Welcome to the City of St.

Petersburg City Council meeting.

Your elected officials are Mayor Ken Welch.

District 1, Copley Gurtis.

District 2, Brandy Gabbard.

District 3, Mike Harding.

District 4, and Council Chair, Lisseth Panowitz.

District 5, Deborah Fake Sanders.

District 6, Gina Driscoll.

District 7, Corey Gibbons Jr.

And District 8 and Council Vice Chair, Richie Floyd.

Welcome everyone to the April 2nd, 2026.

City Council meeting.

Clerk have pleased have a roll call.

Here.

Sorry.

Floyd.

Here.

Here.

Gabbert.

Here and Harding.

Here.

Today we're going to have our invocation given by former District 6, Councilmember Pastor Frank Peterman of Rock of Jesus Missionary Baptist Church, followed by a moment of silence.

And then please remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance.

If you please stand.

Good morning.

Good morning.

It's always an honor to come here before this wonderful body.

Having served here before and some other places.

And I just want to say to you guys, keep up the good work.

Uh, all of you.

Uh it's uh it's not always an easy job, but it's it's a necessary job.

And we'll thank you for what you what you're doing and how you serve this community.

Very important.

Let us pray.

The Heavenly Father, we come before you now, praising your name and thanking you, Lord, for all your goodness.

God, you are supreme.

You reign supreme.

You are everything.

And so, Lord, we come thanking you for this day.

For this is the day the Lord has made.

We'll rejoice and be glad in it.

And Lord, we ask that your spirit be in this place, and that Lord, you will allow these wonderful leaders, these council people to govern, Lord, by your spirit, and that there be good wisdom, sound judgment, and good performance as they perform their duties, Lord, for this city and even beyond.

We love you, God.

We praise you, we thank you now.

Bless this group, bless the mayor, bless this entire staffing lord group here in the city of St.

Pete.

We ask this prayer and ask this prayer now in the name of Jesus Christ.

Amen.

Amen.

Now a moment of silence for Officer James A.

Crop.

End of watch, April 15th, 1964.

Thank you.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which stands.

One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice as well.

Thank you.

You may be seated.

Thank you, Pastor Peterman for that wonderful invocation.

Council members, we have an agenda before us.

I'll entertain the motion for approval.

Second.

We have a motion and a second.

Clerk, if you can open the machine for voting.

Council members, please enter your votes.

Council members, please enter your votes.

Seeing that all council members have voted.

Clerk, please tally and announce the vote.

Madam Chair, the motion to approve the agenda passes unanimously.

Okay, we have a consent agenda.

Clerk, do we have any cards?

Second.

We have a motion and second.

Clerk, if you can open the machine for voting.

Council members, please enter your votes.

Seeing that all present council members have voted.

Clerk, please tally announce the vote.

Madam Chair, the motion to approve the consent agenda passes unanimously.

All right.

We move to open forum.

Clerk, are there any speakers?

If so, please read the rules.

If you wish to address city council on subject other than public hearing or quasi judicial items listed on the agenda, please sign up with the clerk.

Only the individual wishing to speak may sign the open forum.

She only city residents, owners of property, business owners in the city or their employees may speak.

All issues discussed under open form must be limited to issues related to the city of St.

Petersburg government.

If you're speaking to an item on the agenda, you may only speak once during the open form or when the item comes up on the agenda.

Applause is not permitted except in connection with awards and presentation.

In order to provide an opportunity for all citizens to address Council, each individual individual will be given three minutes to speak, and after which the phone will be muted.

If you wish to address city council through the Zoom meeting, you must use the raise hand feature button in the Zoom app or enter star nine on your phone at the time the agenda item is addressed.

When it is your turn to speak, you will be unmuted and asked to state your name and address.

At the conclusion of your comments, or when you reach the three minute time limit, you will be muted.

All raised hands will be lowered after each agenda item.

Regardless of the method of participation used, normal rules apply, including the three-minute time limit on comments, the requirement that any presentation materials must be submitted in advance of the meeting and the rules of the quorum.

If live public comment is disrupted by violations of the rules of decorum, the chair is authorized to accept public comment by alternate means, including by email only.

And I'm gonna bring this mic over to Washington.

Please state your name, address or cross streets, and you will have three minutes to address it again.

Good morning.

Good morning.

I'm Dr.

Perry G.

Washington.

175.

St.

Petersburg for the bird.

You heard me.

Yes.

Fifth and second.

I come to tell you my sermon is on justice.

The word justice.

I heard Deborah say justice last year.

I heard Junior say justice.

And St.

Petersburg, Planellas County.

I'm telling all my people, get this clown out of office.

I want the chief of release moved.

Get him out of office.

Certain members of this council, I'm gonna make it my job that you get out of office.

You think they elected you?

Me and my people elected you.

And I got people around the world.

Last year I came here and told you they arrested me for stopping an individual jackleg from putting a fence in my yard.

You did absolutely nothing.

I actually investigate.

Find out what happened.

Find the truth.

Junior, I called your name out.

You have yet to contact me.

And I call you son, because you're old enough to be my son.

You able to didn't know, don't know.

I'm in your district.

There was a time.

You you couldn't be on this round before six o'clock in the morning, and after six o'clock at night.

I was here.

Me and my people changed that.

You couldn't be where you are.

All children.

Who in the hell would tell us 16?

United States wrestling.

Yeah, only three minutes.

Three minutes.

Why does that exist?

Why do you have to say your address?

Because they don't want you here.

I'm here.

My name is Perry G.

Wars.

Thank you.

Thank you, Dr.

Washington.

Next speaker, please.

No more speakers and none in Zoom.

Okay.

Open forms closed.

And we move to reports.

F1.

We have an update on the unsolicited proposal for a comprehensive public private partnership model for advanced metering infrastructure received on January 14th, 2026.

And the special legal counsel provided by Bryant Miller Olive.

Councilmember Gabbard, you asked for this.

Yes.

I'll turn it over to you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh good morning.

Uh thank you for bringing this item first and having this conversation today.

Um, so I brought this report item forward because the city council knows we received a uh public-private partnership proposal for an automated metering infrastructure on January 14th of 2026.

And then on February 5th, City Council retained Bryant Miller Olive as our legal counsel to begin meeting with the city and advising on the process for P3 unsolicited bids.

There was a meeting that took place between the city and BMO on February 18th.

And I have brought this forward because as I understand it, there are two paths that the city could take in order to move forward with this particular proposal, either a public hearing or uh either a notice period, which uh we'll discuss today, or there could be an expedited process for a two public hearing for city council that would allow for the public and council to discuss the merits of moving forward with potential negotiations.

And so I wanted just to kind of have this conversation out in the sunshine.

I wanted all of us to be able to hear from both the administration and from the legal counsel that we retained, be able to discuss kind of the path forward that council members feel might be appropriate.

And so I brought this forward today.

This is not to argue the merits of the proposal.

This is simply about process and making sure that city council has a voice in that process and how we move forward from here.

Um it continues to be an issue with the automated metering and the water bills and um the exorbitant rates that people continue to face.

And uh we haven't really got to the bottom of all of that yet, and this is something that is before us that could potentially help with livability, affordability, and we want to make sure that we're doing what's right by the residents and having a very thorough conversation about what an expedited path might be.

So with that, um, Rob, should we turn it over to you?

Thank you, Councilmember.

I think if it's okay if we could hear from the outside council first, and then I'll make just a few brief comments on the administration's current position.

Okay, thank you.

Good morning, sir.

Can you introduce yourself?

Yes, good morning.

It's Fred Springer with Bryant Miller Olive.

So it's an honor to be here with you this morning.

I just want to briefly present the as much time as possible for um questions and discussion.

So the Florida does have a P3 or public-private partnership uh law and Florida statutes that's now 13 years old.

The statute does not define public-private partnership.

It does for our purposes define qualifying project and responsible public entity.

That's the inelegant language.

So the city is a responsible public entity.

This project, as presented, is a qualifying project.

So those are the boxes you need you need to check.

Um and the statute authorizes unsolicited proposals, which is kind of a new thing in Florida procurement law.

Um, and again, it's been since 2013, so we've got 13 years of experience with the process.

This is supplemental to existing authorities, so this is not a required process.

There's you know, plenty of ways to get to desired goals you know in a home rule jurisdiction like Florida, but this this definitely is um an authorized process.

Um P3, since it does not define what what P3s are, you can you know Google around and and find what is a P3, and there's a bunch of English definitions.

Um my advice is it's more than just one thing.

It's is it a procurement process?

Well, yes, there's a procurement process to follow.

Generally, if you read those descriptions, it just talks about uh contractual arrangement between a private party and a government party.

And you know, at that level of definition, pretty much everything the government does could fit into the P3 box.

So it's not very helpful.

There's no magic to what is a P3 is is the main point.

Just think of it as a project delivery method.

It's it's one way to accomplish something that the government wants to accomplish.

Um this is a heuristic that I use because when you think about any uh transaction, it helps to focus on who is acquiring what from whom and with whose money.

That that's a great way to cut right through and think about uh transactions.

And there are you know, six important pieces of every transaction when you think about it, someone's got to pay for it, someone's got to build it, someone's gonna operate, maintain it, and ultimately somebody owns it.

So if you look through that lens at pretty much every transaction that the government does, it's a pretty good way to you know think about what's going on.

And depending on how you answer those questions, that from a legal perspective drives you in certain directions about what process to use.

But again, this proposal that's in front of you fits within the P3 process at a high level.

Um to do competitive solicitations.

So most, many jurisdictions and even at the state level, there's usually a dollar threshold over which the government has decided it's a good idea that we do this competitively.

Um and that's why we have procurement shops in our governments.

Um somebody's got got to do that.

So you know, the the process flow across the top of this slide, kind of it, you know, breaks down how that usually happens.

So somebody in inside the government identifies a need, somebody has to think about how we're gonna meet that need, somebody has to go out who might who might meet that need, and then if you have to do a comp competitive solicitation, somebody conducts that, then it goes under um contract because there's a legal relationship between you and the supplier, um, and then that supplier performs under the contract.

So that's that's what the top row is.

The the bottom flow, what what's different here because this statute 2013 authorized the unsolicited proposal, so it's a different way of getting to the ultimate end of the um contract and the performance.

And by definition, since it's unsolicited, you're kind of cutting off those first three steps with your typical solicited process.

So uh the way it happens is the government receives, doesn't ask for it, receives the proposal, and then the next chevron there is is it a qualifying project under the statute?

Yes, this this is this particular AMI project satisfies that definition.

You are a res you know, somebody who can follow this process.

So the first question is, is this something the government's interested in, the desirable highlighted?

Is is this something you want to proceed?

So just because you get an unsocial proposal that that doesn't force you to do anything.

You could say no thanks, we're not interested.

Um if if you decide, well, this intrigues us and and we want to pursue it, then you you move down to to the right on the flow chart there.

Uh two in until two years ago, there was a process that every unsolitized proposal required giving public notice and giving an opportunity for interested competitors to submit competing proposals.

So the law sort of baked in a little competitive process.

In 2024, the statute was amended to make that um optional.

So that's the second highlighted uh there on the third chevron.

That's kind of where you are in this process now.

Um, you know, is is this something the city wants to pursue?

If so, what do we do next?

And that puts you in that third chevron.

Um so, and that's the question of do we advertise or or not.

So if you do advertise, then there's a process like a typical um solicitation.

You if you get competing proposals, you have to rank them, you evaluate them, rank them, and then negotiate with with your top ranked.

Um, but if you don't advertise, uh then you can proceed to negotiate with the unsolicited proposer.

There are some steps that need to be taken the public hearing process.

Um there's the criteria, the statute uh what this slide is the criteria that this statute gives for the decision about whether to advertise.

Um the funny thing about these criteria is they really are the criteria you would consider anyway, even if you uh did advertise.

So these criteria don't go to the wisdom of seeking competition or not.

These criteria go to you know, what do you think of this this proposal and do you want to proceed with it?

So this this is the key step.

Um the statute does not dictate, it's it's completely open at the local level how this decision gets made.

consider anyway even if you uh did advertise so these criteria don't go to uh the wisdom of seeking competition or not these criteria go to you know what do you think of this this proposal and do you want to proceed with it so this this is the key step um the statute does not dictate it's it's completely open at the local level how this decision get gets made um it just says you know the responsible public entity or in this case the city makes this decision there's broad discretion uh these are the criteria that that would you know guide that um decision about whether to advertise or not um so and the these are the um points that would be addressed and documented in your public hearings and then you would have to pause publish a notice uh that the city can considered these factors and you'd have to you know document your findings about proceeding but that's that's what it boils down to now where where you are in the process is consideration of these factors um so and then the economic efficiencies which is the um second bullet there um you'd ideally a public private partnership in theory um is brings these advantages so considering that second bullet about is is this economically efficient these are the factors that you'd be looking at um and you know you're really looking for the risk transfer and risk management to get it you know will will that serve the the project so those are the factors that go to that second uh bullet the financial structure structure and economic efficiencies and then as far as the qualifications here here's your risk allocation um the things you would usually um consider in any any deal really are structuring um and then as far as the uh capability of of the proposer again factors that you would typically consider when you're entering into a contract with a private party so that's it in a nutshell I just want to kind of situate you where you are in the process and you know I we can talk about lots more beyond that but I really wanted to keep this short so we could address what you wanted to talk about.

Thank you sir.

Councilmember Harding Thank you Chair Fred thank you very much for the education and uh and you introduced a new Bar I'm I'm sorry that's right.

I I just think Council may want to know that so no I I appreciate that I completely forgot.

No problem.

Rob the floor is yours.

Oh good morning good morning everybody we just want to very briefly just kind of let you know where the administration is at in this process and want to thank outside counsel for that presentation of course the city administration and team have received the same kind of presentation and information from outside council on this and so generally you know mayor welch has directed staff to try and expedite the transition to digital meters in a timely and cost effective manner.

And I and I think we believe that that's kind of the consensus on city council as well that's what we want to achieve as a city and I think it kind of comes down to how do we want to achieve that there's some challenges with process there's some challenges with funding how do we go about that and that's part of the discussion today right what process are we going to use to to expedite this transition.

So currently with this submission that we have it is our intent to move forward with a public notice to solicit other uh competitive offers we've been working on that uh notice that would go out to the public we anticipate that would be done in two or three weeks we would put that notice out publicly and receive those offers back and go through the competitive process.

So that is our take on on what we've received we do have staff here today and we're happy to answer any questions that we can from council members so thank you.

That's helpful.

Councilmember Harding Thank you Rob Fred thank you again you were very clear I don't have any questions but thank you for the word inelegant I'll add that to my lexicon that is a new word for me that you used and I appreciate that after this much life I don't normally get to hear new words.

Rob if um if see where should we start um if administrator tankersley is uh is in the building can we get them to answer a few questions?

Absolutely pops up thank you for your time I want to I want to back up a step for those watching um and make sure we uh we understand why we're talking about this is the water meters what what uh reads the amount of water going into uh into a a private entity or into your house or into your business and from what I understand we're 1970s technology right now we yes that's so it's just analog it's like the speedometer in your car yes okay and then we go and then we go around and we hand read these.

Correct.

And so the only data that we have if I understand correct uh available um is whatever the meter is read on that particular date.

Correct.

Okay.

So all right, so that's where we are, and it and it's worked for for generations.

Um but what we're looking at uh is uh is moving to digital meters, which in theory are um are much more accurate, and um and as I understand the the what we currently do might be off by a little bit, but this is more accurate.

But more to the point, um this involves technology, and so we will be able to provide data it once we replace the meters, the overlaying technology, which I assume we're looking at as well, we'll be able to provide data to the end users on an hour by hour basis if they choose?

Yes, that is correct.

So we'll so we will effectively for those who want to look at their own usage, um, we'll put control into their hands.

They'll be able to to see what what's happening to their house at three o'clock in the morning or all day Tuesday.

Yes, sir.

Okay, so um so if there is an issue, and I assume that further technology, and I just want to make sure that that we all understand that they can actually probably set up some type of an alert system.

If they use too much water, if they use water ongoing, that the system will alert them.

Yes, sir.

Do we have any uh do we have any thoughts on how much that that particular thought will affect the system?

In other words, I have a leak in my house and I just don't know.

Water is leaking underneath the ground.

Um and I just know that I got a uh a high water bill.

Um do we have any thoughts on how much more efficient that'll make the system, or will it make the system more efficient, or will it save both the city and the end user money?

It'll be a big benefit to the end user.

So right now, when we read the meter monthly, we're reading the total amount of water that flowed through that meter for that one month.

We have no idea of when that water flowed through, you know, was it in the middle of the night, was it during the day, was it consistent across the month, or did it spike at certain times?

All we know is the total number.

And we have to wait, you know, a month before we get that total number number since we're reading it on a monthly basis.

With the digital meter and the AMI technology that we would partner with it, um that data can be available almost instantaneously.

And so, as you mentioned, a customer can review their their usage on a regular basis.

They can the software that we're looking to implement will allow them to set up alerts that if you know, hey, in the middle of the night, all of a sudden I'm using this much water, send me an alert so that I can know about it.

By doing that, we can catch potential water leaks quickly and not allow them to continue to occur for a full month, leaking that water for a full month before we we have information that may suggest there is a water leak.

So we do believe that this will be a big benefit to our citizens.

And um what about the city side?

Does this create less wear and tear on the system?

Does this does this pro prolong the life of the city side of things?

Or how does it or how, if at all, does it does it benefit the city?

It doesn't really impact the wear and tear on the system, but it will impact what we call our unbilled water.

So every year we all utilities throughout the throughout the the world um have a certain amount of water that just for whatever reason is unbilled, unbillable.

Um so for instance, if we're flushing our hydrants to improve the quality of the water during a hot period, that water is not being billed, and so therefore there's no revenue coming in.

A water leak on a private side can end up being unbillable water if we go through the process of discovering the leak and then giving the appropriate um uh credit to the customer if they've addressed the leak.

And so this will allow us to reduce the amount of unbillable water that we have every year.

And with municipalities, counties that have installed systems like this, they see in the aggregate in in the hopes that these problems exist.

They just do.

Right, right.

Once we build something, it starts to degrade.

Um is there any change or any data available in terms of um uh uh water used in the aggregate?

So a certain percentage of the end users are are going to pay attention and they're going to fix things, and is that a thing?

I will admit I have not researched that because it's been my professional assumption that that that would occur.

So I haven't really researched how much other utilities that have already implemented this and may have seen a reduction in their unbuilt water.

So possible benefit but not a downside.

Correct.

Okay.

The we're currently rolling out this program or we have been rolling out this program just in in small phases and only at the the level of the meters, not the not the overlaying technology, correct?

Correct.

And we've got how many?

90 some 90, some odd thousand?

Roughly 97,000.

And how many are we rolling out, or what's our pace?

We've installed it to date roughly 24, 25,000.

And if we continue at this pace, how long will it take?

Another five years.

Okay.

And the and you see you see a big benefit to this.

So getting it done quicker is Yes, I do.

And and my staff would see that benefit also.

Okay.

In terms of of funding, that the proposal that we're we're looking at, or the proposals range from we hire a company and um and pay them and they install our equipment to one of the proposals is meters as a service copied from software as a service.

They do all the work, we can buy it from the back end, they maintain it, correct?

Correct.

What um the the you have an opinion on um that the best option or the best the best way to proceed in terms of getting this done tomorrow.

If if council um gave you all the money that you needed um and just said go do this, Claude, um what would be the most expeditious way to do this?

The most expeditious way would be for us to hire an an outside company uh that has experience in doing these kind of installations on a on a fast track basis, because right now we're doing these installations in-house.

We're using our own teams to to do the installation.

So if we were able to to hire a contractor that has experience in doing these kind of projects of installing these these digital meters and installing the AMI, of doing the data integration, that's an important piece of this is the data integration between the digital meters and the AMI and our billing system to do the project management, can bring in the resources with enough teams to get um thousands of meters done uh per month rather than thousands per year, that would be the most expeditious way to do it.

All right, and but and I meant to ask in the process and command center is too big of a word, but does this all end with some type of command center some office where there's screens available where people where staff are monitoring this?

Is that is that part of the overlaying technology?

Not not really, although I love the visual.

Um it it it would just allow our our utility accounts, the utility billing team to um to to have this information at hand uh so that when customers call in, they'd be would be able to have the information at hand.

Okay, Claude, thank you very much.

Um all that is building too.

I I would like to at least consider and make one of the options.

I um that the the risk of uh of possibly undoing something councils in the past have done and I like tremendously.

Um this one project seems like it has overlaying benefits and should be done sooner rather than later.

And um and actually has a payback to it.

And so I appreciate the fact that that when we look at projects like this, we bond half and pay cash for half.

Um I would not be opposed to looking at bonding this project.

It's not a huge project.

Um but I I think that that um if um if Tom and his team were to look at the the finances of this, I think you would find this project um funds itself as um as it as it moves through its life cycle.

So I I wanted to put that on the table that that getting this done.

Um this is this is something that that uh that I am glad that we have taken on.

Um I think that that the sooner we do it the better, and uh and I think that all options should be considered in in uh in getting it done tomorrow.

Claude, thanks for your work.

Um Rob, thanks for for considering this and making this important and Fred, thanks for the the work that you did on uh on getting us here, Chair.

Thanks for your time.

Thank you.

Vice Chair Floyd.

Thank you.

I'm gonna uh pick up exactly where uh council member Harding left off.

I think uh we've probably been um saying similar things much of this time.

I just want to get clarification um on one thing Councilmember Harding just said uh I don't this is probably Rob or Claude uh about uh project funding itself over time.

I think the implications that because there's more unbillable water capture uh that we have more revenue into the system after we do this.

Is that the implication?

I I I can't speak for council member Harding or what his um you know what he was referencing there, but if that is the case, what I would say is that I would personally be concerned about that because if we're generating more revenue from more accurate reading, then we may want to consider reducing or lowering rates, you know, as opposed to just taking in that additional revenue.

So it it it may be revenue neutral.

Okay.

I do think that that is uh worthwhile points as well though, because I reducing rates is one of our goals as well.

So okay, just wanted to sort of have that out uh that specific question.

Um some of the stuff's already been touched on that I have uh but I guess to administration when we're soliciting um uh additional bids uh are we contemplating different types of bids like because we've talked about meters as a service.

Um are we soliciting like a contractor's claude described as well?

Is that the case?

Thank you, council member.

Um we're currently working on that public notice um that would requ allow us to move forward to the the competitive um process.

And uh we are drafting that to open it up for people to propose a way for us to accomplish this using any kind of innovative or or available funding mechanisms so that it so that it kind of broadens the the scope so that if somebody has a different funding mechanism than what has been presented in the proposal we have, that they could bring that forward to us and then we can compare all of them.

Okay.

Um I appreciate that.

Uh I think I'd uh also like to know uh are we still considering a path forward in which we continue to self-perform and we accelerate it, or are there limitations to that?

If you could speak to that.

Yes.

So um my staff and I would like to move forward with hiring somebody to come in to take it over so that we're no longer self-performing.

Because there are limitations to self-performing and just just due to bandwidth of of our staff.

Um and so would whether regardless of how this particular unsolicited uh process works out, we're still gonna move forward with trying to find a way to bring somebody in to do that for us.

Um right now, one of the things we are looking at, of course, is that we we we do have the geo bond coming up, and that that may offer a method for us to to provide the funding to do the work more quickly than is currently in our CIP budget.

Okay.

Um yeah.

That makes sense.

Um, I'll just take a step back and tell everyone the way that I'm viewing this.

This is uh like the unsolicited proposal we received uh versus um I guess just hiring a contractor that's capable of doing it, in my mind is is just a choice of financial mechanism.

Um and which one is more efficient for the city financially is what I'm thinking about uh and you know, I think honestly, self-performance in my experience has often been the most uh efficient if we uh giving a number of factors, but like uh just on its face, self-performance is often most financially efficient, but I do recognize that we would have limitations to actually like expanding the installation very quickly.

Um, I mean, if there's a possibility for maybe uh additional self-performance that also brings in a contractor to try to keep the cost as low as possible, that's what's in my mind.

Um because you know, I've um just like to do this in like a financially uh responsible way.

Um I think I'll leave it there for now because you know, we had the P3 presentation, which was interesting.

I did take issue with some of the uh perspective that was listed in it um around financial structure, economic efficiencies and risk transfer.

But y'all have heard that uh from me before, so I'll leave it for today.

Um but I would like to see us move forward with um something that is both financially feasible and time uh and increases the time as fast as possible.

And I'll end with saying that uh same thing as council member Harding.

This is so important because of what we had we we've had go on in our city, not just recently, but my entire time I've been here at least, um, that I'm willing to uh step away from uh the way that we are doing bonding within the utility right now uh so that we can really get this issue taken care of.

This is so important because of what we had we've had go on in our city, not just recently, but my entire time I've been here at least, um, that I'm willing to uh step away from uh the way that we are doing bonding within the utility right now uh so that we can really get this issue taken care of, and my preference would be for us to move to a simple more simple financial mechanism than what was in the unsolicited proposal, but I'm willing to uh evaluate all of that on its face before making that decision.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Vice Chair.

Councilmember Gafford.

Thank you, Chair, and uh I am actually gonna go back to Fred.

Thank you for your presentation.

Uh I also just want to thank you.

I know that this was short notice for you, and so thank you for making yourself available to us today and also for putting together the PowerPoint presentation.

I think that one thing that um I would like to touch on is uh in an email that you had sent on February 18th after you had your meeting with the administration and with legal, you laid out a flow of the three, there were three of them actually.

Um so I'm a little curious as to why you gave us, you know, in this email three different workflows, but it was specific to the statute and the um different options between doing the notice and the two public hearings.

So would you just real quickly be able to synopsis, you know, we know what the um the notice period would look like, and I think that there's a range of time.

Um so maybe that's one question that you could answer on the notice portion, but on the public hearing portion, could you just lay out real quickly what that would look like if city council um asked the administration to go that route?

Yeah, I'd be happy to.

So the reason there's three flow charts that I'm a critic of the strategy because I don't think, which is often true with legislation, how that actually gets implemented in real life, you know, which is what we all do for a living.

Um so if you if you look at the statutory requirements, and that got layered in in 2024, those those public hearings, um, how that would actually unfold in real time is something we give a lot of thought to because clients need to do it.

Um so what those three flows represent are alternative ways to meet the statutory requirements to have those hearings.

The statute doesn't drive or dictate when those happen or how they fit with the other things that the government's doing anyway under the statute.

So that's what those represent.

Um again, there are the the statute before 2024 imposed a lot of requirements on the government about the findings that you need to make in order to do this kind of deal.

So that public interest finding is just layered into that without saying when that happens.

So those are alternative paths to satisfying the statutory requirements just at different stages in time.

Okay.

So and then if you choose to advertise the statute did say uh does say um how long that period should be.

Quite often the legally required time for advertised solicitation is super short.

Um, I think at the state level, it was like you know, 10 days for you know, anything need to be competitively solicited.

In reality, things take more time than that.

Um so the this statute, the P3 statute has a range that goes from like three weeks to four months, and then it also says, unless you think more or less time is makes good sense.

So it it gives you a lot of latitude, and that's usually a function of how complicated is this.

You put yourself in this industry shoes, how how much effort, when is it going to come to their attention, how are you gonna advertise it, how much time are they gonna need to put together something that's helpful?

Um you're not you know ideally you're not just checking a box where we have to advertise, so just do the minimum out of time, which would you know be 10 days historically?

It's how much time do they need to give us something that's really gonna help the overall process?

So that's the the range you would look at.

So the statute has a range in it, but it also gives you discretion to do more or less.

Okay, and then the two public hearing process.

Um what would that look like?

And uh maybe McCall or Janine.

Um, I don't know, like let's say today City Council wanted to have a conversation about encouraging uh the administration to go with the two public hearing process for expediency's sake.

Um what could that look like?

Say that happened today, how long would we need to notice that first public hearing and then the subsequent second public hearing?

So the the first public hearing could you could have a special meeting or it could fit into your regular schedule or just be on the agenda.

The factors to consider would be the ones that that were on the slide.

Um, and then at that the thing about the first public, why the reason there's two, at the first one, you have to capture public comment, and then you come back and have your second one, and then when you publish, hey, we've decided to go forward without competition, you you need to see.

Here's how we've addressed each of these factors which were on that slide, and that last factor was public comment.

That that's why there's two.

So you could decide now, let's do it that way.

Your next public hearing could be on the agenda.

You could give a chance for public comment, and then at your second public hearing, you could just address those factors, including the public comment, publish your notice and go that path.

So we're talking about 45 to 60 days starting to be.

I don't know your meeting schedule, but yeah, I mean, maybe before the council break.

Legal.

Yeah, it just the statute just says that you have to hold a dually noticed public meeting.

I don't, you know, I'm not seeing anything that prescribes um again any other requirements or time frames on that.

And again, just could be special meetings.

The factors.

Okay.

And so that I'm clear, if that were the route that the administration and council wanted to take, that is not entering into an agreement.

That would simply be authorizing the beginnings of negotiations with the proposer, correct?

Right.

If you could that would be the fourth chevron on the bottom of the slide there.

So there's still a negotiation process, and usually this is iterative, you know, multiple steps.

So in the statutory language, it's an interim agreement, and then a comprehensive agreement.

The proposal speaks of a development agreement, so they also have proposed an iterative process.

Okay.

Yeah, I mean, I think that you know, a timeline like that, we talk about expediency, and I think a timeline like that, knowing that that type of process would not bind the administration or city council to anything.

What it would do, in fact, is it would give the public two opportunities to come before us and speak to us about the merits of how they feel the process is.

It would give us an opportunity to have those discussions.

If we all decided after those two public hearings that we wanted to move forward, then it enters into these negotiations, which allows for there to be more conversation with city council.

And there is an uh item that council member givens put on the PSNI agenda back in September of last year.

That could be an opportunity for us to discuss those negotiations along the way.

And if council at any point in time during those negotiations determined that this was not the right path to go forward, then that could end.

And at that point, we could continue to look at what you know, potentially doing an RFP for this could look like.

And if the GO bond passes, great.

Now we have even more resources to be able to do more.

But if it doesn't, at least we're moving this down the road and we're getting closer for people.

And I would just remind you that this city, this council administration, this one, the one before, we have never been afraid to utilize state statute when it allows us to, even when other people have not done it yet.

House Bill 1339, the Yigby legislation.

We were the first in the state to take advantage of those because those are affordability issues.

Those help us to be able to build more affordable housing, help people be able to live here.

This is an affordability issue.

This continues to be something that residents ask of us to help us be able to keep people affordably living in our city.

So I would just ask you to seriously consider as we continue this conversation what the benefits of the expedient process could be and how fruitful it could be for us to be able to get into negotiation sooner rather than later so we can accomplish this goal.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Councilmember Driscoll.

Thank you.

Um thank you, Councilmember Gabbard, for bringing this forward so that we could get this update.

Um learn more about the process behind the process.

Is for the administration.

So I'm trying to figure out what goal is being met by going through this process as opposed to whatever process you've been in.

And so maybe if you can tell us where you're at with this and what timeline the administration is on for this, because it sounds to me like the goal is to get this moving.

Are you actively moving this forward?

City council is not involved in the administration's selection process or evaluation process.

Usually something is brought to us once um uh selection has been made.

I could see some benefits of utilizing this tool to help push things forward.

But do we need to?

So I I want to I want to hear where you guys are at and why we might consider just trusting you to continue with your process.

Thank you, council member.

As I mentioned earlier, the public works team staff are very anxious and desirous to move this forward more quickly.

Um we have a path that we are working on now that is baked into our current processes, baked into our CIP.

So we are moving forward, but just not as quickly as as we would like to be able to do so.

Over the past year, we've been looking at several different ways to allow us to do that, um, working with legal to look at different options, um, including you know co-op uh using co-op um contracts and so forth, um, and and just trying to investigate those options that would allow us to move forward more quickly.

Since we received this this unsolicited proposal, um, because this is new to us, this process is new to us, and it's and it's well prescribed or maybe not so well prescribed by the statute.

We we have wanted to make sure that we are moving forward in a way that um that that does not put us at risk of violating that statute.

So that unfortunately, that that lack of experience with the statute is frankly making us go a little bit slower than we normally would under the normal procedures we have.

Um I have been working, as I mentioned, on a um a draft for that notice uh with the intention of getting that notice out and um have been running that that draft through all the different departments that need to look at it finance, procurement, legal, and so forth.

Um, and so that's where we are.

We have put that on hold um in order for us to have this conversation today.

But um uh you know, we're we're we're committed to continue to move forward with putting that draft out.

Um what needs to be figured out in order for us to do this more quickly is how are we going to take the current CIP that we have spread across five years?

How are we going to accelerate that to spread it across a shorter time frame?

So we're spending the same amount of money but in a shorter time frame.

And so trying to figure out how to do that is is probably the biggest challenge that we have.

So what's the plan to fix that?

Like what kind of a time frame are we looking at?

I agree with with Vice Chair Floyd that um a more straightforward approach to financing this is the best way.

Um I wasn't thrilled about what I was seeing with the other options.

But the money's got to come from somewhere.

And um, I understand that it it it does involve a shuffling of priorities with the money that we do have.

I don't want that to get in the way of of progress.

Um yeah, we we we agree, and I you know, I think there's some options here that you know we're gonna be looking at rearranging that CIP, right?

Reprioritizing some of the projects.

We were also thankful for Councilmember Harding's comments about uh debt first cash for this particular project.

That's something else we're looking at.

And frankly, we want to see what we get back on these proposals and see you know what type of of proposals we get and what those funding mechanisms are.

So, you know, what we want really is a competitive process that gets us what we want in the most cost-effective manner in a timely fashion.

That's what we're trying to think about.

Yeah, and I I like the phased approach where you do some get those going.

I mean, that kind of helps to spread out the cost as well over time, right?

Yes.

I liked what I saw when I got when we received that unsolicited proposal.

And you know, we need this yesterday.

So I'm inclined to go along with a process where city council uses this mechanism to make sure that the ball continues to move forward.

I'm I've just been wondering do we really need it?

And I want to be able to trust that you guys are not wasting a single minute trying to get this out there and get this going because every month that goes by is another month when people have um potentially have um very inaccurate readings and very inaccurate bills.

So we we we know that there's a problem.

This is uh you know, we've been talking about before.

Um as council member gabbard said, it's you know, since before um the storms and everything.

And we've got a great solution right in front of us.

So I just need I just I really need reassurance one way or another that this is this is going to happen very soon.

Yeah, we we intend to move it forward, and I think you know, one of the benefits of the unsolicited proposal we've received is it's a mechanism to have an expedited competitive process and get uh competitive solicitations, and we're moving forward with it.

Okay, and we received this one in like second week of January.

I yeah, that that's roughly correct.

I think Councilmember Gabbard actually it's on the new business item.

January 14th.

Oh, yeah, sorry.

Okay.

So it took less time for the administration to put out a notice that they were going to um move forward with the unsolicited proposal for the historic gas plant district that was received in September.

So I think in this particular case, and I don't want to speak for the city attorney, but you know, I think they had some concerns about this P3 process in the state statute.

We wanted to engage outside council, and it's taking us some time as Claude said to work through it, but we feel like we're in a good place now.

Okay.

So um by if if you continue as as you have been, by what date could we be confident that um that that would be going out?

Good morning.

Claude is conferring with Stephanie Swinson, our procurement director.

And I think Claude had indicated that you know in the next couple of weeks we would have the um the uh uh the announcement on the street, so to speak.

Our intention would be to have 30 or 45 days for responses, then there would be an evaluation of the internal, you know, our internal team would evaluate those responses.

Um so I would say maybe 90 days um after we get those responses that we would be bringing something back to city council, maybe is that kind of a rough okay.

Starting when starting once we issue that um or get get the responses from right, but when is this gonna go out?

You can issue the notice for as I mentioned I I've put the notice draft on hold for right now.

Um once we once we come back to it, I'll review any final comments that I will receive from all the different parties, finalize that that that notice and then uh provide it to procurement.

And I and and as Tom mentioned, I was I was conferring uh with our our uh procurement director about how long it would take once I provide that notice to procurement to get it out on the street.

And Stephanie, I don't know whether you want to speak to that morning.

As soon as we receive the notice, we will publish it on open gov.

We'll make this a priority to get it out that day.

Okay, what might that day be?

Are we talking next week or next month?

Oh, not next month.

Uh next week or the week after.

I I'm I'm gonna be shooting for next week.

That's what I'm shooting for.

Um, and so again, I do need to do my due diligence and reveal the comments I receive from the other folks that we need to look at this, but once I have that done, um, then then I'll get it, I'll get it to procurement.

So my goal is next week.

Okay, great.

This isn't going to be cheap, and one of the benefits of going through the process that's being suggested here is um the opportunity for public engagement and comment and for um for people to learn what this is, what it means, and why we um want to pursue this option.

So I think we could benefit from that.

I'm looking at I'm looking at both ways here.

Um I don't see why we couldn't do both.

Um you've you've heard from some council members the sense of urgency about getting this done.

And so and sometimes we have to just be our branch of government to stand strong and say do not delay.

We want this, we want to push this forward and really get the public involved so that to together when we do make a decision when you do bring something to us, it won't be at that point that everyone's learning what's happening.

Um there will have been an ample opportunity for um learning about this.

So I I see an additional benefit to um going about things this way.

Although I I must say I appreciate um Claude that I I can tell that you have a sense of urgency about this as well, and that gives me a lot of confidence.

So thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you.

Councilmember Curtis.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um this is probably for you.

So we have 97,000 meters, right?

Yes, right-five thousand of them currently digital.

Yes.

What I don't see in this proposal, and I know I'm getting into the weeds a little bit, but I promise I'll get somewhere.

Is are we replacing all 97,000 or just the ones that aren't digital?

Just the ones that aren't digital.

Okay.

So it talks about a four to five dollar monthly charge, right?

That's essentially the finance charge for them upfronting the cost of the 72,000 meters that still need to be done.

Is that right?

Correct.

Okay.

And so then it talks about at the end of that 20-year term, we can buy it at fair market value.

Correct.

What's the fair market value?

That has not been determined.

Yeah, I I oh oh they they made it.

They made it uh there's an estimate uh council member.

Is the estimate today brand new, or is it 20 years into it?

Um it's 20 year estimate.

It was 1.2 all right.

Erica, I'm seeing 2.2.

So I'll just direct council to the page of 2.2.

I missed it.

I apologize.

I don't see what page this is.

Page number eight of the proposal in a blue box.

It says end of term fair market value.

Oh, thank you.

2.2 million.

I skipped the pictures.

Got it.

And what's the lifespan of the system?

So the digital meters are warranted for 20 years with a but but it's a prorated warranty.

So for the first 10 years, it's it's full 100% warranty.

Starting in year 11, it starts reducing by 10% each year until after 20 years.

It's so we would essentially be starting this all over again in 20 years.

And so what I see what we have set in our CIP for this, but if you do this all in one chunk, what's the did they give us the finance number that essentially the new 72,000 meters cost today?

No, sir.

What you see in the in the proposal is what we have.

So the this is where I'm I'm struggling with I I totally get wanting to expedite this and get it done fast.

I I think everybody wants to do that.

Nobody is going to disagree with that.

But when we're talking about 77 million dollars of payments, that's without the escalate the 3% escalator, a 2.2 million dollar purchase with then having to CIP it again.

I I'm struggling to go, we've and then not knowing what it's going to look like to 30-year bond it for us.

And by the way, I totally agree with Councilmember Harding.

For the first time in the five years I've been here, I do think we should look at possibly coming off of 5050.

But I would rather it be not to pay for something new, but to keep either rates the same or lower rates.

And so that that's where I'm struggling.

It's like I want to see if there's other ideas out here to see to get this done.

Don't get me wrong.

I I think this is a good proposal.

I think it's strong.

I I am a little worried about some of the financing, but I also want to see to Claude's point, the creative financing.

The last thing I'll say is I actually agree right with Council or Vice Chair Floyd, where at face value self-performing of this, because right now I think and correct me if I'm wrong, we have 25 million dollars set aside for AMI.

We're talking about 77 million dollars here.

25 million.

If if we can self-perform it for 25 million, you know, that's a massive gap.

I get that we don't want to self-perform.

We want to get this, we want to get some of it off of us.

I'm that there is a cost to that, and I'm okay with that.

But that's a massive gap.

And that's where I'm that's really where I'm struggling here.

Is like, is there somebody that can is there somebody that can tighten the gap?

And and maybe it's them because we go and comp we go competitive.

And so that's that's where my struggle is.

And I and uh I appreciate council member Driscoll wanting to know the urgency of this and feel the urgency of it.

And so, you know, it's funny because I agree with a lot of what a lot of my colleagues have said.

I'm just putting it in different buckets, I think, the way the way I'm looking at it.

And so, which I don't think surprises anybody that I went straight to the the financing of it all.

Um so that's kind of where I'm at.

I I very much appreciate the update.

I'm glad I I'm glad that we're being kept in the loop.

So thank you, Councilmember Gabbard.

And uh, and I think that's really important when we're talking about this because it's certainly something we're hearing um from the residents.

Um can continue.

We're continuing to hear from from residents, and so uh that I think that's just where I'm at at this point.

It's I think there's a there's a large gap between what we see to to see it cost to get it done comparing to what this proposal is.

We can tighten that gap and shift some of what I'll call responsibility.

I'm not gonna call it risk, responsibility to to get help us get this done.

I'm willing to pay for that.

Uh, but I I want to make sure that it's not a $50 million gap because that's where we're at.

And again, that's without the three percent kicker um annually.

So I I'll leave it there for now.

But um, I I really appreciate the the update and all the input from across the departments and administration.

Thank you very much, Chair.

Thank you.

Councilmember Fake Sanders.

Thank you, and good morning, everyone.

Um it's good to know that you know we have council members that have their different issues.

So, Councilmember Gertis, thank you for your math mind and and your financial um feedback on this.

But I I just wanted to, my comments are gonna be brief.

Um, I just want to thank Councilmember Gabbard, number one, for again acknowledging the fact that there's two ways that we can actually accomplish this.

Um, I also want to thank legal for your wanting to move with caution in regards to where that statute is, because although I do love our um fortitude and wanting to move forward in in spite of when it comes down to something of this magnitude, I'm glad that we were able to have this update.

Um, and I'm glad that we're having the opportunity to have the additional conversation.

I'm also glad for the administration for saying that you do want to go outside, you know, that you know, self-performing this is the slow but steady um and yet cost efficient way to do it.

And when we're looking at what the services we're trying to provide for our constituents, of course, the fastest way in their minds would be the best way.

Um so I was sitting here thinking, wow, I actually agree with Vice Chair Floyd.

Um, you know, and in I really didn't, I'm saying I'm like, gosh, I really agree with Vice Chair Floyd in this.

And the reason why I say that is because I'm the one that wants to get it done.

Um I'm glad we're having the conversation.

I'm glad that you know we're actually putting voice to a desired action as to how we want to see it.

And I too agree that if we can kind of mix it, um, you know, if we can do it and they provide some of the um, you know, the the installations for us, that would be great.

And in hearing council member Harding, if we get this done faster, and I hope I'm understanding this outcome.

If we get it done faster, we'll receive the revenues from it prior to the five-year gap of us self-implementing this.

Am I correct with that, Clause?

Because if we we're it's gonna take a large investment up front, but we'll see the returns of that investment faster.

There'll be less water that is leaking, um, uh, particularly on the customer side because we get notified of it more quickly.

And so the less water that is leaked, water that is leaked is not water that is used, it's wasted water.

But we've had to go through the process of treating it and distributing it wasted water.

So any time that we can reduce the amount of water that is not being used is is a benefit to the customers and to the city.

Okay, okay.

So that again, my comments are just for clarification on me uh for me moving forward, but um again, this has been a great update because we've been having conversations in regards, and um I'm just glad that we're having this conversation.

And and I hope that I don't want because I was we were here in 2024 when it initially happened, and unfortunately, certain things don't move as quickly.

Um I would like to see some things move a little bit faster than they're actually moving.

So when you go back to having your negotiations and you decide how you want to move forward um with this process, and then you bring it um back to us because I don't want to rush and then regret it.

We never know.

We just don't know what tomorrow is gonna bring.

Um, so I just don't want us to postpone a process only for us to have to start all over again because we're 2026.

You know, we've been talking about this for over a year now.

Um, and so um I'm looking forward to the next conversation, and thank you for your presentation, sir.

Um, and I do appreciate all of my colleagues' insight into this.

So thank you, Chair.

Thank you.

And the benefit of going uh share uh after everyone now, I want to, yeah, I'm gonna speak before so because that way everybody's spoken, and there's a benefit of that because my colleagues have said a lot of great stuff.

Um first of all, thank you, Councilmember Gabbard, for bringing this issue.

It's clearly a an important issue to all our citizens, and clearly administration has put it had a keen eye on this because they've been trying to figure out what the best path forward is due to all the issues that were mentioned, fiscal council member Gertis, Councilmember Um Harding and Vice Chair Floyd.

You know, the issue of what is the most prudent way fiscally to do this is I think extremely important because at the end of the day, that cost gets passed down to our customers.

So fast may be great, but people also care what they're paying, and there is that rub that we're trying to deal with.

And so that's where I'm at.

Look, um, competitive processes, I think important number one, because I will tell you this, when you think about what's best for the public interest, it hashes the benefits to the public, the financial structure, the qualifications, all those things get hashed out in a competitive process.

So I think we all get great benef you know information from that.

So I'm not gonna sit here as a public official and say, no, this is actually extremely important because we're talking about utility bills and what ends up in the bottom lump number.

And so if that works out where you send out the public notice and then you lay out the process, great.

Whether we do this in-house, self-perform or not, I have to rely on the experts to provide me this information.

Some of the questions we're asking are things we don't know because you all know.

The pros and cons.

What are the benefits?

What's is this financing package better than this one?

I don't have that outline.

I I've reviewed a lot of the documents that council member gabbard asked for.

I'm kind of getting it, but I don't have that chart that tells me specifically, which is kind of what the experts do.

What are the pros and cons of this offer or us doing it in-house or whatever?

And I think we actually need that to be able to go forward.

And by the way, this is the purview of administration.

It really is, because that's why you're the subject matter experts.

So I think what you're getting from everyone is the urgency of this.

I do understand.

Look, this unsolicited proposal came in and threw a wrench because clearly you are going through a process, an RFP was drafted.

Then I mean there was a shifting of back and forth of what's happening and where are we going on this?

I think at this point, knowing the urgency and we're hearing from city council, everybody needs to figure out okay, what is the best method to do this, and what's most cost efficient for our citizens and what makes sense financially too.

Because fast, it could cost a lot more money.

And I'm sorry, in 20 years, you need new meters and replacing all the meters the same year.

Guess what happens when they're all old?

You have to replace them all at the same time.

And are you gonna have the manpower then?

There's a reason why things are done, you know, kind of piecemeal, because you have to be able to do it too.

I'm not an expert, but that's what I'm thinking.

So I I want to, I think you're probably gonna have to get back to us and kind of give us that information, but uh the message is the urgency, and um thank you again, Councilmember Gabbard, for bringing this forward.

Councilmember Gabbard.

Final thoughts.

Yes, just wanted to thank all of you for the conversation today.

This was exactly why I wanted us to have this in the sunshine, so that everyone had the opportunity really to kind of see where everybody's at on this.

Because I know I've been having meetings, I've been having conversations.

I've spoken with Claude and Rob and legal, but I don't know what all of you are talking about, right?

And how in depth you are all getting into it.

So I really just appreciate where everyone's coming from, and with all things that I think we try to do here on City Council, we try to find the place where we do all agree and kind of work from there.

And I think we all agree that expediency is the name of the game, and making sure that we are responding to this.

So again, I will go back to Councilmember Driscoll's point.

When Claude, respectfully, I heard you say that you put this on hold because you were going to wait for this.

That's only been four days.

Right.

That's so it's not really on hold.

Right.

Right?

Like you you had an email on the 28th, the day before I filed this item.

You were still working on it.

It's not on hold.

Um, so be fair to yourself.

Um, you've continued to work on it.

And so I believe that you um kind of know where you want to go with it.

I do.

And do you think that realistically city council could get an email on the morning of say April 17th, two weeks from tomorrow, that the notice has been that it's gone out.

I will take your challenge and shoot for that goal.

Yes.

And how many days are we going to give to respond?

Because 21 to 120 is what the statute allows.

Correct.

How many days are we going to get?

Proposing 30.

Okay.

So by end of May, we should know how many proposals we have, and we'll be able to see what that next step might be.

It'll likely be just because we know that that the the advertising process, it has to be advertised in certain venues.

Sometimes when we submit it for that advertisement, it doesn't run the same time we submit it.

So we've found that sometimes we may lose a few days.

That's okay.

And so it I would I would be cautious and say by early to mid-June, not by the end of May.

Wait a minute.

Wait a minute.

Nope, nope, nope.

I'm doing my math correct.

Looking at the calendar.

By the end of May.

Thank you.

Yeah, I was trying to run through the calendar in my brain.

Yeah, by the end of May, I think that's safe.

Okay, great.

So I'm gonna look forward to Councilmember Given's uh new business item at PSNI to be a fantastic update.

Very good.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, City Council.

Thank you, Councilmember Givens.

Thank you very much, Chair, and thanks to each of you uh for your input and your feedback.

Um to your point, Councilmember Gabbard.

I do look forward to us continuing this conversation.

Um this is something that's kind of been sitting out there in limbo for a while.

So um, as my colleagues have said, and I wasn't gonna say much, but I did have to provide my two cents.

Um, time is of the essence.

Um and if not now, then we cannot continue kicking the can down the road.

I think we have a great solution in front of us, um, but I'm willing to discuss what the RFP might look like, how we move forward from here.

Um financing is very important.

And you know, we have to talk about being good fiscal stewards of taxpayer funds, but at the same time, as the legislative body, our constituents elected us to provide services that provide them with relief that make their lives easier.

And when you think about how costs may be passed down to them, the last thing I want to do is burden our ratepayers because they're already burdened.

Um, but I do want to give them the opportunity to provide feedback on what they want to do next.

Um, because this is not an issue that's gonna fix itself.

We have to start having the conversation.

Um, and I think what we need to do is start talking to the experts, get their opinions.

I I don't know how you all make your decisions, but I rely heavily on facts.

Um, but I also need feed and the feedback will come from the public, and if we give them the opportunity to provide that feedback in a public setting, and for us as elected officials to have that dialogue in the sunshine, um, I think it's beneficial to all of us.

Um, so I look forward to us moving this conversation forward and picking up where we left off here in PSNI.

So thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Councilmember Givens.

Councilmember Driscoll.

Thank you.

Just quickly, do we know when that PSNI meeting or when this will be on a PSN?

Well, it's not gonna make it for the next couple of months because we're absolutely loaded, and that's been the issue.

And we've asked administration and Claude, we've reached out on this item specifically as to when they were ready, and that was months ago, and they weren't ready at the time.

Then other things come up on PSI.

Um, and we have the bond issue that's coming up on PSI and all these other things that have time requirements because of referendums that have to be heard in the next few.

So it's not gonna happen in the next couple months.

Thank you for your honesty with that.

I I've it's nothing if not off.

Yeah, I mean, we've been we try to put it so nicely.

I try to put everything as fast as possible.

Okay, so and by the way, we've had three items on PSI, as people know in the next one, and I had Councilmember Curtis give me 50 minutes of his meeting so I can load up my PSI.

I was just gonna add that.

Thank you, Councilmember Gerdis.

And I'm aware that some of that may or may not be mine, so gratitude all around.

Um I would like just looking at the calendar, we on um April 16th, we have a city council meeting that starts at 130.

Um, what I'd like to suggest um is that we have a similar report item on the agenda for that, just for you to provide an update on the 16th, you should be ready to go, if not out on the street by then.

Um, but just a very brief update so that we feel that we are kept in the loop.

Of course, you know, whatever happens before then, but I feel like two weeks from now is a good point.

Um at which we could reasonably expect an update, whether that is that it is out or that it's going out the next day, or wherever you're at in the process, we want to be tuned in and have the opportunity to ask questions in a public setting.

Does that sound fair?

Yeah, well, absolutely.

If if that's what city council would like, we're happy to do that.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilmember Vice Chair Floyd.

Thank you.

I just quickly wanted to uh confirm and uh reiterate my support for uh when we're doing the analysis of all sorts of proposals for this.

We also are uh analyzing uh expedited self-performance and uh expanded self-performance or some sort of combination of self-performance and some other method.

Uh I heard what I think was that that was going to happen.

I just wanted to reiterate that, and uh I see Rob, you uh nodding your head in agreement, so I'll take that as a good sign.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Well, thank you, Mr.

Springer, for sending there for an hour.

Yes.

Um I should have told you you could sit down, but you were like a good attorney, you just stood at the podium.

Um maybe make my time worth it, and I just want to make sure there's no misimpression for Vice Chair Floyd.

The the slide about the the risk transfer or the efficiency of the deal, what to consider, whether it's risk or responsibility, as council member girders said.

The key there, like I I don't want you to miss this point.

Those are the theoretical advantages of certain kind of a deal.

So that's what you you know, people should be looking for.

And when you're deciding whether this makes sense or not, you're asking yourselves, is this true?

So I I don't want to give the impression that hey, every P3 has these advantages.

That's not true.

You know, that but if if it doesn't have those advantages, then it's probably not a good idea.

The point of that slide is this is what you're looking for when you're looking for efficiencies in the allocation.

And if it's not properly allocated, then don't do it that way, is kind of the real thrust of those slides.

So I just wanted to make sure that was clear.

Yeah, I appreciate that.

And I wasn't didn't mean it like anything about like specifically you were advocating for that.

I recognize that it's theoretical, and uh, you know, uh over the years of being here, I've pointed out where uh we anticipated or where another government anticipated that someone else was assuming risk, and that ended up not being the case in the end.

Uh and so it's sort of like a thing that I just bring up constantly at this point.

Um but yeah, I recognize that you're presenting us uh the basis for the statute and the theoretical behind it, and so yeah, I didn't mean to uh make it seem like I was saying that you were saying that that's always the case.

Right.

Yeah, thank you though.

Thank you.

Well, again, uh thank you, Mr.

Springer, for making your way from Tallahassee all the way down here and uh providing us uh all the information priority was very helpful and it led to a very robust discussion as you can see.

So thank you, and thank you, Stephanie Claude and Tom for being here.

Okay.

Next up, we move to public hearings.

E1, an ordinance amending section 2-209, subsection A of the city code to clarify provisions related to the code of silence.

Uh Clerk, you could please read the ordinance.

Propose ordinance number uh 632H.

An ordinance amending section 2-209A of the city code to clarify provisions related to the cone of silence and providing an effective date.

And we do not have any cards on this.

Move approval.

We have a motion and a second.

Clerk, if you can open a machine for voting.

Council members, please enter your votes.

Seeing that all present council members have voted.

Clerk, please tally announce the vote.

Thank you, Stephanie.

Next up, we have E2 in ordinance approving the vacation of a dead-end 20-foot alley, abutting lots 3, 4, and 5 located at 1013, Dr.

Martin Luther King Jr.

South.

Clerk.

In the Alma Heights reveal uh revised subdivision generally located at 1013 Darton Martha Dot and Martin Luther King Jr.

Street South, setting forth conditions for the vacation to become effective and and providing for an effective date.

And we do not have any cars on this item as well.

Thank you.

Councilmember Driscoll.

I I don't know if you wanted to thank you.

Yes.

Um thank you for your work on this.

I just had I had a quick question for the applicant who's present, if that's all right.

Um good morning, Mr.

Barquette.

Good morning.

How was it?

Um and and before I do that, I also I want to thank the Campbell Park Neighborhood Association for um voicing their support for this.

John, um with the recommendation, there were five um conditions for approval.

Um, and without going through them with everybody, they seem pretty simple, but I just wanted to confirm with you that you don't feel that you'll have any issues with satisfying those conditions.

Uh I do not uh to get to replat.

It's a consolidation of lots, it's um granting utility easements.

Um I do not.

Okay, great.

And I want to take the opportunity to thank you for all that you're doing for this um this part of our city for the um neighborhoods because this affects multiple neighborhoods in uh such a positive way, and um I'm really um excited to see your vision uh becoming reality here.

And um I'm really um excited to see your vision uh becoming reality here.

Well we can't do it without the dais without administration, without staff.

This may seem like a really small thing, but the the reality is you put these small things together, um, and you really do start to improve safety, connectivity, and the reality is you know, positive healthy outcomes.

90% of that is based on where you are, it's your community.

Really, only 10% of it is driven by health care.

So, you know, these things are important, so I appreciate you guys you know taking your time and consideration.

And that goes to past dice as well.

I mean, we've been working on things that are connecting the dots.

Um, you know, leveraging, you know, activating spaces under highways as public parks, leveraging that to win um USDOT grants using those funds to open back up the South Side, uh, you know, converting MLK from one-way to two-way traffic.

You know, the simplest things is push button crosswalks, um, you know, crosswalks for public bus stops, public uh crosswalks to connect communities and allow kids that get off the bus to safely you know get across five lanes of traffic, all these things matter.

So thank you.

And this goes back to previous dais.

I mean, this is all working together for a decade to make this a reality.

So thank you all for your time.

All right, thank you so much.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Councilmember Gibbons.

I just want to thank you so much, Mr.

Burkett, for what you're doing.

Uh, you know, we've had conversations regarding this area.

Uh this area has been infested with crime for a number of years, and I think this investment will go a long way to your point providing a great public safety area for children who are growing up in that neighborhood.

And I know your plan is long-term, and you're gonna be doing so much more in that area, and I think this is just the beginning.

So thank you so much.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you.

I'll entertain the motion.

Move the approval.

Second.

Motion and second, clerk.

If you can open a machine for voting, council members, please enter your vote.

Seeing that all present council members has voted, clerk, please tally announce the vote.

Adam Chair, the motion to approve regid item E2 passes unanimously.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Mercat for being here.

Thank you, Cheryl.

Thank you, everyone that joined us for these items.

Next up, we have open forum.

We have no speakers, so we move to announcements.

Councilmember Gurtis.

Yeah.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um it's opening day on Monday.

And uh, as much as I I'll speak for myself, I am celebrating uh baseball.

Uh I just want to one more massive thank you to Beth and Raul and our entire city team, uh, all of our partners.

I mean, just what a massive undertaking.

I'm just so thankful for them and the work that they've done.

Frankly, the sacrifices that they've had to make in order uh to get us what is nothing less than compliant.

And so uh I just I I can't say it enough.

I'm just super proud of them.

Uh James, thank you for your leadership in that department, Rob, mayor, just council.

Uh and the I know it's difficult decisions on allocating that type of money for a building we don't know what's going to happen to.

And so I'm just I'm just extremely proud of everybody that had a that had a part in it and and selfishly very excited to have uh baseball back in St.

Petersburg.

So I just I didn't want to miss an opportunity to say thank you when I know people are showing up in droves on Monday afternoon uh to celebrate the opening of Tropicana Field.

Uh second, and um almost just as important, no, just as important, it's uh Jackie's birthday today.

Yeah, and she was smart and wasn't here for it.

And so, which I think I've done two years in a row now, has not been here for my birthday.

But uh she doesn't we don't have to embarrass her on the dais.

We'll just do it on the television.

So we're gonna sing happy birthday to Jackie.

Uh happy birthday to you.

Happy birthday to you to you.

Happy birthday, dear Jackie.

Happy birthday to you.

Thank you, madam chair.

Thank you.

Councilmember Givens.

Thank you, Chair.

Uh I just wanted to make mention um that we lost a colleague, um, sister in this fight for social justice.

Uh she was vice mayor of the city of Coral Springs.

Um, Vice Mayor Nancy Mateira Bowen, uh good friend.

Umfortunately, she passed away tragically yesterday.

And I just want to take a moment to let her colleagues know and her family know that they are in our thoughts and prayers.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you.

Councilmember Floyd.

Thanks.

Vice Chair Floyd.

I first thank you, Councilmember Gibbons, for that.

I read that news yesterday and it was awful.

I wanted to mention something that I was excited about.

We're sending people back to the moon.

And I'll the launch was yesterday.

Everyone I know saw it except for me.

I didn't touch it either.

Yeah.

So anyway, uh I'm excited.

Uh, you know, my background's in uh electrical and aerospace engineering, and uh it's a great achievement for humanity.

So thank you.

It was yesterday I dropped off my daughter at tennis, and everybody was out at the park, and I was like, what is everybody doing?

I just missed it.

I was delighted.

You're looking out in the water and there is nothing.

And then I realized, oh, okay, that's what they're doing, and there's a rocket launch.

So thank you for mentioning that.

Um thank you all for first of all.

I I have to say, uh, last meeting um I thought council did such a fantastic job at being so engaged and asking so many thoughtful questions.

And I just want to thank you all again again for doing that.

Um, and the same thing today.

We had a very robust conversation, and I really do appreciate um when I hear from all my council members here and my colleagues, um, you know, their points of view, and we have these thoughtful discuss discussions, and we've had this for uh it's been two meetings in a row, and I just wanted to acknowledge that and how much it's appreciated.

So thank you.

And with that being said, meetings adjourned.

Thank you, everyone.