Well, good morning, everyone. Welcome to our June 1st Neighborhoods Meeting. I'll call the meeting to order, and we'll go ahead and start with introductions to my left with Mr. Delaney. Good morning, y'all. Bill Delaney, Mayor's Office. Brandon Russell, Council Research. Mary Stifopoulos, Office of General Counsel. Philip Peterson, Councilor's Office. Good morning, Michael Boylan. Happy Monday. Ken Amar, City Council, District 1. Brandi White, District 12. Mike Gay, District 2. Ron Salem, Group 2 at large. Rothman Johnson, District 14. Good morning. Just visiting. Good morning, Councilman. Reginald Gaffney, Jr., just visiting. District 8. Welcome, visiting council members. Glad to have you here. Do we have any public comment cards? All right, we have two. The first speaker will be Carnell Oliver. Please come on down. You'll be given three minutes to speak directly to a specific item on our agenda and state your name and address or say it's on file for the record. Mr. Oliver, you have three minutes. Yes, my name is Carnell Oliver. Address is on file. I want to speak to the KHA funding that has come in, being sponsored by Mr. Gaffney, Jr. And I also want to speak about the 700-something thousand dollars cap. When it comes down to the city funding, I have my red light is coming on and on. Because the thing about it is that money, a lot of money has been thrown to waste. And some of the biggest lessons that I've learned is through COVID-19 years. I will never forget the lessons that I learned. Because if properly, if this city was a good store with taxpayer dollars, we wouldn't be in the situation that we're in. And it leaves me to talk about what the Bible says. The Old Testament talks about discipline and personal responsibility, right? The New Testament talks about forgiveness. Because somebody paid the ultimate cost for somebody else breaking a lot of furniture. And I don't have really no understanding at this point in time. You look at me like I'm homeless, right? Of course I am. You expect me to get off my butt, do my part. How do you expect me to be a productive member of society when the resources that y'all put out on the streets are not going to the ones that need it the most? You're lining pockets of NGO, developer. I am one of the biggest supporters right now of Ron DeSantis' $250,000 tax exempt because it'll cripple NGOs. It'll stop all this frivolous spending. And we can fire some of these crooked city employees. I'm at a breaking point right now with all the mass corruption. And especially some of these rhinos on the city council. Too much furniture has got broken because of ignorance. I have told you plenty of times about moving fools. But you made the wrong choices time after time after time. And everybody's paying for it. All right. Thank you. Our next speaker will be Mr. John J. Nooney. And as always, specifically on the agenda. Hello, I am John, Philanthropic, Jelly Roll, Good Boy, Resiliency, Nooney, 8356, Bascom Road, Jacksonville, Florida, 32216. I'm in city council district 4, Carrico. CPAC 3, Wislowski, Raymond Day, School Board, District 3, Cindy Pearson, Charter School, Public School, Field Trip Park on Pottsburg Creek. Governor DeSantis, President-elect Howland, Vice President-elect Carlucci, pardon Nooney, 2024-0107. Yeah, I'll be touching on agenda items. We got one, eight. But first, I just, I'm down to two and a half minutes. I'll be making three donations. First will be to the Veterans Trust Fund. The next will be, and by the way, that's 2025-0463. The next is the Parks Trust Fund, 2026-0004. And the third one is the Artificial Reef Trust Fund, 2009-442. So, and I'll be taking those up. And I just shared that with Rich, every media outlet. Get ready. You know, we, you know, this is good stuff. So, down to a minute 50. So, agenda items, 1, 8, 2026-0358, not in waterways. Number 9, 2026-0364, 10, 2026-0377, 11, 2026-0378, 14, 2026-0382, Environmental Protection Board, 2024-0325. Down to a minute 30, 19, 2026-0388, 21, 2026-0391. Are we getting rid of the Environmental Protection Board and creating a new authority? 25, 2026-0396. Okay, this is Todd, red carpet Rubin. Now, we're adding endowment grants to the Jacksonville Fostering Filmmaker Grant Program. I mean, that's super duper stuff. I mean, we're making a movie. It's going to be wicked. You got a shirt. You'll be in the movie. Special consideration will be given to the travel gavel. Okay, we've got 50 seconds. All right, 2026-0450. JU, the College of Law, forgiveness of $1,250,000. Remember, 2024-0107, $3.5 million. So, is that in addition to that other $3.5 million? I mean, 30-some seconds. You know, that Environmental Protection Board, you know, with the $45,000 for the party travel. Scrap it. $45,000. You know, we'll do a GoFundMe account. You know, we've got to start cutting some stuff here. And, in fact, I'm only down to 18 seconds. But when you read the reason, it's education. But then we're going to waive the education. It's right there. We're waiving it. It's for education, but then we're going to waive the education so we can party. Thank you for listening. All right. Thank you. All right. First, we're going to go ahead into our agenda here. We're going to take some items out of order for our visiting council members. First item we're going to take is item number 33 on page 21. If you want to turn to there, we'll be taking item number 33, 2026-0450. Can I get a motion on emergency? I've got a motion and a second on the emergency. Mr. Gaffney, do you want to address it? Thank you, through the chair, to all my colleagues. Just to be brief, this piece of legislation you guys voted on maybe six or seven months ago, we're just extending the term sheet and modifying the term sheet. And it's a piece of simple legislation. Right. So in regards to the emergency? It turns out our emergency. Mr. Peterson, do you want to speak on the emergency? Through the chair of the committee, the nature of the emergency is that, as Councilmember Gaffney Jr. stated, y'all approved a direct contract with LISC last year. Due to some contract negotiations and issues, they have not yet executed this contract. So the emergency is to be able to get that contract executed as soon as possible under the revised term sheet that Mr. Gaffney worked out. All right. No speakers on the emergency. All in favor, say yay. Yay. Any opposed? Likewise, none. Emergency carries. Get a motion and a second on the bill as an emergency. And I've got a motion and a second. Mr. Bullen, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Maybe to Mr. Peterson or Mr. Councilmember Gaffney. The increase from 400 to 750, can you explain the rationale? So thank you. So thank you. So I'm not sure if you recall, maybe like two months ago, and I said this when I first proposed the legislation, us, our colleagues, our body, we allocated through the COVID funds, I think a million dollars, yeah, it was less. That's where I got this idea from. What we're realizing is that some of these small businesses make up to like a million dollars, and they've been reaching now asking for just help, need help in spending and so on. So yeah, so that's what I'm finding out is that most of these small businesses, their salary ranges anywhere from 500 to a million dollars. So by increasing, through the chair, by increasing this to 750, we have a sense that the number of organizations that didn't qualify prior or will qualify because of this 750 number? Absolutely, yes, sir. What is that number? Do you know? I don't know. I have to get with lists, but lists had like a little filler. They said, so pretty much this, this bill was pretty much arranged from lists where we gave a million dollars out, and they had like a list of organizations that did apply that, but wasn't able to receive funds because of qualifications and restrictions. Pedro here, any from the list to speak to this? No, but I can make sure. I think- I appreciate getting that information. He'll be at the Rules Committee and Finance, Lamar. Thank you. Okay. All right. Thank you. All right. No other speakers on the queue. Councilman Lamar, you were on the queue. Mr. Chair, I just want to follow up on Councilman Boylan, and I think that in my years, I haven't heard a great explanation for why we're going to do a $350,000 jump in the allocation here. And so that's what I'd like to know more in that aspect. Yep. So after speaking with Dr. Coren from LIS, what he explained to me that a lot of businesses that wasn't eligible, they didn't meet the criteria. So he said, Councilman Gaffney, in order to make more businesses eligible, we might want to increase the, I guess, the revenue so more businesses could be eligible for this grant. Through the Chair to Philip, is there a timeline for application, and if there is, when will these funds be reverted back to a general fund? Because if I'm hearing the Councilman correctly, there haven't been enough applicants because of the dollar amount, then hopefully by approving an increase would trigger greater participation. Through the Chair to Councilman Romero. So the application process is going to be established by LISC once they have an executed contract with the city. However, all of the dollars will be required to be spent by the end of this calendar year. So there's only about seven months, seven months today, left in the year whereby they have the ability to spend those dollars. So I don't know the exact application timeline that LISC will have established, but there's a minimal time period. Any dollars remaining after December 31st will come back into the city's account. Through the Chair to Philip, follow-up. Given the processes involved, it sounds like the probability of these dollars being spent by the end of the year are extremely remote. And just give me some context there. Through the Chair to Councilmember Romero. So the grant term sheet does allow for the dollars to be reimbursed to LISC, who will then reimburse the entities for the entire 2026 calendar year. So even though you are approving it in June, and we probably won't have a contract until July, the reimbursement qualifying period is the entire 2026 calendar year. So more than likely, I would expect these dollars to all be spent, given that it's not just a forward-looking time period. Right. No other speakers in the queue. I've got a motion and a second on the bill. Open the ballots. Record your vote. Five yays, zero nays. By your action, you've approved 2026-0451. The next item we'll do, turn the page to item 22, item number 34, 2026-000452. I get a motion on the emergency. I get a second. I get a second. I've got a motion and a second on the emergency. Mr. Peterson on the emergency. Through the Chair to the committee, the nature of the emergency is to make these funds available as early as possible as the program that is being funded begins early this month. All right. Thank you. Mr. Gaffney, on the bill or an emergency? On the bill. Okay. Dr. Salem, the bill or an emergency? Okay. So we're still on the emergency. Okay. Okay. All right. So no other speakers on the emergency. All in favor of the emergency, say yay. Yay. Any opposed? Likewise. None. Emergency carries. I've got a motion on the bill as an emergency. Can I get a second? All right. I've got a motion and a second. On the bill as an emergency, Mr. Gaffney, you're recognized. Yes. Thank you through the Chair to my colleagues. So a month ago, I had a chance to go to our Goodwill when I met with the CEO, David, and I met with Mr. Phillip Simmons. They were sharing with me about the Marist Youth Program, how I think like last year, over a thousand kids applied to this program, but only 500 kids was hired for this Marist Youth Program. So pretty much what this is, it's just allocating money. It's the same program similar to the Marist Youth Program. It's just allocating funds to this program to get teens off the street to get them some summer jobs. It's as simple as that. All right. Thank you. Let me go to Dr. Salem. Thank you, Chair. Through the Chair to Mr. Peterson. This traffic calming dollars we approved two or three years ago, correct? Through the Chair to Council Member Salem as part of the 23-24 budget. How much was originally approved for traffic calming in that district? Through the Chair to Council Member Salem, $300,000. $300,000. How much of it has been used for traffic calming? Through the Chair to Council Member Salem, zero. Zero. How much has been spent before this, 75? Through the Chair to Council Member Salem, the council approved $25,000 to go to the Oysterfest, a couple months ago. Okay. So this would leave, if this passes, it'll leave $200,000. Through the Chair to Mr. Gaffney, what is your intent on these dollars? A comment was made by one of my colleagues. I won't repeat it, but I think you probably heard it. If you could address that. So thank you through the Chair. So a couple of years ago, I part these dollars there with no intentions to use them. And at the time, some of the funds was designated to go to speed hunts. But as I eloquently said a couple of weeks ago, is that what I'm finding now, some of these communities don't have the meaning in not getting the petitions to get the speed hunts. But long story short, I part these funds there in this account with no real intentions. It's not all of it's supposed to go to the traffic comings. But some of it is, some of it not. But it was just a method and I guess just a way of parking funds because at the time, I wasn't sure how I was going to use these funds. So that's why a couple of weeks ago, I think a couple of months ago, we changed, I guess, the topic for these funds to make it more strategic. But at the time, I wasn't sure how I was going to use the funds. So I just parted there as a mechanism to use them. Through the chair to Mr. Peterson, this $300,000 was part of the budget process, if I recall correctly. Is that correct? Through the chair to Council Member Salem, that's correct. It was part of leftover dollars in the council contingency. And Mr. Gaffney asked him for this purpose. You know, this makes me very uncomfortable. It sounds like you have another $200,000 that you're going to come forward with some other spending that will not be traffic calming. And we appropriate it. I don't recall the discussion in 23-24, but I'm assuming that the committee believed you were going to use it for traffic calming. So, yeah, thank you to the chair to Council Member Salem. So at the time, I wasn't sure how I was going to use the funds. So I parted these dollars there at this traffic calming. I allocated these funds to this specific designation. Some of it is planned to go to traffic calming. The issue that I'm running into, once again, is that some of these communities don't want the traffic calming now. That was my intention. A lot of communities, 23-24, did reach out to get traffic calming. But what I'm finding out, when I go to these community meetings, is that it's a lot of infighting about these traffic calming. So now I designated these funds there, and these communities don't want them. So for whatever reason. Or they can't get the petitions. So now this money just stuck. So either I can let it there and it just go, not go to good use. Or I can wait on some of these communities. But we have at least seven communities, and I can name them, that reached out about traffic calming. We had community meetings. And so what I'm finding out, a lot of these communities, we don't want them. It's too many. It ruined my car and stuff like that. So at the time, I parted the dollars. Now what I'm finding out, things are changing. We've got other needs and things of that nature. I've said my piece. Thank you, Mr. Chair. All right. Thank you. Let me go to Councilman Amaro. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm going to follow up on Councilman Salem's concern, and it's the optics of what's taking place here. And I know we had this conversation through the chair regarding the 25,000 appropriations for the Oysterfest. And I was hoping there would be some sort of correction somewhere as to where the funds are. It just doesn't look good when money has been allocated for traffic calming, and now you're taking it for Oysterfest and now for summer jobs. And it's hard to vote against kids who are trying to find summer employment. But we've been given a fiduciary role of doing what is right up here with the dollars that have been given and trusted to us. And it just doesn't look right. And so I don't know how I'm going to go on this, but I want to make that clear. All right. Thank you. Let's go to Councilman Bowling. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I don't want to pile on, but I think following the comments of my two colleagues, the best thing to do, frankly, is to put the traffic calming money back into the general operating, put it back into the budget, and have this stand on its own, and then coming out of the operating reserve. I mean, the traffic calming is a safety issue. Now you're using these dollars for a non-safety issue, as important as they are. And as Councilman Amaro said, I want to support it. I just don't like the route that's being taken. We're seeing this happening more and with greater frequency. I'm not disparaging you at all, Councilman Gaffney. It's just the idea of us saying we're going to put all this money over here and then pull it out and use it over there, knowingly, perhaps, that you were going to do that ultimately through this process. It doesn't bode well for you. It doesn't bode well for us as a council. So I would suggest, and maybe through Mr. Peterson or Mr. Fopolis, the prospect of substituting this bill, coming back with a bill that clearly delineates the fact that the money from the traffic calming that you think you're not going to be using to go back into the operating reserve, and then have this stand on its own pulling the money out of the operating reserve. It just seems to be a straighter and more transparent path for the use of these funds. Mr. Chair. All right. Thank you. Mr. Gaffney, you're in the queue next. But my question to you is, a little clarification, is you said you parked the money. Now, are you referring to when you originally filed the bill for this traffic calming, that the intent was to park it, or that now that these communities haven't wanted to utilize this fund, you've got it parked there and not moving forward with that? If you could give me a little clarification on that. Yeah. Well, thank you to the chair, to Councilman Gaffney. So, pretty much, you know, at the end of the 23, 24 budget, we had leftover strategic funds. At the time, I wasn't sure what I was going to do with these funds. But at the same time, in the back of my head, a lot of communities had reached out to me about traffic calming. So, I parked the funds there, thinking that I would need some of it, not sure if I need all of it to use for traffic calming. Fast forward now, I have went to, like, at least four or five community meetings. And what I'm finding now is that a lot of these same communities that reached out to me a couple of years back at odds now, they're not sure if they want the traffic calming. So, I have hesitated to move forward. Right. And I get that part. I was just looking at the original intent that you did intend to do traffic calming. And now that dynamics has changed. Is there an amount now that you would still want to keep for traffic calming? And then, like the recommendation that Councilman Bullen referred to, move a portion of it back to the general fund to where we can structure it that way? I think with kind of what I'm getting from the committee up here, that would be a better place to land this at. Thank you, Councilman Gay, and through the chair. I mean, that's fine with me. The only thing about it is that, you know, now I go back to the first point I made, is that I met with Goodwill. And they shared with me, last year, 1,000 kids applied to Goodwill to get jobs. Only 500 kids were selected. So, you know, that's why I thought about taking it. So, what I'm trying to do is get kids jobs. We could do it that way. The only thing about it, school is out. We got 5,000 to 10,000, if not 15,000 kids that are just sitting at the house. We're just trying to get these kids jobs. So, we could do it that way. I'm not sure how long that's going to take, but school ended up last week. I did bring Phillip, Mr. Simmons from Goodwill is here to speak about that, if y'all have any questions for him. So, we could do it that way in terms of, I guess, taking the traffic calming money and putting it back in the budget and then allocate. I'm not sure how that worked, what's the process, but I'm not sure what that means for the kids starting for the summer youth program. All right. Let me go to Ms. Mary or Mr. Peterson. Through the chair to the committee and Council Member Gaffney. So, you could accomplish it in one bill or you could do it as two. I'm not sure what the point of it would be as if you did it in one bill where you would just move it into one account and then automatically move it into the other in the same bill. You could do a bill. You could substitute this to just convert it to an appropriation out of the traffic calming into the operating reserves and just do that and then bring a subsequent bill that would pull it from the operating reserves to the Goodwill program. You could do that. All right. Let me go back to the committee here. Council Member Morrow. Thank you, Mr. Chair. That was going to be my suggestion just to make it clean. And I know the kids, they're out there. And, again, part of the challenge here is you don't want to vote against summer employment for students. And you're trying to make sure that things are clean, though, and transparent. And so, I don't know if the Council Member wants to defer a cycle. I don't know. Okay. Go ahead. I'm sorry. Let me kind of keep going through the order here. Dr. Salem. I have a suggestion. I don't want to vote against this because I think it's too far along. What if we amended this bill to say the remaining $200,000 of the $300,000 that is remaining will fall into the reserves? Through the Chair to Council Member Salem. So, in speaking with Mr. Peterson, that should be accomplished through a separate piece of legislation is what his recommendation is. You can't just, through the Chair to Mr. Peterson, I can't just amend this bill to do that? Yeah, so, in this case, and I also think Council Member Gaffney, Jr. was also going to request a substitute on this legislation. So, you may want to hear from him on that because it entailed an adjustment to the appropriation amount. At the end of that conversation, if the committee is amenable to that, some of this becomes so substantive that I would be recommending a re-referral at the end of it because now we would be, to accomplish what Dr. Salem is discussing, changing the appropriation amount from $75,000 to $275,000. So, to the extent that the bill was noticed as an appropriation of $75,000 to Goodwill, that's what the public was aware that the bill was accomplishing. We may just want to discuss, as a committee, whether that additional change would warrant sending it back through the process so it could be re-noticed to the public. But you may want to hear from Council Member Gaffney on the potential substitute he was going to ask the committee to consider. All right. If the committee would... Hey, I was just trying to get us out of this quicksand, and I thought that was the best way to do it. If the committee would let me, let's go to Council Member Gaffney and hear about this substitute. Thank you to the chair. So, what Ms. Mary is referring to, so two things. What I want to do is increase the number of kids that get Will Hire. So, originally, right now, it's 25 kids at $75,000. What I want to do is increase it to 50 kids, and it'll be $150,000. Also, I guess the other substitute would be, instead of it going to Kids Hope Alliance, it's going directly to Goodwill. And the reason because of that is because Kids Hope Alliance is going through some transitioning right now, and they won't be able to oversee this piece of legislation until they get a new CEO, until they have another board meeting. So, it'll be going straight to Goodwill. That last part is inaccurate. He would be wanting to change oversight from Kids Hope Alliance to grants and contract compliance. So, all appropriations have to go through a department or division for oversight to administer the contract. So, it's not like the money just goes straight to Goodwill. So, what he's recommending or requesting is that the oversight be adjusted from Kids Hope Alliance to grants and contract compliance. And that adjustment would change some of the waivers in the bill. We would take out the waivers of Chapter 77 relevant to Kids Hope Alliance. And we would also be adding in a waiver of 118-107 where we have to attach that affidavit of disclosure with respect to direct appropriations to a nonprofit. All right. So, this basically changes our whole discussion from when we first started discussing this bill. So, you know, I'm all for getting the money to the kids. So, with this, we would need a motion on a substitute. Yes. A member of the committee would need to move the substitute, and then you would need a second to put it in front of the committee for discussion and consideration. Go ahead, Mr. Bullock. Mr. Chair, I would offer the substitute to increase to $150,000. However, it also includes a subgroup that comes directly from the operating reserve, with the expectation that Councilman Gaffney then will introduce a bill that takes the balance of his traffic calming funds or a portion of it back into the operating reserve thereafter at the least amount of $150,000. So, through the chair to Councilmember Boylan, just to confirm, you're adjusting the appropriation to $150,000. You're adjusting the appropriation account to be operating reserves, and you would also include the change to the oversight to grants as part of this? Absolutely. Okay. If I could, Mr. Chair, bring up a Goodwill person, please, whoever from Goodwill is here to speak to this. I'm interested. I need a second. I'm sorry. All right. I've got a motion to second. Your name and address, please. Philip Simmons. And with my title is Vice President for Mission Programs at Goodwill Industries of North Florida. First, through the chair to Councilmember Boylan, you said you had questions. I do. Yes, sir. With respect to, so we're looking at $150,000, 50 students or 50 youth in this process. Of those, that's on average $3,000 per. How much of those funds would be actually being paid to those students for their services over the course of the summer? Yes, sir. Roughly, through the chair to Councilmember Boylan, roughly $140,000 of that. $10,000 of that will be to admin. Administration. Yes. I appreciate knowing that. And where are you in the process of moving forward with this in the event that it gets through Council the next week? Yes, we, through the chair to Councilman Boylan, we are ready to go. I have already sent out the applications and tried to identify students with Councilman Gaffney and make sure that we, I mean, we already have the infrastructure. We've been running an internship program for now for the past six years. Through the chair to Mr. Gaffney again. I just want to affirm that you'll be introducing legislation, I need to hear it orally, please, that the balance of the funds not needed for traffic calming will be put back into the operating reserve. It's going to require second legislation, second piece. Are you going to be? That's fine, yeah. So, Mr. Chair, I'm trying to get us to land this plane, and I think we're close. Thank you. Before I go to anybody else, we need to make sure we're clear on this because there's still some, I guess, some confusion about the substitute of what's going to be going into the general, back into the reserves, and what's going to stay in District 8 for traffic calming. To the chair and through the chair to the committee. So, based on the discussion and how the substitute was proposed, the substitute would adjust this appropriation to $150,000, which would leave approximately $125,000 in the traffic calming. That would stay there to be moved to the operating reserves by future legislation that Councilmember Gaffney has indicated he would introduce. And this bill, based on the substitute, if it's approved, would change the funding source from the District 8 traffic calming to operating reserves, with the intent that his subsequent bill would replenish a portion of that with what's remaining in traffic calming. I would also just recommend to the committee that, based on the substantive nature of all of these changes, that you might consider whether it would be appropriate to re-refer this bill so that it can be re-noticed and re-advertised to the public with all of the changes that are going to be incorporated. It would add two weeks to the process, but you may consider whether that's appropriate in light of all of the substance of the changes that are being discussed. All right. Thank you. I'm under the mindset of let's move it forward based on this substitute to get the money to Goodwill for the jobs. Next in the queue is Councilman Morrow. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through the chair to Council Member Gaffney, if I'm hearing your agreement correctly, you're going to empty your traffic calming with the balance of $125 and sending that back to the general fund. Yes, sir. But I probably end up creating more legislation. It'll go to the general funds with the intentions of, I'm not sure at this time what I'll use the funds for, but they'll write more legislation, but it will go back to the general fund. Thank you. All right. Thank you. All right. You're in the queue, Mr. Gaffney. All right. So no other speakers on the queue. I've got a motion and a second on the substitute. All in favor of the substitute, say yay. Yeah. Yay. Any opposed? Likewise. None. The substitute carries. So can I get a motion and a second on the bill as an emergency as a substitute? I've got a motion and a second on the bill. Open the ballots and record your vote. Five yays, zero nays. All right. By your action, you've approved 2026-0452. That takes us to our next item, number 10, that we're going to go to for Council Member Johnson. It's on page nine. Thank you, guys. I appreciate it. All right. Thank you, sir. All right. Item number 10, 2026-0377. I've got a motion on the bill. I get a second. And I get a second. Thank you. I've got a motion and a second on the bill. Dr. Salem. Thank you, Chair. Through the chair to Council Member Johnson, we have about three or four months of data now where we've gone from 2 a.m. to 3 a.m. Is that pretty accurate? Two months. Okay. You have the Council Secretary responsible for collecting this data. It was my thinking that DIA may be a more appropriate entity to collect this data. I was interested in your thought process in picking the Council Secretary, if he can respond. Go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Dr. Salem. Through the chair to Dr. Salem. The reason that this is in the Council Secretary will be responsible for distributing it, but if in the legislation specifically, the Northeast Florida Regional Council will aggregate, gather the data from all of the requisite in the legislation. It talks about the JFRD, JSO, downtown businesses, people who live in downtown, gathering that information, and the Northeast Florida Regional Council has agreed to produce the report. The Council Secretary, however, would be responsible for working with them to distribute it to the members of the Council. Okay. May I continue? Yes, sir. So the Council Secretary is not accumulating this data. The Northeast Florida Planning Council is responsible with getting with all the entities, and we're just looking at the hour difference. Is that correct? That's correct. We're looking to see during, through the chair, we're looking to see what happened during that period so that we can see, do we need to decrease it? Do we need to increase it? Are there things we need to do? And what can we do to move toward a downtown entertainment district? As an educator like I was, we're going to compare all the data to two to three versus what might be happening between 12 and one and one and two, for example. Yes, sir. You're absolutely right. Okay. I'm fine with that. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Let me go ahead and jump to Mr. Peterson. To the chair, to the committee. I just wanted to point out, in the legislation, the council secretary is the one who is required to prepare the report. While the Northeast Florida Regional Council may assist in accumulating, the ultimate responsibility falls on the council secretary. So I just wanted that to be made known. All right. Thank you. Councilman Amaro. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just heard what Philip said, and I just heard what Dr. Johnson said. And where I need clarity is, is this within the scope of the role of the council secretary? Is this part of his job description? And I don't know who can answer that. Mr. Teal? Hold up, Mr. Teal. Through the chair to Mr. Teal. Is this within the scope of your role, sir, that you prepare this report? It's different from you presenting versus preparation. Through the chair to Council Member Romero, Jason Teal, council secretary. I would argue that it is not. I don't have the resources to be able to go out and conduct any kind of analysis, nor do I think that my office has the expertise to be able to compile data, evaluate it, make a report based upon the evaluation as to whether or not there are any issues or there are any concerns as far as the operation of these entities between those hours. So, I would say that that is not within the scope of the council secretary's office. I'm the repository for information on behalf of the council. We don't do the kind of analysis. Typically, the council auditors do analysis. But I would argue that this is more of an executive function as opposed to a legislative one. But, yeah, that's the concerns that I have with regard to this is that I don't have the resources to be able to pull that off. Through the chair. Thank you for that clarification because the language is pretty explicit, requiring a comprehensive report by you. And so, when I saw that, it just made me somewhat uneasy. So, I just thank you for the clarity. All right. Let me go back to the introducer, Dr. Johnson. Thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. Chair. What I wanted to say is, and I know this was prepared by Mr. Reingold before he left and we went through it. There was a notice meeting on it. I spoke with both the council secretary as well as the Northeast Florida Regional Council. And I'm looking, and for what I am, the language that was put in was that the regional council was supposed to be the main group. I mean, we really went back and forth about that and even got with the regional council and put it there. They're the main group who are putting in all of the details, going to all of the agencies. As you notice in the legislation, it does speak to all of the agencies that require the report to be done. Again, as I said, when I spoke to the council secretary, we were not asking the council secretary to do the report, but the report needed to be shepherded by someone. It couldn't be specifically from a council member. And the regional council, while we are a member of that and a dues payer to that organization, we still needed someone in-house to be responsible for the report. And so that's why that was the recommendation I received from the general council's office, and I happen to agree with it. I believe the council secretary, while not required to do the report, nor do they have the expertise or data, although they do step in to places where, you know, it's a little tenuous there. I don't believe they should be. But in this specific example, I do believe the secretary's office not should be responsible for creating the report, but certainly working with the regional council to ensure this council receives the comprehensive report. And so if we need to change, I'm certainly open to a language change. So the council secretary does not feel as though that it is unfairly targeting that office to do something that they're not equipped, prepared, or understand how to do. All right. Thank you. Let me go to Ms. Mary real quick. Through the chair of the committee, I would just caution you, you can't mandate to the Northeast Florida Regional Council that they take this task on. If they voluntarily agree that they would assist with it, that's certainly up to them. And you could put it in as a request that they usher the report through or administer the report, but it can't be a mandate. And to the extent that they're willing to assist in that endeavor, you probably would want to hear from them to confirm. Maybe Dr. Johnson did speak to them in that regard. It sounds like he did. But before you add it to the bill, and then you could also just assign someone, potentially DIA or another entity within the organization that's not the council secretary that would work with in coordination with them if they are voluntarily willing to take it on to bring the report back. All right. So I've got quite a few back in the queue now. I would like to just reach over to Dr. Johnson. Would you be willing to list defer this and that all this reach back out to the Northeast Florida Regional Council and the different kind of get this, I guess, pulled together on exactly where it needs to go and then have, if it's the Northeast Regional Council that's going to be involved in this, have them come here as well? I think that would settle everybody down. Let me say, Mr. Chair, thank you for asking. And while I do understand, I think it's important. This is not going to change the data. So I think we're fine. I'm certainly fine with the deferral. And they were supposed to be mentioned in the legislation. And I do have specific emails where I sent over to the General Counsel's office. And that was supposed to be included in this legislation. I do understand there were some personnel changes. But as most of you know, I'm very detailed in the work that I do. I ensured that we literally mentioned it. And there's an email as a part of that from the Regional Council that says they were willing to do this project. I didn't just come up with them and just mandate them to do it. Furthermore, no one's mandating them to do anything. It was a request. As I co-chaired under Council President Salem, or I chaired a subcommittee on the jail, they were our people that helped us create that report. So they have agreed. They've done other reports, I know, personally for my district. So I do agree with the deferral. We will, I guess, move it forward in that respect. I wish that there could have been some communication about this before, because I really did vet this thoroughly before moving to this point. And so I look forward to coming up with this. If we could do it to a date certain, I just don't want us to end up down the road and we not have this report. So if we could do it for the next committee cycle, I'll make sure that it's possible for this to work. Okay, so I'm going to pause on the deferral and keep on letting the committee speak here. Dr. Salem, you're next. Thank you, Chair. Dr. Johnson kind of stole my thunder. I requested the Northeast Fork Planning Council do our jail study two or three years ago. They did an excellent job. They basically did everything. And then the report came back to Council Member Boylan, who chaired that, who received it, and the individual subcommittee members, White, Peluso, et cetera, reviewed it as well. I would see this as a report conducted by the Planning Council. I'm coming back to you, Dr. Johnson, for a final review and then put out. It would be my recommendation. All right. Thank you. Let me go to Chief White. Thank you. I would like to, through the chair, ask Mr. Teal here, but I would, whatever we do, deferred or move it on, it's fine with me. But I would like to make an amendment to change that word, one word for prepare to distribute. Then I think that protects him. And then no matter what they do, if there's a report, it's just his job to distribute it. If there's not, there's nothing to distribute. But I would like to make an amendment to change that word prepare to distribute. But if I could get a second. Can you get it? All right. We've got a motion and a second on the amendment to change Mr. Teal as to distribute it. Councilman Morrow, are you on the amendment? Through the chair to Ms. DeFopolis, what would that language look like? Through the chair to Councilmember Morrow. So I believe Mr. White is referring to on the section one of the bill, which it talks about the preparation. It would just change the word to, so it would state instead of the city, the council's secretary director is hereby required to prepare a comprehensive data-driven report, et cetera. It would say he's required to distribute. What's left, though, is who would then be responsible or requested to prepare it. So if this amendment passes, it would be very clear in the bill that the intent is that the council secretary will receive that report and distribute it to the council. But what's left unstated in the bill is who then is tasked with or requested to prepare it. Through the chair to Ms. DeFopolis, again, the introduction says, ordinance requiring a comprehensive report by the council secretary director pertaining to the downtown blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. So the language would read what ordinance requiring council secretary to present? No, it would be on the fly, because anything within the vein of the intent of the amendment we would address in the bill when we actually prepare the amendment. So if the intention of this amendment is approved, I would probably change the title to say something along the lines of an ordinance requiring a comprehensive report to be distributed by the council secretary. What would need to be added is who would be preparing it. Here to Ms. DeFopolis, do we need an ordinance for that? Through the chair to council member Amaro, yes, this is something that would be done through ordinance and not through ordinance. To ask him to distribute, we need an ordinance. Well, I think the intention of being an ordinance is because it was directing the preparation of the report in consultation with a number of different agencies. So that was appropriately done through an ordinance versus a resolution. That being said, I think your ordinance is substantively lacking if it doesn't indicate who would be preparing it. You know, if you just shift it to distribution, you have a substantive flaw that needs to be filled, a gap that needs to be filled. All right. So basically on the amendment on the floor now is Council Member White's amendment to change. It would be to adjust any throughout the bill, wherever we would need to adjust the language, it would state that the council's secretary director would be responsible for distributing the report once it's completed versus requiring that he prepare it. Okay. But do we need to address the, who does the preparations? Through, to the chair, I would recommend that if this amendment is approved, that yes, you would want to then take an action to address who would need to prepare the report. You could also defer the bill to let Dr. Johnson kind of work through some of that before you start taking up amendments to that effect. But you may want to address that with the introducer as well. All right. Chief White. Yes, sir. It might make sense just to go ahead. If y'all want to pass my amendment, then defer it. And then it will come with that one word change, no matter what we do in the future. All right. Thank you, sir. Dr. Johnson, I got you on the queue for the amendment. It's my recommendation, Mr. Chair, with all due respect, that we defer the bill as a whole. I think Chair White, Councilman White, is absolutely on point with this. As I just talked to the council secretary and understanding the nuances of this bill, I think we need to do any changes together. And I certainly don't mind having it all as one amendment that includes any language referring to the council secretary or the DIA, as well as, and I just looked at the email, the regional council is supposed to be included in this legislation, and it's not. So I think if we just do a blanket deferral, put all of the language in there as one, and then amend the bill when it comes back, and I hope I could get a member of this committee to join me in amending it, because all this is is just asking for this report. I think we would all be in a good place there. All right. Chief White. Yes, sir, I withdraw my amendment, and then maybe it'll go just like Mr. Johnson wants it to. Thank you. All right. So the amendment's withdrawn, and I'm going to go ahead, at the request of the introducer, defer this bill, and we'll discuss it here in the future. The next item that we'll go to is item number 39 on page 25, the very last page of the agenda. Item number 39, 2026-0466, can I get a motion on emergency? I've got a motion and a second on emergency. Mr. Peterson on emergency. Through the chair to the committee, the request for emergency is in order to make the funding available as soon as possible as this program is scheduled to begin early this month. All right. Any discussion on emergency? None. I see. All in favor of emergency, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Likewise, none. The emergency carries. Can I get a motion and a second on the bill? I need to get a motion and a second on the amendment. Can I get a second? I've got a motion and a second on the amendment. Mr. Peterson. Through the chair of the committee, the amendment will remove the waiver of section 110-112 related to the advancement of funds, funds that are placed within KHA. KHA has the authority to advance up to 25 percent, which is what the term sheet identifies, and so there's no reason for that waiver, and so we're removing that from the bill. All right. Any speakers on emergency, I mean the amendment? None. I see. All in favor of the amendment, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Likewise. None. The amendment carries. We can get a motion and a second on the bill as an emergency as amended. And I've got a second. So, no discussions, no speakers in the queue, open a ballot, record your vote. Five yays, zero and a's. All right. By your action, you'll approve 2026-0466, and Dr. Johnson, you're recognized. Thank you, gentlemen, for approving that. I do want to recognize the people from Vision for Excellence that will be carrying out this program that are here, Dr. Faye Davis, Felicia Fredericks, and Kendall Anderson, they will be doing this program, and it was my attempt, at least for the west side, with all the teen takeovers and those kind of things that are going on, this program will be a summer youth-intensive experience that goes into an after-school program at the Lou Brantley Park off 118th Street. So, thank you, gentlemen, for voting this forward. All right. Thank you. All right. This takes us back to the beginning of our agenda. Item number one, 2024-0966, deferred. Item number two, 2025-0361, is deferred. Item number three, 2026-0227, is deferred. Item number four, 2026-0318, is deferred. And it takes us to item number five, 2026-0319. I open the public hearing. Do we have any speaker cards? No speaker cards. I close the public hearing. Can I get a motion in a second? You are correct. This is deferred. Item number six, 2026-0320, is deferred. Item number seven, 2026-0335. Can I get a motion on the amendment? I've got a motion in a second on the amendment. Mr. Peterson. Through the chair to the committee, the amendment corrects the fuel cap fiscal year to the appropriate fiscal year as it relates to this three-year renewal. It places a revised first amendment on file to, again, correct that fuel cap within the agreement. Remove reference to a fiscal year 2032-33. That is beyond the term of the agreement. And then correct various section references. All right. Any discussion on the amendment? None. All in favor of the amendment, say yay. Yay. Any opposed? Likewise. None. The amendment carries. I've got a motion of second on the bill as amended. Let's go back to Mr. Peterson for auditor concerns. Through the chair to the committee. This is the last of the three waste hauler contracts that are coming to you to remove the rate review process. In doing so, the rate review is removed in this agreement. The agreement is extended for an additional three years to match the prior waste pro contract that you approved last fall. And then lastly, it increases the rate above their current rate by 8.8%. That is above the CPI cap of 5% that is included in the agreement. And so, we're just making you aware that by approving this 8.8% increase, that is a $1.1 million difference over what CPI would be. And given that it has a six-year time frame left on the contract, that $1.1 million equates to a $7 million total impact that you are approving towards the solid waste fund. All right. I don't see any speakers on the queue. Open the ballot and record your vote. 5 yays, 0 nays. By your action, you're approved. 2026-0-335. That takes us to our next item on the agenda. Item number 8, 2026-0-3-5-8 is deferred. Item number 9, 2026-0-3-6-4 is deferred. Item number 10, we've already done item number 10, takes us to item number 11, 2026-03-7-8. Got a motion on the amendment. I've got a motion second on the amendment. Mr. Peterson. Through the chair to the committee, the amendment would remove the striking of the Downtown Development Authority and update the terminology to match the definitions within Chapter 250. Would also move language regarding the determination on applications from one section of our code to another section that's more appropriate. Changes references from the Consumer Affairs Manager, that is not in a specifically identified position, to the designee of the Director of the Neighborhoods Department or DIA. Revise the penalty provisions to reflect a Class D offense, unless otherwise provided. That matches the violations in Chapter 609 of our code and then corrects various scriveners. All right. Thank you. Any speakers on the amendment? None. All in favor of the amendment, say yay. Yay. All right. Let me go to Councilman Amaro. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through the chair to Philip. Philip, can you expound a little bit on the part in the amendment that speaks to the revocation of the authority and the role of the special magistrate? Through the chair to Councilmember Amaro. So, with the changes in this legislation, the special magistrate will now be the one who can suspend or revoke a permit under Chapter 250 that will fall under their authority. And so, the code as it currently stands gives that authority to the downtown, the director of the Downtown Development Authority or the DIA. But this includes more than just the DIA. It also includes areas that are overseen by the Neighborhoods Department. So, now that role will be done by the special magistrate. Speakers on the amendment. All in favor of the amendment, say yay. Yay. Any opposed? Likewise. None. The amendment carries. Can I get a motion and a second on the bill as amended? And a second, please. I've got a motion and a second on the bill as amended. No speakers in the queue. Let's open the ballot and record the vote. Five yays, zero nays. By your action, you're approved. Twenty-twenty-six, zero-three-seven-eight. The next item, number twelve, twenty-twenty-six, zero-three-eight-zero. Can I get a motion on the bill? I've got a motion and a second on the bill. No speakers in the queue. Open the ballot and record your vote. Five yays, zero nays. By your action, you're approved. Twenty-twenty-six, zero-three-eight-zero. Item number thirteen, twenty-twenty-six, zero-three-eight-one. Can I get a motion on the amendment? Can I get a second? All right, I've got a motion and a second on the amendment. Mr. Peterson. Through the chair to the committee, this bill authorizes technical changes to be made to the agreements to fulfill the purpose. However, those technical changes are not included in the bill, and so we've reached out to DIA that it's supposed to be their normal technical changes, so we'll include that as part of the bill and then correct various scriveners. All right. Thank you. No speakers on the amendment. All in favor of the amendment, say yay. Yay. Any opposed? Likewise. None. The amendment carries. I've got a motion and a second on the bill as amended. No speakers in the queue. Open the ballot and record your vote. Five yays, zero nays. By your action, you're approved. Twenty-twenty-six, zero-three-eight-one. Item number fourteen, twenty-twenty-six, zero-three-eight-two. Got a motion on the bill. And a second, please. All right. I've got a motion and a second on the bill. No speakers in the queue. Open the ballot and record your vote. Five yays, zero nays. By your action, you're approved. Twenty-twenty-six, zero-three-eight-two. Item number fifteen, twenty-twenty-six, zero-three-eight-three. Can you get a motion on the bill? I've got a motion and a second on the bill. No speakers in the queue. Open the ballot and record your vote. Five yays, zero nays. By your action, you're approved. Twenty-twenty-six, zero-three-eight-three. Item number 16, 2026-0385. Can I get a motion on the bill? No. Can I get a motion on the amendment? I've got a motion on the amendment and a second. Mr. Peterson. Through the chair, the amendment would include carryover language for this funding into the next fiscal year and then also attach a revised BT to correct account information. All right. I have no speakers on the amendment. All in favor of the amendment, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Likewise. None. The amendment carries. Can I get a motion second on the bill as amended? In a second, please. And I've got a second. No speakers on the queue. Open the ballot and record your vote. 5-8-0-A's. By your action, you're approved. 2026-0385. Item number 17, 2026-0386. Can I get a motion on the bill? I've got a motion and a second on the bill. No speakers in the queue. Open the ballot and record your vote. 5-8-0-A's. By your action, you're approved. 2026-0386. Item number 18, 2026-0387. Can I get a motion on the bill? I've got a motion and a second on the bill. No speakers in the queue. Go ahead, Mr. Boylan. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through the chair, Mr. Fopolis, as I understand, there's a bill on the governor's desk that effectively takes away the necessity of them going through the county commission to get millets on the ballots. Are you familiar with that? Through the chair to Council Member Boylan, I'm not familiar with that particular bill, but until it's signed and made effective. Understood. I'm suggesting perhaps either we defer this or... No, they don't have time to make the ballot if this bill gets deferred, which is why it needs to go through this cycle. Fair enough. Just make the party aware, the body aware, that the governor's got a bill on his desk. The legislatures eliminated the necessity of the county commissions, or in our case, or our council, to approve such millage going on in the ballot. All right. No other speakers in the queue? No, sir. Go ahead, Dr. Salem. If you're not in the queue, wave at me if you don't want to speak, because I'm not getting anybody in the queue. Go ahead, Dr. Salem. Thank you, Chair. I will be voting against this today. I just can't support the potential of a tax increase right now. People are struggling. I know it needs to go on the ballot if it occurs, but I'm not there, so I'll be a no today. All right. Let me go to Ms. Mary first. Through the chair to the committee, I just want to clarify that this referendum would not be for a new or an increased tax. It's for continuation of the existing one-mill tax for an additional four years. All right. Thank you. Let me go to Councilman Amaro. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mary, for the clarification, because that was my understanding as well. And I think the ask here is for us permission to allow the voters to make that decision. And I believe in the democratic process that if the voters don't want it to continue, they'll vote it down. If they want it to continue, they'll vote it up. The ask here is for us to have the permission to let the voters decide. So I'm going to support it. All right. Thank you. Councilmember Bolin. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Chair. Ms. Stavopoulos, again, as I seem to recall, the last time we went through this process, I went through the courts, and the court said, you guys got to do it. So can you want to clarify the fact whether we voted up or down is almost immaterial? Through the chair to Councilmember Bolin, thank you for the question. And so, yes, the statute makes it clear that for this type of millage to be assessed, the school board shall direct the council, as the board of county commissioners in this capacity, to ask the supervisor to put it on the ballot. There has been case law to that effect that addresses whether the county commission or the city council would have any sort of say or opportunity to deny that. And it is essentially a ministerial obligation, which I think is why that state law is pending, because it's an extra step that seems unnecessary in this regard. Yeah, thank you. To my other conversation or comment, clearly that was the case. The state legislature recognized this is a perfunctory step for us to have to be in the middle of it. We need to step away from it. But to that end, I understand we really don't have a whole lot of choice but to support putting this on the ballot. Through the chair to Councilmember Bolin, that is correct. And, in fact, the state law used to not have specific language as to which election it would have to be put on the ballot, but that was corrected to allow, because there was case law that addressed that as well. It now requires that it be held at a general election. All right, so no other speakers on the queue, with the same comment that Councilman Amaro made, that the only reason I would be supporting this is that the voters will get a chance to decide. And that's, to me, that's important. So open the ballot and let's record your vote. Four yeas, one may. By your action you've approved, 2026-0387. Next item, number 17, I mean 19, excuse me, 2026-0388. Got a motion on the bill. Yeah, I've got a motion and a second on the bill. Dr. Salem. Thank you, Chair. I've spent a lot of time on this bill. I've met with my good friends at JEA. I've met with Mr. Bertozzi as well and had considerable discussions. This is not a perfect bill by any means, but we've got a building that's empty, been empty. And the point that was made to me that really convinced me is all the expense to evaluating this building is on the developer. So he's likely to pay $2, $3, $4 million evaluating this building for development before he executes the agreement on this building. So with that, it's not perfect by any means, but I'm going to support it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm going to support it as well, even though at first blush the numbers seem kind of unbalanced. I don't know. Paul, are you able? I just got a quick question through the chair for Mr. Bertozzi, and I think this is a C Division, sir. I think this is a great, great opportunity for you to be a Van Gogh, if you will, and create something fantastic on that block. Here's my question looking down the road. When you get through with your due diligence and run the numbers as to what it's going to take to create that vision, can you do it without the assistance from the city? We have a lot to evaluate with the building. Name and address for the record. Paul Bertozzi addresses 96478 Soap Creek Drive. Through the, to Mr. Amaro, through the chair. We have a lot to evaluate with the, with the building. As Dr. Salem said, we'll be two and a half, three hundred, or three million into due diligence for the building. We have a great team, a great group of people that are engaged with us. We have Gensler Architects to be our architect for the building, along with all of their support structure. So we see this, as you said, as an opportunity to create something very valuable for the downtown. We look forward to the opportunity to be part of, part of this project, and obviously with, with your support, we'll, we'll see it through. Thank you, Mr. Chair. One more question. Paul, kind of lighthearted. When Charter owned that property, the restaurant rotated. Is that part of the vision? So there's going to be a lot of due diligence on that. The building was obviously built in the early 60s. So current code does not allow for that building because of egress from that floor. There's a single means of, I guess, egress on that floor. So we'll be looking into that and to see what can be done there. But there's, there's going to be a lot of due diligence done to see what the options are. All right. Thank you. Let me go back to Dr. Salem. Thank you, Chair. Paul, you're fine. Thank you. The, the, the question that came up just reminded me of a point that I wanted to make. We've got this Homestead exemption. It looks like it's going to pass through the, through the House and the Senate. I believe it will pass by the voters in November and I am looking out, I think, incentives that the city may provide are going to be extremely tough going forward. We passed earlier and I wanted to make this comment then, but it got past me on the JWB 20 year loan that we passed, which is very similar to what we've done with VestCorps for similar affordable housing. Um, I think those type of things will be very difficult as we go forward. So I would just caution the development group to, to be aware of that. Uh, I won't be here. Many of us won't be here when, when that, when you probably, if you come for incentives, but I think incentives in general that are not loans of some sort, um, maybe like a house mortgage of some sort where you, you pay it back over a, uh, uh, 15, 20 year period of time are going to be extremely, uh, difficult for the city to afford. So I'll just throw that out there. Thank you. All right. No other. You're in the queue. Um, uh, I've had the discussion with, with JEA, um, in this legislation, Mr. Peterson, is there any callbacks that if they, during this process, they, just, the developer decides to just flip the property? We got any protection or callbacks on any of that? Through the chair or to the chair, I don't recall there being any, uh, prohibition on the developer flipping the property. Um, I would defer to, I know representatives from JEA are here. Um, the, the developer does get a two, two, two year plus due diligent period with all the time periods that are laid out in it. Uh, but I don't recall that once they go forward with the purchase that they couldn't resell. All right. And JEA, you don't want to speak to that? Good morning. Good morning, Chair. Good morning, Council, Committee. Shea Hill, JEA. I just want to introduce, uh, Jordan Pope, our Senior VP of Administrative Services, to answer that question. Thank you. All right. Mr. Pope. Thank you, Mr. Chair. There are no callbacks in that event that you mentioned. What I would add is, if Live Oak spends two and a half to three million dollars to bring certainty to those structures and the potential development around it, it will be capital that JEA did not expend. It is not our core business. We are not familiar with that type of redevelopment. And so I think, um, JEA would still get the benefit of not having the burden of maintaining those buildings, which is approximately a million dollars a year right now. Live Oak would bring certainty to the process, and so they would benefit from the capital that they spent on it that JEA would have avoided. All right. So with that, basically, JEA is now looking to spend another two and a half million dollars maintaining the buildings while this due process is taking place? So they have a year for due diligence with three 60-day extensions, so that's 18 months and then a time period for closing. So to your point, you're looking at somewhere between a million and a half to two million dollars, assuming that timeline sticks for JEA to maintain those buildings. Yes, sir. Right. And you're okay with, like I say, this sale going through at basically 93 percent lower than the appraised value? Yes, sir. And I'm happy to talk about multiple reasons as to why JEA believes that's the right course. I will just for right now say that our other bid on this property was zero dollars, and I think it reflects the complexity, the significant capital investment, and really the unknown surrounding those structures that we'll take as Mr. Bertozzi has represented significant funds to bring certainty to. All right. Thank you. Yes, sir. You know, looking at this building, and I look forward to the developer basically restoring the old charter oil building to its, you know, the original potential that it's had. So I've got great hope that we'll be able to do that, get this on the tax roll, and be able to generate revenue. So with that, let's open the ballot and record your vote. Five yays, zero nays. By your action approved, 2026-0388. Next item, number 20, 2026-0390. Can you get a motion on the amendment? I've got a motion and a second on the amendment. Mr. Peterson. Through the chair of the committee, the amendment will attach revised CIP sheets to correct the prior and current year appropriation amounts for the projects that are a part of this bill, and then correct various scriveners. All right. All right. No discussion on the amendment. All in favor of the amendment, say yay. Yay. Any opposed? Likewise, none. The amendment carries. Can you get a motion and a second on the bills amended? I've got a motion and a second. No speakers on the queue. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Five yays, zero nays. By your action approved, 2026-0390. Next item, number 21, 2026-0391. Can you get a motion on the bill? I've got a motion and a second on the bill. No speakers in the queue. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Five yays, zero nays. By your action approved, 2026-0391. Next item, number 22, 2026-0393. Can you get a motion on the amendment? I've got a motion and a second on the amendment. Mr. Peterson. Through the chair of the committee, the amendment would attach the contract amendment with mosquito control from the state as a new exhibit to support this increased grant award amount. All right. No speakers in the queue. All in favor of the amendment, say yay. Yay. Any opposed? Likewise, none. The amendment carries. Can you get a motion and a second on the bill as amended? I've got a motion and a second on the bill as amended. Open the ballot and record your vote. Five yays, zero nays. By your action approved, 2026-0393. Next item, number 23. 2026-0394. Can you get a motion on the bill? I've got a motion and a second on the bill. No speakers in the queue. Open the ballot and record your vote. Five yays, zero nays. By your action, you're approved, 2026-0394. Next item, number 24, 2026-0395. I open the public hearing. Do we have any speaker cards? No speaker cards. I close the public hearing. Can I get a motion on the amendment? I've got a motion and a second on the amendment. No speakers in the queue on the amendment. All in favor of the amendment, say aye. Aye. Any opposed, likewise, none. The amendment carries. I've got a motion and a second on the bill as amended. No speakers in the queue. Open the ballot and record your vote. Five yays, zero nays. By your action, you're approved, 2026-0395. Number 25, item 25. 2026-0396. Can I get a motion on the amendment? I've got a motion and a second on the amendment. Mr. Peterson. Through the chair to the committee, this bill adds endowment grants to the Jack's Fostering Filmmakers Grant Program, so we're clarifying there's no maximum for the annual number of endowment grants that can be awarded. It updates the department and office names within the trust fund section within our code, Chapter 111.3635, and then places a revised public investment policy on file to correct the date of the approval. All right. No speakers on the amendment. All in favor of the amendment, say aye. Aye. Any opposed, likewise, none. The amendment carries. Can I get a motion and a second on the bill as amended? I've got a motion and a second. No speakers in the queue. Open the ballot and record your vote. Five yays, zero nays. By your action, you're approved, 2026-0396. Next item, 26, 2026-0418 is deferred. The next items are on second, 2026-0444, 0445, 0446, 0448, 0449, 0450. Item 33, we've already taken action. 34, we've taken action. Item number 35, 2026-0457, 2026-0458, 0460, 0463, and 39, we've already taken action. That takes to the end of our agenda. Any comments? None. We are adjourned. Thank you. All right. Thank you.