies. We had one finding this year. We had two findings last year. Both of them have been cleared for now, and I think that's it in a nutshell, right? That's it. All right, great. Well, thank you all for all the hard work, and just as a reminder for everyone out there, not only do we have an internal audit department, but we have an external audit every year that is summarized into this nice, brief, 340-page book that you can find online. So thank you very much, external audit team. Now I believe it's time for JTA. All right. Thank you. Thank you. So we're going to go to item 29, and again, we're not going to do the presentation. I'll give Mr. Barnes a break since he's done it three times already, but they are here for questions. I think the majority of us have already taken action on this item, so can I get a motion on the emergency? Got a motion to the second on the emergency. Ms. Reber? Through the chair to the committee, not Ms. Reber, but the nature of the emergency is JTA is requesting this be moved up. Each additional legislative cycle does cost them additional interest costs, and so they're asking for this limited-term authorization to move up, and then that's the reason. Thank you. Don't in the key. All those who have heard the emergency, say aye. Aye. Any opposed to say nay. The emergency passes. Got a motion to the second on the amendment. Mr. Peterson. Through the chair to the committee, the amendment's very technical in nature, filling in blanks throughout the ordinance and the agreement, clarifying that the term JTA operational funds will be referred to as non-LOGT2 funds through the ordinance and agreement, and then striking language regarding the expiration of the First Amendment, that it will remain in place until later subceded. Thank you. Council Member Diamond, are you on the amendment? On the bill. Got it. All those in favor of the amendment, say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. The amendment passes. Got a motion to the second on the bill. As in emergency, as amended, Council Member Diamond, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to put on the record why I'm a yes vote today. If you look at my social media, you see a lot of people are really upset about this, and they're saying, hey, don't take $30 million and do a bailout for JTA, there is no other option. That is the cold, hard fact that there is no other option, and I wouldn't characterize it as a bailout either. This is simply allowing JTA to use the LOGT funds more flexibly to pay down debt. If they don't do that, they're going to have to fire more people, close more lines, and fewer people are going to be able to get to school and to work. So while the situation at JTA really is a nightmare, there is no other path out other than to allow them to have this flexibility to do this. And ultimately, I do think the projects that the city wanted out of LOGT2, they'll get. I will say this for the record, too. I voted against the gas tax increase in 2019. I voted against it today. It's very disturbing that so much of it was wasted on some of this Navi and Holon stuff, but it is what it is. There's nothing we can do to fix that. They can't drink the spilt milk, but absolutely, we have to vote yes. Otherwise, it will be a nightmare for the city. Thanks. Councilor Engage. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through the chair and Mr. Ferguson, you could come on down. One question that I've been asked by several people is at your bus stop facilities, how are you all handling the trash pickup? Because I'm hearing a lot more about it's not getting picked up and it's really becoming a nuisance. Through the chair to Councilmember Gay, we have three separate contracts, including an in-house bus stop crew that works in quadrants around the city to take care of that. So I will make sure that we get with you to identify that particular area and pay attention to it. All right. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Councilmember Boylan. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to – I was relatively quiet on this conversation yesterday. I appreciated the presentation, but I also want to take a moment to say thank you to the management team for the time you spent with me following yesterday's rules meeting to get me up to speed and express to the concerns I have. And I conclude with a comment that my confidence in both Cleveland, Randall, Jessica, and the management team and the challenge well ahead of them. And I share with many of the comments Councilman Diamond offered in this process, but I think we've got the right people on the bus. That's no pun intended. Thank you. That was definitely a pun. Dr. Johnson, you're recognized. I don't know if I can follow the intelligent puns of my dear colleague, Mr. Boylan. Thank you, Mr. Chair, for recognizing me. My question, I'm not sure who at the agency this would go to, but I was under the impression that the total number to get us to where we needed to be was 45. Where does this $30 million put us in that respect? Are we – what is the plan to get – and I could be incorrect. There's been so much information, and now that I'm no longer the liaison, I don't know the intimacies of it. But this $30 million, does it get us where we're right-sided? We're at a place right now where this will get us where we're at a place to move forward, or are we still digging out of the hole after this? Thank you. Mr. Barnes, you're recognized. Randall Barnes, Chief Financial Officer for JTA, through the chair to Councilmember Johnson. So, the actions that were taken in September were what got us in the right spot that we need to be in terms of the cost reductions. We were simply going along with not enough revenues to support the levels of service we were providing. This $30 million that we are hoping and asking to use from the LGT dollars is going to help us pay off our debt and reduce the interest expense on that debt so that we don't have to pay that. And that will give us more flexibility as we move forward. Thank you. Through the chair, I did understand that. So, is the number to get us where we are starting almost at zero, for lack of a better term, to get forward? Is that this number? And then the other question is, obviously, community-wise, and I watched some of the conversations on yesterday. I reviewed as many of the documents as I could. The other question I had was, will it still – because I think there have been some service routes that have been reduced. And obviously, we don't have a crystal ball, but do you plan to reduce additional services, or is this the place where we kind of stop the bleeding? So, that those services that we have now retain them, the space where – we can retain them where they are. Through the chair to Council Member Johnson. So, we are moving to a Saturday schedule. So, we don't plan to make any – currently don't plan to make any route changes. There are just some lengthening of time between pickups. So, in regard to changing the schedule, that is what we expect to do going forward, and that should be it at this time. Thank you. And one thing that we talked about yesterday in rules that I think we need to just talk about again, which is a good thing, that we are in a place to where you believe the budget is balanced for the remainder of the year. In other words, we're at a place to where, even though a lot of tough decisions had to be made, we're at a place where revenue equals expenses. So, we should not expect to have to do this exercise again. Council Member Diamond, you recognize. I forgot to do the thing I always try to do when I'm talking about JTA, which is to compliment Randall Barnes, Shepler, Cleveland. Thank you for doing the tough stuff to keep this train going. I always – I wasn't forgetting you all this time. But it's – for anybody watching, they have the hardest jobs in Jacksonville right now outside of police and fire. Like, they are – they're doing both. Thank you. All right. And I'll let go of that. Thank you, JTA team. No one else in the queue. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Eight yays. Zero nays. By our actions, we pass 2026-780. With that, we're going to go to item 12, which is on page 9. Can I get a motion on the Neighborhoods Amendment? I got a motion second on the Neighborhoods Amendment. Mr. Peterson, I believe. Ms. Reaver. Ms. Reaver, explain the amendment. Through the chair to the committee, the amendment will increase the total appropriation amount to $31,450,000. Decrease the special reserve amount to $18,267,670. Increase the general operating reserve amount by $10,587,427. Attach a revised Exhibit 1, which is the BT, to reflect those changes in funding. And attach a revised Exhibit 2 CIP information sheet to show the increased cost for the JSO Warehouse Consolidation Project of going to $15,450,000. Thank you. And I'll speak on the amendment since this is my bill. I'm fine with the amendment. I mean, in an ideal world, we would not have given cash back on budget night, so we'd have more of that for this. And I also realize JSO has been working on this a while, that it really wasn't towards the end of the budget process they got the refined cost of what this is. So I'm fine with the amendment as is. No one else in queue? All those in favor of the amendment say aye. Aye. Any opposed say nay. Amendment passes. Got motion second on the bill as amended. No one in the queue. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Eight yays, zero nays. Fire actions, we have passed 2026-0701. Thank you, JSO. On to item 13, which is the JTA, I'm sorry, JEA bill. Item 13, 2026-0704. Can I get a motion? I got motion second on the bill. No one in the queue. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Eight yays, zero nays. Fire actions, we have passed 2026-0704. So no more hopping around. We are going to go and order the rest of the meeting. So going back to page two on the agenda, item 1, 2024-0966 is deferred. Item 2, 2025-0361 is deferred. Item 3, 2026-0227, deferred. Item 4, 2026-320, deferred. Item 5, 2026-0377, deferred. Item 6, 2026-0541. Can I get a motion on the amendment? I got motion second on the neighborhood's amendment. Councilman Diamond, you are in the queue on the amendment. Mr. Chair, I don't know when you want to take up my motion, but my motion is that we defer, and if I can get a second, I'll explain the deferral before we spend 30 minutes on this bill. So the reason I think a deferral makes sense here is that we've got Amendment 3 coming up in a couple of weeks, and I don't know why we wouldn't take this up after that vote. I do think it's a critical piece of the puzzle. Also, I know we're going to be missing certain council people at different times for the next council meeting. So that's my motion. I think it makes sense to, and it's responsible, and literally nothing's going to change other than us being more educated. Thank you, Councilman Diamond. Ms. DeFopolis, so we had a motion on the neighborhood's amendment and then a motion second on a deferral. Can you help me understand the right posture? Should I be going into the queue for those speaking on the deferral only at this point? At this juncture, nobody objected to the motion on the deferral being made. It was seconded. So at this point, what is on the floor for consideration and discussion is the motion on the deferral. Thank you. I'll go to the council president, then Dr. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I concur with Councilman Diamond's motion to defer. Listen, it would be great to have a Publix in downtown. I prefer taxpayers don't have to subsidize it. And I certainly prefer that it not be subsidized with the completion grant if taxpayers have to subsidize it. And I understand why DIA has chosen to put it back on the agenda right now and take it off deferral. I think it is because a lot of the underwriters and the financial backing would like this done urgently. And that is important to me. And I think it's certainly a consideration. But up here, we're responsible for defending the taxpayers and police and firefighters and city employees. As I think Mr. Diamond was alluding to, we're in the midst of one of the most dramatic revenue uncertainties in policy that Florida cities and counties have experienced in generations. And the Amendment 3 loomed large over the entire budget process. Indeed, that was the gist of the final budget night. And would we put more money in? And would we take more money out? If Amendment 3 passes, we'll have a $200 million shortfall there and have to look at some serious cost cutting moving forward in this city. So you do this, you have a $228 million shortfall that you have to do. We're only four weeks from knowing what kind of shortfall we might have with Amendment 3. Listen, we just funded that public safety project with something just north of $28 million. In a future world where we don't have $200 million in revenue, we would have a more difficult time doing that. In a future world where we don't have $228 million in revenue, we'd have an even more difficult time in doing that. We have another element of our city, JTA, that just presented a $30 million plus deficit. So to me, I think the responsible thing to do, whether you like the project or not, is hear it after Amendment 3. But I do have one more reason, and Mr. Diamond alluded to it. And that is that there's some folks who will be out on Tuesday, including me. I'd really like to vote on this. And I heard Matt Carlucci in neighborhoods yesterday say he really would like to vote on this. He said it was the most important issue we'll have to vote on in city council regarding downtown since consolidation. And I think he actually said, I wish I could reach my hand all the way down here from Vermont and push the green button. So I think just for that reason alone, I would support the deferral just so we can all have a chance to vote on it subsequently. But more importantly, just because it's four weeks away, Amendment 3, and we'll have some more certainty by then. Thanks. Dr. Johnson. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. And I certainly understand the sentiments of the council president. I certainly, certainly understand that. I have a couple questions, if I may. Mr. Tarbert, if you're here somewhere, there you go, to the chair, to Mr. Tarbert. My first question is, I hear, I just heard the council president say that this was a subsidy for a grocer. I was under the impression that the subsidy was for a building, that this had nothing to do with the grocer specifically, but it was to do with the build-out of the building so that they could get this tenant in. Am I incorrect in that? Through the chair, you are correct. The incentive package for this project is for the development team, which is a subsidiary of Gateway. Jack's not directly to the grocer, which we also say is Publix. Publix is not receiving direct subsidy in the package that... So we're not giving $30 million to a grocery store to come downtown. We're building a building that's going to bring economic development to downtown. Correct. It's a $150 million mixed-use project that includes apartments, parking, as well as the full-service grocery and additional retail. Good to know. That's what I thought. I wanted to make sure. The other part is, if this is... I know we're entertaining the deferral of this particular development, and I understand why we should possibly get it done now. How does this affect, and you may need to go back and get answers to this question, but if we do follow the recommendation of deferring this, how does that affect the development itself and the next moves, the next steps forward? I see the lawyer coming up as well. So if we could, Ms. Tremmer, as well as Mr. Tarver. Sure. If you don't mind, through the chair, I'd like to just respond before I turn it over. I would just say that real estate development, especially right now, is challenging, and so time is never on our side, and so there is an urgency to get this project approved and moving forward. We've been at the chair's request, at the council president's request. We went back and looked at different versions of how we could structure this incentive package. We determined that those weren't any more advantageous to the city. We think this is the best one. So this bill, I think, was introduced back in June or July, and so we would like to move it forward. I certainly understand the concern and the rationale behind the comments that were made about deferring and waiting. I would just say, though, hopefully that measure doesn't pass for a number of reasons, but if it does, you're going to be relying on commercial real estate taxes to fund the Delta. And so to me, regardless of where you are, this project has to happen in order for downtown development to continue and to build a tax base for the city to support all the services that were mentioned. So that's kind of my view. Obviously, I have the luxury of having a more narrow view of just downtown, but this project is critically important to all the city investment that's already been made. So that's my two cents. I will turn it over to Ms. Trimmer, unless you have any additional questions. No, I'd like to hear from Ms. Trimmer. Thank you, Mr. Charbert. Thank you so much. Good afternoon. Cindy Trimmer, 1 and a minute drive, suite 1200 on behalf of the applicant. For context, this project was approved by the Downtown Investment Authority in December of 2025. The legislation before you was introduced in June of this year. We put the brakes on and spent the last couple months working with council and the mayor's office and DIA to underwrite more than a dozen different options to see if there was a way to change the composition of the ask that was in front of you today. And ultimately, after a lot of effort, three, four months, the answer was that what is before you today is the most responsible way to put this forward in terms of the return on investment to the city, the ability to finance the deal, and be able to move this forward. That said, I understand pending Amendment 3. I don't envy the position that everyone's in trying to balance all of the competing interests. I cannot reiterate enough that this project is integral to really bringing over the hill all of the investments that we have all collectively worked together to make over the last several years. This project needs to be able to advance. This project received recommendation from neighborhoods after a very robust discussion, including the underwriting of the deal, the return on investment, and the additional information that we were able to share with all of you yesterday from a report that we got on Friday from Dr. Gallo at UNF in terms of the additional return on investment to the city. Again, understanding the pending Amendment 3 vote and now the added challenge of the trip that is going to take several people out of the country. We really need to get through finance today because if we were to defer the committee to honor the request to hear Amendment 3, we're looking at another six weeks. We wouldn't be able to hear this at committee until the third week of November. But if we can advance through committee today, and if we have to, we'd be willing to defer just the final vote, which would allow you to take it up after the Amendment 3 vote, the second week of November, and kind of split everybody's need right now. But we really can't—six weeks is a long time to defer. It's going to have this thing pending for a full year. Thank you, Ms. Tremmer. Mr. Chair, I did have a question for the auditor, if I may just end with that. It may be the same one I have now, so go ahead. Okay. Through the chair, to the auditors, if this—and thank you, Ms. Tremmer, for that solomonic advice. I certainly understand, splitting the baby, that makes perfect sense. Through the auditor, if Amendment 3 does pass, how does that affect this legislation for this particular budget year? Or maybe, I'm not seeing it in the future, but how does that affect it if Amendment 3 were to pass? Through the chair, to Councilor Johnson, if Amendment 3 passes, there's no impact to the fiscal year 26-27 budget. However, we, along with everyone I've talked to, agrees that we should anticipate approximately a $200 million decrease in revenues for 27-28, and that would be ongoing. The year after, it increases to $300 million, and it probably grows beyond that. So, this development, if it moves along as scheduled, is expected to be completed June of 2030. So, you would need to be finding funding to pay this completion grant of approximately $30 million in that 29-30 year. So, I think it's a valid conversation. We're good for 26-27. 26-27, no impact. 27-28. $200 million estimate. But, I mean, specifically for this legislation. This project would not be completed in 27-28. We need to find the money for 27-28 and 28-29. But, you'll see in front of you, there is a schedule that has other outstanding completion grants that are not yet funded, that right now total about $100 million in round numbers. You have funded $34 million via action you took probably a month and a half ago. So, there's still $65 million, $68 million of unfunded completion grants. Approving this adds to that amount. Gotcha. That was my question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Past President White. Yes, sir. I think I have a question for Mary. But, if I can read this man's mind, I'm not sure that I can. And, I think I'll let him go first. Go ahead. Go ahead. You probably, you look like you're thinking what I'm thinking. Go ahead. Thank you, if I may, Mr. Chair. Okay. Through the Chair to Mary, we just heard Ms. Trimmer say that she'd like it to go through committee today. But, then we can defer it at the next council meeting and one more. So, then it could be heard on the November 10th council meeting. How would we affect that? Through the Chair to Council President Howland. So, what would occur is, if it is voted out of committee today and it's not deferred, it would be on the agenda for next Tuesday for action. And, a member could move to postpone the item to November 10th. And, that could be seconded. And, that would be a ballot vote that's taken up. And, then it would be postponed to that date certain. And, that is a majority vote to postpone? Yes. Okay. The difficulty here is, basically, I mean, we'd have one, two, three, four, five, six. We could see if, yeah. The difficulty there is not knowing if we would have enough to postpone. Because, there's nothing I can do from a parliamentary perspective as CPE, right? Through the Chair to Council President Howland. No, you don't have the authority to just defer an item unilaterally unless it's something that's on consent. Because, this item has had no votes as well as an amendment. It would not fall on consent on the agenda. So, it would have to be postponed by an action of the Council. Okay. Then, through the Chair, if I may ask, Colin and Cindy and Brian, would you be willing in Council meeting, if Council members, someone on Finance Committee motion to postpone, would you be willing to come up and say, we agree with the postponement, we understand the concerns about A3. And, we can postpone it until a decision to be made certain on November 10th? Through the Chair, you have my word. I will be there, and I will agree to it on Tuesday. Okay. Thank you very much. I'm going to interject with a point of clarification. I don't understand why we couldn't take this up at the November 3rd Finance Committee meeting, because it's still going to then go to full council on November 10th, right? I'm sorry, to Ms. DeFopolis. To the Chair, if it were deferred today, presumably it would just be deferred the one cycle, and so it would show up on the agenda in the Finance Committee. You may want to discuss that specific point with Ms. Trimmer, because the request from her was that it be voted out of committee today, so it would fall on the council agenda, and then just be postponed at council. As opposed to, and I think some of it was a timing concern, but if it was deferred here, and it went to Finance on Wednesday the 4th, I think it is now, because of the election day, it would, if it was voted out on that day, it would be at council on November 13th, or 10th, I apologize, 10th. Thank you, Ms. DeFopolis. So, I mean, both paths get us there on the same council night, if I'm following correctly. Yes, timing-wise it does, but there may have been some other motivation behind the request that I would just defer to Ms. Trimmer. Okay, Ms. Trimmer? They're huddling up real quick. Ms. Trimmer, I don't know if you overheard the last part of that. I did, thank you. Okay. Point of clarification, and this is my own not checking the calendar or misunderstanding the calendar, are we deferring committee meetings the week of the election such that Finance would be after the Amendment 3 vote? Because I had understood that it would basically be the same day, so you wouldn't have your answers on Amendment 3, so there's no difference between voting today or two weeks from today. I know we moved some meeting, Ms. DeFopolis, could you answer yes? So, through the chair to Ms. Trimmer, so the Tuesday committee meetings, Finance, TEU, and LUZ on the 3rd have been moved to the 4th. So, while the election won't have been certified, presumably the results would have been out and available for everybody at that point. SANS oversees ballots. It's an absentee ballots that might still yet to be counted. So, Ms. DeFopolis, to summarize, given that we already moved that committee meeting, we should be 99.9% sure which way Amendment 3 went when we come, we'll probably know by 8 o'clock that night, given how good our election results are at being processed in Florida, we'll probably know with near certainty which way Amendment 3 went when we come into Finance Committee on that Wednesday. To the extent it's not a close vote. I think Mr. Boylan could probably attest to the fact that if it's close, then those overseas and absentee ballots could be a little bit of a shifter. But yes, traditionally you will have an idea of the final results coming out of that absent the certification having yet occurred. So, if I can steal more time here, Ms. Tremor, given that, we will know with near certainty on November 4th, we could take it up in this committee, the concerns we have about Amendment 3, which I've been clear, Amendment 3 actually is not going to impact my decision one way or another, but I think for some members it will. It could actually help, depending on which way it goes. Would you be fine if we deferred it today for two cycles, we take it up on the 4th, and then you have the council president, not to put words in your mouth, but we will take action on the final vote November 10th? Through the chair, if I could ask for the same commitment from this committee, that if for any reason it is close and we don't have certainty, that we will still advance it on November 4th so that we can make the November 10 final vote, then yes. I will promise to vote November 4th the same way I would have voted today. So, with that, committee members, I'll just look for head nods here. I think we would have a commitment that one way or another, even if it has not been 100% called, November 4th will be the day we vote. It will come out of committee, and then November 10th is when it will get discharged to the full council, or I guess not discharged, that's just when it will occur through that. So, I got Council Member White, Boylan, and Ms. Stafopoulos. I'm going to go to you first, Ms. Stafopoulos. To the chair. So, just to make sure, and the posture that you're in is you do have a pending motion to defer, which can be withdrawn if the consensus is that a two-cycle deferral to November 4th is the will of the committee, or you can still vote on the deferral. You just may want to clarify that it's certainly for the two cycles and not just one, since I think the initial motion, the intent was just one cycle. Council Member Diamond, you're recognized. I absolutely meant two. I don't know where you're getting this one thing. I heard him as well. Okay. With that, I'm going to go to the top of the queue. Council Member White, did you drop off Council Member White? I did, but so you have to have drawn your, so it'll get to what you just stated. The motion on the floor is a two-cycle deferment of 2026-541. Yes. No, I'm good. Thank you. Council Member Boylan. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through the chair and Mr. Trimmer, obviously, having a vote of confidence, if you will, from the finance committee today, and Mr. Mull, maybe you want to speak to this. Does that help in terms of inspiring the confidence of the investors in this project to know that it's more than just a word? I mean, I understand. I see where we're landing this plane, but I wanted to make certain there's a level of confidence you can walk away and share with those investing in this effort that this is going to move forward contingent upon the November 3rd vote. Mr. Mull, you're ready to ask. Yes, thank you. Brian Wall with CEO of Gateway Jacks at 100 North Laura Street downtown. Through the chair to Councilman Boylan. I was on the phone with a lot of our investors and my board this weekend, and I know that they are very, very anxious to move this forward. The market right now is, you know, it seems like the 10-year goes up a quarter point every week at this point. So, there is a desire to get moving on this project as quickly as possible before, you know, before that rates or any other economic issue changes. I would say, I sort of needed to say that, but I will say that we are amenable to what was put forth today. I understand where the council is coming from and the committee is coming from, and I'm certain that we'll be able to get our investors and our board on board with that. Thank you. I support where the committee is headed in this process. I harken back to when we were first installed as council members seven, eight years ago when then Mayor Curry talked about the transformation of downtown. And from day one, the incorporation of a grocery store downtown was a clear indication that we've made it. And so, I think the impetus we've got shouldn't slow down. But I appreciate the wisdom, and I'm supportive of deferring this for two cycles. I just want to make sure that the folks who are listening to this, investors and otherwise, and contrarians too, rest assured, I'll be hearing from any of my constituents about my vote on this. But at the same time, I think it's too important for us to let this lay fallow. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Councilor Gay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I support Council Member Diamond's deferral on this completion grant. So, I think that'd be the best, just to wait for this bill to come out to see if it passes or not. Thank you. Dr. Johnson. I'm not sure. I think this is a legal question, Mr. Chair. So, to Mr. Fopolis, do we, if, let's say we do not, obviously right now we're in the deferral posture, but because there was a vote already taken by DIA, I believe, does that put us in any kind of peril if, for say, we come back and then we vote not to do this? Where does that put us with any agreements with the way that it's structured right now? Through the chair to Council Member Johnson. And so, while the DIA has approved the project, it still requires that it go through City Council for approval. So, at the end of the day, absent Council approval, there is no deal. There is no execution of any contracts or anything that has occurred to date. So, that only transpires after Council approval. Thank you. I'm certainly prepared. I appreciate that. Mr. Chair, I'm certainly prepared to vote for this. I've been researching this because it's something that's important to downtown and kind of like Council Member Boylan said earlier, it's something that has been a priority and I believe that a thriving downtown is a thriving city, a thriving metropolis, and I do think this is a part of it. I'm certainly prepared to advance this today, but we'll stand down and look forward to the results of four, excuse me, of Amendment 3. But the reason I bring it up is kind of like I said during budget hearing, on Council Night and others, I think that we're misplacing a lot of our angst when it comes to Amendment 3 because what we can do is use the funds that we have. Thankfully, those funds were put aside during the budget process. So, thankfully, there are funds to advance these kind of things. Well, I believe the funds are there. Nevertheless, what we can do intelligently is to plan for the two subsequent years that the auditor mentioned. Those two years coming up, that 12-month period between the next budget cycle gives us the opportunity to say, we know that there's an additional, I think you said, 30-some million dollars that need to be, no, no, totally, total with this project. Right. That was right. So, an additional $30 million that adds to the money that's already there, it gives us the opportunity to see where things need to maneuver around, whether it be the administration or the council. But I do think this is a project that can be a lifeblood, kind of like this is the heart center. And so, pumping the heart center full of blood means that the extremities get the blood, too, which includes the neighborhoods and everywhere else. So, I'm in favor of this project, but I will certainly stand by to see what the vote is. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Dr. Johnson. Council President, then past President White. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just couldn't miss this opportunity to thank Mr. Mole, Mr. Tarbert, Ms. Trimmer for your patience and your cooperation on this. I think this is a terrific move for not only Finance Committee, but City Council and for Gateway to be prudent here and to be vigilant on behalf of taxpayers. Your cooperation here is not unnoticed. Thank you so much. Councilor Mayor White. Yes, sir. A question through the chair. I don't really know who this will go to, but it sounds like we've got two options to do what we've got on the table. Or if it did go through committee, I would commit to postpone it Tuesday night, which puts us on the same timeline, but which piece would look better to the investors if it came out of committee, voted up or down here, and then I would commit to ask for a postponement, which would put us on the same time frame. But then I would defer to President Howland after he hears him speak, and I would go with what you decided after you hear them speak. But I think it would get it to the same place, but I don't want to send a bomb, so to speak, to the investors if one way looks better to them than the other, if somebody could speak to that. Mr. Mueller, you're recognized, and then I'll go to Councilmember Diamond, and then I'll have a few comments. Thank you. Through the chair, Councilman White, while I think a vote today would be encouraging, you know, I think if we wait until the fourth, that will be okay. I think coming into today, we were a little bit worried that this would end up, if we were deferred, end up in a late November vote. But I think the way that it was described by this committee being pushed to the fourth and being able to vote on the fourth, that would be okay. Thank you, Mr. Mueller. Councilmember Diamond. All right. Councilmember Diamond's good. Okay. So I'll just wrap it up here before we vote on the two-cycle deferral. Well, first of all, to echo what Council President said, again, Mr. Mueller, I mean, you don't always see eye to eye on the financial aspects, but when I walk around downtown, like, gateway is building stuff faster than other groups. So I certainly appreciate that. But some of the words we heard today, we heard that developers and investors are anxious, they're facing headwinds, so are taxpayers, and that's my concern looking at just the amount of money. And, Dr. Johnson, you're talking about the fundings there. We did have the funding there. In fact, if you go back to 2026-419, that was the Culinary Institute of America resolution. We committed $28 million of a $30 million bucket of cash available for downtown investment. So assuming CIA happens, all but $2 million of that has been spent. And then I encourage the council members, if you do nothing else for the next two weeks, take home the financial commitments tracker that the auditors passed out. If you look at it now, we did chip away this year. In fact, we got our total committed downtown unbudgeted cash completion grants, because keep in mind, what you see on this tracker at the very bottom line, that is showing what we have not yet budgeted. We got it down to $68 million. It was well over $100. And if we approve this, we're back up close to $100 million. And again, that's unbudgeted cash completion grants that we will have the next couple of years. Uh, and Mr. Peterson hit on this a little, uh, we'll be okay next year, uh, going into fiscal year 27, 28, we'll have about 4 million of unbudgeted, uh, downtown cash completion grants. And that's because of the bill we passed, uh, 2026-572 that prioritizes our surplus funds towards future unbudgeted cash completion grants. We put a big chunk of money this year through that. Even though I've said my vote is not dependent on whether amendment three passes or not, it's still going to be a no for this. If amendment three passes, it's very unlikely we will have a surplus budget like that again, anytime soon that we can roll that over. So if you go out to fiscal eight, uh, fiscal year 28, 29, right now we have $35 million of unbudgeted cash completion grants that we're going to have to find a way to fund plus whatever the potential impact of amendment three is. And then fiscal year 29, 30, if we approve this, we're up to $42 million more. Uh, so again, I know there's been a lot of talk about amendment three, it's $200 million the first year, 300 million the second. If this gets approved at another $100 million into that mix of total unbudgeted cash completion grants that we're going to have to deal with the next couple of years. So again, it is, to me, it's never been about the project as much as it's been about what our current commitments are. So with that, no one else in the queue, all those, uh, Ms. Mary, do I do a voice vote or a hand vote on this? I'll do a hand vote. All those in favor of the two cycle deferral, raise your hand. All opposed raise. And Dr. Johnson is the lone note on that. So by our actions, we have deferred for two cycles on item 20, 26, 5, 4, 1. All right. Item seven. This one's easier. 20, 26, 0, 6, 7, 2 is deferred. As is eight, 20, 26, 0, 6, 7, 7. Item nine, 20, 26, 0, 6, 8, 7 is deferred. Item 10, 20, 26, 0, 6, 9, 8. Can I get a motion on the amendment? I got a motion and a second on the amendment. Ms. Reber. Through the chair, the amendment will update the fiscal year appropriation to fiscal year 26, 27 and remove the carryover language. Remove the section 118, 107 waiver in the associated affidavit. That's not needed. Correct a scrivener's error and then place the revised agreement on file to include missing exhibits and then update the payment and completion dates. Thank you. I have no in the queue. All those in favor of the amendment say aye. Aye. Any opposed say nay. Amendment passes. I got a motion and a second on the bill. As amended, no in the queue. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Seven yays. Zero nays. By our actions, we approve 20, 26, 0, 6, 9, 8. Item 11, 20, 26, 0, 700. I got a motion and a second on the bill. As a reminder, this was a budget bill just funding a cash completion grant that we're able to fund from other means this year. No in the queue. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Six yays. One nay. By our actions, we approve 20, 26, 0, 700. Items 12 and 13, we've taken up. Item 14, 20, 26, 0, 7, 0, 5. Got a motion. Second on the bill. No in the queue. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Seven yays. Zero nays. By our actions, we approve 20, 26, 0, 7, 0, 5. Item 15, 20, 26, 0, 7, 0, 6. Can I get a motion on the amendment? Got a motion. Second on the amendment. Ms. Reaver. Through the chair, the amendment will provide additional clarification in the bill, title, and the explanation of appropriation, indicating that $715,657 is being appropriated for the Osprey River N4 project, and $419,295.80 is being appropriated for forgivable loans, and then correct the appropriation fiscal year. Thank you. No in the queue. All those in favor of the amendment, say aye. Aye. Any opposed say nay. Amendment passes. Got a motion. Second on the bill. As amended, please reflect. Council Member Diamond. Was it no on that amendment? I have no in the queue. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Six yays. By our actions, we pass 2026-706. Item 16, 2026-0707. Got a motion and a second on the amendment. Ms. Reaver. Through the chair, the amendment will reduce the total appropriation amount to $181,333.85 and the reallocated amount to $48,431.85 based on available funds within those accounts. Attach the provides Exhibit 1, which is the BT, to reflect those changes. Place the federal award agreement on file and correct the appropriation fiscal year. All right. No one in the queue. All those in favor of the amendment, say aye. Aye. Any opposed say nay. Amendment passes. Got a motion and a second on the bill. As amended, no one in the queue. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Seven yays. Zero nays. By our actions, we approve 2026-707. Council Member White, you're recognized. Yes, sir. Thank you, Chair. Going back a couple of bills back to the item 14 with the life-saving corps, I want to thank Councilman Diamond for putting this up, and I never want to put Chief Golden on the spot, but you three gentlemen, if you kind of nudge him on the way out, then you know him, Chief Ed. Maybe he can run that through the fire shop and check the tire pressures and maybe spiff it up a little bit so you all have a vehicle to last you a long time, and I'm sure he'll be glad to do that. But I understand the seats wore out and a few other things. Maybe you can tune it up a little bit before you all take it. Thank you, and thank you, Councilman Diamond, for getting that done. All right. Now, Chief Golden, I didn't realize that was your bill. I would have taken you to the top of the agenda if I realized you were here for a used pickup truck. So with that, we'll go to item 16. No, we already took up 16. 17, 2026-709. Got a motion and a second on the bill. Councilman Boylan, and then Dr. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is the second effort to water down the recent council rules. Frankly, I'm at a loss when, you know, we are elected representatives to allow us the opportunity to not show up on time, not stay engaged to the entire process. I think it's just a bad message to send to our constituents. If this job isn't a priority for my colleagues, and I don't know why they're sitting in these chairs, so I'll leave it at that. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Dr. Johnson. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. One thing I understand is that you cannot legislate morality. And the same thing. I expect the intelligent, sophisticated, smart people that sit around this dais to know that if they're going to be a few minutes late to the meeting, that they're dialed in and engaged. That's why we have the meetings themselves piped into the restroom, piped into other parts. They're monitors that allow them to be able to be seen and heard throughout this building. I do have a major problem with trying to find ways to police it, to police these kinds of activities and to take the power away from the chairs. The chairs are sophisticated enough, intelligent enough, and well-versed enough, at least they should be, which is why the council president appointed them to these positions so they can have some kind of leeway. While it may seem like this is being watered down, one of the things I've said that I kind of got hammered for, but I believe it, that we can walk and chew gum at the same time, which means there are varying priorities that all of the members of this august body have. I think because of those priorities, it's not that being on this dais is not a priority. It is. But there are also, I know since I've been on this committee, I've had more requests this year, and I did the math on it to look and see, this year I've had more requests for meetings than during the entire tenure of my time on this council. And one of the reasons being is because the finance committee does so much with all of the city departments, which I haven't had to meet with all of them, does so much with community organizations from UF Health to nonprofits, and they all want meetings. And part of what I believe is that while I can't meet with everyone all the time, I have used everything from Teams to Zoom to meeting in person, but to give these organizations the opportunity to share just a few minutes of their voice. That flexibility, however, is encumbered when there are specifics on where you can do what you can do and how much you can do. While I certainly appreciate Councilman Boylan's push to want to standardize it, there was a quote that I remember from, and I hate to bring Star Wars into it being that I'm such a Star Trek fan, but Star Wars, they said, only a Sith believes in absolutes. And the Siths in that particular franchise were not things of positivity and light. But the Force, which is where the good came from, believed that there was always flexibility. You cannot look at things in black and white and expect them to service the things in gray. And that's what a lot of the issues that we deal with on a day-to-day basis with people, everything is not in black and white. So while I'm not supportive, I certainly understand the impetus of it. What I do want to make sure is that the judgment and the final arbitration of what happens should be left in the hands of the chair. And I believe that the council members themselves can police themselves, so to speak, and make sure that they're taking care of the needs of the constituents and the unique needs of their districts. Thank you. Thank you. We'll go to Neighborhoods Chair, then Rules Chair. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is going to sound like I'm an arbiter here, but I applaud, I said this in Neighborhoods as well, I applaud all the efforts that Council Member Boylan put into this. And I really do like the things that came out of that bill that was passed through. I really do. But I also like this adjustment because I've heard from others about their concerns here. It doesn't undo 99% of the good that was in that original bill that Council Member Boylan worked so hard on. And so I applaud both gentlemen for what they've done here. And I'm good. I'm good with this. And I agree, you can't legislate morality or whatever else that we think we can, unfortunately in some cases, because I think if we respect this institution, this body, each other, we will show up on time. We will show up at the things that the president has appointed us to on a regular basis versus not showing up or sending someone else in our stead. Unfortunately, you can't legislate that. In some ways, I wish we could. But that's where we are. So back to the original point. Thank you, Council Member Boylan. And thank you, Council Member Gay. I personally think we're in a good place here. Thank you. Bill Sponsor, Council Member Gay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just to reiterate what some of my colleagues have said, you know, it's we're all in a elected position and we're all are here to represent our constituents. And that's the responsibility that each one of us has individually. And each one of us individually are accountable for that. And so moving aside from that, the problem with holding up a whole committee meeting because we don't have five has been a hindrance at some of the meetings. And to slow down the city's business, I think, is where I want to get it back on track. You know, I appreciate and I understand and respect everything that Council Member Boylan did with this. But I think this is an adjustment that we need to make that we went along for a period of time and seen what did work, what didn't work. And I think this just brings it back more to what will work to keep the city's business moving forward. And so that that's the whole contents of why I put this bill forward to keep our committees moving forward. Thank you. Councilman Diamond. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The good government dorking me is requiring me to ring in and explain my vote because I actually I struggle this one, this one with different stuff because I've actually like everything Councilman Boylan has done. I like things that hold us more accountable. This one I'm going to vote. Yes, but I at least want to explain why, which is I think the ultimate accountability for us is the voters. And I can tell you personally, when I was on deployment and I had to miss nine months of meetings here, I got absolutely just rolled over the coals by people and then got reelected. So, you know, it there is accountability with the voters out there. So that's why I'll vote. Yes. But that's it was a principle, thoughtful way of going through. I struggled with this, like it actually did. I probably put more thought into this than any other bill we voted on today. I will also stand up for the Sith a little bit. I think they get disparaged unnecessarily. Like, let's not confuse the fact that they have conviction. They get things done. They're well organized. They're patient. And they have done many great things for the universe. Thank you. All right. So I'm going to vote yes on this again. But I want to say a few other things, too. So Councilman Boyle, I support your bill and the majority of the conversation was about the number of excusals, which I'll put my attendance record up with anyone's on council. But really, my yes vote was the fact that for all four years of my time on council, I've been a chair of at least one committee. So really, my my experience managing quorum, especially being finance chair, I mean, there were days we struggled having four because there's the world I think it was even if you had two excusals, you could reduce it down to four. And so that really is why I'm supporting this. And then also just a reminder, we are not doing anything that's changed a longstanding rule. We're basically putting back into place how it was a matter of months ago when we lowered it from or increased it from four to five. We're just going back to four. And the majority of what you introduced is still intact on that bill. So with that, open the ballot, record your vote. Six yays, one nay. Fire actions. We have passed 2026-709. Item 18, 2026-720. Zero, can I get a motion? I got motion second on the bill. No in the queue, legislative services, please add me as a co-sponsor. I forgot to. And then open the ballot, record your vote. Seven yays, zero nays. Fire actions. We passed 2026-720. Item 19, 2026-740. Got motion second on the amendment. This amendment is very technical, so I won't have Ms. Reba read it. All those in favor of the amendment, say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Amendment passes. Got motion second on the bill as amended. No in the queue, open the ballot, record your vote. Six yays, one nay. Fire actions. We have approved 2026-740. Item 20 is on second. 2026-749. As is item 21, 2026-751. Items 22, 23, 2026-752-753 are on second. Item 24 and 25, 2026-755-756 are on second. Item 26, 2026-0757. Can I get a motion on the amendment? I got motion second on the amendment. Ms. Reber, you're not going to get out of this one. Can you please read the amendment? And then we'll take this amendment up and then go to the auditor-recommended amendment. Okay. Through the chair to the committee, the amendment is to place revised economic development agreement on file to remove land acquisition costs from the definition of capital investment and correct Scribner's errors. I guess I could have skipped that one, having you read it. All those in favor of the amendment, say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Amendment passes. I need someone to move the auditor-recommended amendment. Can I mention a second on the auditor-recommended amendment? Ms. Reber. Through the chair to the committee, the auditor-recommended amendment, we recommend that commencing on December 31, 2027 and continuing through the term of the rev grant, that if the company fails to retain the 20 new jobs, the rev grant distribution for that year will be proportionately reduced. And I see Mr. Randolph out there. I assume he is good with this amendment as well. He's giving me a thumbs up. All those in favor of the auditor-recommended amendment, say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Auditor-recommended amendment passes. So, I believe I need a motion on the bill as twice amended. Roll them on up. Got a motion second on the bill. I don't think it's a question as much as a statement. This is a rev only with a ROI greater than one. So, I will support this. No one in the queue. Open the bow. Record your vote. Six yays. Six yays, one nay. By our actions, we have passed 2026-0757. Council Member Diamond, you better not put in an early excusal for Tuesday night. Council Member Miller, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through the chair, before Ed heads out, I've said this before, but I just want to say through the chair, thank you for listening to us. Thank you for working with us. We've requested, Mr. Randolph, that you and your crew work with us on these incentive packages. You have done that really well for the last three years that I'm aware of. And so, I thank you for working with us, listening to us, listening to the voters, the taxpayers. And this is another example, as the chair just mentioned, of the package that you put together that is very responsible, fiscally responsible, and a cooperative type of approach. So, thank you very much. Have a nice day. I don't even know if you heard us from all the way back there. I hope you did. All right. Item 27, 2026-0765 is also on second, as is 28, 2026-0778. And we took action on item 29. I believe that completes our agenda. Anything I missed? All right. Anything from the committee? We are adjourned.