Welcome, everybody, to our workshop. Good to see everybody here. There's an echo in the room. Can we fix that echo? The last thing I want to do is hear my voice coming and bouncing back today. All right. Here. Does other people have it? Go ahead. Try. I don't get an echo from mine. How are you? Here. Let's switch that. Have you been all right through all these lonely, lonely things? That's better. We're good. Lonely, lonely, lonely nights. Yep. Did you see? Boy, look at that big old mug there. All right. First thing we're going to do is take care of Brian Scott. Brian, your picture is all over the room here. So I just want you to know. Do I have a motion? I got a motion in a second to allow Brian to participate. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Welcome. Good to see you, Brian. Can you hear me? I can't hear anything, guys. Okay. Well, I can hear you. I can hear you. Okay. My voice is bouncing back. You're good. All right. And then Commissioner Flowers said she would lead a song, Happy Birthday, for Vince Nowicki's birthday. So we thought we'd let... Go ahead and lead us. We'll lead us. Happy birthday to you. Happy birthday to you. Happy birthday, dear Vince. Happy birthday to you. That was really nice. Happy birthday, Vince. Thank you, Renee. I couldn't sing. Listening to your voice, I had to hear that one. And thank you, Chris, for not singing. Also appreciate that. My age is not. All right. And I want to thank Deputy Winnick and McSweeney and Manley for being here this morning and taking care of us as usual. Good morning. And last but not least, I saw Chris giving us, carrying around a bunch of books this morning. He's going to hand us over, I guess, our proposed budget that we get to tear up and, you know. Commissioners, you have both a, you have the budget book. If you want a hard copy and they have a thumb drive that you can take with you. So if you want electronically. So they have both available for you at your leisure. All right. Thank you. And did we ever find out what was going on on the... Oh, with the Granicus? Yeah. They're looking into it right now. Go ahead. All right. We'll go ahead and get started. Very, very good started with the airport update. Okay. A couple of updates this morning. So we'll invite Mark Sprague up and he's going to give you some exciting news and also an update on the airport terminal project and the Allegiant operating agreement. And then we'll have Brian Lowick come up and talk about the capital funding program through Visit St. Pete Clearwater. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Commissioners. Thank you very much. My name is Mark Sprague. I'm the airport director at the St. Pete Clearwater International Airport. Thank you very much for the opportunity to provide an overview of the proposed operating agreement between the St. Pete Clearwater International Airport and Allegiant Airlines. This presentation will highlight the key business terms of the agreement, explain why we're updating it, discuss how it supports the long-term financial stability at PIE, while continuing our successful partnership with Allegiant. To understand why we're updating the agreement, it's important to understand how much the airport has changed since the current agreement was in place. The previous agreement served PIE and Allegiant very well for more than 20 years. During that time, the airport has changed dramatically. Passenger traffic has increased over 67% in the last five years. Operational and regulatory requirements have expanded. Our facilities are continuing to age. At the same time, the staffing remains relatively flat, why we're continuing to serve significantly more passengers. The agreement that we started 20 years ago, even five years ago, no longer reflects today's operating environment. Simply put, the airport has evolved, and this agreement needs to be involved with it. With that background, let's look at the overall revenue structure that we've had in place. Under the current agreement, six revenue structures made up the revenue stream. Each structure builds separately. The new agreement combines six revenue structures into three. Landing fees, revenue structure deals with the weight of the aircraft and what that airplane uses at the airport. Runways, taxways, aprons, if it stays overnight. Exclusive use is just it. If you're renting an office space and it's only yours, you're going to be paying for that. And those remaining operational costs are what passenger uses within the terminal, consolidated into a single per-turn revenue fee. The objective is simplicity, transparency, and more modern fee structure and not additional charges. So why this transition? The per-turn facility fee provides several advantages. It better aligns with airport costs with passenger uses for cost recovery. It supports the facility and operational services that is utilized. It provides a more balanced and predictable cost recovery for the airport. Simply put, what it takes to operate the terminal and recover some of those costs. The goal is to create a fee structure that reflects today's airport and operations while remaining fair and predictable for both the airport and the airline. Benefits to Allegiant on this contract. It establishes a predictable five-year rates, providing financial certainty for long-term planning. It establishes an airline service incentive program called an ACIP. We're going to talk about it a little bit later. And it rewards operational growth through a tiered pricing savings. This continues a partnership that has been instrumental in the success of both Allegiant and PIE. Let's look at the financial impact of this new agreement. Starting in fiscal year 27, their agreement raises its rates by 40 percent, projected to generate an approximately $1.2 million additional revenue in the first year over the current agreement. After the initial adjustment, an annual incremental increase is projected approximately $174,000, another 3 percent year over year. Importantly, these revenues support airport capital improvement programs without creating additional county debt. We provide funding for planned staffing growth as passengers' activity continues to increase and their staffing needs to increase. So we have built, in the pro forma of this agreement, one new full-time employee for the next four years per year. PIE needs some benefits as well. This agreement positions the airport for long-term success. It strengthens financial stability. It supports all of our capital improvement programs, provides a predictable revenue stream, expands our organizational chart, and allows us to provide safe, efficient, and reliable service to the traveling public while maintaining a competitive cost structure for our airline partners. So let's talk about these two incentives that are customary to airline-to-airport agreements. The first one is the Airline Service Incentive Program, and the next one is the Peer Per Terms Tier Savings. The program is available to all qualifying airlines that introduce eligible new service nonstop into PIE. It provides a two-year incentive period and includes a cooperating marketing support. The first year is $150,000. It's shared. Half of that cost comes from the airport, and the other half cost comes from the Visit St. Pete Clearwater Visitors Bureau. The second year is an additional $100,000 in marketing cooperation, also a 50-50 split, max three cities per year. And that marketing cooperation is bringing people into Pinellas County. We don't market people going out of Pinellas County. The objective is simple. Encourage new destinations, expand traveling options for our community, and strengthen the airport role in an economic engine for Pinellas County. The Per Term Tier Savings. The Per Term Tier Fee is designed to encourage continued growth. Allegiant receives tiered price savings as it reaches established departure thresholds. For every 3,000 departures is a tier of savings. The approach rewards additional service while maintaining a sustainable financial model for the airport. Simply put, as the airline grows, the airport will grow. The agreement balances increases incentives with the airport's responsibility to operate, maintain, and invest in the facilities for the future. Commissions, I thank you for the opportunity to provide the overview today. This agreement represents the next chapter in a partnership that has served both Pinellas County, St. Pete Clearwater National Airport, and Allegiant very well for more than two decades, and we continue to soar. It modernizes the airport's financial framework, supports continued air service growth, strengthens long-term financial stability, and positions pie for the future. I appreciate your time this morning, and I'd be happy to answer any questions. Well, thank you, Mark. Appreciate the update and the good news coming, right? Yes, we have the signed contract, and it's in current contract review. We'll be bringing that to you in September. Sounds like a good thing. Any questions? Commissioner Flowers. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good morning. Good morning. Great things going on at our hidden jewel, our hidden secret. I'm not sure if it will have anything to do with this, but since Allegiant has purchased one of the other carriers there, and I did reach out to Allegiant just to talk about the transition, and they did share with me that throughout the balance of this year, that airline is going to continue to carry their name, and then starting next year, that airline would then merge in, and their planes would have the Allegiant piece in it. So the additional routes, additional stops that Allegiant will be able to make, will it be because of the absorption of that airline, or is it that, in general, they are adding to the destinations that they currently provide for? Two years ago, Allegiant Airlines made it a phenomenal, major announcement that they were purchasing 50 brand-new Boeing 737 MAX aircraft. So that's an additional to, that was prior, and that's an additional to what they just purchased with Sun Country Airlines. So they're actually bringing in more airplanes into their fleet, and the airplanes that they're bringing in today, they're also keeping some of the other airplanes. There are some scheduled retirement of aircraft, but they're actually bringing in more airplanes, and that's where the service of growth is going to be coming from. Okay, and then the one additional FTE, and please forgive me if I missed it, because I was trying to write notes as well while you were talking, the one additional FTE, will that be within the county structure, your structure, to handle Allegiant's expansion request there? Yes, yes. Okay. What he built that in is he built in a growth factor for his staff, and so that's into the model that he's using for the fees and the employment fees with Allegiant. So he built that in. It doesn't mean that you necessarily will approve that or not, but it's just so he could get the rates right. And then my last question is, because they're adding the potential for adding flights, I love the fact that persons go straight through security, TSA, and then they're like right there at their gate, which is fabulous. Will there be any consideration later for looking at maybe growing that area? Because it could get to be a little crowded sometimes, which is a good thing. We're moving people in and moving people out, and we want crowded, because that says business. That is a great segue for my next presentation. Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. All right. Well, I will not request, and I will wait. I'm glad you brought it up, though. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yeah. Any other questions? Yeah. Commissioner Shearer? Oh, wait a minute. Commissioner Nowicki. Commissioner Shearer, go ahead. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Mark. I'm really excited about all the improvements coming out at the airport. They're lined up like a, you know. That's great. Like an airplane, yeah. Is this fee structure that you've, did you invent this from scratch, or is it in use of the other regional airports? So, when I became interim director back in August, one question I asked and I needed to know is, how much money does it take to operate the airport, both terminal-wise and airfield-wise? So, we hired a consultant to figure that out. The next thing is I needed to know is, with all of our capital improvement programs that we are going to be spending some of our reserves on, what will it take to replenish those reserves? And what better group of people that understand the airport is our very own budget analysts. So, with the cooperation of our consultants, Meet and Hunt, that gave us the performa of what it takes to operate the terminal and the airfield, along with our own budget analysts, we came up with a mathematical formula, and that's how we came up with that 40%, with a 3% year-over-year. It's an investment both in the airline, and it's also an investment of keeping the aging infrastructure efficient. I don't see any letters here from Allegiant, so I guess they're on board with... Oh, 100%. They signed it. Yeah. No letters is good. I'm glad you said that, again, you kind of sprinkled a little bit of your own knowledge and operation of the airport as well. Yes, sir. A little bit of help from his department, a little bit of help from a consultant, and a lot of experience on the ground here. Yes. Thank you. Commissioner Nowicki. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Mark, for the presentation. What's the cost? I mean, I'm not... You know, you talked like, you know, what's like the cost per unemployment? I mean, where's the numbers? There's no numbers. Yep. So, our cost per employment is $2. Currently, it's $2.35 per employment. With this new agreement, it's going up to $3.11 per employment. And after five years, it's going to be $3.21 per employment. Still relatively very low for a small hub operation. It's still very competitive. But every airport has its fee structures very different. And CPEs go all over the place. But for us, that was one of the things that we negotiated on. And with a CPE of $3.11, it's still very competitive for this area. Yeah, I mean, yeah, it is. But it's going up 40%. So, the other fees, you know, are going up, too. So, could we get the pro forma from the consultant that you referenced? Can we get a copy of that? Yeah. And then, you know, it also says that there's an exclusive use to Allegiant. So, but then later in the slide, it talks about future growth and other airlines. So, how can we have an exclusive use with Allegiant, but yet look at future growth and bring in other airlines? I guess that was kind of conflicting in the presentation from my perspective. Exclusive use in their office spaces. Okay. That's strictly it. So, are they, like, common gates, like, that we could bring in? No, their offices is, their break rooms, their station. So, no, all the other common use spaces are wrapped up into the per-turn fees. Right, but I'm saying our gates. Our gates are all common use. They have no exclusivity over the gates. Nothing. Was that anything that they looked at asking for or anything like that? They did not. Okay, yeah. I mean, I'd really like to see the pro forma from the consultant, and then I'd really like to see a financial breakdown that you've used to get to that 40% increase. That's because it's nice just to put it on a slide, but, you know, there's no numbers behind it. So, I'd really like to see that. Sure. Thank you. Yeah. I'm going to get Commissioner Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Hopefully, that's not too loud in there. Thank you, Mark, for the presentation. Allegiant is a very significant partner for us here. So, very pleased that they're on board with this. You mentioned every 3,000 departures, there was a tiered savings. Could you just talk about that a little bit? What does that savings look like? So, we looked at it, and we still wanted to maintain that 40% in the first year with a 3% year over year. And when we built that, we realized that we could save that. And for every 3,000, the first 3,000 is a 4% savings, and then after that is a 7% savings. And how we derived with that savings is we added the 40%, and then we took that 40%, and we divided by the current 2025 numbers. So, we're already ahead of our schedule of our projections. So, the first two years, we're looking at 96% and 98% of cost recovery. But year 3, 100%, year 4 and 5 is 104%, and 106%. So, when you average all that stuff up, it comes out to be 100%. Okay. Great. And how do our employment fees compare with, say, TPA? It's two different airports. It is a big difference. I'll just tell you that with Tampa, they have debt. We do not have debt, so we can save some of those fees. I don't recall their exact CPE, but I know it's somewhere in the mid-teens where ours is at $3.11. So, it's really apples and oranges and hair and pie to TPA. Absolutely. Okay. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mark. Commissioner Nowicki. Sorry, Mark. I forgot one question. Is there any revenue guarantee, or is it totally volume dependent? Like, you know, Legion could sign this 20-year agreement, but then, you know, God forbid, you know, we don't want them to go anywhere, file bankruptcy or something like that. I mean, there's no, I mean, is there any guarantee in the contract, or they could just take their planes and leave, you know, fly out tomorrow, and we never see them again? Yeah. Yeah, we don't have the guarantee. The guarantee revenue structure is strictly based upon their projected growth, what we've seen in the past. Their projected growth for departures was anywhere between 3% to 14%. Their employment was sometimes at over 20%. So we factored all that in, but yes, if they were like a spirit and went bankrupt, then we are left with an airport without an airline. But we also have built into that PERFORMA an 18-month operating structure, and it would be my job to bring another airline in and make it work. Are we working towards that at all since we have common-use gates? Are we working towards bringing in another airline to generate more revenue? I'd love to. There's a lot of inefficiencies and a lot of infrastructure that I'm going to be talking about in order to bring another airline in. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. Yes, Chair. Commissioner Scheer. Yeah, Mark, kind of piggybacking on the Commissioner Witt and Wicke, I think it would be helpful to have some numbers behind your presentation so we can evaluate it. And then I wouldn't mind seeing the agreement itself. I've never had an opportunity to review the agreement that we have on the fee structure. Yeah, absolutely. And, Mark, obviously, you can send it to all of us, so not just, you know, not just birthday boy, but make sure we all get the same information. Do you have anything? Yeah. Yeah, Commissioner Peters. So, to piggyback on Commissioner Nowicki, you know, I brought it up eight years ago. I brought it up any time that Tom came here and when we met one-on-one on why he wasn't bringing in other, I know you're going to talk about it, but I'm frustrated that eight years later, all our eggs are in one basket still. And that's concerning to me. So, I'm looking forward to your next presentation because that is very concerning to me. And if the price range is different, I don't see why we aren't more successful at recruiting a Frontier or a Southwest. I just don't understand why. And I know you're going to explain it, so I'm looking forward to it. Thank you. Anybody else? Okay. Thank you. Okay, once again, good morning, Commissioners, Mr. Chairman. My name is Mark Sprague. I'm the Airport Director of the C&P Colorado International Airport. Thank you for the opportunity for me to present the Terminal Improvement Program for PIE. A couple years ago, we asked for an airport expansion project. Today, I'd like to walk through why a recommendation of a different direction for this project, how that recommendation was developed, and the professional services amendments that will be coming to you in September as we are finalizing the last fees aligned with the scope of the project. The project before you today wasn't driven by one event. It was a result of careful evaluation, stakeholder engagement, and a commitment to make sure we are investing in the right project at the right time. Why are we here today? As the original terminal expansion progressed through schematic design, the design evolved. Through that process, it became clear that the original expansion concept ultimately exceeded the funding available for the project. Rather than continue to move forward, we exercised due diligence and took the opportunity to stop and reassess the program. We met with airport staff, airline partners, Transportation Security Administration, the FAA, and our airport tenants to better understand the airport's long-term operational priorities. What we consistently heard was that before we build more terminal space, we should first modernize the terminal we already have, and we hear this consistently from our customer comments. That input, combined with our financial analysis, led us to today's recommendation. A physical responsibility program that modernizes aging infrastructure, improves operational efficiencies, enhances the passenger experience, and still preserves the flexibility of future growth. So once again, those five factors that led physical stewardship. As the design involved, the estimated project cost exceeded available funding requiring to reevaluate the program. Second, the stakeholder involved. We got the airline involved. We got the airport staff. The TSA, once again. The FAA. Airport tenants and our customers. They supported prioritizing, modernizing, and operational improvements. The third is our aging infrastructure. Much of our terminal infrastructure has served the airport very well, but many systems have reached the point where modernization and renovation is the responsible investment. We have different decade-to-decade-built infrastructure trying to intertwine into one. And with our growth, at times, it just doesn't work efficiently. So fourth was our operational efficiencies. We have the opportunity to improve passenger flow, baggage operations, security processing, and gate utilization, while creating a better experience for our customers. Finally, our long-term vision has not changed. We continue to plan for future growth, but we believe renovation and modernization should come first, followed by strategic expansion when the time is right. It's a little bit of a history. In 2019, we completed our ground-level boarding area, known as Gate 7211. Since that time frame in 2019, we've had seen double-digit growth over year over year, except when COVID hit in 2020. In 2023, we initiated the original terminal expansion program. In 2024 and 2025, the board approved CNS Engineering as the design team, and Manhattan Construction as the construction manager at risk, the CMAR. As we moved into 2025, it became evident that the original expansion concept exceeded available funding by greater than $90 million of unidentified funds. Rather than going down that path, we paused the project for a strategic reassessment. We coordinated closely with the FAA, made sure that they were on board, and evaluated how we could deliver the greatest long-term value for the airport. The process resulted in the program before you today, called the Terminal Modernization, Renovation, and Strategic Expansion. Valued at $145 million, over $95 million is on hand, and over $56 million is committed. We have the funds for this project. So let's talk about what we're going to improve. This is a lot complicated, challenging. This is a very comprehensive 14 elements that we are going to be improving in order to fix our inefficiencies, in order to bring in new airlines, in order to bring in more passengers. But first, we've got to fix our aging infrastructure in order for us to do that. We also have to construct all 14 elements by keeping the airport open and operational. So I like to go through all 14 elements. Let's start up here at number one. We're going back to the drawing board and having a new conceptual drawing. This new conceptual drawing is going to take us to the passenger activity level of number three. And with that, we're going to be able to have a conceptual drawing of having passengers up to 4.5 million passengers in our current footprint by expanding it to a pure concept. Once we have that new concept, we're going to build a 40,000 square foot elevated terminal, four to five new jet bridges. This is the most inefficient area of the airport. Why is because we have one door, one passenger, one gate door to board three airplanes, an ultra low cost carrier. An aircraft should be able to come in, offload, reload in 40 minutes. Because of our inefficiencies, it takes 60 to 120 minutes to turn that aircraft around. That means that aircraft is physically on the ramp for that time frame. We're fixing it through this one. Hey, Mark, is that issue that you just talked about, does that come into play at all on the model that Allegiant uses, like three flights per day per airline getting us back late sometimes? Or is that more, you know, weather-driven or a combination of the two? No, obviously weather-driven is always a combination. But, no, it's the inefficiencies not only here, but we also have it over here I want to talk about. Okay. And, yes. That will make Lou happy, you know, our safety harbor gentleman that always keeps an eye on us. But that's good to know. It's good to know that I didn't realize that that kind of time frame. That's significant. Absolutely. And that's three gates. Yeah. Three gates. And not very attractive to new airlines. Not at all. That we're looking for. Not at all. So, it worked when we had airplanes that were about 140, 150-seat passenger aircraft, not in today's market of 200 seats. Thank you. Go ahead. Oh, Commissioner Flowers. For the jetways that will be going out, will those be, will they be so that the persons won't have to walk, quote-unquote, outside on the tarmac up to the plane? That's correct. Thank you, Jesus. It's jeopardy. Yep. Thank you. All right. Number two is our renovations of our sanitary system. Our sewage system, we replaced our pipes inside the terminal. We also replaced our pipes along our street side. But we still have three sections that we need a pipe. And they're still original pipes from the 50s and 60s. So, we're going to be modernizing the sewage systems of the sanitary laterals. Three is our renovations of our gates two through six. This modernizes the hold room with new flooring, seating, lighting, passenger amenities, and also a new security checkpoint with new queuing and an exit lane technology. Currently, if we have all five airplanes at this boarding area, we don't have enough seats and enough hold room. So, our passengers are sitting on the floor. So, we're going to be fixing that by having new – in today's market, we have new seats that are designed for efficiency, small spaces. And we'll be able to have seats in those hold rooms for those passengers. Four, we need to replace some of the terminal roof, which has reached its end of its useful life. Five, we currently have two jet bridges. They're also going to be replaced during this renovation project. And they're also approaching their useful – end of its useful life. We have restrooms. We're going to modernize, have flexibility, more functionality. Seven right down here is our baggage makeup area. We currently have a baggage makeup area that is only 50% functional because half of that is against the wall. That baggage makeup area should be able to have a full complete 360 degrees of an airline being able to pick up the bags. So, we're going to expand that in order for airlines to be able to utilize that whole entire project. That's the second most inefficient area of the airport. That also, we cannot attract new airlines is because you can only fit X amount of baggage carts around that. Eight, renovating the ticketing A counters and queuing area. We're going to invest into looking at the new queuing area. Also, put in areas, not only new ticket counters, but new kiosks so passengers don't have to wait in line if they just need to check in for the flight. Also, new baggage drop-off areas that Allegiant and other airlines are tracking for. We're going to modernize and replace the ticketing or the rental car facility ticket counters. Currently, we have ticket counters that are 20, 25 years old. That's before the kiosks. So, we're going to modernize that. We're going to make sure that the rental cars are going to be able to put their own kiosks in. We currently have waits of over an hour. Over an hour because they don't have kiosk room. And they have to – so, we're going to be modernizing that so passengers know how to use those kiosks and be able to get to those car rentals quicker. Commissioner Flowers, hold on. So, I'm a regular over there at the kiosk, and I've called at times, not on my behalf, but for the visitors we had coming in. But, question, because they are in our facility, are they – is there anything in their contract where they also pay into costs for any renovations and upgrades, and it's not just us? Yes. Okay. Yes. But since we own the ticket counters, that's what we're going to be improving. Okay. But if they have to do any renovations to their own footprint, it's all in them. But I will say the way that they have changed how you pick up your car is faster, even if the line's a little longer, the way that you can have your car assigned already out there, that has improved. It's better. Eleven is we're going to renovate and upgrade our fire control panel throughout the whole entire airport. Twelve is new construction of a wall right here along the southern portion. So, I said that door over baggage can we had one door that was boarding three flights. We have the same issue here. We have one door boarding two flights, two aircraft, but unfortunately it's not just a direct walk to the aircraft. They've got to walk around the building. They've got to almost do a whole complete maze. So, we're going to build a wall so they'll be able to be secure. Also, take them out of the elements, put an awning over top of that wall, and then, therefore, they're all secured and be able to start boarding those airplanes into that secured area without being on the same busy tarmac of the aircraft as it's beginning to depart. Thirteen is new wayfinding signage all throughout the terminal. And finally, fourteen is modernize all the columns throughout the terminal for a customer experience. All fourteen elements have priorities. All fourteen elements have slowed the growth of this airport. All fourteen elements have inefficiencies that we are going to fix and address. And once again, this is a very complex renovation project because I don't have the luxury of shutting down any one of our gates and any one of our areas of the operation. So, this all has to be done keeping the airport open and operational. So, the project is not about building less. It's about investing smarter. We're expanding the useful life of the terminal. We're improving the passenger experience. We're enhancing safety and security. We're increasing operational efficiencies. We're supporting continued economic development. And we're positioning pie for future expansion when the time is right. Timeline. Once the amendments get approved, we're going to go right into that conceptual drawings. We should have that done by the end of this year and then have schematic drawings 30, 60, 90 by spring of 2028. During that time frame, we're going to be working on the guaranteed maximum price and hope to have that to you by summer of 2028. We go into construction all the way to summer of 2032 with the project closeout the end of the year of 2032. Commissioners, this project reflects a program whose design evolved through due diligence, stakeholder engagement, and careful evaluation. The result is a terminal improvement program that modernizes our existing facilities, positions the airport for future growth, and represents physically responsible investment in one of Pinellas County's most important transportation assets. Mr. Chairman, that concludes my presentation, and I'd be happy to answer any questions. Mark, thank you for the update. You know, the process you went through, obviously, has multiple uses. You can market to new airlines, and that could be the detail page, obviously. You can start letting our residents know in time what's coming, and that needs to be a little bit more electric as far as what you're telling them because, you know, changing sewer lines is like they just put infrastructure stuff. It's not sexy. Yeah. Well, yeah, and it needs to be done. I get it. But, yeah, so two questions on it when it comes – do we have anything on the telephone lot? Is that – is there anything about expansion with that at all? It just seems like every time I go there, it's jammed, or is it pretty much manageable? What was the – The telephone or the cell lot, you know, when you go wait. Oh, the cell phone lot. Yeah. Yeah. No, it comes in waves, so it comes in waves. No changes. No changes. There's not going to be any change currently at the cell phone lot. Is it because there's no room or because strategically you don't think it's necessary? No. Actually, it goes back to that parking crisis, all right? During that time frame, our long-term lot gets full, our short-term lot gets full, and if you're a meter and greener, you're not going to park in an economy and take a bus over. And then the extended period of time is assuming it's work as you operate. Yes? Over here. Please. Just please. Hold on. You get just the time in a minute. Just on the work as you operate concept, is that why the extended period – I mean, it's like 2032 – if we were doing it without having to worry about operating, it would be considerably shorter, I'm assuming. That's correct. A lot of this work has to be done at nighttime. Okay. Thank you. All right. Questions? Nope. Brian, go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much, Mark, for that great presentation. So, the ability to turn this aircraft faster is a massive efficiency that I think Allegiant is really going to love and will be a great tool to have for you to go out and expand with other airlines. So, right now we have, I think, 12 gates. Is that correct? Correct. So, with this expansion, we're not envisioning adding any more gates at this point. Is that correct? Well, that's correct. We're actually adding boarding bridges that are going to make the current gates very inefficient, more efficient. So, the turnaround time for gate availability is increasing. Okay. That makes perfect sense. So, you said that this would give us the ability to accommodate 4.5 million passengers a year. Right now, we're at about like 2.8, 2.9, I think. So, that's about a 60% increase. And we feel that we can get that level of increase just with these efficiencies and not having to expand the gates. The conceptual drawings will be going to a PAL-3, which is a passenger activity level of 4.5. That's if we did a full, complete build-out. So, that 40,000 square foot elevated is going to bring us to a PAL-2, which is 3.5 million passengers. 3.5. And when all of this is done, if we wanted to expand gates, what would our capacity be? Can we go from 12 to 15 or 12 to 20? I mean, what's your long-term projection on that? And that's what this schematic, our long-term plan is to continue to build upon that cornerstone elevated terminal and to continue to build on that in the next phases and then into a pure concept. And currently, we're looking anywhere – it ranges, but it could be anywhere between a total of 18 to 22 gates. Wow. Okay. Great. Thank you very much. Thanks, Brian. Anybody else? Go ahead. Thank you, Mark. Mark, first, I appreciate you saying, you know, eaters and greeters won't want to park in an economy lot, so I appreciate that. And then secondly, you know, I guess going back to the first contract with Allegiant, where it says they have exclusive use of office space, does that include ticket counters? Nope. So, just office space? Strict of office space. Their old agreement had exclusive use of ticket counters. I took that out. So, all ticket counters are common use. So, if an airline comes in, I can put them into any one of my ticket counters. And so, we have enough office space if Avello, Valeris, multiple – three airlines wanted to come in tomorrow. We would have enough office space? No, we do not have enough office space, but there's ways that we can build upon office space. So, inefficient, there's certain rooms that we're utilizing just for storage that we can utilize. Also, with the new elevated 40,000-square-foot terminal, you know, we're looking at – we're going to be looking at building office space for ground handling areas. Is that included in here? I didn't do specifics of the 40 percent – or the 40,000-square-foot elevated. But that's – when we start designing that, that's part of the issues and inefficiencies that we are going to have to bring into new office space. But that's not planned right now? It's planned into this modernization renovation. We have – when are you at 30, 60, and 90 percent design? Correct. When is that due? When's the 30 percent? When was that? 28. Spring of – I'm sorry. There you go. There you go. June 27th. So, I imagine you'll have some bubble schematics that gives different options and addressing the concerns you've heard from a couple commissioners about expansion. And we do get – I'm going to talk about airline expansion and the ability to accommodate them, well, office space or anything else. So, hopefully that will be factored in as we through these different phases of design. Absolutely. All right. It's just not about office space, but it's also about grand handling space, too. All of it. Absolutely all of it. So, that's – we're taking a hard look. That's one of our most inefficiencies that we have. Right. And we're given exclusive use to Allegiant. To their current office space that they have. Right. And they're using 100 percent of it. But we wouldn't have more baggage space for a new airline to come in. We wouldn't have space for them to – Oh, yes, we would. A baggage space – that's why I'm expanding the baggage makeup area now. Okay. I'm just making sure we have space today. If a new airline wants to come in today, that they don't have to wait until completion of the project since we're giving exclusive space to Allegiant. Right. We have an area of ticketing B that we – that is underutilized. And it could accommodate another airline. Not the size of Allegiant, but it can accommodate another airline like Avello. Okay. Perfect. That's what I wanted to hear. So, great. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else? Okay. I see you're able to maybe tentatively price some money out of LOAC for some of the expansion. That's good to see. Certainly, our airport is definitely tourism-related as well, big time. We get a lot of people coming in. So, awesome connection with our visitor St. Pete group. So, thank you for that use of funds that we have available. Anything? Last thing, Commissioners, you know, we had an economic development forum, and we had TPA there and Mark both presenting. And it was good to hear, you know, Michael from TPA talking about the partnership and those two working together and looking at the region. So, it's pretty exciting to see that partnership. Yeah. Good stuff. I mean, I think, you know, we've heard a little bit about having another airline. You know, you go to any airport, and there's always, like, a dozen, 20, 30 airlines, whatever, like Tampa has. And we're not Tampa, of course. It would be nice to get another one that helps augment anything. But what I learned is that even finding another route by the existing line is difficult. So, much less finding a new airline, I'm sure, again, I'm not in the industry, but I imagine that is not an easy thing either. You have long-term agreements to deal with, where they're coming from, and all of that. But, you know, it's clearly something you want, and we would like to see as well. And let's not forget, I'll be bringing a Bermuda Air contract by the fall of this year as they do nonstop international service to Belize and to Turks and Caicos out of our airport. There you go. So, it's a start. Commissioner Lett-Valla. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Do we know yet if Sun Country is going to be using PIE? I know they're at Tampa International now. That's something that we constantly are talking with Allegiant. Right now, they need to go, they need to have a single operating certificate. And meeting with the CEO just a few months ago, Mr. Greg Anderson, it's going to take, he told me, it's going to take about two years. So, once they get that single operating certificate, yes, we are going to continue to ask them to bring that Minneapolis flight from Tampa over to St. Pete Clearwater. There's no sense of competing against, you know, Allegiant being over Tampa with our name and then all of us. Allegiant and PIE are symmetrical. That's, you know, when people look at PIE, they look at Allegiant. So, as the single operating certificate gets approved, we're going to constantly have those negotiations. Thank you. Anybody else? Okay. Mark, thank you. It was a pleasure. Thank you so much. Yep. Thanks for your time. All right. Speaking of Brian Lowak, good morning. Talk about our capital projects funding program. Good morning, Commissioners. Brian Lowak, President and CEO of Visit St. Pete Clearwater. This morning, we are here to talk about the capital projects funding program and why we are here to talk about this is, as a reminder, earlier in this year, the Tourist Development Council recommended and you all approved new changes to the program's guidelines. And the two major changes in there were that we will allow for the use of TDT to be used towards beach park facilities. And the second change was that prior to opening up that program for the application cycle, I will come to you all and you will provide a specific allocation that can be spent during that two-year cycle. And it's required that I will come before you prior to opening up that program every two years so we can revisit what that amount would be. And as a reminder, this program applies to Category D projects. So the museums, aquariums, sports fields, this doesn't apply to Category E, so a spring training facility or professional sports stadiums. Again, how the plan is for the TDT, 60% goes to advertising and marketing, 40% goes to capital projects. That's what we're speaking to today, and one-half of 1% of that TDT out of the capital side is dedicated towards beach nourishment. That's the only dedication that you all have in those TDT dollars. So the recommendation that we wanted to discuss today and was taken to the TDC last month and approved was essentially we've got a lot of words here that I'll go through in numbers and percentages. But at the end of the day, as you saw in the last slide, one-half of one of those 6% is dedicated to beach nourishment. We're simply recommending that the same amount be allocated towards, for this cycle, for capital projects, both the traditional capital projects that we funded in the past as well as those new beach park facilities. And so when you look at the numbers up there, 15.3 million each, that's one-half of one of the 6% times 2 because the cycle is 2 years. So you see it's 15.3 split down the middle between the traditional and the beach park facilities for a total funding of $30.6 million for this cycle. And, again, this matches for each of those categories what's allocated towards beach nourishment. And so when you combine the beach nourishment, one-half of a percent, and then the one-half of a percent for each of the two categories above, you get a total of 1.5 of your 6% is going to all capital projects. And that equates to approximately 24% of the overall tourist development tax collected. Why is that important? Well, because in the plan, 40% of TDT is allocated towards capital projects. So this allows us to spend approximately, over the next two years, 24% of the TDT on capital projects and would leave 16% to build up that capital reserve for future projects. So this approach, we believe, allows us to continue to prioritize and maintain funding for beach nourishment while also funding capital projects, the new beach park facility projects, and then allowing us to save up, build up that reserve account for any potential future capital projects that may arise. Right here, we've got a pro forma of the TDT capital account. This goes out to 2033. And what I wanted to point out is you have on the uses, you see at the top what's projected to be collected, that 40%. Excuse me. Excuse me. Just a second. Yes, ma'am. Can we get, Brian, love looking at your face, but can we get these screens, all four screens with these documents? Because I can't read them in the position I'm at. I can't read the one in front of me. It's too far away. And I have Brian behind me. So if that would be helpful, because I can't. We love you, Brian. But I'd like to see the doc. Thank you. All right. So you can see here the uses. On the uses, this includes the already approved capital projects that are in the works. And then you have the beach nourishment on the last line there. I want to point out on the uses, second from the last line, the additional beach funds. So you'll see there $86 million in fiscal year 2025. That was a drawdown. That was a transfer from the capital reserves over into the beach nourishment so you all could do the emergency nourishment project that was recently completed. You'll also see in fiscal year 2028 highlighted a minus $43 million. So that would represent a potential transfer from the beach nourishment fund back into the capital fund. Why would we do that? Well, because of that 86, the state approved $43 million to come back for that project. So because those funds came from this account, we would recommend transferring them back into this account. And then at the bottom there, you see we put in as placeholders, if you were to take this recommendation, beginning in 2027, placeholders all the way through 2033 on what that one half of 1% for both capital projects and beach park facilities would look like. And then at the very bottom there, you see the final fund balance at the end of the year. Yeah, while we're on that, commissioners, is you've seen bits and pieces of grant funds coming in from the state. So out of that $99 million project, we ended up getting $47 million of state funds towards our re-nourishment. So 52 out of ours. So they did a really good job on grants. This was state, not feds. Well, we're still on track with that, but that'll be up on the next nourishment cycle. You know, we have a lot more work. Nothing. We can't go back. We did this on our own, so we can't, they won't reimburse us. We'll continue to try, but we're not going to get reimbursed on something that we started prior to our modified agreement. But just to highlight, they seemed so helpful and positive when they were here, so I just thought I'd ask. Well, we did ask for reimbursement, but I haven't seen the check. Okay, all right. Go ahead. Yeah, so that's it on that part. Again, we took this recommendation to the Tourist Development Council last month. They supported it. We're here today to look for some direction. Based on that direction, we will bring forth an item for approval to set that budget to you all next month. And we would then open up the application cycle in October. And then in the spring of 2027, we would have recommendations ready to bring forth to the Tourist Development Council and, subsequently, you all. Right. That chart that you just showed us on the flow of funds, that's the 40% side. That's the 40% side. Reserve line at the bottom. Could you just speak briefly to the other reserve funds and kind of what's kind of working through our system, you know, as far as reviewing policies and thoughts about that, those funds? Sure. Well, I don't have that on the presentation. You do have a healthy reserve level in the operating side. That's 60% for advertising and marketing, and that's what's used to fund our operations. At the end of 2026, it's projected that we will have $172.8 million in the reserves on the 60% side. In addition to the reserves here that you're showing on the 40% side. Correct. And the thought behind the increasing reserves, just your thoughts about maintaining that healthy reserve level? Well, I don't know about the thoughts on maintaining that are, but I can tell you how we got there. That's good. Is on that 60%, we have, Visit St. Pete Clearwater and their operating budget has never received 60% for their fiscal year. So, they've been between 45%, and I think we're up to about 56.5% this year in the proposed budget. So, the remainder, the delta between that and 60% is what's gone into the reserves on the operating side. And I think you do need healthy reserves on the operating side. In the event that an emergency happens, you can rev up your marketing. But this is a lot of reserves. Okay. Thank you. I just wanted to comment about how it built. And it seems to be we're heading towards that 60% as it was originally designed, but we're not there yet. So, it's still going to be building a little bit. Correct. But how we use that, I think that might be interesting for a thought for another day. Did you have anything? Go ahead. And, you know, like we would have spent 40, when we started, when we started this project, we didn't know we were going to receive the state funds. But we had reserve levels to be able to cover that. It gave you a lot of flexibility, you know, regarding things that we needed to do. We were just really successful with grants, you know, and so, but going into it, you were able to nurse the beaches, have a booming tourism season. And, you know, in part because of that, and in terms, had we not got those grant funds, it still would have been okay. I understand. But it's still healthy. But it's on the 60% side. So, you know, again, it's a loan back to the other side. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Peters. Thank you. And don't forget that we came under budget. We did. So, I mean, that's a big deal, and that was a really big deal. But, so, I don't know if I understand this well, and if I have to sit down with Chris or with you to understand this better, but those numbers that you're showing, based on the numbers you were telling us when we were looking at the Rays, the Phillies, the beach nourishment, somehow these numbers are not coming out to what my expectations are. So, I think I need a little walkthrough on some of this, because we never spent the money on the Rays, so I'm expecting that bottom line, especially on reserves, to be different than what you're saying, unless that's in that 60%, and I still don't see why in the 60% we need those kind of healthy reserves. Even in an emergency, and I get, we've had plenty of emergencies, we've always had partnerships, and I just don't know that we need those kind of reserves. And, you know, and I'm still pretty confident this amendment will pass, and the things that we can spend money on, parks or whatever it might be, that might not be funded out of the general fund any longer, then I don't know that we need those healthy reserves, as high as they are. And I do want you to help walk me through this, because I'm not understanding that those numbers on what we're going to spend on the Rays, I'm not seeing it, I'm not understanding it, and so if we'll do that on another date, it's fine. Yeah, we could absolutely do that. I'll bring Jim Abernathy into that also. He's been through all those over in Chris's shop. Okay, because I was expecting these numbers to be a lot higher than what you're showing us. Yeah, we can certainly do that. The other thing I do want to, you know, I look over to Jewel, because, you know, the question about what we can spend the money on, it comes down to the legal definition, right? Right. And it wouldn't surprise me if they start changing that, if this amendment passes, so. And that's also been discussed for years, and so there may be opportunities. Chair? Yes, Commissioner Shearer. A simple question. Why is the state grants accounted for in 28 and not 27? I think that's where, for lack of better terms, and Jewel, correct me if I'm wrong, but we haven't received that funding yet, and so they anticipate that we would receive it at a future day, a date, and by the time we get that, we'd be building out that 2028 budget at that time. I thought it was imminent, like, it would be in 27. Anyway. Yeah, I think that they want to make sure the check's in hand before they put it in the budget. Okay. Mr. Nowicki? Thank you, Chair, and I don't know if Commissioner Scott has any questions either. I don't know either, because he's no longer visible. I just wanted to throw that out there. Hey, Brian, are you, before Vince, do you have any questions, Brian, Scott? I do. Okay, hold on one second. We'll come to you after Vince. Go ahead, Commissioner Iwicki. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Great presentation, Brian. You know, I think we're on a good track here. Would be, you know, supportive of it. Also, you know, I'm supportive. You know, I watched the last TDC meeting, as you know. I mean, I would also be supportive of increasing the funding for the elite events, too. You know, I know I think you're going to bring that to us at some point in time, but, you know, so you can start counting votes. You know, I'm in favor of increasing the funding for those elite events, so. Great. Thank you, sir. Thank you. I'm sure that will be a question asked soon. Any other questions for Brian? Yeah, Mr. Chairman. Oh, Brian Scott. Yes, thank you. Thank you. Brian, always great to see you. Great presentation. I am very supportive of this. You know, the biggest comment that I got from residents during the whole RAISE discussion is spend the money in a way that helps us. And this is a way that we can spend the money that helps promote tourism, but also helps our residents by improving our beach park facilities. So I think this is great, and I'm really glad that we're at this point. Very supportive of it. And, Brian, it appears that we're on, at least from what I've been reading and what I've been seeing in the TDT reports, that we may be on track for a record TDT collections this year. Where do you think, your best estimate, what's your best guess of where we're going to land on that this year? Ooh, if I had a crystal ball. I will tell you it's going to be a great year for TDT collection, and we will certainly surpass and outperform the estimate on this forecast. And we've got a strong possibility that we are at that 2023 year. Okay. So do you think we'll break $100 million? Do I think we'll break $100 million this year, 2026? Yeah. What was 90? Hopeful. Yeah. What was 03? 03 was 98.2, I believe. Well, you're pushing it, Commissioner. Yeah, I thought he had a very politically good response, which was, I think we're going to get there. And it's just been a great year. I mean, just unbelievable. All the partners that we have, the airport is one and all the other partners. It's just been an amazing, amazing year. And your group is just doing just incredible work. So thank you. Thanks for your leadership as well. I have a question. Yeah, Commissioner Peters. So to follow up on that question, you know, we have announced that we've been better one year over the next year based on money or based on rooms. So I want to know, are we doing better based on the room rates that we're getting and the Airbnb rates we're getting because they're higher? Or are we doing better because we're selling more rooms? Yes. No. It's because you guys have report this different ways. Yes. And so I want to know how you're reporting this. Is this because more rooms are sold or because the price of the rooms are higher? You're saying it's both? It's a combination of both. When you look at year over year, over 2025, we're way up on both of those, number of visitors as well as hotel demand, as well as ADR and total revenue. When you look at a 2023 and 2024, we're slightly off of those numbers as far as overnight total visitors. However, the demand for the hotels is still rivaling those. So slightly down on total visitors versus 2024 and 2023, significantly up over 2025. And ADR has remained pretty consistent, slightly gone up. Where we've seen a large increase in rate is on the short-term rental side, vacation rentals. The rate's gone up significantly in the last two years on that side of the equation. And travel patterns are changing. And we're seeing a lot more demand for those. We've seen, obviously, we took a hit on the supply last year with those. But that's coming back. And as those have come back online, they're still not at the pre-2024 storm levels. But the rate is making up for it. Okay. And so what percentage now of that revenue is Airbnb versus hotel? It fluctuates month to month. I'm going to say the vacation rentals is the largest segment of TDT collections every month. It's more than Clearwater, the city of Clearwater. So it varies. But I'm going to say pretty conservatively, on any given month, 35 to 40 percent of TDT is coming from vacation rentals. Okay. And then once that inventory is finally replaced, probably we'll end up, you think we'll ever get more than hotels? Will we end up at 60? Because when I was chair before the storm, we were getting pretty close to 50-50. So I don't think it's an unrealistic expectation since corporate has bought up all our inventory to assume that short-term rentals are going to exceed hotel rooms. Yeah, it's hard to make that prediction yet because as the short-term vacation rental market was expanding, the storm came. And so we lost a huge supply there. And in the meantime, the supply in the hotels that we've increased, we now have more hotel rooms than we did pre-storm. We have significantly less vacation rentals than we did pre-storm. Do we have a finger on the pulse on how long it will take for the vacation rental inventory to be complete? I really don't. A lot of it's tied to, you know, community by community and their processes. Brian, any trends on that, to her question? Any trends on short-term rentals, you know, converting back to housing? And do you see any of that going on or significant? I know there's some communities that would love to see that, you know, a little bit less of those short-term. Unfortunately, I don't have the data to give me an answer there. I just see the supply, the total supply. And because of statute, I can't see certain things. So I just see a number that we lost a significant supply after the storms. And that supply, while increasing, has not come close to the pre-storm level. So it could be for a number of different reasons. Correct. Commissioner, we really want to look at that, you know, over the next, you know, several months. Because we're trying to figure that out for, you know, even our own budget. What's going to come back online and when? And whether it's, you know, homesteaded properties coming back online or whether it's new inventory and new EAB. And we're going to work with Mike Twitty, you know, on to the extent we can. But we're really going to have to work with municipalities in terms of what's in their pipeline for rezoning and all those types of things. So it's pretty extensive. But we need that type of projections even for our own budget. Thank you. Any other questions? All right. Thank you. Appreciate it. I think you kind of, Brian, by the way, I think you kind of got nodding support for those, for what you brought to us. We'll see the details later. But, yeah. Thank you. All right. We're going on to agenda briefing. Okay. So item one, looks like you have a check presentation, Water Quality Month. Going over to our public hearings. The first public hearing is on a map amendment, and this is for the whole North Greenwood Community Development Area. It's 461 acres. And Rodney's here. If you have questions regarding that. Any questions? Go ahead. Item five is a map amendment, residential low-medium to recreational open space. This is an area annexed into the city, and it's owned by them, and it's going to be for recreation. Going to the consent agenda, you've got a lot of different reports. Over to item 13, it's a contract award to Stormwater General Engineering Consulting Services for Public Works. So they have different ones that they use. So it's $2 million per firm that they use as needed for their capital projects. Item 14, letters of community support, and this is for the Lake Tarpon outfall structures with the Southwest Florida Water Management District. It's a requirement for us to provide for them. A couple of reports in the sheriff's office. Over to the regular agenda. We're asking that item 18, 19, and 20, they all go together. This is with the airport, that they be pulled and moved to the – we'll bring them back on on September 10th. They've got some additional work to do they want to clean up before they bring this to you. We'll pull 18, 19, and 20. 18, 19, and 20. Well, they're on the agenda, so we'll just not act on those. Item 21 is demolition of vacant property. Item 22, this is an agreement with American Janitorial and with Extreme Clean Janitorial Services. So, this is what we talked about during the budget. So, this is getting that project going because we have to have a transition to the new company. This is subject to budget approval. So, if for some reason you don't have that in the budget, then we would act accordingly. Item 23 is the second amendment to the agreement with William Dakar, and this is for the jail secure entry project. It adds additional design scopes for the eastern parking lot and signage, et cetera, and stuff. Item 24 is the first amendment with cost media services, and this is with CBB for Central Europe, public relations representation. Second one, 25. Barry, is that the same company we used in the past? Brian? Yes. Got a thumbs up. Item 25, second amendment with roster creative. This is for U.K., Ireland, and Scandinavia. Yes. We might want to put that in our bullets. Item 26 is second amendment. This is with Unite USA. This is the CAM project. So, this extends that model while we're working on what you had agreed to to bring that in-house. Item 27 is the first amendment to license agreement with an incorporated Seminole Sports Association for the day-to-day managerial and operational duties. Item 28 is a grant agreement, as we just talked about, with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection for the Sand Key segment of the Shore Protection Program. This is the grant funding with the county match. Item 29 is a grant agreement with Southwest Florida Water Management District for Phase I real-time flood forecasting project. Question, Chair. Yeah, Commissioner Scheer. What is the benefit of this real-time flood thing? I don't know what we're doing it for. We do all of our projections for – come on up, Jill. We do all of our projections and mapping based upon that type of data. Good morning. Jill Silverboard, county administrator. County administrator is correct. It's for predictive forecasting. With all of the blue sky events that we've been experiencing over the last several years, Swift MUD's updating its modeling, and we are part of that project. So that we get the benefit of the entire district. We map floods. We map everything. My question is, Pinellas County hasn't changed that much over the last 20 – I mean, is this data collection? Are we redoing efforts? Do we not have flood modeling already for these? We do. But Pinellas County has – we adopted our own maps based upon existing modeling that are now going to be reflected. It's also – we're changing the predictive modeling based upon new data. So it keeps the model updated based upon actual events that we experience over time. So, for example, FEMA hasn't updated anything since 2016. We're now updating based upon our storms from 2024. So we're in a different data set, I guess, would be the correct way of saying it. But it's for real time. It's to forecast real-time flooding because Swift MUD looks at what our accumulations are, what the creek levels are, what the lake levels are. And so it depends. If we've got – if we've been experiencing a great deal of rain, then obviously we don't have as much capacity. It can affect places that never flood. Are we taking data that we already have and just creating new models? No. We're adding data, new data, in addition to building on the data we've been using. So it's an iterative process. Jill, correct me if I'm wrong, but all the municipalities use this. So when they're building new infrastructure, they're updating a road or anything, they use that data for their own capital improvement projects. That's correct. This particular project, though, is for Brooker Creek, Lake Tarpon, and South Creek Watershed. So it's only a portion of everything. But Brooker, as you know, is huge. It's a – you know, everything comes – a lot of things come from – So what we have right now is not sufficient for our needs for what? I just don't know why we're spending $600,000 on additional modeling when I don't know that our models aren't sufficient. Our match is $300,000. Right. That comes from your surface water utility. It's not a general fund project. It does come from – I wasn't going to get a question. So we actually – we've been a participant with SwiftMUD for, gosh, I don't know, 50, 60 years probably, maybe longer. So we would recommend we continue because we're seeing, as you know, since even 2024, we're seeing a change in the events and the amount of flooding, flooding in places we had not experienced flooding in the past. So it's a – we're trying to keep it current, I guess, is the best way to say it. And is this the – I know that there – we've had some discussions about, you know, the Gulf side versus the Bay side. And we – This is not the Baltimore bill. Hold on. Hold on. I know. I just want to – this is an issue that keeps being brought up to me by folks that are working in this community. We've decided to take a more conservative approach with newer data than the old data for floodplain management. I'm just – does this have anything to do with that? Is this part of the – part of it, or is this – Not necessarily. This is more of a day-to-day, real-time forecast. So if we're experiencing a significant amount of an event or rain, it's more about the – because we watch the gauges, as you know. I understand. It's more related to that as opposed to new development, which is impacted by, you know, floodplain standards and elevations. At some point, I'd just like to get an update from our folks where we use those – FEMA's numbers have a lower – have a lower plane on the Gulf side and a higher plane on the Tampa Bay side. They're most recent. They're most recent. And we've used more recent data. Yes. So ours is a little higher on the Gulf side and a little lower, but you go up to – I just want to get an update at some point that says, oh, by the way, FEMA's numbers have been updated, and they're more in line with ours, or we're still way behind. And I just – I'd like to understand that a little bit more. Sure. I mean, we can schedule that for a work session. I think one thing to remember about all that, though, is what you chose to do was not lower the standard that was in place before the 2016 FEMA maps. I understand. Because they were 10 years outdated. That's exactly right. So you're remembering it exactly right. I just want to see how far along FEMA's come, and we were right in doing what we did, or oops, they got different data than we do. Or are they still using the old stuff? Yeah, we can do that. We can get an update on that. That would be great. Thank you. Any other questions, Commissioner Shearer? Okay. Anybody else? Okay. Thanks, Joe. Oh, Commissioner Scott. Sorry. Go ahead. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Great discussion. I would love to see that update that you talked about, Dave, regarding FEMA. And I totally respect Commissioner Shearer's not wanting to spend it if we don't need to spend it. From my perspective, $300,000 is a drop in the bucket if it makes us more ready for a future event. So I'm supportive of this because, as we found in 2024, things flooded that never flooded before. And anything that we can do to make sure that we're better prepared in the future for that, I think, is a good thing. Thank you. Anybody else? Okay. Go ahead, Barry. Item 30 is a hazard mitigation grant for the Department of Emergency Management for the design of improvements out at McKay Creek. You can see the breakdown in your packet for those improvements. Item 31 is an agreement with Tarpon Springs to provide the unincorporated share of the fire station being constructed up there. Question on that, Chair? Yeah, Commissioner Shearer. Thank you. Where's that? It says we have the funding for that. Where's that funding coming from? Yeah. Go ahead, Matt. Good morning, Commissioners. Chris Rose, Office of Management and Budget. It's coming from the fire district millage, the particular district that is up there. Okay. Good. I didn't know if it was coming out of general funds or where. Yeah. I have a question. Commissioner Peter. So, Chris, when we build fire stations, if a municipality builds it, does a municipality pay for the whole station or does county contribute? We pay for our prorated share, our proportional share of it. So whatever area that is serving is who pays for that portion of it. So different districts. So if it's unincorporated, if it's got some unincorporated, then the county pays. If it's strictly city, municipality, so it's within the city's municipality, then the city pays for the whole thing. Yes, Chair. That's correct. Okay. Most of our cities, if I'm not mistaken, have some overlap of service rendered in kind of agreements because of those gray areas that they back up. Most of the fire districts are shared. Yes. That's correct. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. Go ahead. Did you have a question? Okay. Go ahead. Item 32 is an agreement with locale and media. This is for a learning management system out at our safety and emergency services. It also provides training and stuff for staff. Item 33 is a third amendment with coastal waste management. This is for the Lowellman residential collection. She had a briefing on a couple months ago. Item 34 are change orders to contracts with Archer Western Construction, TLC Diversified, and Caladasi Construction. This is their job order contracting that they use. They use these contracts for small projects that they have, and so this allows them to continue to use those projects. Item 35 is a renewal of certificate. This is for blue car transportation and American and Western transportation. They've met all the requirements. 36 is first amendment term extension with Cigna. This is for the dental benefits for our county employees. Item 39 is a little thing called the next year's budget, and item 40 is the first amendment to a contract with Vansquiv. This is for your federal government relation services contract. So this is the first amendment extension for that contract. Chair, can we get the actual presentation, like, for your report, like, before the end of day? Yeah, you mean the tomorrow? Yeah, it's in process. So I made comments back. The budget book that you have has the transmittal letter, so that took effort, and we're working on the presentation. You will have it before the weekend. Before the weekend? Yes. Thank you. And then also on number 40, I mean, it looks like this hasn't gone out to bid in, like, 12 years, you know, a lobbyist contract. So it looks like, I mean, the agreement started back in 2014, and so I just didn't know if it made sense to, you know, shop around since it's a 12-year-old contract. Yeah, they've done a great job for us. I do understand what you're saying. We typically, again, there's no rule of thumb, but we typically, after 10 years or so, kind of look at putting it back out. It doesn't keep that group from applying again. And it just means that we're kind of taking a look at what the market has to say. So just a thought on that, Barry. Well, I did mention this to each commissioner. There seemed to be, from a staff standpoint, there seemed to be general consensus about continuing this. This is a two-year agreement. You can either pass it or we can put it out in the bid. Are they normally two years, Barry? Are they two years all the time? Well, this is the first-term extension. Okay. So we can do the extension. What's that, Tristan? Yeah. And so you could either, you know, put it out to bid now. You can put it out to bid in two years. You know, it's really the direction. The direction I received, you know, when I... I got you. All right. We'll talk about it. We'll talk about it on Monday. It's really at the board's direction on Tuesday. Yeah, because I was reading, you know, some of the accomplishments, and it seems like they've kind of been just the last two years or so. It hasn't been, you know, since 2014, and so as a newer commissioner, I'm not really sure the value that we've gotten over the last 12 years, and so I don't know if they can maybe add more accomplishments, and I guess, you know, and I've never met with them. They've never reached out to me. They've never introduced themselves, and so I'd be happy to talk to them, too, but I just think 12-year-old contract going back from 2014 deserves a fresh look, a new set of eyes, and then I was also... I thought we brought on a lobbyist, Ballard, to help with some of the accomplishments that they listed, too, because it seems like, you know, I guess maybe I'm a little unsure of that. We brought on Ballard for a specific purpose. They really didn't add much value, and so we released that contract, but there were kind of two paths on that. We didn't know which way it was going to work to be successful, either direct conversations with the White House or working through Congresswoman Luna's office and the Corps of Engineers, and that's really where we had success. So we released the Ballard contract. Yeah, I mean, I would be, you know, happy to talk to them, take a look at it, but, you know, obviously it's up to everybody. Just something that stood out is all. I understand. Thank you for the question. How much has the contract increased in cost over the time they've been here? I don't think it has, has it? No. I think it's... So... Harry will be here on Tuesday, by the way. Yeah. So if they've had that contract and they've not raised the cost, then I think even if you go out to bid, I don't know that we'd get a better deal, and the relationships that Harry has are, you just can't measure that. So, yeah. I mean, I'm fine with keeping him. I think he does an outstanding job. I know the relationships that he has all over the Capitol, and he's got my confidence. Yeah. And I think it's a fair question to ask, since you're, you know, a newer commissioner, and so maybe we can give him a few minutes on Tuesday just to kind of recap the things that they're working on, and are you hearing that over there? I just want to make sure everybody's hearing that. Okay. Thank you. I think that's a fair question, and then you get a chance. I mean, obviously you can call them, they can call you, but to have a one-on-one I think is a good idea as well. Thank you, Commissioner. Yes. Mr. Chair, we skipped the county attorney, and yet I have some important matters to discuss with you today. We skipped you? We did. I did. Sorry, that's my fault. I missed it somewhere. That's my fault. Go ahead. Under item number 37, I do have a confidential memo. I did not pass it around. As you all know, we met individually with each of you and discussed the substance of what's in there. I can certainly share that memo with you, but we have spoken individually with each of you about it. I also want to state that I desire further advice concerning this litigation that is referenced under item number 37, and I am requesting that we have a shade meeting to discuss settlement potential and strategies related to litigation expenditures. We have reserved on each of your calendars a time for next week, Tuesday at 1 p.m., which would be in theory after the conclusion of your regular meeting. I am prepared to post a notice to advertise that meeting for Tuesday, again, at 1 o'clock. There are some strict requirements that govern shade meetings that we will be making sure that we abide by on Tuesday prior to going into that shade session, but I am requesting that we have that meeting and have scheduled it for Tuesday at 1 p.m., and so long as there is consensus, I will be getting with communications and making sure that we get that notice posted specifically for the shade meeting. And it essentially will be following our meeting. Assuming that we're finished by 1 p.m., if the meeting for some reason is going on, we will need to adjourn it to go to the other meeting that's noticed at 1 p.m. and come back and finish the business of the board. And I told you a personal conflict for me at 1 p.m. I'll have to break, but I'm sure Commissioner Vala will. We will be speaking with both of you to make sure that you're perfectly aware, because like I said, these sessions are very strictly regulated by state law, so we want to make sure that we absolutely comply to the letter of the law with those statutes. Thank you. Thank you. One other thing. Late yesterday, we received the petition that has been filed by the town of Bel Air Shore to attempt to vacate the erosion control line within their municipal boundaries. We haven't had a full opportunity to review that yet, but it is going to be our recommendation that the county take steps to intervene in that action. It is currently noticed up as, it's before the Department of Environmental Protection, and it's referenced as case number OGC 26-1668. We did receive that petition late yesterday, and like I said, we can get with Joe and get that posted under the county attorney reports portion of the agenda. There's already an agenda item there. We can post it there so that it's publicly available, and any of you that wish to review it. I thought we had done a letter. Did we do a letter already? We have. This is just going to ask you specifically to give staff the authority to seek to intervene in that action. All right. You already took a position. Did you have? Come on up. Come on up. Sorry, Commissioner. It's Tristan Summer, county administration. So I just wanted to put a clarification in there for the Vansquoia contract. So the way the 2014 and 2018 and 2022 contracts were written, they were a little different. So it looks like the increase from the 2018 to the 2022 contract went up by $5,000, and it just was kind of restructured with how those were written through those different contract periods. So I just wanted to put that clarification in there. So it was a whole thing. It went from what to what? $90,000 to $95,000 for the total. Okay. Thanks for the clarification. You didn't have anything on this last item we were talking about. Correct. No, I just wanted to talk about that. Yeah. Anything else, Jewel? I'm sorry. No, sir. And my apologies for skipping. No, sir. But like I said, we did need to get, you know, these two things on the record. And more importantly, I wanted to. I actually have this on my list here about the shade meeting. So you. Yeah. Well, and I did also want to mention the petition that we had actually received it, and we can have it posted to the agenda so it's available. Okay. Thank you. Anything else? Could you give just like a one-sentence update or maybe two on the RFN that's out for the downtown properties? Anything going on there? What's the scheduled time to hear back? I'm hearing a lot of noise about it, but I'm not hearing a lot about this RFN, so I'd like to know when that's coming. Yes, sir. Blaine Williams, Assistant County Administrator. So the deadline for the receipt of the reposals is September the 16th. Okay. So we're just a month out because, and if some of you have tried to go in and download the materials, you have to register so we have a sense of how many entities have downloaded those materials and is in excess of 50 at this point. I understand that developers are talking to the city as well about their properties, so there seems to be active interest in it. We're really looking forward to the receipt of those proposals. Yeah, it makes a lot of sense to be talking to the city, especially if properties are next to each other. Yes, and we've alluded to those. We have provided a link and an addendum to a city's website. They have theirs. They can talk to the city about it, Al Battle, the assistant manager, so that they know that those assets. They're due that date. Do you have a sense of the timing on when we might, when that can be called down? Yes, sir. And when we would be seeing them? So we're going to, first we have a staff group along with CBRE that will shortlist those proposals. And then at that point, and we've talked about this, we're providing indicative terms. So you all told us you want some flexibility on how the deal might be transacted. So we provided, here's what we're thinking to the developers. We're going to get their responses. For those that are shortlisted, we're going to tease out themes that they're willing, where they're willing to go. And then we will provide a common set of terms that we want them to then give us their best and final offer. At that point, it comes to you as the evaluating committee, the ultimate decider in all of this. And we expect that through the end of this calendar year, that due diligence and the negotiations that I'm talking about will go on. And it will come to you in the spring. Okay. Commissioner Lett-Vell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Do you anticipate the city adding more properties to the RFN? Because my understanding is they had some properties that they were going to add to our RFN, and they decided not to. Now they may add like an amendment or an addendum to their RFN. We wanted to be very careful. This is a complex real estate transaction, and we wanted to keep it separate between the two governing bodies. This is the county's decision. I like that answer. They did ask, you know, would you consider highlighting some of the properties? We did agree to the North Ward because it's a little bit further away, and we want to be a good partner. They did have other properties that they have, again, reminded us that could be, as CBRE might say, accretive to the deal. But we want to be very clear. Those properties are not part of the county's evaluation, although they could be complementary to it. And so we invite them to contact the city and say, hey, what's possible? But when you evaluate this, we've been clear, city parcels will not be evaluated as part of the county project. Has the PSTA facility on Garden Avenue been talked about? Yes, sir. That is in this new list of properties that's in the addendum that's on the city's website. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. So North Ward, is it part of our proposal or not? No. Because it just sounded like you said we did take North Ward because it's not closed. Yes, it was just, you know, no, it's not part of the proposal. Okay, so we have no city properties as part of our proposal. Well, in the RFN, we noted that the city had the North Ward, and we said contact the city for that. Okay. So we just were trying to be good partners. There's a big piece of land further north that you might. So, Blaine, the answer to the question is no. The answer is no. Okay. Thank you. That's what I wanted to make sure. Thank you, Chair. Hold on. Hold on. Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead, Commissioner Latvala. Go ahead. Just for clarification, who makes the final decision? You do. Well, not me, but. Well. You as a board. The board. The county commissioners. Okay. You are the final. Yes. On our properties. On your property. On your property. Commissioner Flowers. So let me ask this question because, yes, people are asking a ton of questions. Are there any of our properties that we are not listing as a part of this RFN? No. I just wanted you to say that because I did get a call about some properties that were not a part of the footprint that they thought should have been a part of the footprint. Well, because they were a part, they were owned by the county, and I couldn't really answer that because I thought all of the properties. I know we discussed this quite a bit, whether or not we wanted to split it up in case there may be separate interests, and if it would make the deal more attractive, or if we wanted to just do it as an entire block of all properties that we own. So I think that, you know, if there are any properties that we don't want a part of the process, hopefully we've identified those and not put it in the RFN. I would imagine that a master developer, that's what the RFN's out for, will piece these properties out to people that work directly for them as they put these packages together on different development options that are out there. That's just realistic, because there's people that do certain things really well, and they may want this little piece and that. So I'm assuming we're going to hear about that when we get our proposals in. Yes, and so we put all the properties on the table. Now, depending on what we get back and what you decide, you know, that may or may not involve all the properties. There may be a strategic reason after we've seen the responses to retain one or two. We don't know, but that's why we've made this so creative. We want to be able to harness the best thoughts of the private sector and the development community. And I think you've done, you've taken into the comments here, especially the part about the lease options that are out there. I know Commissioner Scheer brought that up originally, and we're going to get that thought, too, throughout this process. So we'll have some good data to look at, information to look at when we make the decision. Yes, sir. Anything else? Yes, Chair. Commissioner Scheer? Lane, I talked to you about this earlier, but it's my understanding that when CBRE put their RFN out, they blasted it out to, like, 10,000 recipients. And a lot of large developers, it went to their spam mail because it was identified as spam. And I just want to know if they've reached out to those people, sent them another notification, make sure that the people they intended to get it to got it. Well, with 50 recipients so far that we're hearing about, we've done pretty good, but good question. Well, 50 or so development entities. So on top of that, they augmented it, Commissioner, with personal reach-outs to developers that have been interested in projects in the past, others that they know and haven't met yet. But they have gone out and tried to actively seek and recruit interest in this project. Yes, sir. Thank you for the question. Commissioner Scott, do you have anything? Just so you know, Commissioner Nowicki has been looking out after your interests. I certainly haven't. I'm kidding. Are you there? Yeah. I'll have a – I have another question. Commissioner Latvala has a question. Has the CMA property as well as the old fire station been mentioned as being added? On the city side? Yes, sir. I would need to revisit that list, but I'm glad to share it with you, what they've asked for, or the link to the website where they're posted. So if they add property on the city side, does that extend the RFN, or is the RFN still ending in September? This has been the – they can add property, take property, it doesn't matter because our entire valuation would be on our property only. We're simply saying here's the city's list of properties that they have, no different than a developer could have private property that they want. Well, then they have to worry about the assemblage and zoning and all of those things. Absolutely. So a developer could theoretically say we want all of the county property and we would like, you know, these three pieces of property on the city side and make their own deal with the city, right, apart from us? Apart from you. And, I mean, everything's going to be contingent. But your evaluation, our recommendation is your evaluation will be based on the property that we have. And the due diligence that's going to occur is, whether it's private property or whether it's city property, they're going to have to work those issues out. Because if they develop private property and they want to put a 26-story building on them but it's zoned, you know, something different, well, then that's outside of our realm. That's up between them and the city that they'd have to work those issues out. Or, as you said, a private owner. A private owner. Yeah, it could be. A private owner could be city property. So those would be outside of our evaluation. And it kind of gets back to some of the comments I made early on, which is the attraction of our properties has certain value. Correct. And if you add others to it in different areas around this city, it will have more value. Correct. And they're going to have to do that work and figure out if that package is attractive enough to them. And if they get a good sense of it from the city or from a private investor, it might add to their ability or interest in responding to us. But they're separate. And they need to be separate because you need to have an evaluation for what you can control, you know, which is, you know, your property, you know. And thus, it could be two more years before they figure out the other issues with other properties, you know. So those city properties are just additional opportunity for developers to expand the vision, perhaps, or make something work that is key to them. But the evaluation will be, you know, you can look at the total vision, but it's really only about the county properties and your evaluation. Any other questions? Fine. Thank you. Anything else, Barry, from you? That's all. And before we adjourn, any other comments or thoughts? We'll see you guys back here on Tuesday morning at 930. And don't forget the shade meeting afterwards. Whenever we're done, we'll have a few minutes, and then we'll jump into that shade meeting. All right. Thank you. We are... Mr. Wilkes has on board. All right, Commissioner Scott, did you have anything else before we... No, Mr. Chairman, I'm good. Thank you. Okay, thank you. We'll see you on Tuesday as well. Sounds good. All right. We are adjourned.