##VIDEO ID:Oy2P1ulYhHQ## e e e e e e e e like to call to order this special City commission Workshop meeting can I have have a roll call please yes commissioner dollison here commissioner Mercer here commissioner danor here mayates and May and mayor Bon here all right uh we have one item on the agenda um you want take it t thank you sir uh good evening mayor and commissioner welcome to this uh special City commission Workshop we're here this evening to and we will have two of these special City commission workshops one this evening believe the next one was uh September 4th um this is in in uh association with uh a report an assessment that we had done specific to our utility water and sewer connection fees um part of the and uh ask the City Attorney John Murphy to correct me if I say this errant but part of the reason we do special commission workshops when it comes to connection fees really ties back to What legislation pertains to with impact fees and while connection fees are not necessarily considered impact fees as they are defined um we take a belt and suspenders approach to make sure that if there's any challenge to that at any point we have jumped through all the necess hoops and crossed the hurdles and done what would be compliant with impact fees as they were um you agree excellent that's my lay approach to a city attorney's explanation right um it's less expensive than a city attorney's explanation um I'm the cheapest attorney so anyways we have for years relied upon the services of Raph Tellus to help when it comes to water rates and connection fees prior to that brown and Caldwell was who performed those services for us uh Mike Rocka was with both of those agencies and in more recent years Joe Williams has been our consultant extraordinary uh on all things related to Water and Sewer connection and utility rate fees so I'm going to ask Joe to present to you this evening um just a couple precursors to this he does have a small slide deck there is a report that is located actually within your regular agenda packet that aligns with ordinance 24-42 these are adopted via ordinance um but just to keep in mind when we talk about connection fees these are the fees that are assessed on new development in association with their impact on the capacity of our system as it stands today and capital projects that need to ex to be put into place to expand our capacity if so needed uh to address that so these are when you think about connection fees think of them in the sense of an impact fee that this is something that would be paid when a new house is constructed when a new bricks and mortar business is constructed or an industrial development they are not paid um when a house is sold you know an existing home is sold from one person to the next they are they are paid at the time of new construction specifically so uh the assessment of those in the case of on a residential property that's going to be the developer that is going to incur that cost and likely that developer will hand that cost over to a consumer in the purchase price of that home um in the case of a business that is establishing a new product let's say the uh the Sunny's Barbecue Restaurant down at Avenue O and US 17 they paid an they will pay an impact fee when their water meter is set because that is a new system a new development that is not on our existing utility system they factor that cost into their proforma into their construction costs the same as they would other permit fees so with that I'm going to invite Mr Williams to the podium to walk us through the study and their findings and recommendations moving forward thank you T Michael and good afternoon for the record Joe Williams with ref Tellis and mayor Commissioners nice to be with you all this evening um and again thank you for the great introduction on what we're going to be addressing so extraordinary circumstances again this is this is based on meeting certain requirements uh within Florida Statutes and there is a study that is completed um provided you have a copy of it in your agenda it's with the ordinance that will come before you in the coming week and month for first and second reading and you're going to be considering adopting a new fee schedule for the water and sewer connection fees and really these fees are increasing in some cases by by a lot because there's major projects that the city is embarking on to continue providing water and sewer service um to all new development Joe can you pull that mic down just a little bit to you yeah thank you okay is that better okay um so the main projects that are really driving the fee calculation are your participation in the prwc pul regional water Cooperative you need new water capacity to continue growing uh have more businesses more homes coming into the city and this is largely a state Water Management District uh mandated group that you're you're having to be part of so they they control the water supply and this is the next increment of water available to pretty much all municipalities and the county within P County and wastewater treatment plant three um this is an old facility really reaching the end of its useful life and to accommodate existing needs and future needs there's a major upgrade rebuild expansion that's happening for wastewater treatment plant through fre um and we'll show you some of the costs of that in a moment and we do recommend that as those ordinances come to you for first and second reading that you do adopt these fees as calculated and presented and what that's going to do on the next slide is it's it's going to allow you to maximize your collections of the cost that you're incurring to serve new development so if you're if you're not maximizing the cost from the development then your other source of Revenue is your user rates and that's largely paid by your existing residents so it's an it's an equitability of who's paying for the services um so connection fees are very common pretty much all utilities charge a connection fee or impact fee and it's a way to get growth to pay for growth so we've we've updated the calculations uh based on the existing assets that you have in Service Plus the future assets that you're going to be constructing adding to continue providing service and you'll see at the end we have a comparison with other utilities who charge similar connection fees so water system overview you currently have nine water treatment plans over 2.9 Million linear feet of water lines throughout your service area providing service and then a a mix of storage tanks High service pumps booster stations all all the things that go into providing a water system um so existing investment about 2526 million and you'll see that just from just from the water Capital Improvement plan not including pul Regional water Cooperative capacity um there is a a new polar Road Water Treatment Plant major upgrades at the Cypresswood plant and then various other improvements upgrades to existing plants to make sure they're meeting regulatory requirements um they're being upgrad to provide additional demands for new customers and there's also line extensions and line upsizing as new development continues so that's $57 million in additional expenses um so significantly more than you've even invested in your utility to this point and then comes prwc so what this table shows is the whole prwc project for phase one and the buildout which is kind of a phase two so you can see that they're getting up to 12 a half million gallons and they'll be investing about $470 million um potentially more into the new water into the new wells water treatment plant and major transmission system that they need to develop to get the water from the lower floor nfer out to all the different participants of prwc and in the near term Winter Haven is going to be taking about 760,000 gallons per day for your own uses and if we keep the cost per gallon consistent with the entire prvc project on the far bottom right you can see about over $47 million is your net participation cost in prwc um there are considerations for financing costs it's going to be major debt funding from PR you see and um in addition to any of these costs which are not considered in this study but in the rate study there are ongoing operating costs that will come with being part of PR prwc do you want us to ask questions now or at the end because I have a question about that financing cost 36 and a half% I was hoping you could clarify that but I don't mind waiting till the end I just don't know how you want to do it yeah we can we can do questions along the way that's that's fine um is that a factor of so for the financing costs that that's developed based on um really the they're they're looking at a variety of different loans in sources from wifia to revenue bonds to srf loans and based on the estimated average costs because I don't think any of those documents are fully executed yet they're going to have about a 4% interest rate and average term of 30 to 35 years we we documented a little bit better in in the study and then about a .1% cost of issuance and if you if you take that and really just schedule out The Debt Service payments over time is what we did is we said okay if you're if you need to invest $470 million you're going to borrow $470 million and then you're going to have Debt Service payments over the course of 30 years your debt service your the additional cost from interest is actually closer to about U 70 75% yeah that number seems low to me it's it's really higher but the program the the way we've designed these fees is that you're going to pay back your capacity to prwc over 30 to 35 years based on that debt borrowing but then you're actually going to sell the capacity to new customers in a much shorter window so by having the prwc costs as part of the connection fee calculation you're going to build up a balance in your connection fee fund and you're going to be earning interest on it and then over time that interest is going to offset The Debt Service interest cost for prwc it was yeah it's a little convoluted it truthfully it it is a little over 30 years that's that's that's a little convoluted in my mind but you know is this government accounting or is this rap Talis accounting or what kind of accounting is this um this is trying to come up with a reasonable cost basis for justifying a connection fee so a a lot of times the financing costs don't even necessarily end up in a connection or impact fee um because there's always there's timing and other it can get a little messy on developing those relationship so we tried to forecast it out and then come up with a reasonable way to discount it back reflecting that we're going to collect the connection fees in a shorter period of time than the 30 years that we're actually paying for so let's assume these numbers are correct in Phase One we're going to spend 278 up front but our total cost is 380 all in after 30 years is that what that's telling us or I'm just trying to understand the math here yeah we so yeah the so build if we look at buildout 344 um they're really going to be paying like like if you add in all the interest cost of the debt Debt Service and whatnot it's going to be higher than the 470 million to pay for the prwc but again we we use that 36 and a half% which is a discounted number also us we have to admit these numbers are staggering yeah and and I'll I'll say this you know so if you look at the Winter Haven portion of that that's based upon our proportionate share of the yield of the southeast wellfield project and certainly mayor berong may be able to speak more clearly to that as the chair of that project project committee but um you know it it at 344 million buildout cost I think that number is actually low uh I believe that when as they get you know those are based upon Uh current day estimates and um you know they have a business plan that they look at each year mark do you know what percent they're at right in 90% on Southeast wellfield yes so Commission yes the uh the 344 is based on 60% um estimate we just received yesterday sign higher justed and that's based upon you got to go with the information you have at the time and certainly the 90% cost estimate that they did just receive and there's a lot of questions about that that have to be vetted out and and what uh value engineering can be done to bring that down I think that what I'm trying to say is at the end of the day you know we're we're recommending a connection fee that um is based upon the best information we have at the time we calculate that but we also understand that the cost of projects May escalate during the time at which the connection fee is in place and that Southeast wellfield is one of those that's we're watching particularly close I think every member of the prwc is and of course again our portion of that on the the net total cost of $470 million um our our proportionate share of that total is out to about $ 47.6 million over the the period yeah and this is a um approach that we've um we spent a lot of time thinking about with other municipalities that we work with and have done connection fees in the county um so we are using it consistently so you're not going to be different than many other utilities who are part of prwc but it is based on a level of assumptions so yes it it's probably a little lower than the actual cost but with timing considerations we're we felt comfortable with the result okay and then connection fee calculation um really kind of piece it all together you take your existing capacity that you have in your nine treatment plans plus the capacity you're going to be getting from pul Regional water cooperative and um divide it through to come up with a cost per gallon you you can see that the average cost per gallon here is about $13 including the fact that you have some existing capacity available for new development um so I'll go back a slide real quick the the PK Regional cost on the very bottom right is about $31 per gallon of capacity and when we weit it in with your existing remaining available capacity it pulls it actually pulls it up to $13 per gallon so and then the level of service for a new single family home 275 gallons per day and that's how we arrive at the fee of $3,671 for a water connection fee so just a couple points on this Commissioners keep in mind when we talk about cost per gallon um it's it's not just about remaining capacity but it's also how dependent up are we as a community upon water that comes from the prwc some members of the pr WC are going to require significantly more water than Winter Haven um our our take on that at 1.5 MGD is to you you blend that with water you already have so if you have you know uh 14 MGD that you're already producing at at a lower cost and you're having to blend in 1.5 MGD at a higher cost that allows you to have maybe a lower cost per gallon overall expense than say a city that's having to rep maybe rely on 50% of their water source from prwc so that's going to fluctuate from one city to the next that 275 gallons per day level of service um we're going to talk about that as well this evening in your in your agender review Workshop because we have an ordinance uh for your consideration it present time the level of service on water is 350 gallons per day um through an analysis of what actual consumption is in our community uh we are recommending that that number come down to 275 that actually aligns with actual consumptions um kind of interestingly I was in reading the the fact sheet on this and I don't know that Eric's in the room but um in the 1990s our level of service was around 250 gallons per day and then it shot up to 350 gallons per day based upon actual usage in the early 2000s prior to a very concerted effort towards conservation so those conservation efforts are helping and and what we're seeing is an actual usage that's closer to the 270 that helps us in the long run on uh water allocations um when we look at uh land use assignments and site plans and everything that we're dealing with and we talk about how much water capacity there is when you're calculating Homes at a lower number number certainly you're in a better position uh with what your water resources are so I just wanted to throw that comment out there okay and Wastewater um so similar approach you know right now you have two waste water treatment plants Waste Water treatment plant two and three and ultimately number two is going to be repurposed and be more of a a lift station a transfer station and wastewater treatment plant three is going to be your your primary plant where all the all the flow throughout the city goes to wastewater treatment plant 3 you also have 225 lift stations five Master lift stations 220 local so there's going to be neighborhoods shopping centers things like that and 1 point3 million linear feet of collection lines and a current investment of about $59 million in the Wastewater system so Capital Improvement plan again wastewater treatment plant three this this is the major investment for the Wastewater uh services so it's about 180 million dollars is the first phase and it's going to be a major revamping of the existing assets upgrading and probably a little bit a little bit of an expansion getting started in that first phase um we're going to be essentially decommissioning Wastewater Plant 2 and then again with continued growth there's line extensions line up sizing to make sure that there's capacity in the transmission system to serve them so over $250 million of future near-term future investments in Wastewater and with those considerations um you have about 9 and a half million gallons per day of capacity and you can see that this cost per gallon $32 is tremendously higher than water um but with a slightly lower level of service accounting for some non- return water there fact that there's some level of irrigation um so at 2 150 gallons per day which also is reduced from your current level of service the result is a I should say Wastewater connection fee of 8,175 and again I'll just comment on that that the that level of service of $250 gallons so remember level of service on the water we're producing putting into the home is at 27 our level of service in in consideration of Wastewater what's coming back to us from the home is slightly less because you're going to lose so much per day typically in irrigation and watering of outdoor landscape and things like that not everything that comes out of your TAP comes back to us so that's the basis for those numbers and again that is reflected in an ordinance uh that you'll consider Monday for totally separate from this and in summary um put them side by side your your existing connection fees total right around $5,900 little below $5,900 the new calculated fees are about $1,900 so the increase is about $6,000 um pretty much doubling and you can see that majority of it is on well a larger portion of it is on sewer they're both increasing by a large number and in a [Music] comparison you know that really the the connection fees are a moving Target throughout the state right now um communities who are updating and who are growing and having to invest in new water new Wastewater capacity are seeing significantly higher fees um Lake Alfred you know they theirs were updated in 2021 2022 they were pretty much the highest at the time at $11,300 just in the past year and a half or two years they're starting to move down the scale a little bit as others are updating fees and encountering different situations um Groveland CER County those those both happened this year so those are those are very fresh fees and you can see the the type of jump that were proposing for Winter Haven from existing to calculated proposed levels mayor Commissioners if I can make just a couple comments on this um this is the combined connection fee what you see in black is the water side of that connection fee which you see in green is the Wastewater or sewer um if you notice in places like use Lake Alfred and Davenport for an example they had to make the most significant improvements to their water capacity uh in that side of the house if you look at places like Mount Dora you can see that a significant amount of their investment had to be in the in the Wastewater side and that's really where we fall as well if you were to just look at the water connection fee increases that we're recommending um the city's water uh connection fee is a standalone in PK County would be the uh third highest behind Lake Alfred and Davenport and just a few dollars more than what Lakeland is actually proposing um as it stands right now we are the uh fourth I'm sorry the third lowest connection fee in P County the only ones that are lower than us in our current rate would be the City of Lakeland and the City of Fort me when you look at the Wastewater side that's where we're we have the greatest need and where we're recommending um you know such a a a significant uh increase there and that would be the highest Wastewater connection fee in P County these are based upon what the actual cost is this is based upon what the the capital Improvement plan is which is laid out to meet what our needs are um it considers what is our available capacity in the system today and as Joe said early on those costs to expand facilities and to accommodate New Growth if they're not paid by New Growth they're paid by existing customers and I think that's probably the most important point that if you're not going to require development to pay its fair share for its impact on the system somebody else is going to have to pay that and that ends up being the people that are already here and that's where the you know the the fairness question often comes into play um in terms of you know Winter Haven fee increase in to basically double of what it is if you take a look at um what Lakeland is at the lowest end second from the bottom it just shy of 3,000 and what their proposed is it's $7,200 you're seeing a more than doubling there uh as well and that's in a community you know I don't like to to do an Apples to Apples comparison with other cities because we're so different but that's a a community that's that's doubling that rate uh in spite of having significant um you know assets within their electric utility that that help offset some other expenses in other areas so I just say that because it's not something that's just specific to Winter Haven it is a challenge across the board Lake Alfred did increase theirs two or three years ago um if there's concern about is this slow growth well in the eyes of some maybe that's that's favorable you know and some of our residents say if it slows down growth because we're charging people what it actually cost to join our system then that's you maybe that's a favorable outcome I can tell you that what we've seen in other communities Lake Alfred again being the prime example it has not slowed growth one bit that place is is getting ready to bust at the seams just the same as as everybody else um so you know comparatively uh they're up at that higher end Davenport's at that higher end places where we're seeing a lot of growth um and I think that those that are that still are down lower we going to see some adjustments to their connection fees if they haven't already commenced a study uh and are bringing something forward at present time and certainly Mr Williams and his team have worked on a number of these for other cities uh as do other Consultants I expect we're going to see all of those that have not been touched in some time feel the pinch of all the growth and all the need to expand systems and begin to make those changes at the same time how many do we have any clue how many home like like let's say you didn't approve we didn't pass any other approvals for subdivisions or anything like that no more building what has been approved out there how many homes could that be any ideas like I would have to defer to Mr Labby and and the folks in Economic Opportunity Community Development tell you is as site plans come in um that site plan gets approved and platted you know we're locking in what is their water and sewer needs and and kind of vesting that in the system so that we don't overcommit um you know and I looked most recently I think what the remaining capacity Within our existing water use permit um was around 3/4 of a million gallons per day and so if you divided that against the 270 gallons per day um that is the the level of service that would give you some calculation of that however we also have in the works a uh update to our water use permit with the southwest Florida Water Management District to increase our capacity beyond what we have today and I will also say the 14 point mark at 14.2 million gallons per day does not include the 1.5 that will come from um prwc uh we're asking to increase if I'm not mistaken I believe it's to 18 I think 18.75 maybe um is the requested permit that we're trying to get approval from Swift Mud now so we're asking for more capacity because we know that certainly the facilities that we have can and the pumps that we have and the well systems and all that we can do that if we're permitted to withdraw it and if it's a if it's a multifam unit you know good question so multi um now we're talking erus equivalent residential units um when we talk about erus we we actually did this change believe it was in 2023 we made a change to our eru assessment single family homes are one um when you have single that's attached and single family detached if you have multif family units that are four or less attached so let's say it's a town home that there's four units there we charge those at one full eru per unit once you get to five units in a building or greater so think of Carlton Arms or Carlton at Lake Dexter or Pros where you have maybe 20 units in a building we assess those at 6 erus per unit and that's based upon the concept that you have um when you're dealing with multif family your consumption is an anticipated to be a little bit less your irrigation um the size of the unit all of those things play into that so just trying to and Eric's here now to save the day I don't know if you heard that question or not that I I just propose so I was just curious do we have any clue of how many units could could be built Tomorrow based upon current approved subdivisions and plans out there like so that's going to require a little more research because it's there's two parts there one is of the subdivisions that have submitted plans or that have approved plans that have not yet been constructed that we know of um I would guesstimate that there are probably um somewhere around 1,500 to 18800 available um units like right now that could you know as they're moving through the process we still have units at Harmony right we still have units at vmar we still have uh like are those included in that 1500 would those would be in those numbers right and then we have vacant lands that are that have a residential zoning um that we would have to evaluate how how many vacant Acres we have and you know estimate a density on those and we that would require some some research I don't have that number on I mean it'd be safe to say thousands yeah I mean certainly so for every thousand you know this is about 11.8 million quick kind of quick and dirty calculation so that's why trying to get at was just trying to understand you know as these future homes come online and then we haven't even talked about the commercial piece of it um there but you know what where that puts us at so 4,000 homes are built you're at $48 million I just that's how I kind of make sense of numbers I'm just kind of walking through you know what could be built what what we're going to be charging now going forward um and and commission may for keep in mind that the rate you have what you're seeing there at $1,846 that's based on what we call one eru one equivalent residential unit when we look at um commercial properties so those are calculated through our engineering department they look at that what is the consumption what's the demand what's the characteristics of the of the of the operation and they establish an eru for that and if you're a high water user you could have an eru that you know instead of being one it may be I don't know 20 30 100 depending upon what that is so that you know that's the multiplier against that connection fee and we've got agreements with other municipalities now um what what other it's hanne City and who else so yeah we we are in the process of finalizing um our our interlocal connection or interconnect agreements with s town of dunde city of hanne City uh Eagle Lake and Lake Alfred in Auburn and all of those are members of prw RWC yes yes and that and that's about Wheeling water is what that is because we will be the receiving point for prwc water at the PO Road Water Treatment Plant it'll come up Logistics Parkway from Southeast wellfield and then it will we get the we're basically a clearing house we're getting our capacity Plus their capacity and in turn through those interconnections we're Wheeling water to hannes City it may not be directly what came from Southeast it's coming from our system but we're backfilling our system to offset that that Wheeling I sorry no I was just going to say that even though there we are applying for an increase in the permit the management distri district has said that all of the municipalities in Pope County uh is going to be count uh at the N of 2025 or 26 level that hasn't been put in writing but that's what has been said because we are the city of win haven we're not at our uh capacity right but whatever your capacity is either 25 or 26 they're saying that's where you're going to have to be at and the bottom line is is whether we want to or not uh we we won't have a choice but to take the water that's going to be produced and we got to pay for it if we the municipalities there are some municipalities that said no we are not going to participate but that was two years ago as we have gone along they have realized that they've got to participate because if not if if we don't do something like what we're doing now to uh be on board with this process and try to to get as far ahead of it as we can the bottom line is is we'll keep going keep going and then we won't have enough leverage with the uh interconnects we just this cost is going to have to we going to have to pay it either we going to have to where are we going to get the money we're going to have to get the money from somewhere and so that's the things at least three municipalities did did not join and participate have come back and join the Cooperative because they it took them a while to realize that this is not some kind of video game that this is what's really happening and that if you don't if you don't participate eventually you going to have to participate and the cost to participate later is going to cost you more and so that's that's what has happened over the last 3 years that municipalities just weren't really participating they were coming but they weren't signed we have to sign uh agreements and contracts we've you know we've agreed to this we've agreed to it and I've actually not me personally but as a representative the money that's being talked about that's being spent and projected I've sign notes not on as city of wi Haven but as to Bor I've signed a couple of notes that's uh uh almost $500,000 $500 million I'm sorry $500 million million, $500 million and and I'm not I'm not asking these questions to really be I'm I'm I'm for this I just trying to map out this is pretty confusing based upon what was presented here like there's all kind so I'm I'm trying to dumb it down let me let me help with that if I can and I'm going to steal something that the mayor just said that if you I'm going to use your words to make my point if you don't participate now it's going to cost you more later I think that's what you just said with respect to the prwc and if you don't establish you know a fair share cost that really aligns with what your expected and anticipated costs for your system are today and not collecting that for people as they're coming through the door that puts either a greater burden on the people that are already here or the people that are going to come in the future so if you're if you're earning potential IAL is at hand my recommendation is that you you seize what you you can today uh fair and justly I'm not saying be greedy but this is what the costs are this is what the expansion of the system is this is what the long-term impacts are that's what the cost is um it is about you know what what does that build out look like and and you developer what is it going to going to cost you to be a part of it um it it's BAS Bas Upon Our Capital Improvement plan um and I think that you know if you're going to if you want to come to Winter Haven and you want to come develop you know this is this is this is the the price tag from a water and sewer standpoint that's probably the most you know said it seems like a hundred times in the past few weeks Public Safety is the duty of Lo the first duty of local government uh Public Safety includes Water and Wastewater in my opinion and and how we treat and care for that if we can't if we don't have that then we have nothing and I think if this if this slows growth that's not a bad thing this this G that gives an opportunity for us to catch up over the last unprecedented eight years of of growth that we've seen it gives the opportunity to catch up on infrastructure and Harden our systems and make things better if it if it if this doesn't do anything to growth then all the new residents that move here are paying the proper portion that needs to be paid to expand our systems from where they are today so this makes sense well and I think to question I'm sorry go ahead John well I think just to highlight the point that the Mr Williams has made and city manager that the the growth that we've experienced over these last several years the prwc and the significant improvements that we need to make to our Wastewater system those are what I would view as EXT ordinary circumstances that we may or may not see as we move forward in the future but they're here for us today and that's what leaves lays the legal basis to the extent we need one um to recommend to you to do it all now all at once rather than phasing it in or limiting it to 25% over a period of years the suggestion from Mr Williams and from staff and us is that you do it all now based on this information for those reasons so Mr Mayor can I have a yes question so we've heard the word fairness a lot and the issue in the in the um in the interest of fairness Mr Williams have this is this is my uh my thought and I'm hoping you can help me quantify this potentially so and I'll use myself as an example I built a house 25 years ago and this was back when I didn't have a lot of money and so I had to pay impact fees at that point and it was whatever it was I mean go back and look it would it would be readily available um and now I'm at a point where I'm potentially thinking about downsizing maybe and I might want to build another house and in the issue of fairness for people that have been here and have paid the freight all along from the very beginning if there was some way that we could get a credit for what we've already paid or some sort of uh forbearance for money that we've already put into the system because and I felt this way for people that I've paid my water B for 25 years and if I were to go get another water bill I feel like I should not have to put up a a sizable deposit because of my credit is good and I've proven this now I'm not a good example because I have the money now to pay this so I could pay this and that'd be all right but I'm just thinking about in the name of fairness is for me to fully Embrace this for us to go top of the list here in po County um I would like to be able to offer some sort of Olive Branch to people that have been here from the beginning and that have paid the freight all along and not treat them like somebody moving down here from New York you know what I mean so it can't be that much money is there is there a way that you could quantify that for us um to where we could potentially make that part of the deal and not not screw not skew the numbers too bad but also take care of the people that have been helping us all along from the very beginning and to take it one step further if they're coming from New York maybe we can add another zero to the end of it and if they're coming maybe from New Jersey put two zeros on the end of it but you know that's just not here or there but and I'm just I'm being factious on that but I keep thinking we should try to take care of the people that like me okay I was born here uh but I've been paying water bills for 60 years were not me but my family so I feel like there should be some sort of some sort of an allowance for people like that versus somebody just moving down here that have never put any money in the system if you know what I mean so can you can you quantify that in any way or I I think that we can explore options with staff and legal that they they would not be able to get a discounted fee but there are potentials for payment plans spread the cost out over a number of years um I would offer let me offer just a thought if I can on this and and and I I appreciate this question it's a great one and and you've asked this before um when we we looked at connection fees a few years ago so a connection fee is paid by a developer when they build that house that connection fee is included in the cost of the sale of that house in the same vein you built a house 25 years ago and paid connection fees and impact fees for that property I would expect is the buyer of that house from you in your sale of that that the cost associated with those impact fees is included in the sale of that home so I'm incurring you're you're you're handing that cost that you paid 25 years ago in the sale price of what it is today um in terms of how do we reward our existing customers I'll be a little bold and say adopt a connection fee that's recommended because that's taking the burden of new people moving into the area off of your existing customers who have been you know paying their way and footing their bill they shouldn't be on the hook to foot the bill for new people coming into the system you if I paid five grand and and you're asking me to pay another 11 what's wrong with me paying 6,800 in the issue of fairness there's I can't add additional $6,800 to the price of my house if I sell it I mean I could but if the market will allow it but to to say that that's an implied part of the sale of a house that's rather convoluted in my mind I don't know how you make that leap but I can I can say hey and I don't think the numbers are that high if I sell my house and I move into an apartment or whatever then I'm I lose that thing but if I just sell mine and build another smaller house and you guys are asking me to spend another 11 eight when I've already put five or six grand into the system 25 years ago I think I should get some credit there's not that many people that are going to do this but I think in the issue of fairness which is what we're after I think that makes sense and that gives us as an elected something to say to people when we go to vote we're going to be the highest in po County we can say well look you know and the people that are complain are going to be the ones that have been here for a while most likely the people coming down from New York are not going to complin about it as much they might but I mean I'm just thinking I I don't know how who's going to actually complain but if we say hey you're going to credit if you've been here a long time that to me is reasonable it's not that much money it's reasonable so but don't you think that it's somewhat built in like if if you're going to go build a new house today it's 11,846 if this is passed $1,846 more don't you think that that's built into somewhat in the values now of all the existing homes they don't have to pay that 11,000 so that 11,000 is somewhat intrinsically getting built into the existing property values and raising those so that's where they're going to get their credit from well maybe maybe but I'm just saying that it's all esoteric if you want to get right down to it it's just numbers on paper I'm trying to talk us take us back to the issue of fairness you know I mean I can pay 11 Grand right now if I want to build a house okay but back 25 years ago I couldn't so for me to save $11,000 or $5,000 on a house back then that would have been a big deal for me so you know and the fact that I get what everybody's saying but I'm just saying if we want to be fair this is a way for me to fully Embrace this big of a jump because this is a big jump and so I just think we could we need something we ought to do something for people that have been here all along well let me let me just make one final point and it's entirely up to the commission you know how you want to go forward with this but I will say that it's not tied to the individual it's tied to the capacity so if I'm paying a connection fee for an impact of that residential property on the system I'm not removing the impact of that house when I sell it the impact is staying there with it it's like saying I bought a seat on a train and I'm going to sell that seat to somebody else and I want to buy a new seat for a discounted price because I had a seat cost of the seats hasn't changed the impact hasn't changed so the the capacity and the impact doesn't transfer with the individual it stays with that home it was the cost of the that home 25 years ago to buy into the system that was the the connection fee as we add a new home there's a new connection fee with it that has to be accounted for I just you know that's that's my kind of explanation of how I I don't know how you you discount you know I paid it once should I pay it again the the the benefit of what you pay doesn't travel with you to a new property it stays with that property because that's the that's where it was paid it's tied to the property not to the individual I disagree I mean under your scenario the value of that train the a 40-year old train it's a lot cheaper to have a seat on a 40-year old train than a brand new one you know what I mean if I buy a seat on a train a 40y old train is going to a heck of a lot cheaper than a brand new one so we can argue this all day long I think I just think there should be a credit for people that have been part of the system and have kep carry it all along everybody May disagree with me but that's what I think I think there should be some sort of allowance made for people that have that have kind of helped pay the freight as they go that's that's what I think so I'm just not sure how how will you how you would do that I paid five grand and I go to get a new one I get a $5,000 credit off my 11,800 I see so now I got to pay 6,800 whether I that's what I think you do or some some some P portion there of if it's been 25 years maybe you get 125th or I don't know there's some just some sort of allowance for people that have been here from the beginning one of the things and I I don't want to comment on on that issue because I'm not a rate Setter um I would defer to the experts on that issue but from a legal perspective and in in the municipal uh connection fee rate setting context you have to be as you as you are so concerned Equitable and fair and you have to make sure that you are not disproportionately treating One customer over another or one class of classifications of customers and you know I think that's sort of the the the the general gist of Municipal utility rate setting Concepts and to the extent this is a you know this is not a rate this is a connection fee it's there are there are some of those Concepts included I quite honestly would not know from a legal perspective how you could justify that outcome you know in in in an ordinance based on a rate based on the calculations as I've understood them presented tonight the the the capacity that you purchased 25 years ago is being sold when you sell that house and that has to be captured in the value of that sale of that house it's it's axiomatic to me it's not a guess it's not speculation that sale of that house that person doesn't have to pay this $1,846 because they're choosing to buy an existing home that's already attached to the system that had paid for capacity 25 years ago so you're saying my impact fees are paying for capacity not for not for um physical holes in the ground and pipes and all that stuff all I'm P all I'm buying for my impact fees or capacity you are buying for treatment and transmission capacity it's divided into two categories and the user rates now that's a different subject I'm not paying for any pipes or any kind of hard structure I'm just paying I'm paying for something that's called capacity you are paying for the additional capacity that is required when you join the system and that includes treatment and transmission so there are some physical things that are being that are being purchased and and I don't know maybe commissioner Mercer Can Shed light she's probably you're you're paying for the capacity you took out when you bought that house that house is going to have that same capacity no matter who owns it if you sell it now the next thing you're buying you're buying the new capacity that you're taking out right so that's kind of the well that's my point I see it and that's where you can't you your new capacity is the same as the the new capacity from the person from New York so the fact legally I don't know how you can treat well because you're from New York I mean or because you're from some other place I I don't know how you legally would would uh come on John you're SM that up you're smart I feel like I am but I but I don't but I don't talk about technicalities well you know you can figure it out commissioner dancer technicalities are so important and and and I'm not being argumentative I I understand what you're saying but I don't I'm I'm not aware and you know of course defer to the the rate setting experts um on these subjects but I as commissioner Mercer pointed out it's the capacity is there it's been it's and you're paying for new capacity regardless of whether you had old capacity or not let's ask the expert Mr Williams has this been done anywhere else or am I just totally off the wall here has this been talked about or considered or contemplated anywhere else I have not heard that discussion before I've not seen it implemented okay um again not to be dismissive of the comment I generally agree with the economics that's been discussed but we can we can work with John a little bit to see if there's any policy it's probably it's highly likely not going to lead to a reduced fee but it could there could be policies to minimize The Upfront burdens um if you're building a new house you can probably build those fees into your mortgage if someone was going to pay them up front there's probably a payment plan that can be done to help ease the burden with full cost recovery consider but that but that that doesn't address separate that doesn't address commission's position because we're talking about treating an existing City of Winter Haven user differently than someone who comes in and and that's so it's a separate type of yeah I don't that would be very contorted if if at all possible I guess essentially the cost of doing business changes and that's what what we're talking about my my question is uh we're we're we're making this significant leap and others are you know we I think what was shared was that others would eventually have to come up to that level or at least meet that uh at some point because you look at we're we're we're number three at present is that correct uh if you're looking at what's on the screen we are what's proposed is we would be that the third from the high the top there which would be the highest in pole County yes I understand but currently until that until that is actually approved currently we are at the bottom and there are four existing cities below us Lake Wales BTO Lakeland and Fort me Lakeland is based upon their existing Fe not what's proposed now we're making this we're saying the cost of doing business is going up if you're going to build so other municipalities will have to address the same challenge that we are currently facing absolutely going be unique we're just making it now or early or earlier if you will but the others I I guess the question is how uh assuming that we're we're we're going to be one of the highest that the others will have to follow suit uh perhaps how long of a time span are we looking or when that could possibly happen or or because I think in short term we would probably see if impact fees if you're a builder developer you knowing that the impact fees are this much higher in this area uh with current uh building I guess it wouldn't be it wouldn't matter but anything that would be propos a coming or looking perspective uh Builders or developers coming in that uh they I'm sure this is something that they do consider a look at you know abely that cost is going to be passed on to uh well it's it's part of the the uh whatever the selling price of the of the home will be period no no no individuals necessarily looking at that uh because again if the Builder is building the house you got to have water so they're going to they're going to connect it and this is this is at the point of connection I think for water that's kind of one of the last things is done I believe right yes so that impact that impact doesn't hit until really the house is pretty much completed and uh ready to come online right right so well let me go back to your question you know first of all our recommendation for the adjustments in connection fees which we be presented to you in the ordinance and I'll be quick about this because I know we're bumping against that meeting um is a January 1 implementation is what we're recommending um the we're we're recommending it happen now think you know some of these other cities they're already in place and in the case of Lake Alfred they were roughly two years ahead of us um if we had done it two years ago and had the same CIP in mind at that point in time uh that number we might be you know right around where they are is some of these other cities address what their needs are as their infrastructure uh reaches end of life that's going to drive those numbers you know potentially even higher than what ours are I think it's just a matter of timing this is what our need is as of you know the summer of 2024 in anticipation of what we look to need over the next roughly five years of our CIP so I think that yeah we're we're jumping to the front of the line um and if you go back you know when Davenport adjusted theirs when Lake Alfred adjusted theirs they quickly jump to the front of line as well um and I think that others not knowing what their timing will be will certainly be ahead of ours as they face similar challenges in their system that we face and unprecedented growth that we've faced good else continue last slide um just next steps is this coming Monday you'll see first reading for this connection fee ordinance and the bra study ordinance second connection fee Workshop September 4th and then second reading of the ordinance is September 10th and Commissioners um again in align alignment with that ordinance 02 2442 is on the agenda for Monday evening for first reading there is also uh separate ly ordinance 0 2441 which is specific to the rates utility user rates that's existing customers and what they're paying uh Mr Williams will prepare a uh he'll offer a work a presentation on that during our agenda review this evening uh to help you understand how that plays into this same concept all right and I believe that concludes everything we had for you that being said uh motion for a joint motion we are joined thank you thank you do we need a break okay five minutes e e e e e e e e e e e our regular agenda review session for this the uh 21st of August at uh 6:11 p.m. can I have a roll call please commissioner dollison commissioner Mercer here commissioner danler mayor proam Yates here and mayor Bon here okay so uh we have the usual things the invocation and Pledge of Allegiance presentation this Proclamation we're going to do this this Monday night yes sir okay uh so then we will move to uh our ordinance's second reading so mayor Commissioners these are really nothing's changed since first read one of them pertains to site plans one of them pertains to the language that aligns the um the uh code with our U affordable housing language and appointment of uh planning Commissioners and some of those items nothing's changed okay then we have the uh consent agenda can you give us a brief overview of these please certainly um on the first one uh this is a request from Blue Line Aviation and we have with us this evening Aon gross close with blue line uh somewhere in the room he may just stepped out and um Troy heidle he may they may be actually in the hallway speaking together now uh but this is an extension of their their uh the existing lease that was done uh about a year ago and was to be completed by September 15th of 2024 since that time actually amended that lease to expand the size of the property that they'll develop um and they have asked for an extension on the timing of that to go another year to September 15 2025 I will note that the um the design of that plan Improvement is complete and it is with local agencies for permitting review and approval believe only the Swift Mud approval is what remains so they're asking just for an extension on the time of that okay um the PBA agreement and uh Sean uh dkes our HR director is with us this evening along with uh Chief Brandon and deputy chief Vance Monroe the PBA is the collective bargaining unit for members of The Winter Haven Police Department and we commenced uh our negotiations with the PBA earlier this late spring early summer uh that has is uh was alternatively agreed to all the articles that are noted within your fact sheet voted on by members of the collective bargaining unit and is ready for uh authorization by the um uh City commission at this point so happy to say we have a collective bargaining agreement with the PBA for our police officers um item 10 C this is for some security fence replacement at the winter Set uh water treatment plant so this is uh this was a bid that we issued it is included in the um water Department's 2020 risk and resiliency assessment it had recommended this replacement so this is again replacement of the security fence for $51,500 okay the 10d this is a uh Joiner and consent to a permanent lift station easement this is at the Blue Sky Florence Place uh apartment complex there on the just to the west of First Street North um there was a uh blue blue Winter Haven or Florence Place previously had granted 610 uh the owner of an additional parcel access to a lift station located on the property and so the City of Winter Haven because we provided a loan to Blue Winter Haven for that property secured by a mortgage we have to uh agree to join and consent to any such permanent easement so this is more of an administrative function associated with the funding we had provided to Blue Sky for that development um 10e I believe we're on is that correct yes 10e this is the travel and training this is for uh all of you to attend your respective legislative policy committee committee meetings the Florida League of cities that will occur October 4th November 8th and December 5th um I don't know if those all happen on the same days or times for you all but you know what your schedules are and so this is just authorizing that travel and then uh 10f um this is a resiliency program Grant I'm going to ask MJ who has been facilitating this one to give you a quick overview uh good evening mayor and City Commissioner so this is for a grant opportunity through the Florida Office of resiliency uh this will enable the city to perform a vulnerability assessment so this many of you may recall the significant storm water modeling work that we did a few years ago so this would build on that couple it together with flood uh flood plane mapping and it would also look at uh critical infrastructure like our utility system and kind of put all of that under one umbrella um this grant would pay for all of that work uh we we're estimating we would apply for about 350,000 with no match required um and just look seeking uh authorization to apply for that Grant okay all right resolution uh R 2435 so 20 2435 this is fourstar this is the harmony property on Lake Eloise phase 3A 33.9 acre subdivision um this area that that we're uh they're requesting final plat approval on doesn't contain any building Lots it's just five common Lots uh and it includes the dedication to the city of the 100 foot right of way for the realignment of West Lake Eloise Drive they have submitted a performance bond in the amount of 3 3,380 92221 for the remaining infrastructure items to be completed which are earth work final roadway construction sanitary sewer potable water storm water and uh engineering certification so um uh again this is a staff recommending approval of r435 for that final plat approval okay and then the next one is just the release of the performance right and and I think that's pretty self-explanatory yeah okay and then um R 2438 Eric would you mind commenting on this one this is one of the one of the projects that's up on uh lucern Park Road we've had a lot of discussions about Transportation concurrency on sure mayor Commissioners this is the uh final plat approval for Harbor at Lake Henry um it is 179 building Lots 14 common Lots um that cons consist of uh storm water retention Wetland uh areas lift station open space areas um the internal roadways are contained within 50 foot rights away and will be public roadways dedicated to the city um water and sewer utilities utilities will be owned and maintained by the city and all drainage conveyances and storm water will be maintained by the HOA they did um issue a performance bond in the amount of $ 33,258 um submitted to cover the cost of the remaining infrastructure um to this date it's about 71% um constructed as far as the infrastructure goes um it was developed consistent with uh PD 2201 and so it is consistent with the future land use and the zoning designations um we'll go on the the tax rolls were estimating at about uh $40.5 million of taxable value which would generate about $266,800 our code requires at the final plant and there is capacity in at in lucern Park Road um for this project and we went and we calculated um willbrook North which is not at final plant yet um but that we know that they have an approved site plan and they're in the works um developing that property now um bringing Harbor Lake Henry on and Willowbrook North on will leave us with about 70 available PM PE hour trips in the westbound Direction and about 66 in the eastbound Direction so we have enough currently today to facilitate those two projects this one and Willer Brook north which will access access just barely 70 and 66 trips available in each Direction I was going to ask you who got there first but they both got it in the same Under The Wire yeah they sure did I think there's one across the street from this that is not doesn't I think it's the one that misses out and then there's one down further that had been um we've seen a couple site plans on across from willbrook yeah um kind of almost across from The Village at Lake smart that again is may miss out on on development rights because of concurrency yeah so after this one and after willbrook North it'll it'll be just a few trips left on that roadway and then at that point um we won't be able to issue anymore until that for laning is in the fdot's uh Capital Improvement program so the one that so the one that we sent to the state last meeting for approval that would be declined by the state or that'll come back to us and then we would decline it it would be evaluated at that time when they're when they're ready for plat approval um we will look at uh what the current capacity of lucern Park Road is keep in mind capacity es and flows now you know generally because of growth the trips have been increasing and increasing increasing over years but there may be something that happens in the in the system that starts sending trips in another Direction so you know that's why it's fluid and that's why we do the concurrency management um so at that time when they come in we'll look at what's available or what the background trips are and if there's anything available after we look at the background trips and uh if there's nothing available then well um yeah if there's nothing available is not an answer um generally speaking so our concurrency management system contemplates this and it requires proportionate fair share agreements and the like and so we will be required to contractually ultimately deal with that issue in concert with the planning staff and with you all of course um but you know that's just going to make life more complicated but it will be it will have to be dealt with property rights so so if a project if another project comes for a request that involves lucern Park Road would would it ultim Ely still come to the commission or Planning Commission or both or would y'all as staff say there's no capacity it it without being specific because I would want not want to be hypothetical I want to know facts specific but in general projects there there there there are Pathways that have to be followed that are in our code that would I think I'm correct in saying this would ultimately come back before you all before the Planning Commission before the city Commission even if even if staff deemed that there wasn't capacity it would still come to us for or actually would go to planning first and if you're if you're talking about the assignment of land use and Zoning to a property for a future project um if if somebody annexes annexes into the city for example and we need to assign land use and Zoning to it um we're required to assign land use and Zoning to it so we would look at what's appropriate in that area what's compatible with adjacent uses and assign a future and hopefully assign a future land use and a zoning to it that would be appropriate the developer would be on notice that that roadway currently has no capacity and they would have to deal with that whenever that project moves forward whether it be through a proportionate fair share agreement or waiting until improvements are done on lucer Park Road by the fdot and capacity becomes available that they would have to deal with that in that situation but I don't think it would be appropriate to deny an appropriate future land use and Zoning designation because we don't know when that project's actually going to happen it could happen 30 years down the road we can never deny a project that's what I just heard don't we don't we set ourselves up by giving them this permission don't we set ourselves up to get sued because then the developer comes in and says you guys gave me permission and now you're no no let me reset the discussion we are not giving them permission in that sense by assigning land use and Zoning it's a mandatory thing you have to have a land use and Zoning category under our comprehensive plan and our ldrs we are simply legislatively in the land use Arena assigning a compatible and consistent land use and in the quasa judicial Arena assigning a appropriate zoning District that is compatible with the land use and around surrounding zoning so think of it as sort of a 30,000 ft is the land use and then the zoning and then they can then apply for specific development for specific site and that is where we are talking in statute that's called a development order right and so land use and Zoning doesn't give somebody the authority to go out there and build roads and and build lots it it is assigning what would be appropriate on that property a development order is after you go through all of the site plan approval process the concurrency management process you get all of your agency permits Swift Mud Dot and all of that then then you can be issued a development order and actually do something on that property right yeah and that that's so there are checks and balances in place to make sure that there's capacity at that time and so I I don't want the public or to anyone to construe that that by assigning land use and Zoning we're giving you permission to build or to or to have a development order a vested right if you will that happens later on in the process but it is an issue and people can sue us if they want to they just can't Prevail perhaps that's a good statement um can go can I have a quick question um a quick side note just so you know and I had this conversation last year at a mayor's convention with the mayor of pimbrook Pines or somewhere in South Florida this is what they're doing now they're not guaranteeing they're giving people water permits but they're not in for tium they're only for like 20 years right that's the new thing now in South Florida there's and people are still building houses but they don't they're only guarante them in water for a certain period of time that's sort of the new thing that that's happening now that people I I had heard that what's the what's the um in 20 years what's happening that's reducing that are they they overc committing their capacity or they expect to have a a reduction in capacity well they just don't want to have to um I I had a long conversation with him and I hate to say we' each had a glass of wine I don't remember exactly what it was but it was it was convoluted in that it was like in 20 years I kept saying what happens in 20 years they said well probably nothing but if the world changes and global warming happens and all our water all our field all our water fields are filled with salt water we're not going to guarantee that guy water forever so it's a it's a change in the available capacity based upon environmental impacts not on overc commitment of it but something else that reduces what you actually have and I get it the kind of thing I've heard about is prepaid capacity and different things that you can do that it's only good for a finite period of time I don't want to get into that conversation my question Eric is going back to our previous discussion so this guy comes he's got 179 Lots can he pay all his impact fees at once at300 $3,000 per lot or can you is it only when he pulls a permit per lot so if we pass this increase in January and he starts pulling permits in he has to pay the new rate so it so Water and Sewer uh connection fees are paid when they call for a meter set so that's after the house is built and everything's ready to go and they're ready to connect for water that's when they pay their water and sewer connection fees all the other impact fees Transportation parks and wreck library and all that are paid on the front end when you're issued a building permit which is the development order that says you can build this house and that's done by permit building permit per residential unit if they come in they pull you know 20 building permits they'll pay 20 you know buckets of or 20 packages of of impact fees they're each for each specific one it's not for the overall development unless you were doing say a multif family well not to confuse the issue but we're going to be having an ordinance come forward that will somewhat accelerate that besting right process at the preliminary plant stage want to get into all that conversation but save that for another we'll save that for another evening but suffice to say that if there is a failure of a of concurrency capacity in this example State R 544 there are mechanisms that we have codified proportionate fair share mitigation agreement being one of them that would be available for a developer to mitigate this failure MH and pay into a fund or do something and it requires coordination requires an agreement I guess what I'm trying to say is that no may not mean no no I mean there I it's nuanced and there's there's more to it than that well in case you're wondering I I'm not opposed necessarily these people paying these impact fees more I I was my whole argument in the last session was a credit for people have already paid them but theoretically these people aren't going to be pulling permits till next year so if this P if if we pass this stuff they're going to all have to pay more the I mean that's that's a realistic yeah right exactly so the people that are causing all the traffic are going to pay a little bit more to help St alleviate I'm talking about water sewer but I'm right it's all it's all part of the cost at the end of the day okay good okay Eric is it yes sir that's it all right so I'll take um a shot at 2422 uh and there please feel free to to jump in this came before you before um this is Spring Lake Square in the development of 100 residential multif family units on the the lake side of Spring Lake Square I had reviewed that um after it came to you all for first reading and asked that it begin the process again because I wanted to make sure being consistent with the goals and objectives of our strategic plan that our notification was going above and beyond and we could could check every box and and not just be consistent with the letter of our own law and policy but really the intent of it so we we started the whole process over and it went back to Planning Commission um I believe earlier Late July early August actually I think maybe just two weeks ago it went before the planning August 6th yeah August 6th so this again is uh a request from Landmark Investments to amend their PUD so this is a planned unit development you know specialized zoning on that property um that really the project could be developed with over 1.7 million square ft of commercial property um they are requesting that they take 3.1 Acres of the vacant land and develop that with a 100 units of multifam down along the lake if that were developed commercially it would be an addition of about 405,000 Square ft of additional commercial space um the other thing that happens within this is that it allows us to clean up some of the language that's in the original PUD you may recall we had some issues with uh some businesses and activities that were happening in that Plaza that came before you and there wasn't a whole lot that we could do because of what was written into the original PUD um this does allow us to uh ancillary to the to the condition of the 100 units make some improvements to the original language of the Pud that I think safeguards our residents a little further out there I point out on page 27 of the fact sheet the difference between 45,000 Square ft of commercial and 100 multif family units of residen itial property there's a difference calculation on the far right of that table and you can see that impact on water sewer and transportation goes down um we do pick up an increase in uh school students because obviously you don't have school needs when it comes to commercial so you see there is some Savings in water and sewer and and roadway capacity um this was uh presented the Planning Commission uh on August 6th we had a number of people that were here in attendance for that that that spoke out of concerns for it um this is amending the Pud certainly when it goes to to site plan approvals and everything there's there's still Hoops that have to be jumped through I can tell you uh you have access to this property from two dot roads uh being us7 North and Havendale Boulevard um the primary axis here being really US 17 North uh we just met with LK nandom today in in uh in other conversations and brought this up about you know this is one of those developments that you know what was intended for uh Transportation concurrency and access and and Dot roadway improvements when this was first developed probably in the 198s trans Transportation looks very different today and and traffic counts look very different so um that's something that we'll work very closely with do on when it comes time for this to actually develop in some form or fashion but at this point this is just an amendment to the Pud to allow for the multif family residential and I know commissioner Doon was here for that that Planning Commission workshop and it was very well attended so oh yes where are they going to put the apartments um on that little map I can't it's just to the left of those three buildings or yeah if you flip to page five of five of exhibit a of the ORD there it is perfect thank you AJ oh there it is it's the the the vacant green space is that blue area sort of behind the existing shopping center they on the the land to the to the West that vacant all that vacant property no sir they don't own that no okay all right 024 36 Eric will you take this one please yes sir uh 02 2436 and 02437 are related um one is to amend the future land use um on a parcel from neighborhood support future land use to Neighborhood Suburban future landuse um this property is located the northeast corner of Buckeye Loop Road and palm Nut Drive uh it's approximately 3.68 Acres uh the parcel is currently subject to a PUD ordinance which permits uh personal storage units on the property uh and has remained undeveloped since the Pud was uh assigned the petitioner proposes to develop the property with 32 multif family residential units um at about 12 units per acre Allowed by the R3 zoning um District the the the the theoretical maximum in that District would be 44 again they're proposing 32 um it's a small scale land use Amendment so it doesn't require review by Department of Commerce and other agencies uh staff has determined it's consistent with um surrounding uses uh we do have infrastructure capacity available uh the request would be consistent with the comprehensive plan in the R3 zoning would be consistent with the neighborhood Suburban future land use designation that's requested um This Was Heard by the Planning Commission on August 6th and um they voted unanimous unanimously to recommend approval with no public uh comment uh again we'd recommend approval of both ordinance 02 2436 and 0243 7 okay any questions all right then we will o 2441 so this one I'm going to ask that we spend a little bit time on this evening mayor and Commissioners and this is goes along with the uh connection fee report that you you discussed earlier this is this is the opposite side of that so this is the rate study that addresses daily consumption rates for water and sewer um again we we look at this in consideration of what are our operational costs for the water utility what are the the capital Improvement needs of the water utility what are the other revenue streams that come in whether that's grant munding funding or um borrowing you know all the the different aspects of that so I'm going to ask Mr Williams to to come to the the the podium and present on this um this is this is different from connection fees in that connection fees new development this is your existing customer um these are fees that would take effect if approved by the city commission October 1st of this year so we will hear this is a first ordinance at the meeting Monday evening and is a second reading of the ordinance on September 10th and then they would be um implemented the First full billing cycle after October 1 so Mr Williams if you would please great good evening mayor Commissioners again Joe Williams from Rellis and as mentioned we're g to be going through the rate study side the utility rates the monthly user rates so these are people using water ex you know they're they're currently here this does affect future customers as well and it's based on how much water you're using every month um there's been a lot of pressure on the utility over the past several years costs have been increasing from labor chemicals power materials all those things have been increasing tremendously postco and as we've discussed previously there is additional cost for p Regional water Cooperative uh by the time they start delivering water in 20208 time frame that's going to come at a cost of over $3.5 million per year added to your water system um wastewater treatment plant three that's going to come in the cost of additional Debt Service in the future upwards of $10 million per year for your Wastewater system uh major Investments major impacts and again there there's over 450 million or about $450 million of Capital Improvements we'll talk about this in a moment and there's going to be significant issuance of new loans and gear andest Teem are also working on acquiring as much grant funding as possible and reviewing options for that debt funding to get the lowest costs available at the time and we have identified some rate adjustments and some new fees that would be part of the rate structure for those monthly user fees as well the capital Improvement plan again over the next 5 years there's about $450 million included here um 180 to 200 million of it is or 215 Million by the time we add an some cost escalation wastewater treatment plant three um there's some new water facilities po Road um there's changes happening at Wastewater treat plant 2 there's a new administrative facility for the for the water department and then as you can see some other some other larger projects and how it's being funded and paid for over a period of time um this this accumulates to the 450 million you can see in the middle there's a proposed debt Line This is going to come from a mix of sources between potential potentially wifia revenue bonds and srf some combination and over $250 million of new loans grants um we we have about 25 million 24 a. half million programmed in Gary's hoping to exceed that over time but maintaining a conservative forecast we're at 25 25 million and about that's about 5% if I'm not mistaken Joe is that correct and and Commissioners one of the things I want to point out and I think Gary had mentioned this in some of the briefings that we had done Gary hubard um you know our expectation and our certainly our aggressiveness in Grants is to do much better than 5% on grants you may recall we just submitted for I want to say around around $120 Million worth of Grants through State programs um do I think we'll get $120 million under those Grant applications no but I'm certainly um glad to send the message to Tallahassee of what we need and plant that seed uh we realistically think that we should be able to hit about 25% in Grant value off of these so if that comes to be then that helps us down the road even further with any you know future rate adjust adjustments that may need to be it helps postpone And Delay that we're going to be extremely aggressive in our grant approach and you can see um in 2026 at the very bottom this is the start of when construction at wastewater treatment plan 3 is going to begin so there's a there's a major commitment of funding starting especially in 2026 um there's a large commitment this year to projects as well and you you'll see that play out in the in thei some of the financial charts where there's a little bit of pressure in 2026 we're we're working on phasing the rates in as much as possible not not having rate shock to customers and trying to keep your rates as low as possible so some of the new loans um you know the biggest one is at the bottom this this is going to come from a combination of sources by the time 2026 rolls around and um it's further evaluated by Gary and financial advisers that you have on what what the best options are so right now it's programmed in as revenue bonds there's there are going to be opportunities from srf State revolving fund which has a significantly reduced or lower interest rate for borrowing um so that will be leveraged as much as possible Revenue sufficiency forecast uh brief overview of your existing rate structure so for each customer that's connected to your system they pay a monthly base charge for water service and for sewer service and it the base charge increases as you have a larger meter size this is tied to studies that have been done and potential potential impacts or demands that you're going to be causing on the system so if you're a larger customer you have a much higher potential use on the system you're going to pay a higher base charge consumption rates this is pay for what you use so if you're a low user and you're using 5,000 gallons or less per month you're going to be paying $22.25 per thousand gallons as you start to use more we have a conservation tiered rate structure so you start to pay more per thousand gallons of consumption and irrigation at the bottom you can see that those rates are even more incentivized for irrigation customers because we know that water is going Outdoors for commercial and Enterprise in the middle uh section all consumption is at a consistent rate so there's a lot there's a lot more variation in the types of commercial businesses and it they have different economic incentives to keep their water use and cost as low as possible while operating for-profit businesses so that's that was something that was changed several years ago Wastewater again very similar to water where on the on the left side we have the different customer classes base charge per meter size and to the right side is the consumption rates everybody pays $552 per thousand gallons for residential we have a cap at 10,000 gallons per month because on most properties there's just one meter going onto the property that measures the water going in and we don't have a separate sewer meter for measuring sewer that actually comes out of the property so the 10,000 gallons based on um a lot of historical analysis and review is the approximate maximum that comes off of properties and anything above that is typically going to be on the irrigation aspect one of the things we do Commissioners you may recall is encouraging uh residential customers to get an irrigation meter so if you're if you're a customer that you're using let's say 5,000 gallons of water and for potable sources for in your home you know showers toilet sinks washing machines and another 5,000 for irrigation um if you're not on a separate water meter for irrigation you're paying sewer on 10,000 gallons CU all that's going through if you have a separate water meter uh for your irrigation you're not charged a sewer fee for that irrigation water because it's not coming back in the system we don't have to treat it so that's uh one of the things that we encourage people to do that's a great cost savings and I would encourage all of you if you do not have an irrigation meter at your home to do so because you'll find the savings within that froze for a second there we go um projected new development so part of the race study we do look at growth continuing um you know I I think you'll see that the growth we're forecasting in the future is relatively conservative to what you've experienced over the past several years we're we're looking at two and a half% growth in water customers and that results in right around 900 new customers per year and with the assumption that all of those new customers have Wastewater service it results in a slightly higher percentage calculation because you have still have a subset of customers that are on septic tanks are not connected to your central sewer so that's why there's a difference in percentages it's based on that same approximately 900 customers per year and there are two pretty significant uh potential industrial customers and those will begin connecting in 2025 2026 time frame and for the for the larger one project missed phasing in over a three-year period based on information that's currently available so Commissioners if you look at that um the erc's for project Miss remember I told you that we estimate what are the impacts of water demand an ER or equivalent residential connection uh for a single family home is what we were talking about earlier that $1,800 so in a project like project Mist where you have 8,800 equivalent residential connections uh based upon the type of manufacturing that is if you calculate that out you see what that impact is at the end of the day so that is significant on that type of development um one of the things that we have plugged in and this is separate from this ordinance but within the ordinance that pertains to connection fees is that recognizing how performers work that that can you if you jump up a a connection fee significantly on a major development like that or say a multif family is giving a what we'll call a soft lock uh on connection fees that if you have an approved site plan and we have that prior to January 1st when that connection fee takes place and you can get that project done within I believe it's 24 months you get the benefit of the current connection fee because of the size of the project and we limit that to 300 unit multifam developments 250,000 Square ft of commercial space or 250,000 square fet of industrial space would be the only ones that would qualify that recognizing that you don't want to kill projects um simply because of a significant change in that profor on our end yeah okay so take taking into account you know you what we do on the revenue sufficiency part of the study is we take all your existing costs and we look at how that's going to change into the future who's going to be here to help pay for it how much revenue is going to be generated and then we look at what what is the gaps what are the gaps we need additional rate adjustments to make up the difference in your case so for water rate adjust ments we're able to continue with a 2 and half% annual rate adjustment on the Water System given that these additional fees at the bottom the prwc fee and RNR fee which we'll talk a little bit more about are also implemented so it it kind of all works together and for Wastewater um largely really having to phas in to meet the new future Debt Service payments that are com coming from the wastewater treatment plant 3 project again it's about 10$ 10.5 million per year impact um we've pushed out that burden as far as reasonably possible working with your financial advisers um and pushing that to 2028 2029 time frame even though construction of the project is beginning in 2026 so it's giving us the ability to do 7 and a half% adjustments each year for for a period of time as opposed to any larger adjustments than that more near term to meet a a typical Revenue Bond repayment you know as soon as you issue a revenue Bond you typically are on the hook for Debt Service we've looked at capitalized interest to defer that issue so that we can phase in these rate adjustments so the prwc fee this is a fee that's designed based on annual consumption in your system and costs of P Regional water Cooperative creating a relationship between between those we'll show you that on the next slide RNR fee there's there's increasing needs across your system for renew and replacement um you know nearly 10 11 12 million per year of investment that's going into renewal and replacement of the assets that you have um so this this fee is a a very reduced version of funding that1 to1 million but it's creating a new fee a new Revenue source that can be addressed over time um and increased as needed and right now it's increasing based on a two and a half% index per year so the prwc fee to dive in a little bit further um you can see the annual prwc costs on the table ranging from $600,000 to a million dollars over the next few years and then jumping to that three and a half million dollar level once water's delivered in 2028 and in into the future and if we're looking at annual consumption again this is how many gallons would be applicable for the fee and we divide it through um we tried to kind of keep it as a nice clean fee level so 25 cents going to a dollar um the one thing that we did do on this fee is that your your really low use customers so your normal residential customers who are using 5,000 gallons or less per month even some of the individually metered residential customers um that really doing their part to conserve and keep their water consumption as low as possible so we're not applying the prwc fee per thousand gallons to any consumption below 5,000 gallons per month as to the higher users once you get into block two block three consumption and and Commissioners you may recall from the briefings about 75% of our residential customers are at 5,000 gallons or less per month about 50% are at 3,000 gallons or less per month so means about 75% of our customers will never see that um that additional uh charge related to prwc water and I think Joe you hit on the head because they're doing their part to conserve and uh they're not a high demand user the high demand users are what Drive the need for alternative water sources and the RNR charge um well okay I'll say it looks like this slide will probably be updated by the time you see it again but I I think the RNR fee um I was thinking $11 okay so there's about six seven million dollar per year in renewal replacement activity so you have different budget line items the 4605 is a key one in your operating budget so there's one for water one for sewer repair and maintenance uh it's typically called repair and maintenance special it's for larger renewable replacement type projects that are ongoing um and then in the CIP there's ongoing lift station needs as we showed you earlier there's 225 list stations in your system there's constant activity needed to upgrade Parts keep those keep those in working order so if we divide through those RNR costs by the equivalent connections to the system you can see a calculated fee of $910 per month to provide full funding and to start again start setting up a new funding source ease into the to the New Concept of having an RNR fee that's a fixed fee per month whereas the prwc fee is a consumption based fee per thousand gallons um so this is effectively an Adder to your add-on like a base charge um working with staff you know we just wanted to introduce the program get a new funding source started and start to set the stage for the future on these renewal replacement C cost so on a revenue sufficiency um on the chart what you'll see is three different bars going up and down so the dark the dark blue those are your typical operating expenses you can see in 2028 where that starts to increase that's the impacts from pul Regional water cooperative and this is this is combined water and waste water you have the the green bar just above that which is your ongoing Debt Service so again in 2028 you can see this the big jump this is when it's proposed that the first payments for the major Revenue bond for wastewater treatment plan three would come payable and then in yellow you have ongoing other expenses and transfers um so what we're what we're really trying to do is Phase rates build a program where we're increasing revenues over a period of time at a relatively stable rate to meet the needs of 2028 and future um and to recover a a little bit in 2024 there's some elevated expenses so what does it mean for your customers again here about about 50% of your residential customers are 3,000 gallons or less so from existing rates to fiscal year 2025 when we're adding the prwc charge who these customers it does not impact and the RNR charge we're going up by $3.82 per month and then into the future it's about $250 to $3 per month um each year thereafter so it's you know it's percentage wise it's n it's about 9% but it's about a little less than $4 per month for the 5,000 gallon customers we're going from $58 to $63 again this is including prwc charges which don't apply to these customers and the RNR charge and our increase here is $4.7 about $5 and going up by$ 350 to $4 or so each year thereafter and on a local comparison at 3,000 gallons again this is about this approximately your median customer right now you're you're the lowest rates in the county pretty much and um jumping up above bto's existing rates now a lot of these other customers will be increasing their rates come October 1 that's not factored in here for the most part outside of P County um so you may you may kind of relatively remain retain your position at the very bottom or you know you'll be right there with towards the bottom and Commissioners I'd like to comment on this one because I think this is this goes hand inand with the earlier conversation about our local folks and how we you know look out for the existing customer if you think about this is at a 3,000g consumption so 50% of our customers at $465 under the proposed rate adjustment and I'm I'm just going to call out one of our our adjacent cities and if you look hannes city uh immediately to our North for the same amount it is $20 more a month for that service um in in Lake Alfred a city that has a connection fee that is relatively equivalent to what we're proposing on our connection fees for that same monthly consumption um they're about $11 more $105 doar more a month for the same level of service so I think that that that's kind of The Balancing Act and I think that's why it's important that we show you on the same evening here's the recommendation for a connection fee increase so that new growth pays for New Growth and by doing that we're able to to maintain a lower consumption rate and monthly customer rate that people are paying every time they get the bill you know the the granted the connection fee may be part of a mortgage payment you're making but that's an upfront cost of of that new home this kind of shows what we're able to do for the customer at the end of the day the fixed income person the person that you know is trying to conserve water we're keeping that to still be the second lowest in the county and that's questionable for how long that would be because I don't know if Barto is looking at a rate study right now or not but I think that that's that's the other side of the story as as Paul Harvey would say that's now you know the rest of the story there got you yeah and it's not explicitly stated in this presentation there's more details in the full report that we provide which is also in your agenda packet that approximately $8,200 Wastewater connection fee that we're proposing we are that does factor into the rate study to a degree we didn't we didn't Factor 100% of it because it's not adopted yet but we didn't factor in an increase we use those funds to help pay a portion of that future 10.5 million Debt Service that's coming online so it's it's helping to keep the rates lower for existing customers would that be the same as it relates to some of the larger industrial projects that the city currently has on the the near Horizon and selling the additional water to additional municip to other municipalities all that's factored into this as well and helping keep the rates lower as well absolutely absolutely and commissioner Yates May for if if development slows if um a project of significant connection fee impact doesn't happen as quickly then what we have to do is look at what at the CIP the capital Improvement plan in the prioritization of those projects and the timing of those and make adjustments on that just same as you would in any business if my Revenue income um doesn't meet you know my performer then I've got to change what my outputs are and what my expenditures are the same concept here if if uh you know we we allocated I want to say it was 515 erc's or something to that effect for the ilc I think was earlier in the report if those projects didn't come on quite as quickly then um yeah 514 erc's for the ilc that's anticipating some new warehousing and things that are out there if that gets delayed in some time you have to look at those revenues year-over-year and and you're budgeting according to that the CIP is your your plan it's your strategy for how you're going to improve the the system the budget is the actual policy of what you're going to do each year and we bring that back to you based upon what the actual revenues are but if you look at that bar chart that was just passed there there's some cushion built in with these numbers clearly as well so slight cushion within there and you know you're also trying to reserve some some fund balance in there uh you know if you have major disruptions in the system or some type of economic turn or if you have a a natural disaster you want to make sure that you've got some Reserve funding there as well I think the point is we're minimizing The Jerk reactions exactly trying to be very strategic and I and I'll say very conservative um I think that the CIP is is aggressive um but the the funding source to get there is a conservative approach the growth perspective is um is much less than what we've actually experienced over the past few years but we recognize connection fees could change that the grant revenues that we estimated at 5% I fully expect that is a very low number um so I think you know it's it's a very conservative approach on the finance side and if we perform better than forecast then that certainly delays any future increases that may have to otherwise be taken yeah if if you're outperforming to the that exactly the point you can minimize future debt issuances you may not have to issue as much for a wastewater treatment plan three and other projects you can provide a little additional cash funding Min reduce your future costs for those projects um yeah try trying to put you in a position to succeed and Reserve fund forecast the one thing I'll say about this you can see in 20126 there's some pressure on the utility what we assume when we fund a CIP through our forecast is that if you're going to spend you know commit 11 12 million of cash in 2026 our study assumes that it's spent where really you you those some of those projects are going to be multi-year projects so the actual cash balances are likely to exceed what we're showing here but this is representative of funds available for future commitment um so 2026 there's a there's a little bit of pressure but it bounces back back in 27 we didn't feel the need to again have that knee-jerk reaction to frontload the rate adjustments a whole lot more um and there's other strategies that can be implemented some short-term loan financing things like that to bridge the gap if uh really got that that close and I will say just the the way utilities work having hundred million programmed in 2026 just executing rfps and procurement and everything that goes into that type of funding is is challenging and usually es and flows a little bit so um so if that actually comes to fruition is that something that would be appropriate to use our Reserve fund to cover that Gap and then replenish the reserve fund with future income say that again we have sorry so we have our Reserve fund right our thir in what is it 30% or 90 days oh you're talking about our the you're talking about general fund yes yeah rather than rather than borrowing money wouldn't it make I mean is that I don't internal borrow might be too common make too much common sense um but to borrow from there to to fund that Gap if if you were to need it and then replenish it with with proceed future proceeds so we have done some internal borrowing in the past typically not against the fund balance of the general fund but more so against things like the capital replacement fund for vehicles in very small amounts and we we uh we charge an interest rate you know whatever is uh Prime at that point was what we've done and we we it's been a while since we've done that you could you could borrow against anything above the 30% in your general fund but I think that that's that's got a ripple effect on your non-utility based project so I would I think we would just need to explore what are the options in play at the time that that need if should it arise yeah we got a couple years so I was just curious like you know if we I mean it looks like it's only about what $34 million shortfall for that one year roughly and again this this is assuming all the money was spent at the yeah at one point in time is like yeah you're likely to do a little bit better in actual cash balances over time my thought was we just you're talking about 26 May time yeah I mean my my thought was I mean we've got the we've got the funds in that emergency Reserve fund you know as opposed to borrowing outside is it doesn't it make more sense to fill that Gap and then replenish those funds in 28 29 potentially well I don't I don't have a I don't have my magic eightball this evening but I would say if that was a strategy that that the commission and that the dis at that point wanted to to take what I would probably suggest if and this is very speculative is that in that given year you wouldn't do a transfer from the Utility Fund into the general fund and instead take any fund balance in offset with that but that is that is you know really getting out there um trying to predict the future I think that that's a point in time kind of discussion I wouldn't want to say hey give us the money in the transfer from the Utility Fund we're going to turn around and give you alone it would make more sense just say this year we'll go without the transfer and instead we'll take that from Surplus fund balance or something like that but that's again makes sense and I and I only rais the question because we're looking at at it right now now hopefully 2026 rolls around and that shortfall isn't actually there and we don't have to worry about it but I was just more of a curiosity question because it's and it may feather out if that's an appropriate term I don't know in the finance world but it may feather outout based upon as Joe said the timing of the project itself and when dollars are actually spent and things occur because it's not like okay we're going to spend um we've got a budget for 300 million basically for next year for the City of Winter Haven we will not spend $300 million next year because the timing and the the sequence of getting things done you just you can't get it all done and so you have to pay for it but it's going to end up carrying over year over year so that may feather out and kind of smooth a little bit to be less of an imp I hope my CFO is not having a you know stroke over there with my comments can't see her it'll be all right okay and so that brings us to the conclusions um again this for coming Monday when you have the ordinances in front of you you know we are recommending that the proposed rate adjustments to your existing rates the 2 and half% for water 7 half% for sewer are adopted and you also adopt and implement the new prwc and RNR charges and there there also is in those ordinance considerations for miscellaneous charges increasing um so we think that those should be implemented as well and then lastly just part of the discussion is we are relying on some level of increase from the connection fees to help make this whole program work on the utility rates as well so Commissioners again this is ordinance 02 2441 this is um you'll have this on first reading for Monday night and second reading on o on September 10th uh we don't do the the separate workshops for this um all of our utility rate customers have been noticed uh of the um the date and time of of Monday's meeting and the um I'm sorry the September 10th meeting uh that's by policy that we we have to do that that has gone out on our utility bills so if you've seen that on your utility bill uh that's that's how we have have provided that notice and advertisement for that meeting and these would take effect if they are approved um October 1st of this year the first billing cycle immediately proceeding or following um October 1st again lower rates than everybody else around us with the exception of Barto and I think that that's subject to see what they do but um the ability to do that is by making sure that new development pays new development's fair share and I think that the customers at the end of the day or who you know we're trying to look out for there in low rates so thank you all right thank you um 2442 I don't think we need to talk any more about that unless you want to that's that's that ordinance related to connection fees and then 448 this again is remember I told you earlier we're changing that level of service based upon what we're actually seeing in the system people aren't using the 350 gallons per person per day to drop that to the 275 gallons per day and likewise the uh water uh waste water to 250 gallons per day um so yeah okay we have no new business then we have our L on and all of our reports and emergency matters and then we are joined any other discussions motion to join We join