Commissioner Hardiman, Commissioner Lopez, Vice Chairman Garcia, Chairman Gonzalez. Four members present, we have a quorum. Thank you so much. And before we get started, folks, Commissioner Garcia has an amazing proclamation that we're going to do downstairs. So if everybody could just meet me at the well. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the ability to make this special presentation. It's a proclamation in honor of Sahara Price. She is a young lady who has shown extraordinary talent as it comes to financial literacy and investment. This is a program that is done through NACO, the National Association of Counties, who nationwide is the sponsor of the scholarship. They give out four scholarships, totaling $2,500 each for students that show their ability to understand the importance of saving. And I want to tell you something, Sahara. We were talking about it earlier. I just want to appreciate the work that you've done and understanding and having your mother, who her mother is Shandra Price, who is an employee here of DTPW, who makes sure that we get around safely, and we appreciate the work that you do every day. And I think I was talking to Greg. I was talking to Greg Price. Not Greg Price. Russell. Russell. I was talking to Greg from Nationwide. We've met a while back, and you wouldn't know that because I can't remember his last name, so I apologize for that. But I want to thank Nationwide for ensuring that we educate our families about the importance of financial literacy. I think one of the biggest problems that we have in all of our communities is that we don't learn that until much later on in life. I think it's important to understand and recognize that when we start teaching our young students about the importance of investment and saving, and they start doing that at an early age, by the time they're 40 or 50, they can easily have $2 million in a bank account for their retirement. And I think this is something that we do, and Nationwide, I thank you for this ability. If you want to come up, and Mr. Chairman, if it's okay. So, Sahara, I read your essay. Can you stand up, please? Guys, can we give her a round of applause, please? So I want to thank Commissioner Garcia for highlighting you because I don't think you understand how impactful your essay is. I know grown adults that don't understand the importance of financial literacy. I didn't understand the importance of financial literacy until after college, and it was through great books like Think and Grow Rich, Rich Dad, Poor Dad. I don't know if you've read those, but it was through books that I was finally able to just get a glimpse of it. So I would just say that you are not only a blessing to everybody that gets to read the essay, but I'm sure that you're a great blessing to the young people that hang out with you because I would say that you probably inspire them, and never be ashamed or timid to tell people the knowledge that you have, girl, because God gives you talents in life, and God gives you knowledge, and then your job is to make sure that you get that knowledge out to everybody you can. So I actually have a copy of your essay. I don't know if you'd be willing to read it for everybody. No? Come on, girl. Last paragraph. The last paragraph, at least. No? Mom, you want to read it for her? Yes. All right. So she wrote, This stage is also when I would focus on bigger goals, such as buying a home, saving for my children's education if I have kids, and avoiding lifestyle inflation. Instead, spending more just because I earn more. I would keep living below my means and invest the difference. In late career, my focus would shift to protecting the wealth I have built. I would continue saving, reduce financial risk, and prepare for retirement by estimating my future expenses. I would also create an estimate plan, including a will, so my assets are protected and passed on properly. That's important. Overall, financial wellness is about making smart choices consistently over time. By starting early, contributing to a 457B plan, avoiding unnecessary debt, and planning for the future, I can build wealth and achieve financial independence throughout my life. That's awesome. And she's now in Miami-Dade. She's in Miami-Dade North Campus, which is the best Miami-Dade campus, because that's where I went to. But I don't know if you folks want to say something. I just want to say that listening to your words, I wonder if everyone, so many people need to hear your words. What your mother read today is sound financial advice for anyone, but more importantly, for young people who are just getting started in their lives. So I just want to commend you. I want to tell you how proud we are of you, and we hope that more of those words will circulate throughout our community. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Listen, you're bringing so much joy, so much joy in my heart this afternoon, because I was very proud to sponsor legislation for financial literacy, that our mayor, and I was supported by, you know, our board of county commissioners, and that our mayor is implementing, because I realized that it is so important for residents to know how to budget, especially in these difficult times. So we are proud of you, and I know so many little girls who are watching right now, you represent, you know, a model for them, a role model for them, because as a young lady, and then, so keep it up. Don't be too shy. I mean, your voice is really loud in this essay, so don't be shy to express yourself, because you are a role model for so many little girls who are watching right now. Congratulations. Congratulations. So part of you winning this contest, I think, also gives you a scholarship, and I think we have some folks here that want to present a check to you for a scholarship to further your education. Please come up. Would you like to say some words, Greg? Okay, will do. Thank you. Let's do it. All right. Good morning or afternoon. Afternoon. All right. Good afternoon. My name is Greg Russell. I'm with Nationwide Retirement Solutions, and I want to thank the county again for being the plan sponsor and trusting Nationwide in helping your employees. Nationwide is on your side. Yeah. I used, well, I got the shirt on. There you go. Can I take the shirt off and let the Nationwide? No, I'm only joking. But just to say thank you so much. This is an important day, and it's not only to recognize the young lady, Zahara, in her journey, but just to say she's a great example for what we should all strive for. And Nationwide is here to help make sure your participants and your employees are better prepared for that longest vacation in their lives, which is retirement. So thank you so much. I want to thank my partners down there in crime, Victor and Melissa. They're in the benefits department. They make sure to keep Nationwide on their toes to make sure we're servicing your employees each and every day. So as a token and a thank you and a great honor, Commissioner, do you want to present this? Okay. All right. So I'm going to present a $2,500 scholarship to Ms. Zahara Price for her to continue her education. And thank you so much. Best wishes. And the significance of this, that she is one of four nationwide that got this scholarship. So that is a huge accomplishment. It's not just in Florida. It's all over the country. So congratulations. And Mr. Chairman, thank you for your indulgence in making sure we take care of the youth and the community. Yes, sir. Congratulations, guys. God bless you. There's more. In recognition of all your accomplishments and being that one of four nationwide through the NACO, the National Association of County Scholarship Program and nationwide, we are proclaiming today on behalf of the three million residents of Miami-Dade County, our chairman, our county commissioners, our mayor, and our chairman of our board, we're proclaiming today's Sahara Price Day all over Miami-Dade County. Thank you. One more time? Hold it down. Perfect. And congratulations. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I will be on Senator Rayner's Instagram. Oh, and also I can respond. I just want to go over the line today. I have my hands. I just want to see. How are you doing, sir? What's good? I'll do it. All right. All right. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. All right. All right, clerk, can we call the roll? Good afternoon, Commissioner Bastian, Commissioner Hardeman, Commissioner Lopez, Vice Chairman Garcia, Chairman Gonzalez. I am here. Five members present, we have a quorum. All right, folks, and Commissioner Hardeman, would you lead us in the invocation, sir? And then we can do the Pledge of Allegiance. Commissioner Garcia, would you do the Pledge of Allegiance? Thank you, sir. Dear God, thank you for giving us life today. As we gather to conduct business with this county, may you give us the patience and guidance to bring fair and just decisions. May we be open-minded to others' opinions as we all seek to move Mamadi County forward for our residents. Amen. All right. Good evening, everyone. So I do not have any speaker cards. Do we have any speaker cards? At this time, I don't have any speaker cards, but let's open up the reasonable opportunity to be heard. Yes, Mr. Chair. I'll let them public hearing items. If there is anybody today that would like to be heard, right now is your time to be heard. Would love to recognize you. Going once, going twice, going three times. Can we close reasonable opportunity to be heard, please? And if I can get a setting to set the agenda. Mr. Chair? Moved by Commissioner Lopez. May I just note a change for the record, Mr. Chair? Of course. Go ahead. In addition to the addition of item 3C, which is noted in the changes memo, there's also been a request to withdraw item 1F1, which is the discussion item. Thank you. And so we have the agenda set, motioned by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Bastien. All in favor, signify by saying aye. And are there any discussion items, any item that any of my colleagues would like to pull at this moment? Commissioner Lopez? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to pull 3C. 3C? If the county attorneys can please note, 3C is being pulled. Any other items? Can I get a motion to move the rest of the agenda, except for the public hearing item? So moved. It's been moved. It's been second. All in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. And let's go ahead and let's start with the public hearing item. Is that okay? Yes, Mr. Chair. Let's do it. Item 1G1, ordinance relating to the Miami-Dade County Behavioral Health Advisory Board, establishing Section 2-430.6 of the Code of Miami-Dade County, Florida, creating the Miami-Dade County Behavioral Health Advisory Board Trust Fund, and providing severability, inclusion in the code, and an effective date that is your public hearing item. So let's go ahead and open public hearing. It's opened. I don't have any cards. Would anybody like to be heard on the public hearing item? Going once, going twice. Let's go ahead and close public hearing. Now, Commissioner Garcia, this is your item. You're more than welcome to say some words or just move it. Just in the sake of transparency, all we're doing is allowing the Behavioral Health Board to create a trust fund for anyone that wants to donate funds to the Behavioral Health Board. That's all that we're doing with this, to be able to accept private donations. That's what the ordinance does. I'll second it. It's been moved by Commissioner Garcia, seconded by Commissioner Lopez. All in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Roll call. Roll call. Commissioner Bastien. Yes. Commissioner Hardeman. Commissioner Lopez. Yes. Vice Chairman Garcia. Chairman Gonzalez. Four. Motion passes unanimously. Okay. And now we can go to item 3C. Commissioner Lopez, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So I obviously listened very carefully to some of the conversations that took place in the airport committee earlier today regarding legacy contracts. And I just wanted to have a little more information regarding this item as to, first of all, when does this expire? But more importantly, why we would move to a non-competitive legacy contract. Can we get somebody from MDFR to come up, please? Chief, I see you already coming down. Thank you, sir. Chief, in all fairness, there was a healthy bit of discussion at the airport committee around legacy contracts and how we continue to, vis-a-vis software, how we continue to always just move these legacy contracts because we're told too late in the process, thanks to Commissioner Hardeman's comments. We need to know earlier why we have to move forward with legacy contracts. So maybe we'd start out with when does this expire? So good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. Ray Jadalo, Fire Chief. Through the Chair, I don't have the exact date that the actual contract expires. I'm going to look at it right now. I'm having my team pull it up. But I'm more than happy to answer some of the additional questions you may have. So talk to me a little bit about the non-competitive nature of the contract. So this contract, though, is the end beneficiary is MDFR. It's a combination of CITD and MDSO. So the actual user of the program is MDSO because it's their 911 call takers that actually utilize the ProQA. So the ProQA does two things for MDFR. When someone calls 911, they are given pre-arrival instructions on what to do with the patient in case that something needs to be done. And the second component is actually the triaging of the call. Not all 911 calls come in are categorized as all emergencies. There are various types of emergencies and what we know as four levels. What are those four levels? So for us, it's an Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta call. And it's based on the severity as to how we're going to be responding. So our Alpha calls, we're responding as routine. This could be just someone that may have fallen out of bed or fallen on the floor. No injuries that have been noted after the pre-9 questions have been asked. The Bravo may be along the lines of someone that has a BLS injury, a basic life support injury. It's not critical, not serious in nature, but requires a fire department response. Our response is with lights and sirens, but we also try not to push vehicles into traffic, not to push them into the intersections. The Charlie Delta calls are the more serious calls. They could be the shootings, the heart attacks, the strokes, the drownings, et cetera. Those where the individuals will take discretion in regards to the response, possibly responding against traffic. They may actually go up on curbs to get to the 911 call based on the severity of the call. So tell me a little bit about why we would move to a non-competitive process versus competitive. So with this contract, again, it's a combination of two agencies, the end user being MDSO. So we would have to incorporate MDSO in the conversations where they will be doing the pilot testing, the beta testing. It's their 911 dispatchers that actually have to get this trained. One of the other things that we've also noted is MDFR is transitioning to a new CAD system, computer-aided dispatching system. We're going to a system called the Hexagon. We're currently in the Motorola. I know that it has come up in discussions that if there's any changes, though we may implement it in the Motorola, it may not necessarily work with our new CAD. So I think for us, we've been just waiting until we implement our new CAD in about 18 to 24 months before we make any changes to any of our softwares. The other thing is that if you've seen the item, it's mentioned in regards to just the software requirements. So I'll give you an example. Though there may be additional softwares that are out there, Motorola may not necessarily give permission for that software to be implemented in their system or vice versa into our Hexagon system. So there are some complexities in regards to the different softwares that are even authorized in the various computer-aided dispatch. So do we know which ones Motorola would interface with, or are we being told that this is the only one that they will interface with? No, we have not been told which ones have and have not been. So if we went out for a competitive bid, wouldn't we know that? So, again, we would, but our concern is going to be now when we get our new computer-aided dispatch, the Hexagon. So it may work with the Motorola. We don't know if it's going to work with our Hexagon computer-aided dispatch. And for us to actually do the beta test, the pilot test on our system when we actually have the system implemented, it may, let's just say a program may work for Motorola, and it may not necessarily work for Hexagon. Or they say that we could get it to work for Hexagon, but because we don't have Hexagon actually established, for the program to be implemented only for it not to work can actually cause some repercussions for us. So if Hexagon is going to be implemented within two years, why is this contract for five years or the term of a two-year option? Wouldn't we wait? Couldn't you do a two-year and wait until Hexagon is now implemented so that we know how all the systems interface and work? We could, but just going back from our previous issues with, you know, the vendor that Hexagon, we may have delays with the implementation. So, you know, even if we do go with another program, there's still the RFQ, the research and development, the bringing in of the other. So it's not just in a matter of, you know, a couple of months. Those are all the questions I have. I will just make a comment. So this is exactly the kind of thing that gives me some pause for concern. You're looking at three different types of programs. I think that moving forward, we should start looking at how everything interfaces, right? It looks like we are patchworking things. Like, you know, we have Motorola, we have Hexagon, and now we're going to do this, this dispatch software. I would think that in order to be more efficient and more cost-effective, we would start looking at all of our programs, both software and hardware, to make sure that everything is interfacing correctly. Because it sounds to me like what we're doing here is we've already got Motorola, Hexagon's coming on board, and this one's going to be with us for at least five years, if not seven, because we have a two-year option to renew. So I just caution all of us, this is part and parcel for what I think is an issue with all software and all tech in the county. And we heard it this morning, and I'm telling you we're hearing it now, and at some juncture, there will be a need for us to look at all of our softwares and how they interface and what is the purpose of them, and are they as innovative as you yourself, Chairman, said this morning? Are we moving in innovation? Are we just piecemealing projects together? And so those are my comments, but thank you so much, Chief, for your responses. Thank you, Commissioner Lopez. And Chief, or I don't know if this is for the administration, but I believe Commissioner Lopez did ask, when is this contract up? Do you guys have that information? I have it, and so if I have it, you should have it. Yes, December 31st. Okay, and to Commissioner Lopez's point, we're extending for five years with two-year options, right? That is correct. And I do have one question, unless Commissioner Lopez would like to be recognized? Yes, I would. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, because now I know exactly what I didn't know before, which is what we learned at the airport committee when Commissioner Hardiman said, so now you bring us this at the very last minute, leaving us with really no options. That's really what it comes down to. So instead of bringing this to us a year ago and saying, look, you know what, this contract's going to expire on December 31st, here are your options, here are some of the issues that we may have, here are some of the challenges we may face, we're hearing about it in October, less than two and a half months before it expires, really effectively leaving us with no choice but to do what you've asked us to do. And I continue to say it's not up to the bureaucracy or the administration to make those decisions for us. We should, in fact, have all of the information with good advance lead time so that we can make a decision whether or not this is in our best interest or not. And that's just basically a continuation of what we learned this morning. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Commissioner Lopez. And to procurement, did we look into any alternative providers of this software and what that cost could have been? Commissioner, yes. So, Commissioner, when we looked at the other, during our research, other providers, the cost could be between $5 million to $6 million easily, just for the initial and implement, initial cost. Did any of the supplier respond to any? No. So, we did reach out to a lot of companies in terms of can you maintain the existing system, but it's proprietary. However, it's to do a comparison for the cost for the replacement, yes, $5 to $6 million, but maintenance is all proprietary at this point. Any other further questions? Thank you. And so, can I get a motion to move? Oh, Commissioner Hardiman, you're recognized. Thank you. Is there an appetite to amend it, to make it a shorter contract so that they can do the research to see if this is something we want to move forward with in the future? I think Commissioner Lopez had alluded to maybe two years. I don't know if Commissioner Lopez has an appetite. I had an appetite to wait until Hexagon came on board, but with a two-year option, just in case it's delayed, but I see the director here tell us. Chief, you're recognized. So, through the chair, I would argue or I would caution against that. I know FIRE is trying to get another program, and depending on how long it takes to RFP and secure that, it may go past the two-year mark, and then we'd be back here again in two years trying to do it again. I can't imagine a world where we would find another program, Hexagon, for FIRE, and implement that within the five years. It'll probably take that long. So, I think the way it is right now, Commissioner, it's where it should be. So, I would say this, and I'm sorry to cut you off, Commissioner Hardiman, but I see where you're going with it. I would say this before I recognize Commissioner Hardiman again. I would caution you, the administration and the department, and nobody's trying to pick on MDFR. This is a reoccurring issue that is happening again and again and again. I would caution that perhaps we should prepare diligently for these contracts to come back before our back is against the wall, and we have to make a decision without having all the information because you're hearing an appetite in the last committee to defer an item that was very important, and now you're hearing an appetite in this committee to shorten a contract. I understand where you're at, but I would caution the administration and every department all across Miami-Dade County, don't bring things half-baked. Commissioner Hardiman, you are recognized. Thank you. I think your words echo sufficiently, but I will add this to it. You're asking us to do something for you, but you're asking for a contract of five years, which is beyond the amount of time that I'll be here. I know that for a fact. It's beyond someone's election and re-election to this body, right? Which puts people in a position where the first time they'll hear about this is with a brand-new board. The next board I hear about this is a brand-new board, and then that board will get a request for a five-year extension that is non-competitive. And that's what's happening here. The administration is outliving all of us because if we're thinking that this is not the most prudent thing to do, not only are we making that decision for them, but then the next board is put in that same position. So at least by making it two years with maybe a one-year extension, you give us an opportunity for them to come back in two years because they have a one-year extension or a year and a half or a year and say, this is what we believe the plan should be. But we can't operate a business by saying that, oh, it just costs too much to change. It's just not how this works. Unless, like, you know, Commissioner Gilbert said on the record, if these are lifetime contracts, then let's start to operate them as if they are. Then where is our discount? Now, why are we doing better? Why must the company do better every single year but Miami-Dade County residents can't? So, you know, my appetite would say I would shorten it and put the staff to work to ensure that they bring us back a product or at least a plan that makes sense instead of, hey, less than two months before this thing needs to be renewed, we need you to extend it for an additional five years. Would you like to make an amendment? I would move to amend it if... I would second it. It's been moved for an amendment. To the county attorneys, can you please clarify the amendment? I believe what Commissioner Hartman, I certainly don't want to speak for him, but I believe what I understood is an amendment that gives it a two-year window, but also ask for the administration to come back with a full report as to how to move forward. Is that correct, Commissioner Hartman? So it would say it would be a two-year contract with a one-year renewal, subject to the same language you already have. And then what I would ask, I'm not going to tell you when to do it. As far as the administration and procurement, that's their professional recommendation to do it. I just know that this isn't the right way. I know 30 days before it's supposed to be due, so it's not the right way. So if you determine that it's two years, then that's what you decide, because then you have a one-year extension that's left. Because you need to at least give yourself opportunity to create a procurement that makes sense for Miami-Dade County. That way we then have an opportunity to act on it as a board. It shouldn't be on the night before the decision needs to be made. And so I'm going to let the county attorneys chew on that so that we can get a proper amendment, and I'm going to recognize Commissioner Bastian. Yes, I've been listening to the questions asked by my colleague, Commissioner Lopez, and I'm listening to you, Commissioner Hardeman. If I had a mirror in the future, I can hear commissioners, because most of us will not be here, as you indicated. I can hear them say, oh, they approved it. They approved it, and here we are. They left us with this mess. Hopefully not, but I can hear that. So that's why, to the administration, I understand that there are many legacy projects around, and the tendency is to choose among them. But I think we need to ask ourselves. We need to do our due diligence. We need to do research. Just saying that it's cheaper is not enough. There has to be a deep assessment made. I mean, best practices. What are the best practices out there? The decision cannot be made just on the fact that it is cheaper. Cheaper doesn't mean better. So I hope that the administrations heard Commissioner Lopez's and Hardeman's clearly, and moving forward, before you come to the board, come with real answers, because it's really upsetting for us to come back to the same questions again. And no, we don't have this answer. We don't have this answer. We have to be good steward of the people's money, and we have to do better in terms of assessing and presenting a case to us where we don't have to say, oh, we're not going to be here in the next four years, or we're not going to be here in the next three years. What are, or for commissioners in 2030 to say, oh, what had these commissioners left us with? I think these are valid questions that you guys need to think about and then come to us better prepared, and if it's a legacy project, we're awarding millions of dollars. We have to have all the hard answers. Why? Why is it noncompetitive? Why did we choose this entity? What are the best practices? Why, why, why? We have to have the answers. Very valid points, Commissioner Bastian. So I'm going to recognize the county attorney to clarify the amendment, then Commissioner Garcia, and then Chief, I think you want to be recognized, after that. County attorney, please. Mr. Chair, the one thing that I would note is that because this is a contract that was negotiated and signed by the other party prior to bringing it to this committee, any amendments to that contract would have to be subject to agreement and negotiation with that particular vendor. So the item could be amended and move forward as such, but there's no guarantee that you actually enter into a contract on those terms until the vendor agrees to those terms. Duly noted. Commissioner Garcia, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I just maybe want to reiterate the chairman's point that this is really not anything against MDFR, and we really appreciate the work that you all do. This goes a little deeper than one agency or one department. The problem that we've had here for far too often is exactly that, that we keep on hearing legacy projects, legacy projects, legacy projects. It gets to a point where we do need to start looking at the technologies that exist nowadays and making sure that these systems interface with one and each other and use a technology that's out there currently. I think we all have been a little frustrated on what the lack of systems that do integrate with each other, and it's not just at MDFR, it's across the board. So I think as we move forward, maybe this is the time that this county commission starts trying to look at these legacy systems that we have. However, when we do start looking at this, there is a huge investment that needs to be done to try to bring these systems back. So we need to look at that as well because it's easy to talk about legacy projects. I'm talking out of both sides of my mouth right here right now, but it's easy to talk about legacy projects and get rid of them, but we also have to look at what cost is associated with getting rid of a legacy project and bringing in new software that interfaces together with it. So with that, Mr. Chairman, I'm okay with the amendment that we have before us, and I think if the vendor themselves don't want to enter into a contract with us, then I guess we'll go out and find another vendor, but I don't think that will be the case. I think the one that we have before us is a two-year contract with a one-year extension. Is that what we have? That would be the amendment. Right. So I'm fine with that. I mean, I'm fine with that amendment for now, yes. Chief, you're recognized? Yes. So respectfully, just to answer some of the questions, this is the program that when somebody dials 911, we use to identify what kind of call it is. Depending on the severity and the type of call, it can either go to the MDSO or it can go to MDFR. The contract expires in December. It's a licensing program. If we do not renew the program, there's a chance that we won't have the program. I'm just giving information. There could be arguments on either side of this. If we amend the project, like the commissioner said, it's fine. We can amend it. There's no guarantee that the vendor would agree to the price. So we'll be right back here. And the other thing is we're not unhappy with this program. We really like this program. It works very well for us. We were not planning on changing it. Chief, with all due respect, who's we? The administration, FIRE, MDSO? Who's we? The administration, because we control the 911 center. Even though MDSO answers the phone, the center is ours. The infrastructure is ours. The program is ours. So we're okay with the program. What we're worried about is even when we looked at going outside for another vendor, it was double or even twice, two times and a half the price. So the price is reasonable. So it's not like we didn't really look into this and we were not doing our diligence. We did, we thought this is the best way to do it, and that's why we forwarded this program. I know it says legacy on it, but it's just what it is. It's an identifier. That's why we did this. Just giving you information, and we'll abide by the ruling of the board. Thank you, Chief. Commissioner Lopez, you're recognized, and followed by Commissioner Hardiman. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. To respond to the Chief's situation about that things are more expensive, it's been my experience that when you go out to bid, you'll figure out if it's more expensive or not. It can't be that because, you know, the market out there, I can say that my product is going to cost $10 million, but when I answer an RFP and I want the business, I may charge much less than what you think I may charge, you know, and I think it's just a function of always having accountability to the taxpayer. That's what taxpayers would do. You know, they can hear that a pool guy is going to charge $10,000 and another one's going to charge $5,000, but not until that they actually say, give me your proposal, do you know whether, in fact, you're getting the best price. So that's one. But two, we come back to the situation of, will the vendor approve it or not? Well, you have two and a half months to let us know that he won't, he or she won't, and then we can make some other decisions. But I think it's prudent upon all of us to do exactly what we've said here today. And I will say this about all these legacy contracts. I am working on legislation right now to bring to this board that would require the administration to give us notice two years before a contract ends in any of these legacy projects. In response to what I heard this morning, I began working on that already, because it's true that we should know two years ahead of time, and we should have all the facts, as Commissioner Bastian said, before we can make a decision. And it all sounds good that this is the only thing that works and it's the cheapest, but I don't know that, and I won't know that until I go out to bid. And that's part of the problem that I always have with these legacy non-competitive contracts. We just think it's more expensive if we change, but we won't know it until we go out to the market to see it. So I am supportive of the amendment and really hope that the vendor will continue to service us. And if not, then we have our answer for certain. As do I, and thank you for your leadership on that coming change. Commissioner Hardman, you're recognized. Thank you. How long has the medical priority consultants been a vendor or has been providing a service for Miami-Dade County? To the administration, can we get somebody? MDS, so when they were MDPD, has been utilizing this specific solution since 1998. Okay, so that's what I read. I read that this thing, the systems have been supported by the county's 911 operations for approximately 20 years. Wow. Additionally, that they found that no suitable cooperative contract or authorized reseller capable of meeting the county's requirements was identified. Now, it will be interesting to look back 15, 16, 17 years ago to see if this same language was being used then as it is being used now, but what is being recommended to us is that a contract that you want us to non-competitively give for a vendor who's been around for 20 years at least and give them an additional five years plus two, so an additional seven years. To me, with the foresight of literally having the same game run on us again, and that's my trouble. And so, you know, right now we've amended it to 2-1. No, they don't have to agree to it, but I also don't have to agree to it. I don't have to agree to the five. I can vote no. I can choose to vote no. And so we're trying to get you to a yes. That's what I thought this process was all about. But if you would prefer to keep the contract as it is, maybe it will move forward throughout this committee with me voting no and, you know, and maybe another. I don't know. I hope that you explain to him that, you know, this can be amended again in the future to the entirety of the board. You can get through this board with just with what it is, and then maybe in your divine sort of knowledge, you're able to take it from a 2-plus-1 back to a 5-plus-2. That probably should be your best bet, but then you would at least know in the full board would know that we thought about this and that these are the facts, and we're consistently being put with our backs against the wall to give someone a seven-year contract every seven years that passes. So I believe you posed an amendment, Commissioner Hardiman. Yes. I believe the amendment has been adopted, and we will have the amendment read into the record now. We can take that vote. If that vote fails, we can come back and take another vote. Would anybody else like to be recognized before we move forward with that? And so the county attorneys, can you please clarify the amendment? The item was amending so that instead of a five-year contract with a two-year renewal, it would be a two-year contract with a one-year renewal. Okay. And I believe this is a roll call vote. No? All in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. So the ayes have it. I believe Commissioner Bastion would like to be recognized for some very special guests. Yes, yes, indeed, indeed, indeed. We have some very special guests amongst us this afternoon, and I'm very happy to introduce the students from Miami-Dade Community College, my alma mater, downtown campus. Exactly. So I'd like the professor, Dr. Pradel Frank, I don't know if any one of you would like to come and say a few words, but I'd like to ask all the students to stand up and be recognized. They are part of the civic engagement initiative, and I don't know if my colleagues recall that in 2024, I did pass a civic education, you know, legislation at the county. Any of you would like to come and say a few words? Don't be shy, I know. Don't be shy. One, two minutes, two minutes. Dr. Pradel, welcome. Thank you so much for having us, everybody. My name is Professor Pradel Frank. I'm from Miami-Dade College, the Wolfson campus. I teach in an English for Academic Purposes program, and these are some of our students that we brought here today to learn about the process and how government works. She would like to say a few words to tell you a little bit more about the program. She'll go ahead and introduce herself and tell you something about the program. Again, thank you so much for having us. Good morning, everyone. My name is Melita Cardenas. So we are from Miami-Dade College. We are for the World Learning Program. We are very excited to be here. It's our first semester, and we are here to improve our language. Thank you. All right. Congratulations, and thank you for stopping by. All right. We're going to be taking pictures with them. If any of you, my colleagues, would like to join in the communication room, media room, no? Yes. All right. Thank you so much, and welcome again. Come back. All right? Thank you, Commissioner Bastian. Thank you, Mr. Chair. No, thank you. And I think with that, can I get a motion to adjourn? So moved. So moved. And we are adjourned. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.