Yeah So do chairman of the Board of Commissioners of the City of Tarpon Springs on Tuesday, July 30th, 2024 at 6:30 p.m. Roll call please. Mayor Vatikiotis here. Vice mayor Coolio's here. Commissioner Eisner here. Commissioner kuleana here. Commissioner DiDonato here. Okay, I guess we've got five agenda items, and I'm going to turn this over to, city manager Mark. Yes. And as Ron's walking up to the podium, the first item we have is updates from July 9th budget work session. We have most of the, we have most of the department heads in the audience. So I think, Ron, we usually put this item on, to talk about anything we may want to talk about. Any questions you may have had on what we covered at the last budget workshop, of the staff, while they're here and stuff. So I think that's Ron Intent. Now to look at what we did at the last meeting. And is there anything we need to we need to talk about before we come into the part two of the budget, which is CIP, enterprise, CRA and miscellaneous. Ron, you want to add something? Okay. Good evening. Mayor. Commissioners. Ron Herring, finance director I mean, I made a list of everything that you all discussed last week. I can just briefly try to go through that, I know one thing was Shepherd center. You wanted to fund it at $5,000. Youth sports from 3000 to 5000. Youth sports from 20,000 to 25,000, there was and some of it was just discussion. There was discussion. Discussion on the land development code and the funding, the Stamos property, the reorg that's going on, the budget for the new city manager, where is capital for, you know, items like the cops and kids building the Craig Park phase two construction, and then the sponge docks pump station that was discussed, there was I'm going by each each, commissioner and mayor that discuss things, reorgs were discussed again, on call pay increasing that, trying to make an attempt to increase the unassigned fund balance, fix the light poles at spring by you, the discussion on Lime and Huey lift station. The cost now 2 million. Discussion on the police radio system and the microwave dish system, which I think the police said he is been able to get the dish system at a much reduced price. I think it's going from 430,000 from 430,000 to under $40,000. So that'll save money where it's budgeted. And the impact fee fund, I think there was about a golf cart for the Little League at the sports complex, there was discussion on the Christmas decorations, discussion on some areas of the city not having sewer lines. There was a request for the accountant coding how we code our accounts and what is operating supplies, what falls under those categories. And I supplied that, there was a discussion on inline pumps, especially with Seabreeze Drive and Bayshore, there was discussion on, talk about the workers comp, 10% budget and 5% pay increase, the 3.75% increase for water and sewer rates, health insurance is budgeted 10%, what was prior year was at 7%. Asked what percentage of general fund budget the actuals were coming in at. And usually in the general fund. We're at like 98.5%, which is about usually about between 3 and 400,000 under budget. At the end of a year, it's been the average, and then there was talk about trying to increase unassigned fund balance because we've, we've hovered right between 8.6 and 8.8 million for the last six, seven years, so as recommended by the Budget Advisory Committee, we're, we've set aside 1% in the current year, about 366,000, and we have money set aside 1% in the budget. We're working on to increase the unassigned fund balance. The 1%. And there was also the last thing I had was a discussion about the clinic and its effect on the insurance premium rates, and that's where we left off with the discussion items from the last budget workshop. Again, what we're looking for is any questions about those or anything additional that you may want to ask the department heads and their their budgets that you thought about from the time of the last meeting. Let me ask just a basic question. All those things that you listed that we brought up, have they been accommodated in the budget or are you still working on it or. Yeah, most of them have been accommodated. But like I say, some of those items were just discussion items that we're still working on. A lot of them, we're still working on to try and fit them in. Right. And I know, like the Christmas tree lights and again, what happens tonight and, subsequently that that helps the site. But those are all everything that was said on that list is still in the mix, to do is as we run closer to the total and what we have now just for, we're not getting to that point yet, but I just want to bring it up for clarification. I know on the Bayshore Drive sewer there, the staff is looking at this, maintenance thing and stuff, from a legal perspective, Tommy and yourself and, our city attorney, I think. And or involved me and you too, Ron. I guess you're all involved in this in one way or the other. And then, that next rate study that we have, and it's just to get information whether it's illegal or legal to do anything, that sort of thing. We owe it. Yeah, some answer to the residents, but I was asked by. I'm not suggesting one way or the other. It's just we need to get the. There's a lot of information. I'm going to be sending a memo to all you all, Commissioner DiDonato, ask for an update. I'll be sending it to you. And the rest as as I know. And I don't know. Are we there yet? As of today, Bob, is it? Do we still have a checklist on the Bay shore, or are we. We're still working the checklist, so it's not complete, but it's near complete. Yeah, and what I want to do is give a memo. I say I talk to been talking to Commissioner Dean and all of you. We've been talking about this thing to give it up date. So the residents know, even though they see it going to be complete within whatever time of the checklist I mean, they're not going to they're going to think it's done pretty much, except little things. It's not done yet completely. And I'll let you know when it's done. But the lay out what the future is and nobody is going to be getting notices that, okay, the project's done now, y'all got notices, you got to hook up. Everything is on hold while we're looking at all these options, the options of funding the options of time we were given, one grants in. But we're also looking at some other grants that probably in October, October ish, there may be a new round where it might be able to do, we don't want to come back with you piecemeal. We want to bring everything, including the rate study that we're doing, water and sewer, January in January for some analysis of if we covered those things, how we'd handle it in the race day. So there's a lot of things going on. But and I'll put a memo to back it up. But you can assure there's there is going to be no notices in the media future. No. You're starting the project and your year starts up, nothing's going to be done until everything is brought before the commission. The commission looks at all the options, decide what is going, what, what they're going to go to. But, you know, we're talking about a process that's six months or more down the road because again, we're looking at the rate study. We're looking at everything for you. But nobody can worry about the projects done here. We are on our notices and we're going to be forced to hook it. That's not going to happen until the commission gets all the information fully decides on, and I'll have a follow up. We'll post it on our information on our website that we have. So all the residents are assured, don't be looking for the mail for the notices because you're not getting them until until this is resolved, or even if there's a notice in the future coming. But they can still hook up. Yeah, we're not required. Oh, there's some that have to. Yeah, there are there are some people that have to hook up and are new homes that have to hook up. All all that's ready to go voluntarily. But there is no yeah. All voluntary. There's no beginning of any process, for the mandatory in fact, remember the ones that we did the 18 or so homes, we did 4 or 5 years ago, then the they still haven't been given the mandatory because we were waiting for the whole project to be done to do that. So nobody out there has got any kind of notices on the timelines, the center part. Yeah. So there's a lot of information, a lot of work and stuff to get done. But you will get that to confirm the concern, of the residents that something's going to happen now that the project's done. It's not. And there's still a lot to do to see what this board is going to decide on it. Okay, I'm going to ask the commission to use your lights if you want to say anything. I've got one other question for, Ron, but, Commissioner Eisner, thank you for that, on the health insurance, you mentioned that, but I didn't quite catch anything. We don't have any information on that yet, do we? No. Let me go ahead and take that. Okay Because as of 4:00, I of today, I, we believe the rate is going to come in at 8.9, where we had budgeted ten, it's now 8.7. Okay. That's good. I think I think, I think Jane was trying to get a hold of you, but she came back and she had a mistake in the number. She called me. That's. I'm sorry about that. I like those mistakes. I think I was supposed to tell you before the meeting, but we're. We're doing we're doing this between 4 and 5 today. I was about to say that's the one thing in the budget I'm the most nervous about was the health care. Yes. And this is, the increase with United Health Care. Is that correct? Correct. Yes. Okay. Well, that's good because I would assume that's what the employees are still wanting. Is United Health Care, is that correct? Yes. Okay. Good All right. Let me go to, Commissioner Eisner, could we get a list of what's still left on the check off of what needs to be done, for the Bayshore project? Sure. Okay And could we also have that, presented to the people so that they're proactively, made aware of what's still left so that they have an idea as well? Certainly. Okay. Okay Commissioner DiDonat, I, I just want to follow up on, the, the extra care that we provide the employees, how that's affecting worker's comp rates and, and even the health insurance rates. I asked about that last time. I don't want to make extra work, but I just want to know what the numbers are and whether it makes sense to continue. Our consultant that we have is working on those for you. Okay. He's working on those, you know, we've got again, one of the best things we did. And I wasn't exactly for it when we hired that consultant, but that consultant has saved us hundreds of thousands of dollars every. It was the best move this commission made their our broker. Their our broker. They're the ones who broke into this deal down because this deal was probably 10% or above. Got it down. I think, to the 8.7, and he's working up all those night, they were told what you had asked last time and the consultant is working all those up. And now that we're finalizing, hopefully tomorrow what the figures are will be better to give you those. So that is on the list to contact you and work with you on that. Mr. Mayor. Yes, Mr. Herring, thank you for going over pretty much everything we discussed at the last meeting, can you do you have, a list of what's still discussion for us, maybe to consider for the budget, to consider, like, if there were you made a list of everything that we talked about and you had stated maybe some had been. You know, put into the budget, but there's some items that are still open for discussion for us to talk about. Well there might be one that's getting into the capital and the CIP. Just go ahead and go over the final ones right now. The rest of them are under discussion. You had the list of the is that what you'd asked for, Commissioner Eisner? Same thing or I didn't, but I was holding off until we get to that. Okay. We can hold off then. Okay. I mean, I'm not saying that we have to. I mean, I thought we were talking about the for a list of things that are still outstanding on the budget. Right. Well, I personally had my own conversation with Ron and he gave me the answers, of what he could. But I still have other questions for others. What we can do is tomorrow him to do that checklist of what he said and send to all of you this has been done. This is still being looked at and, and send though if you do that from that list, Ron, and send tomorrow to him what stages of those requests, what stage are they in, in the budget process. Okay. Yeah. Just go ahead. Yeah Like we like the two light poles over at spring Bayou. I'm just really hoping we can get that. Well, that's one we're trying to do within this. Two, we're trying to do it within this year's budget. And this year, not not in we're trying we're trying to do this one now and not in. And that would be like the status of his when he put it. The status was we're, we're, we're we're attempting to do this in, in this budget now and get it going and have plenty of time, plenty of time before January to get that one done. Absolutely. So that's a status somewhere, hopefully done in this budget somewhere looking at. So we'll do that list tomorrow and we'll send it to him. Ron, get with me and we'll finalize that and get it to him. Where what stage they're in. Commissioner Curliness, do you have anything? No. Okay. Is there anything else that you want to do from the last, meeting any more? No. Again, this this budget. Budget is fluid. Budget is 365 days a year. So if you think of something from last meeting or when we get done with tonight's meeting, if something comes up that you recall or looking through the budget again, you find just get with Ron or appropriate, you know, every day it's a process of getting this budget finalized. So just be sure and contact us. And, and we can work on it. Okay, did you want to go on to the CIP? Yeah Ron, you want to go to CIP, please? Well, we went over most of all the capital last week, and I can bring up the presentation again. As you know, right now, we have see up here, we got 12.7 million of CIP, about 7.6 million is physical environment, which is mostly your enterprise funds, projects. And just trying to break it down by category. You've got your public safety items, your police vehicles, your radio system, the microwave, dish system, which is now instead of 430,000, the chief's been able to get it for. I think, under 40,000, the fire staff vehicle, 60,000, 2.2 million. Construction reserve for the fire station, 70. That'll be the last amount we need. We've been saving off money in the prior two years. Plus, we get money from the county, and we've got some money reserved in from the perpetual care easement on the cell tower. About 720,000. So we've got currently about 6.2 million ready for the construction of Fire Station 70, fire bunker gear, 170,000, 10,000 for Ada handicap ramp. And then the debt service on the two fire trucks. We got 178,000 and 196,000 transportation related items. We've got the annual sidewalks, 100,000 street paving, 150,000 brick Street road reconstruction, 150,000, and some reading pile replacement of 15,000. Almost 16,000. Cultural recreation. We've got Sunset Beach pavilions. We've got community center improvements, Craig Park back patio, a pump for the golf course. And then we've got design permitting for the new golf course clubhouse, 325,000. And then we got the water and sewer fund, capital projects, additional CIP, we've got raw water, well constructio, well rehab, hydro hydrant improvements, utilities for other projects, lead and copper rule management, metallic waterline replacement, Beckett Bridge utility replacement, water and sewer, 3.9 million meter change out upgrade program. Sewer system improvements. Manhole Relining utilities for other projects or sewer related variation basin for concrete rehab. Triplex Bisulfate pump. Skim CL two analyzer C-c-c blower. Capitalized repairs. Force main pigging program. Lift station. Pump. Rehab station. Rehab for our Ferris and Dixie lift station. Electrical rehab for our total 7.3 million, and the water and sewer fund. And then, physical environment and stormwater related. We've got citywide pipe Relining 150,000 replaced two Godwin pumps, 128,000 and a message board for 16.5. And I think that is all the capital that we have, that CIP related in the budget for 2025. Okay the one thing I wanted to go back with your the Marina pilings, I mean, you don't have to go back, but the, there's 15,000, during the centennial that we had for the, the Hope day, actually, the Baleares centennial celebration, I was looking at the, the sponge dock structure and those vertical. It's not the pilings, but the vertical, the original stuff from 30 or 40, 35 years ago that was completely gone. And I really and I know we talked about this, and I think you had a diver that looked at the integrity of the, of the seawall, and they didn't really see anything there. But I think we need to kind of revisit that other part of it. There is a depression over there where the, flapper valve work was. I don't know whether it was just poor compaction. And that slab is beginning to settle now, but once it settles, it begins to collect water and that gets down into the, substrate of the stuf. And so I really think we need to make a provision in the budget for an inspection for just a structural from a commercial, you know, marine construction company, not not somebody that does specializes in residential docks. Okay okay. You can do that. Yeah And, that was the only new thing that that I had the other thing, concerning the CIP, I talked to the city manager briefly about this is that, you know, I'm going to I'm going to presume that we I'm going to assume that the that the spoil site property is going to be purchased. I know that, Commissioner Collins, I'm hoping I don't know, I'm hoping that you're working on that. Funding approach for that, the financing approach for the purchase of that. And then also, you were going to at least you stated that you were going to look at perhaps rolling into some of these other projects. Okay I think that, again, you know, we've got this list of things that we're talking about. We've got a whole bunch of projects that, we've already budgeted that those funds are encumbered for. And I know last year we went through this kind of more involved process of looking at everything and looking at how much more money we need and things for that. And, I kind of missed not doing that this time. And I know we've got a third. Opportunity. An opportunity for a third meeting. And maybe that's something that we should, focus on. As far as the prioritization again, and also the funding and then some, some of the discussion that may be Commissioner Koulianos actually, I shouldn't put it on you. I should say Mister Herring, in conjunction with, Commissioner Koulianos is coming up with, with this long term, funding. Well, I think we need, we need to have that priority meeting first. I mean, we are we're working on things, but I don't I don't want to be the one to put them in the priority list. I think we need to come up with that so that we know what we're funding with, with debt. I think, if I'm not mistaken, that's what we're talking about. Maybe doing at the eighth. On the third, I'm saying maybe the third separate third budget, on the third budget, then I can follow, I can loop back after we come up with an agreement of the priorities. Then we can loop back and apply the debt service to it. Some of the some of the real obvious stuff like, police vehicles and things that are needed for public safety, that is just a recurring cost. That's not a that's not even in question. It's just some of the other things that. But they wouldn't be in that, the thing that, Vice mayor brought up about finishing the second half of the, sidewalks, and that would be in it, but not anything that's in that's a recurring that's already covered through general funds that wouldn't be included in this. This would be the, you know, the above and beyond I envision is, well, how that well, the full list of what's not funded right. What's not funded very, very similar to what you did last year. That spreadsheet and everything was very helpful. So I know it's work, but no, but that's kind of the thoughts on that. That's something because we should get completed with the majority of the budget tonight. But that's a very important thing for finalizing this budget and for the set up for our future budget. So that would be a perfect segue to do on the eighth. And just purely that meeting, you know, take a meeting just to concentrate on that. To use the commission agrees. The eighth, to do that. Okay. Yeah. And one one of my, questions I wrote down, is Commissioner Koulianos. Yeah. Is this on the same thing, on the same subject? This is on what we're talking, Ron, if you could put together a debt maturity schedule so we know, the timing of the current debts we have and as they're maturing. Because that would be helpful for that meeting as well. We can do that. Yeah. Thank you. Okay, Commissioner Eisner, I'm sorry your light was on first, but it's okay. It's still lit. So, you know, I had a couple of things that I wanted to speak about. One, I'm going to kind of shock, Chief Scott Young, we spoke about this a while back. The, boat that the fire crew uses needs a canopy over it for multiple reasons. One being that it is deteriorating and expensive boat, and two, I don't know if everybody if anybody has gone out with them, but when you go out with them, it is brutally hot out there, and they've got to wash this whole boat down in the brutal sun. I'm not looking for anything elaborate, but I'd like to put something there so that they're somewhat protected while they're doing it, they're in full uniform because they have to be, and I just don't think it's an expensive thing. And it it would protect them mostly. But the boat when they're not on it, and I just don't, you know, if we do have a storm, we can make it a zipper type removal. It's not an expensive thing. And I'd like to see that be one of our, capital improvements for that. So she's got that. Somebody bring that up to you or anything we talked about it, I just don't know without the city's always trying to make everything they put in hurricane safe. I just don't know if what you're talking about would withstand the hurricane. The framing I can look into that. See if I can get an idea of what it might cost us. See how quickly I can get them out there to take a look at that. I've seen them on other docks. I just don't know how hurricane proof they are. But we'll check on it and see what kind of costs we're looking at, yeah, I just kind of, I just kind of was the reason I was looking at you, because my mind was thinking that, you know, if you put in, put some kind of, like a canopy or, you know, like what boats have, wouldn't that be an obstruction or reduce some flexibility in, in your ability to, to do your work? I don't know, I guess this is a, this is some type of a structure that would mount to the dock where the boat is housed right now. I mean, a boathouse or something. Not not a boat itself. It's a I've seen them. They're like a, aluminum framing type thing with a canopy that goes over it half. So when the boat's sitting out there, it's not in direct sunlight. It's like. But not operating, not something that you would use. No, it's not going I understand though. Okay, so let me. I just want to explain a little more. This is, like a concrete platform that floats up and down, you know, hydraulically. So it would be attached to that, what I'm saying is, if there was a heavy, you know, storm coming, it can be removed, not the framework, just the canopy itself. So but, it's just it's really rough on them to have to. I think they take it out every week. Correct. So they take it out every week. And it is I know my wife and I do the washing down of my boat. It's brutal to do, so I would like to have them protected and the boat protected and I can't see it being, you know, much. So I don't know who ever brought it up after I originally brought this up, but I would like to see it get done. Yeah. No, I just I was just I didn't understand. Okay. Did you want me to go through the rest of my. Whatever? It's your turn, whatever you like. So. Because a lot of this. I did speak with Ron and got the answers, but he also referred me over like I have, if Bob would like. Yes, Bob would like to come up, we have. You put aside and I think I brought this up to you $1 million for the dredging, but honestly, we don't know how much that's going to cost. Correct? Yeah, we're working on getting those numbers now. So would it be possible to put aside money for 27? For 28? We don't know, so I don't understand why it was just put in as a $1 million on one year. I think it was an estimate we made back in the beginning of that process, you know, the other thing you can do is leave it in as 1 million and we can do as much dredging as we can do up to that limit, and then phase it for multiple years. So what we're doing right now, explain fully what we're doing right now. Okay. Thank you. Mark, so what we're doing now is we've got a consultant that's that's done the bathymetric survey for all the bayous and all the areas that that are of concern, right now, and they're doing the calculations on how much quantity of material needs to be actually dredged to reach certain certain target depths. And, from that, we can calculate the cost. And we're not quite there yet. So I don't have the answer for you on what the numbers will be. Okay, do you have the numbers of what it was to do? The whole Anclote? Yes. And that was hard to compare or to compare. Yeah. Okay. About 4 million in dredging activity costs so that that whole thing was 4 million, okay. I'm just curious because, this is a discussion that if anybody watched the Charter Commission meetings, there was a big consideration. And, you know, the comments were we don't remember the last time it was done. I know it needs to get done. And so, the other thing was, let's see, did I have anything else for you? Yes. The sponge docks. The flood abatement isn't that the. Are you talking about the, volts? Yes. Okay Was there any procedure in looking into getting inline pumps there instead of the volts? I haven't had a chance to research that yet. Okay so we put aside, tough to see this. This is like we put aside, like $900,000 and then $500,000 in the following year in 27. I'm not sure how that's broken out. Ron, can you help me out? Ron will be the answer of the money. Yeah the 900,000 and a 500,000 is for the sponge dock pump station project. So for the volts. Yes Okay. So I would really would like to see what that, you know, when you do get a chance that that gets, you know, so we have an idea because that might be way too much for the inline. You know, project, but. Okay, I think that's all on that. I'm just myself personall, I'm a little confused. So what what are we talking about? The in-ground pump station. And this is a part of the funding that you're talking about. Or there is there is inline pumps that you can put in instead of the volts. So this is new then. Yes okay. Yes And what I've been asking is for Bob to get involved and get information on this. You know how they work. Well how does this fit in with the bigger not the bigger project, the different project, which is at the end of Dodecanese and Athens, you would you wouldn't need the volt. I'm not sure. Are we? Again, this is something again. I mean, I don't have an objection. I'm just not. We've got four point something million going on for this other thing. We're waiting for. You know, another grant and we're talking about another 500,000 for pumps. The way I'm listening to it, it would do the same thing again. We have got we have got something we've worked up. We've got a major $3 million grant that we're waiting on. Obviously there may be an alternative. Again, if we get the grant for what you did the grant for, then we've got $3 million. But what is asked for is an alternative to look at either alternative, the better use of spending the money or an alternative if we don't get the money. What's on, what's on the list that when we talked about this, whenever I lose track of time, we talked about this. And Bob's charged with that to start getting ready, for when we come to you, if, if there's a viable alternative using that method and stuff, we need to work on it and have it available when we actually have the meeting with the board about the options, the monies, and what's available, we've been asked to have that option. Is there an option of that available and do so. So that that is what is coming back to you, but but what is the money that Commissioner I mean, yes, Commissioner Eisner is showing in the budget. I just think the budget is for the present project. Now it's words. It's where the budget's placed and again and again, if there's an option to do something else. No, I'm I'm okay. All of that. I just didn't understand. It's just the it's just Ron's budgeting to get it paid for and done. It has nothing to do with new stuff. It's nothing to do with nothing new old. It's the it's the regular project. We're working on now. There just may be an alternative, depending on all the things that he's brought up. And we're gonna have that information available when we bring this thing back to you. I told you, waiting. We're going to bring all that back to you. To look at, I understand. Okay? I didn't mean to interrupt. That's okay, I didn't understand, Tom, is Tom Kiger here because I had something on. So we have the raw water, well, construction. Yes. There you are. Yes why did we put aside in 2005, 866,000, then 190, then 910, then 200. Why were we alternating it like that, that's alternating design and construction funds. So the, the originally we were trying to do two wells, every other year, you know, trying to consolidate, in our previous CIP revision, right now, we've got a plan design one year, build the next design one year build the next one new. Well, every other year. Okay. I just was on, you know, unsure. I didn't know why. It wasn't just evenly spaced out. That was my thing. And the other question I had for you was on the water. Well network, why in 26 are you using 335,000 in 2026? Yes. That's what it says. But the other years you have nothing in there. Page 336. Okay. Yeah I think we'll need to update 2026 to reflect our current CIP. I'm sorry I didn't catch that. I think we'll need to update the 2026 numbers to reflect our current capital program, but that seems to be a holdover from the previous capital plan. I still don't understand what I what what you just said. May. Maybe it's me, but we need to update the 2026 projects that that was the number from from a few years ago when we had other projects listed. And we've got a new capital plan that was developed in the rate study. And I think we just need so that's all going to be done then in 2026. And that's why it's on there. Is that what, like I said, I believe that projects might be erroneously listed. We'll just need to go ahead and update those, 2026 number. Right. Or the number maybe. What I'm trying to figure out that projects. I believe that projects been superseded by other priorities. So it may need to be up. The number might not be correct. You may need to update it. Yes. That's why he's asking. Everything needs to be updated on 2026. It looks like that's exactly what I'm asking. I just don't know if the number is real or not or is that the year we're going to do a great deal of work? Was the question. Okay, we'll work with them on updating that number. Yes. Okay. And I can provide an updated, ten and 20 year CIP for the board after this. Okay, I think that's all I had on that. Okay. Vice mayor. Yes. Yes, sir. Just, as we're going over some of these capital improvement projects, it looks like we're going to have a third meeting, at some point, if we can like for the we have the sidewalks and, the annual sidewalk. So we could have that. I'm just curious to see what the priority list would be this year and what where? Yes, where they would be. Same same with the street parade, the street paving and the brick street and road reconstruction. I just want to see what streets or what areas are being handled, because I know there's already a priority list, but it just, it helps me understand it a little bit better, too, as well as some other capital improvement projects like, Orange Street that at some point is going to come in the future, you know, s, we could have those. That would be great. And as. Mr. Kiger answered some questions regarding what Mr. Eisner said. So I'm good for now. Thank you. I don't have any other lights on. No. Not you do. You just put yours on. Good for you. Thanks, Mr. Okay, so, this might be a Tommy Kiger lash. Mr. Herring questions. So, on on your, on the first, slide after the introduction. So you got the water sewer, you say capital outlays budgeted for 2025, 7.4 7,429,001 45. But when I go down to the. And so maybe I'm off here, but when I go down to the proposed budget CIP for water sewer, there's it's 7.3 million. There's like $127,000 differences is that am I or am I looking at apples and apples or am I explaining that's a total of CIP? The difference is some minor capital outlay items. It's like miscellaneous stuff that's not listed. I didn't list them on there, just minor capital. Okay. So going back to the water sewer, the, so if we get the, if we get that grant for the Becket Bridge, we still have to come up with 800,000 because we have to come up with 20%, right? Correct. 20% match. Okay now this so that with. Okay, so the 800,000. So if we take the 4 million off at 800, it leaves us at four. That would be that would change the 742 9 to 4 229, which is about a which is a 44% increase still rather than 153% increase, and then on top of that, we've got. We're saying that we're only raising rates by 3.75 per this schedule. How do we how do we pull that off? We've got funding between the other. You mean to balance it out? Yeah. How do we how do we how do we have a 27.8% right now with. That's with the Becket Bridge. Assuming we don't get a grant, now we haven't talked about debt servicing yet, but if we had to pay that, we've got a 27% increase in our spending budget, and yet we're only raising rates by 3.75. So explain to me how we've got that. We when we did the last revenue sufficiency study, we folded in this project in the cost. In fact, we did it. The $3 million that validated the 3.75% increase. So we added the rate study, a $3 million, you know, funding for this project. Well, obviously, when we worked on this rate study a year and a half ago or year plus, you know, all of a sudden the projects up to 3.9 million on that. So we've got the funding within the within the fund for the 800,000, if that's what you're asking, and still be able to only keep the rates at 3.75% increase. Correct. You're comfortable with that, Tom? I would like to clarify, the current rates are only adopted through this year. So previously we had a long term plan for like a steady rate escalation. And that's something where that we'll be looking at this year coming up. So right now the only thing we've got penciled in is the 3.75% increase, in in that was adopted last year for this fiscal year coming up. And we'll be looking at that in the rate study to determine, you know, how how that will look long term to make sure we have a sustainable level of funding for our capital projects. You're not this you're not saying that a 3.75% increase can cover these costs. The three we believe. Yeah, I think we can cover that. I mean, the, we're going to be looking at that, but we do have in the original rate study, we did have a little bit of room to build up the fund balance to, but we would want to make sure that we looked at that long term. That's and that's how we're going to be looking at the next year. Thank you. Oh, sorry. Is, Ron, explain transfers. Explain it to me, we have interfund transfers, going from the enterprise funds to the, you know, from currently, it's currently sanitation fund, water and sewer fund, stormwater fund, the general fund provides all the administrative work for the stormwater fund, sanitation funds and the water and sewer fund. This is so this is a mechanism to be able to reimburse the general fund because they provide all these services for, you know, the sanitation, stormwater and water and sewer fund. So, okay, so why is it why is it up by almost 18%. Well, the reason is mostly because of the water and sewer fund. We had the 9.9% increase last year. And our what we based it on for our current policy is 8% of the charges for services, which is the revenue number. So the yeah it's the reason I chuckled is because this is a long standing debate of how it's done. This is the one of the ones you set out in the office with Ron and hash out, because it takes a while to go through it all. Yeah, I'm still not getting my hands around, but we could talk about it. It was originally, what, five, six years ago? About 2%. What was it? There was a it was about 2%. And then three, 3.5%. It was 3.5%. Yeah. And then over time, it slowly escalated to the current percentage based on a review that you did with what it. Well yeah. That in our auditors to and they said, you know you really should have a basis for this and we didn't have a basis for it. And he said one of the one mechanism was 8% of charges for service. So we decided to go with that mechanism. We did a survey. And that's what a lot of cities were doing, was the 8% of charges for services. It's okay. So long. Complicated. Yeah. But is it a is it an allocation of sharing of administrative mostly administrative costs. It's all the administrative costs which are provided for those funds within the general fund. You've got procurement actual. It's just you're just saying 8% because you just throw a number. You're just throwing an 8% number there. Yeah. It's not actual. It's not like you take all the administrative costs and then apportion it amongst all the different funds. Well, I have done a calculation in the past of trying to calculate all the administrative expenditures and gone with that mechanism, but we just did his own calculations and hit the exact number, came close to the same thing. And the other cities there's a number with the other cities. If you look at the other cities, Ron did a separate his own calculation and almost hit the nail right on the head, right, of where that number was. It it was a very long and involved process to get to there. And for Ron to verify it before he brought anything forward to this board, to deal with. In fact, my question when I first became a commissioner was the exact same thing. I kept saying the percentages increase. Yeah. And then Ron had to give me the history of it, just like you're getting the history. I'm tortured because my CPA mind can't get around it. But the, the, this is maybe more of a question for the rest of the board, maybe for the mayor, these this conversation we're having about vaults and pumps down at the sponge docks. Maybe I missed it. Maybe I wasn't on the board then because I came a year after you guys did. Did we have experts that came and talk to us about the effectiveness of all these different methods? The answer is, The idea of the in-ground pumps, has been used in Pinellas County for a long time for local basins. In other words, there is no drainage out of local basins. We've got a few local basins around here that you can't drain it. So you'll see them down in Largo, Pinellas Park, Clearwater, South areas and, and so, if and I don't want to misspeak, but I think it was the mayor, former mayor's idea or his thought about pursuing something like that at the intersection of Dodecanese and Athens with the idea that if it worked there, perhaps it would work elsewhere. And I think the original estimate was about 800,000, if I'm not mistaken, about eight, 800,000 for that originally. And then we did some work and it was 1.2, and now it's over four point. But and then I would throw out, kind of an alternative like, Commissioner Eisner thought that, well, you know, we need to be careful because of sort of thing. And, Mr. Funcheon has, has looked at what I proposed, I don't know that how far we've gotten with Mr. Eisner, Commissioner Eisner's idea, but to answer your question, it it we remember I keep saying we need to have this meeting to decide what our objective is. Before we spent this four point something million. If it's to keep that intersection dry, this thing is under certain circumstances, is not going to do that. This, this, this $4 million approach, if it's to address the time where the tide is high and it rains and there's nowhere for the water to go, then it'll work. If the tide comes above the seawall, it's not going to help. If the, if the, if it if it's just raining at a low tide, we don't need it. It it, you know, the water flows out natural gravity. So it's just that time when we have a king tide and it rains, which it does on occasion. Seems like we have bad luck in that. And probably happens a little more often than not where we wind up with this. Not just the water at Dodecanese, Athens, but also water at Hope and Athens. I mean Hope and Dodecanese, and also Roosevelt and Dodecanese, and then around Island Drive. So, that's a long answer to a simple question that we haven't really thought it through yet. And that's why Commissioner Eisner said they're throwing stuff out. This this discussion point has come up. A couple dozen times we've talked about vaults and this project, and I've never had we've never had an expert, whether it's one of our engineers, whether it's an engineering firm that can tell us what the effectiveness of this is. I mean, I hear what you're saying, but I'd like to be able to drill down a little. It's I think at some point we need to have something. But but before before we why don't you discuss what we were doing again that meeting we I've talked about with you, when we get everything together and stuff come back, that's exactly what we're bringing to the point where we have to decide what we're going to do and, and let the public know what is the true effectiveness of what we're going to do, or lack of effectiveness. That's what we got. That's what we got to bring to you when we have all the information that is that next meeting I'm talking about, when I keep saying the next meeting, we have everything we know about the grant and Bob knows it's number one priority to get before this board. As fast as we can get it. But of course, fast with getting all the information you have to have everything to bring to you. So you have everything, but that is on the agenda speed dial agenda to get all that and get and get those experts here because we have to make sure because from the beginning of this thing, the expectation that was put out to the public, I even knew and I don't have any technical knowledge in that area, but I knew it wasn't going to be what the public thought it was going to be. It's not going to be. It's not going to be that it'll be something. But you need we need to let the public know exactly what it's going to do and exactly what it's not going to do. So that's that meeting I'm talking about bringing forward. And it may be a meeting where that's the only subject on the agenda, a special meeting to do, that's that next meeting that's coming. Mark, we're waiting for a 300 million, a $3 million grant. Is that right? That's what we're waiting for. Okay? A $3 million grant that has been applied for. Is it FEMA or. Well, we don't know what we do with that $3 million grant because we haven't decided what. It's three HMP. It's a FEMA grant okay. And, and but the how how are we applying for a grant when we don't we not sure what exactly we're doing. So we so we have we have a schematic. Go ahead and go. So you have a schematic of these vaults and that's what you submitted for the grant. I have a lot more than that. So let me clarify. We have engineering studies that go back many years. I think it was 2016. We did the first one where they did hydraulic modeling and looked at all the scenarios that the mayor is talking about. And this happened before our time. This is not a new idea that we just plucked out of the air. The other 45 minutes an hour conversation that I'm in the office, that make sure you schedule them down to give them that from the start, and any other can have it. Anybody else on here? Because it's important, because it's been going on a long time before this board. But just so everybody knows, the local basins that I talked about where these things are effective, it works. 100% of the time with them. In other words, when it rains, there's no place for the water to go. So you had this works for that. In our situation, if the tide is down, we've got the drainage already there. The rainwater will drain into the river. So it's not necessarily it's not that we need it 100% of the time. Just in those one, you know, special circumstances where we've got the tide up high enough hydraulically to prevent the water from draining by gravity into the river, other than use. And I know you're I believe everything you say, but other than you saying this, I don't think anybody on this board has no, no. Has heard anything technical brought before us. No, John, you're absolutely right. And the point is, I've had these conversations with Mark, several times, and I'm being patient because I get the same thing that we're waiting for. The $3 million grant from them, and they will have that meeting. I think I've asked you 2 or 3 times about that. Right. Yeah. So you could I think then we'll have this huge technical discussion on it. Could I just fill in a quick blank here so that you know, where I'm at least come? I'm coming from. I've been to the Florida League of Cities with Commissioner Kulas, and I did speak technically to people who suggested this, as well as when I was in forward. Pinellas people have suggested this to me. This idea that they're using it in Miami, elsewhere. So when the project went from this 800,000 to 4 million, if we get the, the money, then all we have to worry about is putting down the time of we of doing this installation and hurting all the businesses there. So that's when I suggested to our city manager and to Bob to look into this, procedure, because it's less costly, it's an easier installation. Some of the problems technically that's been happening if you wanted to know, is we have duck bills on the end, which Bob will tell you, and debris gets caught in it and it keeps it open and that's how the flooding comes back into the city. So this would remove that. You could still have the duck bill there, but it would be able to evacuate the water at those high tides. That's where this whole thing came about. Vice Mayor Kelly, you've been very patient, so I just I think our main goal is to, for that project over there is to not stop the day to day operations that happen during the summertime with the high tide, how we go about it is, something for this board to discuss. The natural, you know, disasters or phenomenons that happen is really out of our hands. So anything we can do to, you know, limit those day to day high water signs that prevent people going down to the nieces, is what we're looking to do, I did want to ask. I think it would be Mr. Kiger, under the water, physical environment we have replacing the cast iron galvanized steel pipe, it looks like that's a project that's going to start increasing over the next few years. And can you just go over it briefly? Yes. So with regard to, pipe renewal, the city we have about a little over 50 miles of kind of legacy pipe, you know, old metallic, cast iron water mains and galvanized water mains. They, they tend to last really well until they start to age and then they start to age quite rapidly in some cases, particularly galvanized lines. So this was one item that we had wanted to before, we set out to do the rate study and the capital plan last year. We really wanted to prioritize this and expedite this, because of the financial position, we had to kind of defer a couple of years, to address all of our, you know, most pressing regulatory priorities. But, we've got some small quantities in there for the next couple of years to, you know, focus on in-house projects and things like that. And then after that, we've got a dedicated line item that starts at about a million bucks a year and escalates over time to 2040 to $1.5 million a year. And then in 2041, it really accelerates to $3 million a year. And basically the goal of this program is it's a 30 year program to remove all 50 miles of cast iron galvanized water mains from the city. And I'm just happy you brought that up, because, you know, I know we have some of the residents, their concerns when they see some of the water that that comes in their house and this project is it's a multi-decade project. I mean, we're an old city, so I'm just happy we're able to discuss it and, have a program in place where we are replacing those, pipelines to for the residents. So thank you, Mr. Kiger. Yes. And if anyone has any questions about that, we did a good detailed presentation at the most recent sustainability meeting, and you can go look at that presentation and get a little bit more information. Thank you sir. Okay. Mr. Yeah I need Tom as well. I'm sorry. There were two more yellow lines I missed, would you be able to explain the WPTV DF electrical life extension resiliency? Yes. And, before I get to that, I'll go back and answer your original question, I apologize, I wasn't quite ready for the 2026 projects I was still focused on next year. So the Water Well plc network, project, that's a line item from our ongoing electrical and cybersecurity master plan that we completed two years ago, and it focuses on renewing, existing network components, as they age out to stay ahead of, cybersecurity rules, and that was estimated by our engineering consultants, and your next question is about the electrica, resiliency Project. Yes. Okay. That is sort of a two, two part project, right? The most important thing is, making the facility more resilient and also, ensuring that it's, we're replacing components as they begin to age. So the wastewater treatment facility was built in 1985. The electrical systems are largely original to that period, you know, we've made some updates over time, but, you know, the core and the guts of the electrical system is still largely original, it's at capacity on the electrical systems. And, one thing we've also found is that, you know, it's below the current 100 year flood elevation, and it's vulnerable to storm surge. That's what I was very curious about. I thought that that's what it was about raising the height of this as well. Yes, this. So that's two it's two components. One is replacing all the electrical components. From a resiliency perspective, a lot of those components are no longer manufactured. So it's very difficult to get spares. If something were to happen or break, or if there was to be, you know, a flood or something of that nature. So, modernizing the system will inherently make it more resilient. It'll be easier to get critical spares. We'll have, shelf spares ready to go. We can go out and buy parts as needed, in the event that we do have damage. And additionally, we're planning to relocate, the entire electrical system and, and repurpose the old chlorine building. So we're going to get some value there by repurposing an old structure that we no longer had a use for and, elevate all the electrical components to four feet above base flood elevation, which would provide a much higher degree of protection in the event of a storm surge. The as long as the electrical components and the electrical control system stay dry, even if we had major disruptions to wastewater service, we'd be able to restore it much more quickly after a storm. Thank you, Commissioner DiDonato, do you have anything, I've been through several of these, so I'm familiar with what we're doing. My biggest thing that that I would like to see several reasons is for us to start clicking off these priorities. So I want to I do like to even see them numbered. I mean, it's comprehensive plan books really nice, but I think it's important that I mean, I start my day off with a list. It says things to do today, and I click them off one at a time. And I think it might simplify to for us to know where we're at sometimes if we had that kind of information, I don't know how to necessarily go about it, but my big thing is I'd like to see the priorities capitalized, I guess. And defined so that so that we can click them off. Did you get that for Franklin? He was asking for a list. And, which was list was that I was getting another list. You say that again, Commissioner. I was talking about how I go every day. I have projects I want to complete that day. And I try to prioritize that. I click them off one at the time. So at the end of the day and tomorrow, and I know where I'm at and I know what I need to do. And sometimes when you go through all of these, especially the budget process, it gets so complicated sometimes you bounce around and you, you know, just to know where we're going day to day, month to month, year to year. It'd be nice to, even if you had to put numbers on it. And if it's prioritized properly, what I'm saying is we're going to get the most important thing done first, and then second and third, and then fourth. And I just think it'll make it clearer for all of us. And even for the public. So that's my big I'd like to see somehow that we can do that. I wouldn't dictate how we do it, just that we consider doing it, that I think that's going to be a lot of substance of the eighth meeting, if that's the way we're going to go on August 8th. Okay, okay. That's, that's that goes and once we get there yeah, yeah. Okay Is there anything else on the CIP? Did you want to go ahead next next slide. Enterprise funds Ron. Sure. I've just got like one slide just to make it brief on each of the enterprise funds. You know, the first one being the water and sewer fund. You know, the budget 2024, the budget 2025. And we got personnel services at, you know, almost 7.9 million. It's a $511,000 increase, mostly due to pay and insurance increases. Operating services budgeted at 7,075,000, an increase of 442,000, or 6.66%. I believe we're seeing hopefully some costs are leveling off and stuff because the last couple of years we've seen, you know, cost increasing 12, 13 and 14%. So hopefully that's leveling off, capital outlay 7.4 million. Of course it's an increase of almost 4.5 million. But the 4 million of that is the Beckett Bridge project, the debt service is just based on our schedule for the, for the water plant. That's an all debt service for the water plant bond issue. And then there's a interfund transfers, which we talked about earlier, the 8% going to the general fund. And then the last item is a utility deposit interest, because when you have your utility account, we calculate interest for them. And that's the budget for the interest to pay the customers on their utility accounts. And then just mentioned below we're going into the, you know, the Pinellas County and the new bridge, for Beckett Bridge, hopefully they get the grant and then we just have to pay the 800,000 bucks, the 20% match. Other than if we don't, then we're going to have to be responsible for the full cost of 4 million. And then just down below, I'm mentioning that revenues are based on the approved 3.75% increase, and we will be working on a rate study come next January. January for the water and sewer fund. So if you want any questions on water and sewer, I can just keep going to the other. No, I just wanted to kind of fill in a little bit, the we remember that quite a bit of discussion that we had on the water and sewer rates, maybe 7 or 8 months ago. And, Paul was, in Mr. Kiger were kind of trying to, you know, is the material, the cost of materials and things like that, that study actually, put in place the 3.75% for this budget. So that's that's not anything that we should negotiate or change. That was based on a rate study, the one that's going to be done in January 2025, probably go through the same thing again between January and some other time for 2026. And that gets back to Commissioner Giuliani's question. Is the 3.75, enough to kind of cut cover those things that we were talking about? That may change after the update in 2026, January of 2026. For the 2026 budget. And I can tell you the most critical aspect of those, rate studies or the assumptions that are made. If the assumptions are bad, the outcome is going to be bad. And so, that's how I wanted to kind of fill in the process. So even though it's 3.75, that is going to be subject to change next year with the updated rate study, in January 26th. So, and let's see if we talked about just any update on the bridge, Mr. Robertson, is there any update as far as the start date? No So we're still looking at the end of this year, maybe. Yeah Okay. Yeah. Can't wait until after April of 2026. Right All right. That's a personal date. All right. Well I. Oh, God. SNH green stamps. I can trade for that offer, so. All right, is there any questions for anybody concerning the, the enterprise funds? Okay I have a quick question. Yeah. Go ahead, could you explain the unrealized realized gain and loss, the difference between 22 and 23? Yeah, I believe it was that the one you were asking for the other day? We had the loss a couple years ago because when we bought investments, we bought them at the lower interest rate. And what we had to do at the end of the year, I think it was September 30, 2022. We had the Markham. Markham to market value. We don't lose the money because we have the market, because we hold our maturities to a to a, we hold them to a investments to maturity. I'm sorry. So we gain that loss back in the in the later years. Thank you. I just wanted you to share that with everybody else. Thank you. Okay. City manager the next one. Next slide of the enterprise funds is the sanitation fund, or personnel services 700, almost 705,000 or $36,000 increase. Again mostly due to pay and insurance increases. Highlighted is the operating services, which operating services is mostly, you know, to pay the contractors waste management for refuse and recycling. And then our yard waste contractor, it's gone down, but it will be going back up because when I did the, worked on the budget back in Ma, I was looking at revenues that were were down during the year. So I'm going to be increasing that probably for the final budget resolution, because fortunately that we're seeing the revenues start going back up for the solid waste. Capital just some 79,000, a couple minor items. I think once a Kubota and then some other garbage waste receptacles. And then again, there's the Interfund transfer 8% to the general fund. And as like the water and sewer fund, there's a utility deposit interest of the 54,000, which is which is paid to the customers. Down below I just mentioned of the contractors under the operating services, that's the biggest expense in sanitation. And then the revenues, the rates are based on a 3% maximum as a board approved for the sanitation contract. And this current waste management contract expires March 30th of 2027. The I was going to ask you I have a question. You know, we keep getting these, not keep we do get emails from time to time complaining about the residents, hauling something to the to the landfill. If it's not a landfill. But, you know, our facility collection facility. Have we given any thought about it? Was there any discussion about maybe reducing the fee to that I did, and did it go up, or did it go down? I if is there something we can talk about on that. Yeah, that was something we were going to maybe look and, and I'm not sure someone were making accurate arguments, but some of the things somebody got a pickup truck and a pickup truck stuff and going off and that the, the bottom rate was too high. That's something we need to look at when I don't know when we're, you know, doing it again around when are we looking at that. But I know the issue is the smaller truck. Now, we do have our citizens taking advantage of running their own business and run all these trucks out there like they're they're trimming their own house, and they're not trimming their own house. And usually we catch those and you don't hear the complaint again because we've caught them. You got a lawn service and you're not you haven't cut your bushes and stuff 15 times in a month. You know, we have caught those people who are trying to use the use the, the rule and going back and forth. But, Ron, is there anything reminding me when we're going to look at that again on the I'm not sure if the yard waste operation in general. I know Mr. Funcheon and I are looking at that with the rates. Did increase, we used to pay only $20 a ton to haul it off. We build the customers $50 a ton. So there's like a 2.4%. That difference is 2.4%. So we used to have revenues, say of 400,000 expenses of 200,000. We had a lot of cleanup out there. But I think what Tom was working on getting that contract renegotiated. But now we're paying $64 a ton to haul it out. And, we're receiving the $90 we, we at to keep it at the same 2.4. We thought, well, it would just be too high to charge 120 bucks a ton to the residents. So that so we did the $90. So we're watching the operations because right now it's barely breaking even. It's a concern. So we're looking at the revenues and expenses monthly. Not sure if that's, but the one we are looking at is the true the true pickup truck full of. And again, we probably have to adjust the cost up to the to the other thing. But that is the thing that we've noted and would be looking at in the future. There's a difference between, yard waste and, and household goods for the dumping. Right? Yes. The price of it. And I was thinking more of, of not necessarily the yard waste, but the household goods, isn't it a $15 or some $20 for, anything that comes in on a truck or. Yeah. I don't think we've had any complaints on that. We haven't many. The complaints is all was on the yard waste side. You That's all the ones I've got at least most of them. 99% of the complaints have been on the yard waste. Not on the, container service, just the yard waste. Yes Yeah. Okay, so that's what went up in the. Okay Thank you. That's the only question I had on the sanitation fund, there any other commissioners have anything, Mr. Morris? Okay. Next fund, next fund is a stormwater fund, again, personnel services. The highest one for the fund is 804,000, an increase of 37,000, again due to pay and insurance increases, operating services, 639,000 actually went down a little bit, but mostly due to we had to buy some computers in the previous year and the cost of fuel went down for some of the vehicles in that fund, capital outlay 294,000, mostly. There's, some annual pipe lining, Godwin pumps and a message board. And then again, just like the other water and sewer and sanitation, we have the 8% charges for services that goes to the general fund. And the balance at the bottom is other some reserves, we've got 247,000 in reserve that if needed for other projects. Fiscal year 2025 is the last year of the current ten year rate plan, so it's increasing $0.50 a year for a single family going to 1065, we plan another revenue sufficiency study, probably in January or February of next year for the, stormwater fund. Mr. herring, I know we do a, a rate study for the water and sewer, and something tells me we do a rate study for stormwater as well. Yes. That's. Yeah. And when is that again? Did you say that we'll do that probably the same time we're doing the water and sewer next year because 2000 this rate increase right here for 2025 is the last year of what was approved for ten years of rate increases. So we could foreseeably see a different rate. After we do this thing next year. Okay. All right. Okay, any commissioners have anything on the stormwater system? Enterprise fund next onto the golf course fund? Yeah we've got personnel services 660,000. Again, pay and insurance increases, operating services, about 1.2 million. The biggest increase was for the cart lease increase, mostly at the ground. Maintenance is a higher amount. A new budget, about 617,000, an increase of 53,000. And the new CART lease agreements 117,000. Increase of 49,000. Increase, mostly due to I guess there's a new lithium batteries that are being used in these golf carts, which should be good because they'll be more efficient from what I understand, the capital in the golf course fund is for the design of the new clubhouse. And then down below, I just, wanted to show how the revenues have been coming in the last three years since I've been doing so good in 2022. We're at one almost 2 million. It was an increase of 30 336,020 23. We went up to almost 2.3 million. Another increase of 329,000. And so far through June 30th of 2024. We're at 1.9 million. We're at at that same time compared to June of 2023, where 50, almost 52,000, more than last year. At the end of June. And I think, Howard at the, Mr. Hunt at the golf course is reviewing and reevaluating the rates for the golf course, probably trying to increase them a little bit. Okay Any commissioners have questions? Vice mayor, let let Commissione. Are they, at what point will they be able to start paying their transfer? Well, you know, this fund went through about 20. I think, since the inception, you know, 25 years of being in a negative balance. I, I really want to see him try to build up their fund balance before doing any transfer. I sort of like I said, I'd like to see them build up their fund balance again, and especially if we're maybe thinking about doing a new clubhouse too and any debt service on that. So I mean, it is a possibility, but but not yet. Yeah. I just, I'm just so glad to see him in the positives right now. Yes. I'm more looking towards the design of the, the golf, the new clubhouse. And I'm just I'm just hoping we, try to put some quality engineering into it. As I talked about, I just prefer not to look like a barn with, you know, one of those four square barns with the plastic bricks outside that, you know, make it look sharp, I know it can be a community area. And our golf course has a lot of potential, and it's taken some time to get the revenues where we're at. And Mr. Howard and staff have done an amazing job, including, public services, who take care of the park or the golf course. I would really like to see a liquor license come to the golf course, I think we could drive up even more revenu, and, people are responsible. People have a right to be responsible. And, if you're paying $50 for a round of golf and you have a few drinks on the weekend, you're going to end up spending about the same amount, too. And I just think could be a nice increase. And it's going to tie in together to the new clubhouse where where it's going to be a community place. The golf course right now is a place where you play your 18 and you pretty much get out of there as soon as possible. We sort of want to change that. We want to try to make it a community area, a place where some of the local organizations can rent out a nice hall or space for their and, hopefully have like a bar restaurant style to keep people staying there too, after their playing. And so that's what, you know, hopefully my intent is to help, bring towards the golf course and, make it a place where, it is known where you can have a few drinks out there and enjoy yourself as well, because it's not necessarily known for that. And the golf club course has done a great job. The I see the tee boxes are getting implemented and it's looking sharp. And, we could just consider those two things. The liquor license. I think it could help drive up some good revenue. Thank you, Commissioner Koulianos. Sure, curiosity, do do municipalities have to pay for liquor licenses? We do not. Not at the same rate that. I think we get any breaks. Do we have to we do we apply for a license or do we have to buy an existing seeing when we have the. When we finally get the one, which is not an easy process because we've been working on it since you did. And it's not our fault it's taken so long. But there'll be one for the auditorium here that Diane's been feverishly working on and stuff. Yeah, it's the same process. It's a tough process. And cities don't get any leeway or time. But we're not. We're not paying six figures for an existing license. Okay, I was just curious. Okay Anybody else? There was something I wanted to go back to, but but that's okay. The I'll think about it again. Go ahead. Next one. The last enterprise fund. And the smallest is a Marina fund. And again, personnel services, 82,000, an increase of 5900 bucks, again mostly paying insurance increases, operating services went down, what am I finding out? Two years ago, we used to play flood insurance there, so we took that out. But now, just last month, we found out from, from HR, they were required to pay wind insurance so that $15,000 savings there is going to be. It'll probably balance out to zero, because now we got to pay wind insurance down at the Marina. And then the $15,000 for the, piling replacement. And that's about it with the Marina fund. Marina always does a good job. And so I, I don't make down there as, well liked by everybody. And I'm hoping he hangs around for a long, long time, any other commissioners, any comments? I think we're on the CRA. Correct? Yeah. That's the next item. Go same, spreadsheet here for the CRA fund. Just trying to keep it simple. Personnel services 136,000, down a little bit, but that's mostly because we got a vacant position in there within the CRA. Operating expenditures increasing, 71,000. That's mostly due to a, 70,000, $70,000 worth of decorative light poles in the fiscal year 25 budget. We haven't budgeted any capital outlay. That's why there's a it's a -100,000 for the change. And then when we got 100,000 for the grants and aids for the facade grants, and we still have money in the reserves, 605,000, like I say, no capital currently in the in the CRA and the tax, just for reference, the taxable value increase for this coming year is 9.12%. I've got some, but I want to ask the other commissioners if y'all have anything on the CRA. Commissioner Giuliani's anythin. Mr. Herring, the one thing I've kind of wondered about and, and I don't see it. And maybe it's in the cafr. I don't know, but do we ever. And I know that, we have, basically a value, a worth of the city, basically, you kno, capital worth of the city, what is the city buildings, facilities? Everything that we have is worth what it's worth. Do we have anything like that for the CRA? Yes. We do. And as a separate audit, part of the budget. I'm sorry. That's not normally part of the budget. No, you're just talking about all the assets within the CRA and the value. I can get that for you. There's a now there's required a separate cafr for the CRA. It is in a cafr or a separate cafr from what, the one that they started a couple of years ago. And I can get you that number. I would be interested in seeing it, because the one thing that, I brought up at the, at the, Charter Revision Commission was the, the, the we do loan the CRA money sometimes from the city. And the thing that has bothered me is that there's never been or has we had not required any kind of excuse me, formal document between the two as far as the loan goes. And, and I think we should, But that's not a budget issue, the other part that is the, the thing that troubles me is that, that the CRA also owns property, which is the, former Hoffman piece. And the also the, the, some motel property. And I don't think the Forbes property is owned by the CRA, right? Yes. It is. Okay. Yeah The big difference between the CRA and the city is that the city has certain protections built in for the sale of property in other words, it has to go to referendum. The CRA does not. The CRA, meaning this commission can meet as a CRA and decide to sell the property to, somebody. But that's good and bad. And so, somewhere along the line and this is a budget issue and it's also protection issue of the assets is that, and the one thing when we bought the Hoffman property, we as the CRA, we had a referendum that was not required to sunbae per motel property, was purchased without a referendum. And so, and that created some issues. So with the Hoffman property, we put that to the to the residents and they said, go ahead and purchase it. But there's nothing in the future that says if, if, you know, if the property is going to, let's say the somebody wants to purchase it or whatever, there's no requirement that it goes to referendum for it to be sold, which I think it should. I don't know if a solution, I, got into a discussion with one of the charter revision commissioners as far as, you know, transferring the property back to the city strictly for the purpose of, of protecting the property. But I guess from his perspective, he was saying that while the city needs to pay the CRA the money that, that it spent on, on purchasing the property, on the other hand, there's a lot of things that are done in that the CRA pays for that contribute to our capital, assets that we don't pay the CRA for those. So at some point in the future, I'd like to have some discussion, and somewhere along the line, I know that, you know, we do have this net value, this this value of both the city's assets and the cra's assets. And I think that we need to have this policy discussion for the two as far as how to do that, I'm just a little concerned. Not for myself, but somewhere in the future. I'm just concerned that, you know, that that some property may be sold without the residents. Input. And there is no charter revision commission for the CRA. There is no charter for the CRA. There's a state law that governs anything. And so it's a different environment in the CRA than we have. But we do have a CRA budget, which is what you're talking about right now. So if you could provide that information to me in the future, but I just wanted to broach this tonight as part of the budget discussion for the, just to give the, the commissioners some, some something to think about. So Commissioner Eisner, go ahea. The salaries is that for Karen? Is that is the on the CRA who is the salaries for, no, there's a Karen's not in the in the CRA. She's in she's in the I can think of nobody else that's why I said that. No, I think there's a one. Technician in the in the, helps with the landscaping. And then we've got part a portion of the was the, the soup, the assistant supervisor position within the parks department is allocated there a certain percentage, just those two positions. I think it comes up with 1.85 full time equivalent equivalents. So, back in 23, they had that much overtime. Back in 23, yes. You paid 190. Karen you're safe. Which year was that? 2000. 23. That they had the 27,000? No it's. Oh, I'm sorry, 9000. Well that part of that could be related to, 23 Hurricane Ian work related to that. But you're not sure? I'm sure. You're sure? Yeah. Because you said because you got the technicians in there. Now Okay. Do we get paid back from FEMA for that? Unfortunately, I've still been working with, FEMA on Hurricane Ian. Hurricane Idalia. We're getting close to getting our money back. I know it's so much for our federal government. Watching our back, it never ends. We've been getting it. But over a long period of time later, we end up. It's getting closer. We his FEMA on time for their premium payment. No. I'm kidding, okay, I just thought it was, you know, an excessive amount of money. You know, it's. Did you not think that. Well, just related to the hurricanes. Yes. Yeah. Okay That's all I can say. I just bringing it up. Okay, I've got other lights on, you're done for right now. Yes Okay, Vice Mayor coleus. Yes, I just want to follow up with some general statements and just hope that at some point we can improve certain areas, and I'm not. I think it falls into the CRA, but we have, as you see in Tarpon, have a lot of those brick, plasters on the sidewalk that they're getting old, and I know it's expensive and the same thing's happening down Tarpon Avenue. If you look on the sidewalks where it's half cement and half brick and it's sort of falling apart, and at some point we have to consider and replacing those as they are, the entryways to our community. And I just hope that, that segment on Orange Street from, alternate 19 that leads right over to North Spring Boulevard, those bricks are nice red. They're sharp. You know, they seem to have maintained their color for so many years. We just at some point, please consider that when we go to do our renovations and, the medians, the medians, on alternate 19, if we can just spruce them up a little bit with some more, lower lying landscape. That way it's not too high or, you know, lower cars can't see the other vehicles on the other side. And that way it's just a nice, beautification to our entryways into the community. So I just wanted to point that out. Thank you. Do we do we charge the CRA for all that the vice mayor is talking about? I don't think we do. All depends on the location. Right But as far as the charging of the what he was talking about on the improvements, the landscaping and the road, some of the road, well, they fall within the CRA area. Yeah. I think I don't think for the alternate 19 medians is that I don't think we've used it. I would think that, you know, if you've got these, two employees working there, that if they cover that area, she is. If it's a general maintenance that you can do anywhere in the city, that's not an eligible expense for the CRA. But if it's something that you're reconstructing or you're starting something new, like you say, you take apart the whole mirrors parking lot and do something completely different to it. That would be if it's just general maintenance, then that's not an eligible expense. Do we have a written policy on that, it's in the state statute. We do. Okay. State statute dictates it. Statute Okay. But getting back to Vice Mayor Coolidge's comments, would that something would that be something that, Miss Lemons, would that be something that, that would qualify for CRA funding, what? Vice mayor, I think you were going to enhance the sidewalks and enhance the bricks and do that sort of it would it would be a coverage. Yeah, it would depend on what we wanted to do if we were tearing up a project which would fall under the state statute. And if we looked at that's what we'd probably do, do it. So it meets the requirement and it need, well, it needs it. So absolutely. I just wouldn't be a stretch. It'd be something we need to do to beautify it. Absolutely. And I know it could be very pricey, but I, just revamping what those newer bricks and stuff will really brighten up those entryways into the community, and it would make a big difference. And so I just hope we can start planning a budget for that here in the future. Thank you, Commissioner Koulianos. So just just for general, general knowledge, the way the CRA works, right, is we have a base of, taxable values, right? Correct. And then anything above those stay in the CRA. Correct So when, when in your budget where you have 1,001,003, $436, that is the your anticipated revenue correct. Between the city portion and the county portion. Okay. And how much does the county give us, roughly about I think it's about this year, about 400. And get that number for you. So if so, we didn't if we were not in the CRA, we would not get that 400,000. And then the, the and so it's $1 million. So we would have 600,000 and that would have all gone in the general fund. Correct? Correct. And the city portion that we're budgeting is 521,000. And from the county will be 467,000. Okay I'm just curious how it works. Thank you. That's it. Well anyone else on the CRA? I think we're done. Yeah. The miscellaneous is always put into there's any of the subject that you want to broach or talk about from either the past that we've talked about the last two sessions or something you want to bring us in the future. We've already talked about the eighth meeting of what we're going to cover. So miscellaneous would also be a place. There's something else that you'd like us to bring, to that eighth meeting. This would be the time for the board to talk and, and let us know the, I just wanted to follow up, there were a couple of things that I don't think Ron mentioned earlier, and maybe you did. I didn't hear, was the youth leagues as far as the grants and things like that go that was already upped from from what you said. Yeah, he said that one in the Shepherd center, 3 to 5000. The youth sports, 20 to 25. That's already been. Those are some of the things that were done after you stated them at a at the first item. That's when he sends you that list tomorrow. It'll more declare that this has already been put in the budget. This is being looked at, this is trying to be done in this year's budget as opposed to that. That's what that list that we'll be sending out tomorrow will have. So it can clarify all those all those things where we're at, Commissioner Eisner, go ahead. Yes. I had one thing for, chief. Yes I had a quick question on what happened with the freight and postage, for 24, if you don't know what it is, I'll in which line it's code enforcement or police. It was on expenditures and code enforcement. Police. It just says code enforcement. It's paid 113 if you want to know. We were just talking about it was in code enforcement, sir. Okay. And it was, last year that was not in a line item in 24. There was no line item, the previous year is 23. And prior it was a finance calculation that was done, there was line item budgets in those years, for some reason in FY 24, there was no line item. We still had expenditures, obviously, of roughly about $3,500 in 2024, and then or 2023. Right. Ron Correct. I think close to 4000, close to $4,000. And then anticipating about 7% increase in postage and handling and those types of things, that's why we kind of use a number of 5000. You know what? Inadvertently it wasn't in last year's budget. That's why. Yeah, because I see in 22 it was 5500. Then it was 4900. Then it dropped down to 600. And now back, you know, back up. So it was just I, I didn't know what was the issue with that. Yeah. You know, I could just say for last year there was no line item for it. But we did have the expenditures of about 30, almost 3700, I believe it was okay. I just needed clarification. Thank you sir. Anything else? Mike That's it. Okay. You're good. Frank. Okay. John and your team. Anything Mark. Anything. We'll put together that on the agenda and get it to you for the for the eighth. Again. Anything that you think of or something new you want to add, just get in touch and we'll have that information to you and add that and again, all these department heads are still available. If you find something else in the budget or you've got questions about or history's on, they're available every day for you to meet with and get all that information. Meeting adjourned. Are we ready to adjourn? Okay. Meeting adjourned at 807. Thank you. City staff. ---------  special session of the Board of Commissioners of the City of Tarpon Springs on Tuesday, July 30th, 2024 at 5:30 p.m. Roll call please. Mayor Vatikiotis here. Vice mayor Coolio's here. Commissioner Eisner here. Commissioner Collins here. Commissioner DiDonato. Here All right. Well, this evening, special session is to, finish up on the work that we do have for the, referendum on the, proposed spoil site purchase. And, we're going to start off with agenda one, Mr. Saltzman, if you could read ordinance 2020 4-05 by, title, please. Mayor, did you want to look at public comments first? Yes. Thank you. Are there any public comments? Are there any public? There's two residents here. Let me go, Mr. jumper, there any remote access? Comments. Hello, Mr. jump. Is there anyone from the public that would like to stand in for Mr. Jump? I didn't quite hear you. Just want to check it. Oh, yes. Technical difficulties. Yeah we had some technical difficulties earlier. I'm seeing if we had it resolved. All right. See what you started, Mr. Saltzman? I was just following the agenda. I know it's on the agenda, so. It's almost like a mystery. Shadows are crossing back and forth. And we do not have any raised hands at this time. Thank you. Mike. That was Mike rice, right? Mark Johnson. Mr. Jump. Thanks, Mr. Jump. All right, let's go to, agenda item one, ordinance 2020 4-05. This is the second, reading. If you could read the ordinance by title, please. Yes, mayor. Ordinance 2020 405, an ordinance of the Board of Commissioners of the City of Tarpon Springs, Florida, submitting to the electors of the City of Tarpon Springs a referendum question and ballot title for the purchase of the station's property, located on L and R Industrial Boulevard, from Anclote Properties, LLC for the use as a permanent dredge spoil site. Expanded water utility facilities, recreational trail parking access and other municipal uses, and providing for an effective date of this ordinance, that is, ordinance 2020 405. Read on second reading by title only and published in the Tampa Bay Times on July 10th, 2024. Thank you, Mr. Saltzman. Are there any public comments on this item? Mr. jumper, are there any remote access comments? If anyone online would like to speak on this item, please raise your hand and you'll be allowed into talk. And we do not have any raised hands at this time. All right. Thank you. Let's go to the commission. Anyone have any comments? Okay. If there are no comments, may I have a motion to approve ordinance 2020 4-05 authorizing a referendum question to purchase the stainless property on Eleanor Boulevard. So moved. Is there a second, second? Roll call please. Mr. DiDonato. Yes, Commissioner Collins. Yes. Commissioner. Eisner. Yes Vice mayor Coolio's. Yes, mayor. Vatikiotis. Yes, item two is the approved the election contract, miss Jacobs, I want to leave it to you. As far as any comments, this is just our standard contract, and it has been reviewed by the city attorney. And, it's nothing to conduct this election. Let me go to public comments. Are there are any public comments for anyone that's in the auditorium? Mr. jumper, are there any remote access comments? If anyone online would like to speak on this item, please raise your hand and you'll be allowed into talk. And we do not have any raised hands at this time. All right. Thank you. Commissioner. Comments. Vice mayor Killian, no, I just, we've talked about this, this referendum question, and I truly believe it's up to the residents to decide. Say that again a little louder. Yeah Say it again. Yes we've talked about the issue, and I think it's up to let the residents decide. I'm fine with it. All right. Anybody else? I still I did not hear what he said, so I have no idea, Commissioner DiDonato could not hear. I, I think it's just time to let the residents decide on this issue. So I'm looking forward to letting them decide. Oh Commissioner Eisner, you got any? Thank you, Commissioner DiDonato. Commissioner. Anything. Anything Okay, if there is no further comments, roll call, please. We need a motion. Yes. Would help, wouldn't it, I have a motion to approve the election contract, dated or for November 5th, 2024. So moved. Second. Thank you, Mr. Jacobs. Roll call, please. Commissioner DiDonato. Yes, Commissioner. Koulianos. Yes, Commissioner Eisner. Yes, vice mayor Coolio's. Yes, mayor. Vatikiotis. Yes Okay. The next one is, something that we had to wait until ordinance 2020 4-05 was approved to get the resolution with the ballot language. And, it's resolution 2024. Dash 22, Mr. Salzman, if you could read the, resolution, I guess you have to read the ballot language as well. Right The proposed, or or maybe just a no, just the title. Okay. Resolution 20 2422, resolution of the Board of Commissioners of the City of Tarpon Springs, Florida, calling for the special referendum election to be held in conjunction with Pinellas County's general election to be held on Tuesday, November 5th, 2024. For the purpose of providing for establishment of the ballot title and substance for a referendum question on the purchase of the station's property on LNR industrial Boulevard from Anclote Properties, LLC for use as a permanent dredge spoil site, expanded water utility facilities, recreational trail parking access, and other municipal uses providing for said election. Submitting said referendum question to the voters. Providing for notice to the supervisor of Elections, and providing for the effective date hereof. That is resolution 20 2422. Read by title only. Okay. Thank you. This was the resolution put together by the city staff, I would assume, and then reviewed by our attorneys. Yes. Okay. And then it was given to us, as part of our package for this evening. And, and I took a look at it and, the, the only in a, you know, apologize for a late, recommendation for a change. But I felt that it was important as we try, the staff is doing with whatever they ask for approval these days. They tie it to how it fits in with the comp plan, and the strategic plan. And I felt it was important to, to include that in the ballot language and also, I knew that somebody, would ask where in the comp plan is, is it referred to the dredging and the, the river itself. So I, I compiled this, went through the, comprehensive plan, which also, cross-indexed the, strategic plan and provided this, these comments here. So it's basically referenced in five out of the 13. Elements to our comprehensive plan. And, I'm not sure if anybody wants to discuss that. I, I think that the first version was just slightly, repetitive. And I want to make sure somewhere along the line, we make a clear case that is consistent with, the strategic plan and the comprehensive plan that the residents had put together. So, I'm going to, city manager. Of course. You got anything to say on that or. No. Again, both. Both versions meet the language. The words and stuff. It's the wording. So? So either one is sufficient for you to approve tonight to put on the ballot. So, let me go to vice mayor, did we go to public comments yet? We did not, or did we? We did not go to public comments on those public comments. Are there any there is anybody in the auditorium except, our two favorite ladies that are at every meeting sitting way in the back? Are there any remote access comments, Mr. Jump, if anyone online would like to speak on this item, please raise your hand and you'll be allowed into talk. And we do not have any raised hands at this time. Okay, let me go to the commission. Vice mayor, do you have any thoughts on one way or the other or anything else that you would like to see? Mr. Salzman took a quick look at the second version as well. I think you he was oka. Either version is acceptable. It's just a question of, I think there's a difference in five words, between the two. So they, all meet the requirements, and I think addresses the issues. But whatever the board is more comfortable with, to me, I just it I'm not going to you know, take a strong stand on this. I just thought it was important that we tie things together. So go ahead. Mayor, I think you brought up a good point. And after looking at it and the possible revision, I think the first one, the last sentence does become redundant. And what the purpose of the, what the purpose of the purchase of the property is. And I think it the second one, is shorter and it does let the residents know this is set up for the strategic and comprehensive plan and is for the needs of the future needs of the city. So I have no problems accepting, the revised one. And we have to let the residents know that pretty much every decision we do is based off the charter, the strategic and comprehensive plan, and everything for the city and how it all blends in together. So, I think that last sentence and that change up is, is good and I would like to support it. Thank you, Commissioner Archer, anything. So I would have been happy supporting the first or the second. I really don't have much preference. I mean, it's a bit of semantics, but it's okay, so I have no issues with that. Okay, Commissioner Koulianos, your light's on. Yeah Using the buttons today. I'm teasing you. Go ahead. The. No, my only concern, I and I have no issue with that language, but I just want to reaffirm with the city attorney because one thing we can't do in these, in these referendums is steer people, we can't. It's not. We have to give them facts. And we are not supposed to put opinions in here. I don't think this does that. But I just want to ask the attorney, because when we say is it when we say the acquisition is consistent, are we making some form of a judgment that would would be taken as steering the reader? I don't think so. I think we're giving information which you're allowed to educate on this, and, it's a decision I mean, one of the bases is for this. Is that it is consistent. Right. So I think that's is that a is that a judgment that we say it's consistent? It's an internal judgment, I would say from our from our city staff. So if you're good with it I'm good. Yeah I can't look I'm not going to say that people don't challenge these, but I would be surprised if that would be the term. They would challenge it o. Okay. I think it would be concerned if it wasn't consistent with our comp plan and well, but that's a judgment that it's consistent or in, in, in in that case, are we steering the reader to believe something? I'm not saying it's not. I believe it is consistent, but I'm just talking about the wording. Right. I would think if it was a direct challenge, we need to do this because it's consistent with the comprehensive plan, right? You know, it's not saying that okay. It doesn't matter to me. No. But I'm again, we're talking about whether a whether language can be challenged. And if the attorney believes he's comfortable with this I'm comfortable with it. That's all I'm saying. Mr. salesman's comfortable with it. And that's therefore I'm comfortable. Thank you. All right, Commissioner DiDonato. Well, I was I was going to echo what Commissioner just said. I, I like either one. I think maybe the first one is a little bit more, but certainly the second one basically is saying let's, let's go to the I mean, the first one, same thing. So. Right, the first one is more plain. Yes. Language And, but I, I don't think the commission, somewhere along the line and Miss Jacobs pointed out that there is a reference already in the resolution, with regard to the comprehensive plan, in, in, in this in this question, but as you know, there's a lot of, you know, there's a lot of, things that we have to defend these days that are common sense. But, you know, it's like, as I said, if someone's going to say, well, you know, you guys did a strategic plan and comp plan, where is it in that? Well, here it is right there. And so, maybe we can put that and work it into the, into the, the narrative of the, Mr. Lucas on the narrative of the, you know, whatever we hand the people either way is fine with me. I mean, I agree that the first version is more plain. It's a little repetitive, but maybe you need, but there is there is a conclusion in the first one, too, because you're saying this acquisition supports the city's infrastructure. So the same conclusion is there's a conclusion in each one. So if we have a problem where somebody's going to challenge that position, it would be in either one. All right. Well let's, let's let's throw fate to the wind. Let me have a motion. I make a motion that we accept the, revised version as, recommended by the mayor. Okay Second. So. All right, roll call. Are there any other further comments? Roll call, please. Commissioner DiDonato. Yes, Commissioner Collins. Yes. Commissioner. Eisner. Yes. Vice mayor Coolio's. Yes. Mayor. Vatikiotis. Yes. Okay, I think that's that's it. Let me go to, just for the sake of killing a few minutes, any staff board comments? Chief young, you got anything? No Okay, Mr. Saltzman, no. Mayor, I want to thank you for being here, Mr. Saltzman. And initially, I thought that we may have not needed an attorney for this, but actually, I'm glad you're here. Thank you. Yeah, city manager. Chorus just an update from Saturday. We've begun. We begun, talking about the contract with the new city manager. We're anticipating an October 1st arrival. Obviously, there there may be a little leeway. And obviously he has to get his whole city's budget in passed and done before it goes. But we are figuring right now, and we still got the contract that we've got to get on agenda. It's physical and stuff. So, so right now it's a give or take unless he needs more time to close things out of this community. We're probably looking at an October one being October or November. October. Okay October, October 1st. Although there may be of some circumstances, you know, we take it to November week or two, but but that's what we're anticipating. Everything going. Well, and we've already started the process, the I don't know if we're going to get it on the, the sixth agenda, but it'll definitely be the contract, we're working to see if we can, but, beyond that. But everything's already started and going well. And with the anticipated date of, of, coming on board, Miss Jacobs, I have no comments. Thank you. Mike No comments. Got anything? John I just, wanted to. Kind of say that this month, October, August 1st is starting, like, in a couple of days. And this Friday, this Friday, this week's Friday is first Friday for August. So, time is moving along. And, there isn't any urgency or immediate things that need to get done, but we can't, waste any time in in keeping focused on what we need to do. I know that there's, a tremendous amount of distraction going on right now. And I'm hoping that, that will resolve itself in one way or the other in the future. And I just want to just keep us focused. I know we're going to go into the workshop and I'll probably say a little more about that at that time. So I want to, adjourn the meeting, and then we're going to reconvene with a new meeting at 6:30 p.m. So meeting adjourned, 5:49 p.m. We have some.