[1. Call to Order]
[00:00:09]
>> GOOD EVENING EVERYONE I WOULD LIKE TO IS CALLED THE CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP FOR THE CITY OF PARKLAND OCTOBER 20, 2021
PLEASE RISE FOR THE PLEDGE. >> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OR AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND
>> OKAY WHO IS GOING TO DO THE PRESENTATION?
[4A. American Rescue Plan Fund Distribution]
IF. >> ACTUALLY WE ARE GOING TO BE PRESENTING FROM VARIOUS STAFF MEMBERS.
I WOULD LIKE TO DO JUST DO A QUICK KICK OFF SO EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS WHERE WE ARE IN THIS PROCESS.
I WOULD NEED SOMEONE TO FLIP THE SLIDES FOR ME.
SO AS THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT AS REFUTE WAS OUR PATH, WE WILL RECEIVE A 17.1 MILLION. TO DATE WE ALREADY RECEIVED 50%.
SO WE HAVE HALF OF THAT IN OUR HANDS TODAY.
SO, THIS IS ONE OF THE MORE IMPORTANT SLIDES BECAUSE IT OUTLINES THE ELIGIBLE USES. SO ACCORDING TO THE TREASURY, WE CAN USE THE FUNDS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH AND ECONOMIC IMPACT PREMIUM PAY REVENUE LOSS AND INVESTMENT IN INFRASTRUCTURE.
I WILL TELL YOU WHEN STAFF GO THROUGH ALL OF THE SLIDES, THERE IS A LOT OF RESTRICTIONS THAT COME WITH EACH ONE OF THESE CATEGORIES. AND, ANOTHER BIG CRITICAL ELEMENT IN DECIDING WHAT WE CAN DO IS THE TIME REQUIREMENTS.
MONEY MUST BE INCURRED BY DECEMBER 31, I'M 2024.
SO THAT MEANS IT MUST BE COMMITTED.
IN ALL OR HOW DO YOU EVER WONDER SAY IT IS COMMITTED TO A PROJECT AND MONEY MUST BE PAID BY DECEMBER 21, 2026.
CITY GOVERNMENT DOES NOT PAY INVOICES UNLESS THE JOB IS ONE 100% COMPLETED. SO THAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT THAT THIS TIMING REQUIREMENT AND THE FEASIBILITY'S OF THESE PROJECTS CAN BE ACHIEVED WITHIN THIS TIMEFRAME.
AND THEN OF COURSE, THE USES WILL BE AUDITED IN THE TREASURY DOES ALWAYS SAY THAT THEY CAN PULL BACK ON THE FUNDS IF THEY DID NOT USE THEM CORRECTLY. THEN THE CITY LIABLE FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF ALL FUNDS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SECTION 603C. SO THAT IS THE OVERVIEW OF THE PLAN. NOW I WILL HAVE STAFF GO THROUGH THEIR SECTION AND DISCUSS THEIR DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS.
>> GOOD EVENING THANK YOU NANCY, FOR THE RECORD I AM THE FINANCE DIRECTOR. I WILL DOVETAIL OFF OF WHAT NANCY SAID. THIS IS THE FIRST STEP IN OUR PROCESS WITH THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN.
AS SHE SAID WE HAVE RECEIVED OUR FIRST EIGHT AND A HALF MILLION DOLLAR INSTALLMENT PAYMENT LAST WEDNESDAY.
SO THE MONEY IS IN THE BANK AND WE ARE READY TO ROCK AND ROLL.
SO FIRST USE THAT WE CAN DO IS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH AND ECONOMIC IMPACT. SO BASICALLY THE FIRST THING WE HAVE TO DO IS NOTIFY A NEED OR IMPACT.
THIS PRIMARILY ENCOURAGES WORKERS AND PEOPLE OF COLOR WHO ALREADY HAVE PROGRAM THROUGH EXISTING AGENCIES.
SO, I RAN THROUGH THIS PREVIOUSLY WHEN PRESENTING CONTRACT LAST MONTH. BASICALLY SOME OF THE ELIGIBLE USES OF THIS CATEGORY WERE IN FOR MITIGATION, MEDICAL EXPENSES, BOTH CURRENT AND FUTURE, PAYROLL EXPENSE FOR SAFETY AND PUBLIC HEALTH AND HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AND OTHER SIMILAR EMPLOYEES. EFFORTS TO REMEDY THE IMPACT THAT COVID-19 HAS SAID IT HAS THE EXISTING ECONOMIC DISPARITIES. SO WHERE THE FAULT LIES IS PARKLAND DOES NOT HAVE ANY QUALIFIED SENSE OF STRATEGY.
SO ANY PROGRAM DESIGN UNDER THIS, THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND ECONOMIC IMPACT SESSION, WOULD NEED A VERY THOROUGH DETERMINATION IN DUE DILIGENCE TO DETERMINE THAT ELIGIBILITY OF THE REQUIREMENT. AND BEING THAT THERE IS A LACK OF THOSE EXISTING SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCIES HERE IN PARKLAND, IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE TO LOCATE THE EFFORT WITH REGARD TO FEDERAL STATE AND COUNTY PROGRAMS AS WELL.
[00:05:02]
THE SECOND COMPONENT WILL PREMIUM PAY.THIS IS USED TO PROVIDE PREMIUM PAY OVER AND ABOVE THE DEFINITION. IT CAN'T EXCEED THE PERSON'S PLACE PAY. EXAMPLES OF WORKERS APPLY TO STAFFING AND NURSING HOME AND FACILITIES.
WORKERS ARE FARMS, GROCERY STORES ET CETERA.
JANITORS, TRUCK DRIVERS, BASICALLY ANY WORK THAT HAS BEEN IN THE FRONT LINE IN THE FIGHT AGAINST THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC.
THE FALL HERE IS IF WE WERE TO AWARD THE GRADE TO SOMEONE.
WE DO NOT HAVE CONTROL OVER IT, AND THERE BECOMES A STRINGENT REQUIREMENTS FOR US TO OVERSEE THE MONEY WILL BE GIVEN TO.
SO THAT IS, WILL BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO HANDLE AND CONTROL. REVENUE LOSS, THIS IS WHERE WE CAN USE THE PHYSICAL RECOVERY FUNDS TO THE PROVISION OF GOVERNMENT SERVICES TO THE EXTENT OF REDUCTION OF REVENU REDUCED. THIS CAN BE CALCULATED OF FOUR POINTS ABOVE DECEMBER 31 OF 2020, THIS COMING DECEMBER 31, THE ASSEMBLY 20 -- DECEMBER 31 OF 2022, AND OF 2,023.
LATER WE WILL HAVE AN ESTIMATE OF WHAT THAT NUMBER OF DECEMBER 31, OF 2020 AND MEMORY ESTIMATE WILL BE BACK LATER THIS. AND THIS CATEGORY IT GIVES US A BROAD LATITUDE IN HOW TO USE THE FUNDS.
EXAMPLES ARE BASICALLY TO RECOVER GOVERNMENT EXPENSES.
ALSO MAINTENANCE OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND THINK SHE GOES SPENDING ON NEW INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE MAY NEED.
THAT KINDA DOVETAILS UNDER GENERAL CURRENT CAPITAL CURRENT CAPITAL SPENDING WHERE WE CHARGE UP GO AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
THE FALL OF THIS IS GENERALLY WITH GRANT PROGRAMS LIKE THIS, THERE NEEDS TO BE A DIRECT LINK BETWEEN PERFORMANCE AND AN OUTCOME. THERE REALLY ISN'T THAT SORT OF DIRECT LINK WHEN IT RELATES TO THE REVENUE OR LOSS CATEGORY.
LASTLY, WE HAVE INVESTMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE.
SO IN THIS CATEGORY IT IS IMPORTANT ACCESS TO DRINKING WATER, IMPROVE WASTEWATER, AND PROVIDE ACCESS TO HIGH QUALITY BROADBAND INFRASTRUCTURE. SO UNDER THE WATER AND WASTEWATER USES, THAT KIND OF FALLS UNDER THE CLEAN AND OR DRINKING WATER STATE REVOLVING FUND CATEGORY.
AND IN THE IMPROVING WATER QUALITY AS YOU CAN SEE CONSTRUCT AND IMPROVE AND COMPARE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. ANYTHING TO HELP IMPROVE DRINKING WATER AND THEN ON THE FLIPSIDE SAME WITH WASTEWATER.
ANY IMPROVEMENTS YOU CAN'T MAKE THERE TO IMPROVE THE FLOW OF THE OUTGOING WATER AS WELL. THEN THE LAST CATEGORY UNDER INVESTMENT IN INFRASTRUCTURE IS TO EXPAND THE EXPRESS OR BROADBAND INTERNET. SO BASICALLY IS THAT TO PROVIDE INTERNET TO ANY UNSERVED OR UNDERSERVED HOUSEHOLDER RESIDENT THAT MAY NOT HAVE ACCESS TO IT. SO THOSE ARE THE MAIN CATEGORIES. THE BIG FALL WITH A PROJECT LIKE THIS IS WE DO A PROJECT THAT IS GREATER THAN 10 MILLION.
AND THE ORDER REQUIRES BECOME A LOT MORE STRINGENT AND BECOME A LOT MORE DIFFERENT. AND WITH WAGE CHECKING AND I THINK THE EMPLOYEE CHECKING VERIFICATION IN THAT AND A LOT MORE TEDIOUS AS WE GET INTO IT. AS NANCY MENTIONED THERE ARE SOME STRINGENT'S IN THE FIRST ONE IS THAT A SPEE BEFORE DEBORAH DECEMBER 30 AND AS WE HAVE TO REPORT TO THE TREASURY.
WE HAVE TO GIVE THEM AND TELL THEM WHAT WE ARE DOING, WHAT EXPENDITURES WE OCCUR TODAY. ANY UNDERSERVED POPULATION THAT WE ARE PROVIDING MONEY TOO, AND COMPLIANCE AS IT COMES TO THE LARGEST COMPLEX. IN ANY OF ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS THAT MAY BE NECESSARY.
WITH REGARD TO THAT IT WOULD BE AUDITED.
WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH WHEN WE GO TO THE PROCESS WE HAVE TO DOCUMENT STEP-BY-STEP HOW WE DETERMINE WHAT PROJECT WE ARE FINDING, AND ALL THE FUNDING REQUIREMENTS IN THE BACKEND.
ALL THE WAY TO THE RECORDING OF IT.
SO WE ARE GOING TO HAVE IS A SET UP A SEPARATE ACCOUNTING FUND WITHIN THE FINANCIAL REPORTING SYSTEM AND THAT WAY WE DON'T COMMINGLE OUR FUNDS WITH OPERATING FUNDS AND REPLACEMENT FUNDS AND CAPITAL FUNDS SO THE WEIGHT IS 70 MILLION DEVELOPED BY ITSELF IT WILL BE COMING UP WITH ANYTHING ELSE.
SCHOOL THAT WILL BE OUR INTERNAL CONTROLS TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING
[00:10:02]
IS CORRECTLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT.WITH THAT I WILL TURN IT OVER TO THE NEXT PERSON WHO GO OVER
THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS. >> HAS TRAINED EDGE? WHO HAS THAT ONE? -- WHO HASN'T DRAINAGE?
>> ON THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR FOR A LITTLE WHILE LONGER.
WE ENTERED INTO A PRELIMINARY STORMWATER MASTER PLAN WORK AND WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF WORKING ON THAT.
WE HAVE PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS.
I WILL SPEAK TO A COUPLE TONIGHT AND WE FEEL THAT THE MORE PRESSING ISSUES THAT WE NEED TO DO.
THE FIRST ONE BEING THE RANGE DRAINAGE DITCHES IF YOU WILL.
I THINK YOU ALL ARE FAMILIAR WITH THAT AREA AND HOW OVERGROWN AND SILTED IN AND SEVERAL OF YOU HAVE BEEN THROUGH IT WE HAVE HAD A COUPLE OF ISOLATED FLOODING EVENTS THAT OCCURRED OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS UP THERE. ESPECIALLY IN THE 68 THAT AREA UP THERE. THIS PROJECT WOULD ENCOMPASS REMOVING THE DEBRIS DREDGING THE CANAL IN DOING A FOLDABLE BOTTOM WHICH MEANS THE ELEVATION WOULD BE DETERMINE WE HAVE A GOOD FLOW FROM FRONT TO THE BACKSIDE SO IT HAS GOOD DRAIN.
DUE TO THE OVERGROWN VEGETATION FROM THE CANAL THE CANAL EMBANKMENTS REMOVE THE OVERHEAD VEGETATION BECAUSE THERE IS QUITE A BIT OUT THERE. FROM ABOUT 2 FEET ABOVE THE TOP OF THE BANK THAT WE CAN SO THE CANALS.
THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE CROSS PIPING AND SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE CORRUGATED METAL PIPE HAVE SILTED IN PRETTY HEAVILY.
WE CLEANED IT OUT SEVERAL TIMES. BUT SOME OF THE PIPE NEEDS TO BE REPLACED. SOME OF IT NEEDS TO BE CLEANED BUT WE ARE GOING TO DO IT WHEN OTHERS ARE DOING THE RIGHT WAY AND THAT IS REPLACE THE PIPE. AND THEN REESTABLISH AND REFURBISH THE NEW PUMP STATION IN THE BACK WE HAVE NO ABILITY PUMP WATER IN AND WE HAVE NO ABILITY TO PUMP WATER OUT.
IT DESPERATELY NEEDS IT OVER THERE.
WE ALL OVER RARE THAT THE ESTIMATED COST ON THIS IS ABOUT
$5.8 MILLION. >> PHIL COULD YOU GO TO THE SIDE SO THEY CAN SEE A VISUAL ON THAT.
>> SURE I AM SORRY WE ALL KNOW THE AREA THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE SLIDES YOU CAN SEE THE CROSS-SECTION IN THE CROSS PIPING THAT I AM TALKING ABOUT HOUSE BEEN COMPROMISED IN THE TOP.
IT IS CRUSHED IF YOU WILL. IF YOU LOOK TO THE LEFT OF THE SLIDE THAT IS A REESTABLISH CANAL EMBANKMENT THAT HAS BEEN STABILIZED. YOU CAN SEE QUITE A BIT OF THAT DEBRIS IN THE BOTTOM IN THE GROWTH ET CETERA IT NEEDS TO BE CLEANED OUT. AND UNDERNEATH ALL THAT WE WILL THE WATERLINE IS A TWO LIVES THROUGHOUT OVER.
SO THE ELEVATION OF THAT DRAINAGE DITCH IS NO LONGER WHAT IT USED TO BE. SO THE CAPACITY TO CARRY WATER INTO HOLD WATER AND TO CARRY WHAT IT IS COMPROMISED OVER TIME. IT HASN'T BEEN DONE IN A LONG TIME AND IT NEEDS TO BE DONE. SO THAT IS THE DREDGING AFFECTED
I ALLUDE TO. >> IF ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS
YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND ASK. >> THANK YOU MAYOR, SO MY FIRST QUESTION IS MY UNDERSTANDING BASED ON PRESENTATION IS THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURAL INVESTMENTS ARE DEALING WITH DRINKING OR OF WASTEWATER. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PUSH AND FLOW OF THE DRAINAGE WATER FALLS WITHIN ONE OF THOSE CATEGORIES ARE NOT. THAT IS VERY DIRECT.
>> DRAINAGE IS INCLUDED IN THAT AND IT IS INCLUDED IN THE CRITERIA OF THIS THAT'S WHY THIS PROJECT IS BEING PROPOSED IN THIS MATTER. ANY QUESTIONS?
>> NO, CARRY ON. >> THANK YOU.
>> I JUST GOT ONE, CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE CULT LIKE I AM LOOKING AT IT YOU ARE YOU SAYING BECAUSE OF ALL THE DIRT ON TOP IS COLLECTED THAT IS WHAT IS COMPRESSING IT DOWN I GUESS IT'S
HARD FOR ME TOO SAY? >> YES, OVER TIME, THAT'S CORRUGATED PIPE. TYPICALLY WE DON'T USE THAT ANYMORE IS THIN-WALLED. WHEN YOU ARE IN AN AGRICULTURAL SETTING OR YOU'RE IN A TEMPORARY SETTING OR YOU'RE IN A NOT VERY AVERAGE FAIRLY SETTLED WITH TRUCKS YOU.
ALL THE FIELD THAT IS PUT ON TOP OF THAT BECAUSE OF THE SETTLEMENT HAS BEEN COMPRESSING THE PIPE.
SO COMPROMISES THE INTEGRITY OF THE PIPE YOU WERE LOOKING AT THAT THAT IS A VERY LOW FLOW. WHEN WE HAVE A BIG RAIN EVENT,
[00:15:02]
LIKE THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO WE HAD ABOUT 15 INCHES OF RAIN THREE DAYS IN THE PICKUP WAS COMPLETELY FULL.BUT WHAT HAPPENS IS, THAT NO SOUTHEAST CORONA OR CORNER OF THEIR CAN'T RELEASE IT CANNOT GET OUT UNTIL EVERYTHING ELSE DRAINS BELOW IT. THERE IS VERY LITTLE CAPACITY ANYMORE BECAUSE IT IS SILTED IN THIS VERY LITTLE CAPACITY BECAUSE CONVEYANCES SOME OF THE PIPES ARE COMPROMISED.
WE NEED TO IMPROVE THAT, SO IT FLOWS OUT AND WE NEED TO BOIL WATER IN THERE, WE NEED TO HAVE DEEPER DITCHES IF YOU WILL.
SO THAT WE HAVE THAT HOLDING CAPACITY, AND THEN WE NEED TO HAVE A GOOD INVERT ELEVATION, SO WHEN IT IS TIME OF RELEASE IT GOES OUT OF THE GATE WE NEED HELP WITH ALL THAT IS ASSISTED THAT IS A MUCH NEEDED THAT GOT IT OKAY.
SO YOU HAVE ON THE SLIDE DO YOU HAVE AN EASEMENT? WE HAVE A DRAINAGE EASEMENT. THAT SIDE OF THE CANAL, I AM NOT THE PERSON THAT WE DO ANYTHING WHAT I'M PROPOSING IS WE TAKE CARE OF OUR SIDE THE ROAD SIDE. AND WE WOULD DO THE DREDGING.
SO WE WOULD BE IN THERE AND WE WOULD HAVE AN EASEMENT THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO DREDGE, THEY ARE NOT GOING TO CLEAN OR CUT ON THE PRIVATE HOMEOWNER SIGH. OKAY?
>> I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. IF WE ARE GOING TO BUILD UP ON THE CITY SET HOUSE AND I TRANSLATED IT ON THE HOMEOWNER
SIGH. >> WHEN I SAVED UP THE NECK AND I'M GOING TO RE- ESTABLISH THE PIGMENT MOST OF THE CASES OF THE PRIVATE SIDE YOU WILL SEE THEIR SHAPE THAT OUR SITE IS.
I DO NOT KNOW THAT WE WANT TO GET INTO TIGHTER BROKERING A SPECIFIC DEAL WITH EACH HOMEOWNER OUT THERE I THINK THE GIST OF THIS PROJECT IN THE SPORT IN THE NEED FOR IS MORE TO REESTABLISH THE BOTTOM OF THAT DITCH, AND OUR SITE BECAUSE WE CONVEY TRAFFIC ON THESE ROADS. AND THERE IS NO SHOULDER IN SOME AREAS SO IT IS A SAFETY CONCERN AS MUCH IT IS A DRAINAGE
CONCERN. >> PEOPLE IF YOU'RE WORKING ON THE BOTTOM OF THE DISH DOESN'T OVERLAP TO THE HOMEOWNER.
>> YES IT WILL WE WILL WANT TO DO WAS TO THE DISH BUT NOT GO UP
>> I APOLOGIZE, JUST SO THAT WE ARE CLEAR WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE REMOVAL OF THE PIPES IN ORDER TO PUT IN NEW SYSTEMS AND STUFF LIKE THAT WE ARE OFF IT'S HE GOING TO BE TOUCHING THE ROAD. SO IS THE $5.8 MILLION THAT YOU ESTIMATED HERE GOING TO ALSO INCLUDE ANY ASPECT OF THE
ROADWAY? >> IT WOULD JUST BE IN THE GENERAL AREA OF WRITER OVER THE PICK.
SO REMOVE THE PIPE, WOO THE NEW PIPE IN, AND WE WILL BEHAVE OVER THAT. AND WE WILL SPEAK TO THAT I THINK SOMEONE WILL TALK TO ABOUT THE WATER THE PAVING COMING UP.
>> OKAY. >> OKAY TO PROPOSE RANGES WATER PROJECT, SO AS YOU KNOW THIS PROCESS STARTED IN 2015 AS PART OF A FEASIBILITY STUDY. AND IN THAT FEASIBILITY STUDY THEY WENT AHEAD AND PROPOSED THE INSTALLATION OF AN 8-INCH WATER DISTRIBUTION WITH THE RANCHES. THEY TALKED ABOUT PROVIDING ADDITIONAL FIRE HYDRANTS IN THE COMMUNITY.
AND ALSO WE TALKED ABOUT IMPROVING THE EXISTING 8-MILE OF ROADWAY DUE TO THE UTILITY WORK AT THE TIME.
AS PART OF A APPROVING RESOLUTION IN SID OR WAS THIS AREA. TO THIS COMMUNITY FOR WATER AND SEWER. SO, WHAT WE DID WAS IS WE WENT AHEAD AND WE WORKED WITH AND SID, AND WE ACTUALLY HAVE THE WATER MAIN ACTUALLY FULLY DESIGNED FOR THIS COMMUNITY.
AND ACTUALLY IT'S SHARED IN THE COST IN THE DESIGN OF THE CITY.
WHAT WE DID IS THE COMMISSIONER APPROVED AS AN EARLY START PROJECT AND WE ACTUALLY INSTALLED A WATER LINE ALONG RIDGE ROAD. THAT RANCH ROAD WATER MADE HAS BEEN INSTALLED IN THE SERVICE IS 2017.
AND SID IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF OPPORTUNITY.
SO, IF WE WERE TO A MIDORI LET ME GO BACK.
SO THE ACTUAL WATER MATE ITSELF WAS PERMEATED IN 2016-2017.
IF WE CHOOSE TO MOVE FORWARD WE WILL HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT AND GET REPORTED JUST BECAUSE THE TIME THAT HAS ELAPSED. THAT PRINTING UPDATE WILL BE REQUIRED AS PART OF THE PROJECT. THE PROJECT ALSO REQUIRES ANY ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION PLANS THAT WE DID NOT DO THAT ON THE PROCESS WHEN WE DID A WATER MAIN DESIGN.
SO THAT WOULD BE WAS OR ACTUALLY WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT AS PART OF THIS PROJECT. THIS WAS SIMILAR TO RANCH ROAD
[00:20:02]
WE MOVE FORWARD IN THIS PROJECT, AND WE INSTALL THE WATER MAINS SID WOULD ALSO ASSUME MAINTENANCE AND RESPONSIBILITY FOR THESE LINES IN THE COMMUNITY.AND IN THE CITY CONVERSELY WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY ROADWAY MAINTENANCE AFTER THE PROJECT. SO JUST SOME PROJECTED COST, THE LAST TIME WE PRESENTED THIS ITEM TO THE COMMISSION BACK IN 2018-2019. THE ROADWAY BECAUSE AT THAT TIME WAS ACTUALLY THE ROADWAY IN WATER MAIN COST WAS $7.23 MILLION. WE UPDATED THE COST TO SHARE IN THE STRATEGIC PLANNING. THAT NEW NUMBER IS 13.6 MILLION, THAT IS PLACED ON PROJECTS THAT WE HAVE HAD IN THE CITY PLUS SIMILAR PROJECTS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY AND WE WENT AHEAD AND APPLIED TO MULTIPLIER FROM THOSE PROJECTS.
AND BELIEVE IT OR NOT IT IS ALMOST A ONE MULTIPLIER ON THE COST. AS WE TALKED ABOUT AS WELL TO THIS COST INCLUDES THE PROPERTY IN THE DESIGN COST, AND WELL READ AND DID IT WE DID A 12% KICKER FOR ALL OF THOSE SOFT COSTS FOR THE PROJECT. IN TERMS OF TIMING, I KNOW CHRIS MENTIONED EARLIER ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF MEETING THE TIME IN THE PROGRAM. WE NEED AROUND 16 MONTHS FOR DESIGN AND PRINTING, AND I THINK WE CAN GET THE ENTIRE PROJECT IT DOWN TO 40 MONTHS IS WHAT WE THANK YOU.
IS GOING PRETTY INTENSELY COMMUNITY SMALL, WE ARE ALSO ESTIMATING A LOT OF MONEY FOR MAINTENANCE OF TRASH FOR THIS PROJECT IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE ALL THE CONSTRUCTION FOR THIS PROJECT IS REQUIRED. AND THAT'S THE END OF MY PORTION
OF THE PRESENTATION. >> WE CAN RELY UPON ENTITIES TO COMPLETE CERTAIN THINGS AND DETERMINING AND STRUCTURING DESIGN ROADWAY ET CETERA FROM OTHER COUNTIES AND STATES.
HOW DO WE GET SORT OF ASSURANCES THAT WE ARE TO BE ABLE TO GET THEM TO DO WHAT THEY NEED TO DO ON A TIMELY BASIS, IF WE ARE NOT THE ONLY CITY THAT IS TRYING TO UTILIZE THEIR FUNDS WITHIN THAT
TIME AND MANNER? >> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION, SO THE TIME THAT I'M SHOWING HERE ON THE SCREEN, IT IS TIME BUILT IN FOR TYPICAL TIMING FOR BOURBON.
SO WE HAVE DONE A FEW PROJECTS, WE HAVE A KIND OF A TIMEFRAME FOR THOSE PROJECTS. TO YOUR POINT, THERE IS NO CAPS THE BALL THAT WE CAN HAVE. SO YOU WILL GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF PROJECTS GOING THROUGH YOU CAN SEE DELAYS.
WHAT WE DID FOR THE 40 MONTH'S IT HAS FLOW BUILT-IN TO ASSIST US. ONE IS A PERMANENT ELEMENT, AT AN ELEMENT ALSO IS THE CONSTRUCTION MULTIPLIER EARLIER.
RIGHT NOW IS GETTING HARD TO GET CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS PROJECTS.
THAT IS ANOTHER THING THAT WOULD NOT BE IN OUR CONTROL.
WE PUT IT ON US IS THAT OF A CONTACTOR AND WE BE AT THE MERCY OF GETTING THOSE PRODUCTS AND SERVICES THAT WE HAVE ON THIS
>> JUST AS A FOLLOW-UP TO THAT, I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE ABSOLUTELY CLEAR ON THIS. IF WE UNDERGO THIS PROJECT, AND NOTWITHSTANDING THE FACT IS OUTSIDE OF OUR CONTROL AND WE GO COMPLETED ON TIME BECAUSE SOME OTHER ENTITY DIDN'T DO WHAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO DO, WE ARE STUCK WITH THE TAB AS A CITY FOR COMPLETING THE PROJECT AND THE MONEY THAT IS IN THIS PARTICULAR ACCOUNT ARE GOING TO BE TAKEN BACK AWAKE?
>> IT IS POSSIBLE, WE WILL GET TO THE TIMELINE EVENTUALLY.
YOU WILL SEE HOW THIS 40 MONTHS FOLLOWING THE TIMELINE, BUT WITH THAT TIMELINE FOR THIS PROJECT WE LOOKING AT THE YEAR 2025.
THE END OF THIS PROJECT IS THE END OF 2026.
THERE IS SOME FLOW BUILT-IN TO FACTOR CERTAIN THINGS IN BUT YOUR POINT YOU ARE CORRECT. YOU COULD GET TO THE END AND WAS
NOT DOING THESE IMPROVEMENTS. >> I JUST FOLLOWING UP MY QUESTION, GOING BACK TO REVENUE RECAPTURE I KNOW WE TALK ABOUT IT IN A MINUTE. IS IT IS POSSIBLE YOU DON'T HAVE TO LISTEN WE CAN COLLECT AT THE START OF THE PROJECT WHICH HE USES THOUGHT THE FUNDS. SO WHATEVER REASON WE GO OVER THE DEADLINE AND WERE NOT ABLE TO RECOUP THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION PROJECT IS A POSSIBLE THAT AS WE SEE THAT HAPPENING LETS A COUPLE MONTHS BEFORE THE END OF 26, THAT WE CAN THEN CONVERT THAT WHAT WE WERE ORIGINALLY GOING TO DO INTO A REVENUE AND CAPTURE SO WE CAN STILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO.
>> I WILL LEAVE THAT TO THE FINANCE SPECIALIST.
>> SO, WE WILL GO THROUGH THE PRESENTATION AND EXPLAIN ALL OF THE DIFFERENT PROJECTS AND THEN WE WILL STRATEGIZE ON HOW BEST TO UTILIZE THE 17 MILLION. AND THERE ARE STRATEGIES THAT WE
WILL BE SENT INTO. >> THE NEXT QUESTION I HAD YOU SAID THE PROJECT IS A TOTAL OF 13.6 MILLION.
HOW IS THAT BROKEN DOWN BETWEEN THE ROADS VERSUS THE ACTUAL
WATER PROJECT. >> IT IS 7.8 FOR YOUR WATER AND
[00:25:05]
IT IS.A FEW 5.3, THREE LOOKS LIKE AN EIGHT SOMETIMES.>> I THINK I AM RIGHT. >> WE WILL NOTE THAT FOR THE
>> ONE MUST QUESTION THE COST OF THE BANES OF THE TRAFFIC IS AT
INC. TO DISMOUNT? >> AS IT IS.
>> I HAVE BEEN MORE I LIED, AND SID SHARED THE COST OF THE WATER DESIGN IT MAKES FOR THAT THEY WERE CONCERNED BECAUSE THE ROADS
WELL? >> KNOW WE HAVE NOT IN TERMS OF ROADWAY. ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE I KNOW IN A LIFETIME WE DID THIS PROJECT AND IT OPENED UP THE DESIGN.
BUT NOT NECESSARILY MEDEVAC CAN TAKE THAT BACK AT ONE POINT WE OFFERED TO DONATE PIPE TO US TO HELP WITH THE PROJECT BUT WHAT THEY WERE GENERATING IS NOT THE SAME SIZE OF PIPE THAT WE NEEDED FOR THE PROJECT. THEY WILL TRY TO HELP IN
WHATEVER WAY THAT THEY CAN. >> SO THIS WATER PROJECT JUST INCLUDES THE WATER LINE TO THE HOMEOWNERS IN THE RANCHES? IT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE COST OF THE HOOK?
>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> SO HAVE WE SPOKEN WITH AND AS IDEA WHAT THAT PROJECTED COSTS IS IS THERE SOME CONSENSUS OR WHATEVER IT MAY BE TO HELP MITIGATE THAT COST?
>> WE DO KNOW WHAT THE COST PROJECTED COST IS, AND IT CAN RANGE FROM 3-5,000 PER HOUSEHOLD.
BECAUSE THEY ALSO HAVE TO HAVE THE METER.
WE HAVE NOT, ONCE WE COMPLETE TODAY'S WORKSHOP, WE WILL HAVE MORE GUIDANCE ON WHAT WE NEED TO DO.
SO AS FAR AS GETTING WITH NSAID TO HAVE ANY DISCUSSION, WE ARE
>> OKAY ANYBODY ELSE? OKAY BILL, I ASSUME YOU ARE NEXT
TO YOU ARE STANDING. >> SO IN STAYING IN THE DRAINAGE WORLD, WE HAVE THE PROJECT THAT WE ARE PROPOSING OVER ON PINETREE. THE DRAINAGE DITCH.
A COUPLE YEARS BACK WE HAD SOME BACKUP OUT THERE.
WE PUT IN AN OVERFLOW MAKE SHIFT PIPE IT WORKS OKAY, BUT THAT DITCH NEEDS THE SAME THING OVER AND AND AS WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT IN THE RANCHES. IT NEEDS TO BE DREDGED THE PRUNING NEEDS TO HAPPEN SO ON OUR SIDE OF THAT DITCH IF YOU WILL WE ONLY OWN ABOUT A FOOT DOWN ON THE EMBANKMENT OR ON THE SLOPE. BUT THERE IS AN EASEMENT THERE IT AFFECTS OUR HOMEOWNERS. WE DO HAVE SOME I DON'T KNOW WE HAVE SOME COLLABORATION PINETREE.
BUT THIS IS OUR PART CHECK TO FIX, WE WOULD DREDGE IT AND CLEAN IT WE WOULD CUT THE OVERGROWN VEGETATION.
AND REESTABLISH THE BOTTOM TO CREATE MORE OF A POSITIVE DRAINAGE FLOW THROUGH ANT AT THE CONNECTION POINT WHERE IT CONNECTS DOWN ON THE HILLSBORO SITE, WE WOULD INCREASE THE PIPE SIZE THERE WERE FLOWS INTO THE LAKE IF YOU WILL AND IN THE BACK WHERE IT GOES OUT EVENTUALLY TO THE LOGS.
>> YES SORRY APOLOGIZE. >> AS YOU CAN SEE IT IS OVERGROWN, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE GONE BACK THERE I KNOW THE VICE MAYOR SAYS YOU GO BACK THERE REGULAR YOU'VE SEEN WHAT IT IS. IT NEEDS TO BE CLEANED, IT NEEDS TO BE READ DREDGE, IT NEEDS TO BE REESTABLISHED NOT MUCH AS DONE OF IT. WHAT I WILL TELL YOU IS OUTSIDE OF THIS PROJECT THE GIST OF THIS PROJECT IS THE SAME THING THAT I JUST ALLUDED TO. AND THE DOLLAR VALUE THAT YOU HAVE RIGHT THERE IS 1.9 MILLION. BUT WE HAVE APPLIED AND SHERRY HAS BEEN INSTRUMENTAL IN WORKING WITH EVERYBODY IN SPURRING THAT.
WE APPLIED FOR A 3 MILLION-DOLLAR GRANT, WE ARE HOPEFUL THAT WE WILL GET THAT. THAT ALSO INCLUDES OFFERING THE SLOPES. SO IT WILL BE RIP RAP INSULATION ON THE SLOPE TO MAKE THEM THE INTEGRITY OF THEM.
WHICH WOULD HELP IN THE FUTURE. SO, IF WE GOT THE GRANT, IT WOULD HELP US OUT. BUT IF THAT IS 8.9 MILLION, THIS IS A MUCH NEEDED PROJECT, IT DOES AFFECT A SECTION OF THE PINETREE FOLKS. AND IT NEEDS SOME CARE.
>> BILL, JUST I UNDERSTAND THIS IS ON THE NORTHEAST SIDE OF PINETREE IN THE SOUTH SIDE OF HILLSBOROUGH IS THAT RIGHT?
>> YES YOU ARE EXACTLY RIGHT, YOU WILL SEE ON THE MAP RIGHT THERE, YOU ARE LOOKING BACK DOWN THE DISH.
>> THIS PROPOSED PORTION OF THE PROJECT IS NOT COVER THE CANAL
[00:30:07]
THAT RUNS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF MONTEREY AMONG SAWGRASS?>> NO IT DOESN'T. >> OKAY AT EVERY TAKING A LOOK AT THAT WITH ALL AS FAR AS CLEANUP NEEDS AND DREDGING?
>> THAT'S PINETREE, AND THAT'S ONE OF THEIR BABIES BACK THERE.
THEY ARE CONSTANTLY MONITORING. >> THAT'S THEIR WATER DISTRICT THAT CONTROLS IT? YES THAT WATER CONTROL DISTRICT THAT IS THEIRS. I DON'T WANT TO SAY THAT ONE DOESN'T DIRECTLY AFFECT US, BUT THIS ONE REALLY DIRECTLY AFFECTS US. AND WE KNOW THERE'S A BAD PROBLEM HERE IN A HEAVY RAIN EVENT JUST BECAUSE WE CAN'T GET IT OUT. I WILL RESTRICTED BY THE SIDE OF THE PIPE, AND WE ARE RESTRICTED AGAIN WE HAVE NO CAPACITY IN THIS BECAUSE IT SILTED OUT. IT IS GROWN OVER.
IT IS A NUMBER OF DIFFERNT THINGS.
IF WE COULD GET THAT CAPACITY BACK AND THE RIGHT ELEVATION ON THE INVERT SO WE HAVE POSITIVE FLOW AND IN THE PIPE TO GET IT OUT AND IS PROPERLY SIZED. IT WOULD MAKE THAT SITUATION MORE PALATABLE AND ONE OF THOSE BIG RAIN EVENTS THAT WE SEEM TO
GET QUITE OFTEN. >> WE HAVE NO PUMP RIGHT?
>> KNOW THIS IS ALL GRAVITY. >> TO COMMISSIONERS POINT, AND OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT THE STITCHES FOR A LONG, LONG TIME. I MEAN,, I MEAN, MY OPINION IS IT JUST NEEDS TO BE DONE. BUT THE PART OF THE COLLABORATION EFFORT, AS I KNOW THAT PINETREE WATER CONTROL DISTRICT, HAS BEEN TALKING ABOUT DOING MAINTENANCE ON THOSE DITCHES BEHIND YOU KNOW THE SAWGRASS AND THE CELL THEORY AND ITS OWN IT MAY WITHOUT NECESSARILY COMPROMISING THE ARPA FUNDS, IT MAY BE SOME COLLABORATION REGARDING THE VENDOR OR SOMEBODY THAT CAN DO KIND OF IN A PERIOD OF TIME MIGHT BE HELPFUL. SO I WOULD REACH OUT TO PINETREE WATER CONTROL DISTRICT, TO SEE WHAT THOSE PLANS ARE.
I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT DOING SOME MAINTENANCE.
>> WE CAN REACH OUT TO WARREN CRAIG AND FIND OUT.
>> THIS WAY TO HELP THE COLLABORATION AND WHATEVER THE COST WE DID BECAUSE I KNOW SHERRY IS GOING TO DO IT AND IS
GOOD AT THAT STUFF. >> SO MY ONLY CONCERN WITH THAT VICE MAYOR IS I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT TYING INTO SOME COLLABORATION DOESN'T AFFECT THE TIME CYCLES THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE MANDATED TO FOR THESE MONIES. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE NOTWITHSTANDING THAT NEED FOR THAT IT DOESN'T HAVE AN IMPACT
ON ANY OF OUR TIME? >> I THINK TO THE VICE MAYOR'S POINT, I THINK WE CAN SAY THIS IS WHO WE ARE USING AND WE COULD DO OUR OWN CONTRACT. YOU KNOW AND KNOW THAT THEY ARE DOING WORK FOR US IN WORKING TOGETHER AND SAVING EACH OF US A LITTLE BIT OF MONEY POTENTIALLY. IT'S A SEPARATE CONTRACT SO IT
WOULDN'T AFFECT OUR TIME. >> I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM THAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY LOOK AT THE PROJECT AND THEY WE ARE GOING TO START OVER HERE VERSUS STARTING WHERE WE NEED THEM TO
START. >> WE ARE GOING TO DO OURS, I WOULD ASSUME IN THE DIRECTION THAT WE GIVE WE WOULD DO OUR SEPARATELY. I THINK WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT COLLABORATION TO SHARING VENDORS AND LETTING THEM KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO. I THINK THAT IS ALL.
>> TIMING ELEMENT. >> YES THOSE AGAINST THE SAWGRASS ARE IN DESPERATE NEED OF SIMILAR REPAIR.
>> LOT OF CLEANING OUT CLEARING OUT.
>> ARE YOU HEARING WHAT WE'RE SAYING?
>> THE BEAUTY OF THESE TWO DRAINAGE PROJECTS, I ALLUDED TO THE SMALL AMOUNT OF PIPE ON THIS ONE AND ON THE CROSS SECTION OF PIPE WITH THE CROSS RAISED BY. THESE ARE EQUIPMENT AND MANPOWER AND LABOR INTENSIVE PROJECTS. WE ARE REMOVING MATERIAL.
I AM NOT USING A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL THAT WE WOULD BE FACED WITH THE DELAY ON GETTING.
WHICH MAKES THESE PROJECTS HOPEFULLY MOVE MUCH QUICKER THAN OTHERS THAT WE POTENTIALLY COULD BE WAITING ON MATERIALS PIPES AND VALVES AND ALL SORTS OF THINGS.
>> SO I KNOW AND GO BACK TO SWAN DAY WE DON'T HAVE A CRYSTAL BALL DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHEN WE EXPECT TO HEAR BACK ON THE
>> BY APRIL WE SHOULD HEAR. AND THEN IF WE DON'T, THERE IS ANOTHER ROUND OF FUNDING THAT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR A YEAR
LATER. >> OKAY TWO BYTES OF THE APPLE, OKAY THAT'S GOOD AT THE OTHER QUESTION IS IS THERE ANY OPPORTUNITY I GUESS IF WE ARE DUE TO SIMILAR PROJECTS OF ECONOMIES OF SCALE TRYING TO NEGOTIATE SOMETHING RECOGNIZING THAT IS GOING TO REQUIRE THE SAME TYPE OF SERVICE.
>> THAT'S A GREAT IDEA WILL GET THE TIMING OF THIS I'M NOT SURE.
WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE TIMING ON IT.
OF COURSE THERE WOULD BE, BUT THE RIDGES PROJECT IS GOING TO
[00:35:01]
BE SO VERY INTENSIVE, I AM NOT SURE THAT WILL WORK.BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK AT IT. >> OKAY.
NEXT? >> HOW THE REVENUE IS CALCULATED I DON'T KNOW WHO WANTS TO DO THIS ONE?
>> I AM THE BUDGETS AND GRANTS MANAGER.
SO THE CALCULATION FOR OUT TO DETERMINE HOW MUCH REVENUE LAWS TO TAKE IS GIVEN TO US. BY THE ARPA GUIDANCE, AND WE CAN'T TAKE THREE YEARS PRIOR TO WHEN COVID-19 HIT AND SEE WHAT THE GROWTH WAS FOR OUR CITY IN REVENUE IN GENERAL FUNDS.
WE HAD A LITTLE INTERESTING CHANGE BECAUSE WE IMPLEMENTED THE ELECTRIC FRANCHISE FEE IN THE MISTS OF THAT.
SO I DID TAKE THAT OUT BECAUSE I DID NOT THINK THAT WAS FAIR THAT WE PAID $2 MILLION THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE BEFORE.
EVEN WITH THAT OUR GROWTH WAS 10% AVERAGE.
OR IT WAS BETWEEN 17-18-AND 19. THAT GROWTH THEN WELL IT WAS ASSUME THAT IT CAN CONTINUE IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING ABOVE 4% YOUR 4% WAS ABATED. SO I FEEL GOOD ABOUT THE 10%.
THEY CREATE THE FORMULA WOULD YOU SAY IF YOU CONTINUED AT THAT 10%, COMPARE THAT TO WHAT YOUR REVENUE IS AT THE DECEMBER 31 IN TIME. WHICH IS A LITTLE FUNNY FOR US, WE ARE IN THE FISCAL YEAR OF OCTOBER 1.
BUT WE DO HAVE THE ACTUAL REVENUES AS OF 123120.
USING THIS FORMULA, WE CAN CLAIM 1.9 MILLION ALMOST OF ELIGIBLE REVENUE LOSS. AND THE NICE THING ABOUT THIS IS THEY USE THE FREIGHT'S BROAD LATITUDE OVER AND OVER AGAIN ABOUT HOW YOU CAN CLAIM THIS ONE.
SO THEREFORE YOU CAN'T SAY YOU HAD IN YOUR BUDGET THE COST OF PROVIDING GOVERNMENT SERVICES OF 1.8 MILLION IF YOU CAN SHOW THAT IN YOUR BUDGET YOU CAN USE IT. AND WHAT I LIKE ABOUT THIS AS A USE KNOWLEDGEABLE USE IS THAT IT IS BASED ON AUDITED NUMBERS USING THE ACTUAL NUMBERS AND IT IS EASY TO REPORT ON.
ALTHOUGH WE DON'T KNOW WE HAVE AN ESTIMATE FOR 12312021, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER AND DECEMBR YOU.
BUT THAT LOOKS LIKE ALMOST 2.9 MILLION.
SO LOOKING FORWARD TO THOSE NEXT NUMBERS, USING THE SAME FORMULA WE HAVE SOME BIG NUMBERS THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN IF WE ADD BEEN AT THAT 10% GROWTH RATE. AGAIN, WHAT IS NICE ABOUT THIS IS IT IS JUST EASY TO REPORT ON. YOU HAVE TO WAIT OF COURSE, WE WILL NOT KNOW THOSE NUMBERS UNTIL A COUPLE MORE POINTS IN
TIME. >> THANK YOU MAYOR, SO DO WE THINK THAT WITH 22 AND 23 IN THEIR IT WILL BE SOMEWHERE HIGHER THAN 2021 IS? SO 2021 WE HAVE 4.6 OR SOMETHING
LIKE THAT. >> RIGHT BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THE ESTIMATE FOR THIS UPCOMING DECEMBER IS 45-46 MILLION, SO WE ARE NOT GOING TO HIT 53 IN ANOTHER YEAR THAT IS A BIG JUMP FOR US. WE ARE SLOW AND STEADY SO THERE SHOULD BE ANOTHER GOOD CHUNK COMING I WOULD ESTIMATE.
>> AND THE TIMING THROUGH THAT IS TO THE END OF 23?
>> YES AT 12- $$TRANSMIT 1-23. >> SO YOU CAN RECOUP THROUGH 23?
>> YES THE REPORTING THAT'S COMING UP IS APRIL 30 THAT IS COMING UP AND ANYWHERE THERE AFTER WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF GUIDANCE ON THAT SO WE ARE NOT EXACTLY SURE IF WE CAN CHANGE OUR MIND? THAT IS THE BIG UNKNOWN IF WE GO TO AND SAY THIS IS WHAT WE GOING TO DO AS AN ELIGIBLE YOUTH AND AS WE GET CLOSER TO THE END WE CHANGE OUR MIND, I WE ALLOWED TO
DO THAT ON OUR REPORT? >> AS OPPOSED TO ALLOCATING IT
FOR SOME SPECIFIC PROJECT? >> CORRECT.
>> OKAY. >> PIERPOINT IT IS EASIER TO REPORT, AND IS ALSO SAFER BECAUSE WE ARE NOT TYING IT TO A TIME SENSITIVE PROJECT. SO THIS IS EASIER AND SAFER.
>> IS VERY EASY. >> FOR THE CITY AND THESE ARE MONIES TO COMMISSIONER'S POINT, THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY USE FOR WHATEVER PROJECTS WE WANTED, BECAUSE THEY WOULD BE IN OUR
GENERAL FUND. >> THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY QUESTION USE ABROAD THAT IT TOO BUT I WOULD QUESTION WHY WOULD
[00:40:03]
WE JUST DO THIS TODAY SAID THAT WE CAN MAXIMIZE THIS AND THIS DID SPEND THE FUNDS IN THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS WITHOUTRISKING GOING OVER THE DEADLINE. >> WELL THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION, PERHAPS SOME OF THE RESIDENTS MIGHT WANT TO SEE SOMETHING A LITTLE MORE CONCRETE AND THAT'S WHERE THAT DIRECT LINK MIGHT BE OUT WEAKNESS OR A PITFALL TO THIS.
WAS WHAT WOULD YOU DO WITH YOUR ARPA FUNDS? THEY ALWAYS WANT TO KNOW WHAT IS THE OUTCOME? WHAT DID YOU CREATE WHAT DID YOU MAKE? WHAT GOT BETTER? AND JUST TO SAY WELL, WE CAP GOING AS A CITY, AND MAYBE DIDN'T RAISE YOUR TAXES, OR SOMETHING WAS FUNDED MUCH MORE EASILY,.
>> WRITE WHAT I AM SAYING IS WE WOULD STILL SEE COLLECTIVELY WHAT WE DECIDE UPON AIR MARKET FOR THE BUDGETS WE ARE PRESENTED ON THESE PEOPLE KNOW WERE GOING WE ARE NOT SUBJECTING OURSELVES TO THE RISK OF NOT MEETING THE DEADLINE.
>> EXACTLY I AGREE. >> YET BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, THIS IS GOING TO BE ALLOCATED IN A SEPARATE POT, SO THIS IS A SEPARATE PART ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, SO IT WILL GET SPENT FOUR IMPLEMENTS TO THE DEGREE ON WHAT THOSE APARTMENTS AND THIS ALLOWS US A LITTLE MORE TIME TO MAYBE TO TALK ABOUT MORE STRATEGIC PLANNING AND MAKE SURE WE HAVE A DEFINITIVE PLAN GOING OUT FIVE YEARS OR WHATEVER. AS OPPOSED TO TRYING TO RUSH AND COME UP WITH PLANS BY APRIL 30. THAT WE MAY OR MAY NOT RUN INTO PROJECT TIMING ISSUES POTENTIALLY BUT WE OBVIOUSLY CAN'T TAKE 17 MILLION SO THERE ARE STILL PROJECTS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO DO BUT I THINK WOULD BE EASIER AND STAFF AS WELL, MAYBE WE HANDLE TWO OR THREE PROJECT OR WHATEVER.
>> I MEAN, IT LOOKS FROM THE PROJECTED NUMBERS I COULD BE OFF, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE HALF OF THAT IF NOT MUCH MORE THAN THAT.
MAYBE 10 MILLION OR MORE, THAT COULD BE ATTRIBUTED TO REVENUE LOSS. MY QUESTION IS IF WE HAVE DETERMINED IN A REPORT IN APRIL OF 2022, HOW WOULD WE KNOW WHAT TO 20 AND 24 REVENUE LOSS WOULD BE AT THAT TIME?
>> EXACTLY, NOBODY DOES WE CAN SAY WE COULD TAKE A PORTION OF REVENUE LOSS. WE DO NOT EVEN KNOW IF THE REPORT IS GOING TO BE LIKE WHEN WE LOOK AT IT.
>> RIGHT, RIGHT, MAYBE WE GET GUIDANCE I WILL GET ABBOTT ON 23 AND 24. BECAUSE WE HAVE ALREADY BY THEN EXPERIENCED A 4.7 OR WHATEVER IT IS .8 LOSS.
BUT THE QUESTION IS WHAT GOES BE ON THERE?
>> WE WILL BE ABLE TO HAVE GOOD ESTIMATES I WOULD ASSUME.
>> AT WHAT POINT IN TIME? >> FOR 22 AND 23?
>> FOR APRIL IT CAN BE TOUGH, WE DO NOT KNOW, WE DO HAVE A
FORECAST I GUESS. >> WELL, I MEAN, YOU CAN'T USE IT ALL ANYWAY SO, SO IF YOU WANT TO KEEP GOING NANCY?
>> WE ARE GOING TO GO OVER THE PROJECT TIMELINES, OBVIOUSLY EACH PROJECT AS A TIMELINE, AND DATES WHEN THEY NEED TO BE COVERED, DO YOU WANT TO JUST DO THE SLIDES FROM SHERRY? THE FIRST ONE IS THE RANCHES DRAINAGE.
>> YOU SEE THE TIMELIN OF RUNNING A COUPLE KEY POINTS IN THAT YOU CAN SEE WHEN THIS PROJECT WOULD BE COMPLETE THE 1ST QUARTER I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ACTUALLY EQUALS BUT THE FIRST PART OF 24 SO WE MAKE IT IN TIME AND BARRING ANY DELAYS IN MATERIALS WE STILL HAVE QUITE A BIT OF TIME TO GET THIS PROJECT DONE, SO IF I CAME BACK AND SAID WHOEVER SAID WE GOT A 16 WEEK DELAY IN THESE CROSS-SECTIONAL PIPES THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, THAT IS OKAY. WE WILL MAKE IT.
WE ARE BOUND UP BY OUR EQUIPMENT BROKE DOWN AND I CAN GET THIS SECTION DREDGED OUT AND WE GET TO WAIT A LITTLE BIT AND IT'S RAINING FOR THREE MONTHS WE WOULD BUILD A TIME IN THERE.
BUT THIS IS NOT SUPER AGGRESSIVE, THERE IS SOME FLOAT IN THERE, THERE IS SOME REALISTIC MILESTONES IN THERE.
AND WE FEEL REAL COMFORTABLE FROM A PUBLIC WORKS SIDE THAT THIS IS AN ACHIEVABLE PROJECT THAT WE CAN GET DONE IN THE SET
FOR TIME. >> AND THIS IS 5.8 MILLION
RIGHT? >> CAN THIS PROJECT THE RANCHES DRAINAGE PROJECT, OCCUR WITH FREQUENCY WITH THE RANCHES WATER
[00:45:05]
PROJECT OR DO THEY HAVE TO BE DONE SEPARATELY?>> I AM SMILING BECAUSE I KNEW THAT WOULD BE NEXT.
I ATE IT IS GOING TO, WE ARE GOING TO HOPE WE CAN DO IT ALL AT ONCE. BUT IF YOU REMEMBER EARLIER WE TALKED ABOUT THE DESIGN AND PERMIT ELEVATING FOR THE WATER PROJECT WAS GOING TO GO TO THE WATER DEPARTMENT.
I KNOW I WILL BE HELD UP BETWEEN 16-20 MONTHS ON THE PROCESS BUT WHAT WE DECIDE IT WAS WE WILL EXPEDITE THIS PROJECT FIRST, GET THE CONTRACTOR OUT THERE AND WE WILL TAKE THIS AS HE IS WRAPPING UP IN THE CONTRACTOR ROLLING IN. SO THAT IS OUR STRATEGY ON THIS.
>> THE NOT THE SAME CONTRACTORS? >> IT WILL NOT BE THE SAME CONTRACTOR BECAUSE IF I GO TO GROUP THEM TOGETHER I WILL LOSE SOMETIME IN THE PROCESS WHEN THIS COULD HAVE STARTE IN
ACTUAL WORK GETTING DONE. >> ARE THE WATER MAIN AND THE ROAD PROJECTS GOING TO BE CIVIL CONTEXT?
>> YES THOSE ARE BE LINKED TO THE SAME CONTRACTOR.
HERE IS THE WATER PROJECT WE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE SO BILL IS WRAPPING UP IN APRIL OF 24. THIS PROJECT IF EVERYTHING GOES ACCORDING TO THAT I'M NOT SAYING IT.
>> THERE IT IS SORRY. >> THIS PROJECT SHOULD WRAP UP IN JULY OF 25. SO A LITTLE BIT OVER A YEAR LATER WHEN THIS PROJECT WILL WRAP UP.
>> AND THE 613.9. >> THIS IS 13.6.
>> I REQUIREMENT IS THE PROJECT SHOULD BE COMPLETED SO WE CAN MAKE THE LAST DAMAGED BY THE END OF 26?
>> YES RIGHT NOW I'M ABOUT A YEAR END HAPPY FOR IT THAT'S HOW
WE APPROACH HER. >> THIS IS BECAUSE THE RADA IN
THE ROADS. >> I'VE HAD SOMEONE ASKED ME IF WE ARE GOING TO DO THE ROADS WHY WOULD WE ALSO DO THIS OR AT SAME TIME? SO MY QUESTION IS HOW WE LOOK INTO THE LEASE WHAT THAT COST WOULD BE RECOGNIZING THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO DIG UP THE ROADS IF THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY DO IN
ONE FELL SWOOP? >> YEAH WE HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT THAT BEFORE, THE PROBLEM WE HAVE AND I'M CALLING IT A PROBLEM, BECAUSE UNLIKE THE WATER PROJECT WHERE I HAVE THE PLANNED IN DESIGN, I AM I AM CALLING HIS CHILD ALREADY BECAUSE A PLANE IS ALREADY DESIGNED. I HAVE NOTHING DOWN FOR THE SEWER. WE HAVE NEVER DONE ANYTHING WITH THE SEWER. WE HAVE DONE PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES FROM THE ENGINEERING STANDPOINT BUT NOT NECESSARY HARD CORE DESIGN PLAN ESTIMATES. IF I AM STARTING FROM SCRATCH AND I KNOW I WILL LEAVE THIS PROJECT THIS PROJECT CAN BE FEASIBLE IN THE TIMELINE PRESENTED.
IN ADDITION, WHEN YOU'RE DOING PROJECTS GIVEN THE LENS OF THE ROADS, AND THE RANCHES, YOU WILL END UP WITH DEEP SEWER MAINS, AND TO AVOID THOSE DEEP SEWER MAINS YOU HAVE TO INSTALL THIS STATION AND PLUGGED THOSE TWO LINES BACK UP TO MAKE THEM MANAGEABLE. THEY'RE GOING TO BE NEW REAL ESTATE TO REPLACE AND RIGHT NOW WE DON'T HAVE THE REAL ESTATE IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY TO DO IT.
SO WE WOULD NEED A PRIVATE PUBLIC PARTNERSHIP TO GET LIEN SPACE TO DO THE STATIONS. WITH ALL OF THAT IN COMBINATION I DON'T SEE THIS PROJECT BEING FEASIBLE AT ALL.
>> FROM WHAT I AM HEARING, IF THERE IS SOME SORT OF INTERESTS OF THE MEAT RANCHES PEOPLE, AND THEY ARE WILLING TO HAVE SOME SORT OF CONVERSATION ABOUT NOT ONLY JUST ALLOCATING PLANS WITH THE RIGHT OF WAY BUT EVEN THE FINANCES TO PRESENT, AT LEAST IT IS SOMETHING THAT COULD BE DISCUSSED IN THE EVENT THAT THEY ARE WILLING TO MOVE FORWARD AND HAVE SOME SORT OF FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTION RECOGNIZING THAT IF THEY HAD TO DO IT ALL INDEPENDENTLY THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO BE PAY FOR THE ROADS PAVED AGAIN. AT LEAST CAN BE PART OF THE
CONVERSATION. >> IF YOU ARE DOING THAT INDEPENDENT PROCESS YOU CAN HAVE IT WORKING THROUGH THE UPPER PROCESS. WE WOULD MEET THE TIME FRAMES.
>> IF WE DID BOTH THE DRAINAGE AND THE WATER PROCESS, THEY MAY STILL HAVE TO BE SORT OF SOME MORE BECAUSE THOSE TWO AMOUNTS SURPASS THE AMOUNTS THAT ARE GOING TO BE ALLOCATED FOR THE
OPERA FUNDS. >> I THINK NANCY WILL GET INTO
>> ACTUALLY WE WILL GET INTO IT RIGHT NOW.
>> AS SHERRY HAD MENTIONED HIS DIFFERENT POINTS OF THE TIMELINE THAT WE CAN CALCULATE OUR REVENUE LOSS.
SO, WITH THAT INFORMATION AND KNOWING THAT WE CAN CALCULATE REVENUE LOSS, WE HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT EVERYTHING COSTS, AND EVERYTHING ALWAYS COMES THE MONEY.
SO JUST IN THE PRESENTATION THAT STAFF IS PROVIDED TO YOU.
RANCHES WATER IS 13.6 MILLION. THEN YOU HAVE RANCHES DRAINAGE AT 5.8, PINE SHOULD BE DRAINAGE AT 1.9, AND USING THE TWO YEARS WE WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR CITY REVENUE IS 4.8.
SO TOTALING ALL OF THOSE UP YOU ARE AT 26.1 MILLION.
NOW AS YOU KNOW ARBOR IS 17 MILLION.
RIGHT THERE YOU ARE SHORT 9.1 MILLION.
[00:50:02]
>> CAN YOU STOP RIGHT THERE. IF THE CITY REVENUE IS JUST A RECAP OF MONEY, IT IS NOT REALLY GOING TO BE SEPARATE PART OF THE COST OF THIS PROJECT. WHEN YOU HAVE TO REDUCE THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE THREE TOP PROJECTS AND SAY YOU WERE GOING TO DO THE REVENUE AND THE REST OF IT WOULD BE COVERED?
>> NO. THAT'S NOT HOW THE FLOW WOULD BE. WHAT IT IS SAYING IS YOU HAVE 17 MILLION AND YOU HAVE TO DISPERSE A 17 MILLION ON THOSE PROJECTS. WE ARE GOING TO MAKE A PROPOSAL I THINK JORDAN WHERE YOU MAY BE GOING, BUT LET ME GET THROUGH THIS FIRST. AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE THE FUTURE REVENUE. THE FUTURE REVENUE AND THIS IS ESTIMATED VERY LOW. THE TWO YEARS THAT WE DON'T HAVE CALCULATED, I AM JUST GOING AND GUESSING AT 4 MILLION.
SO NOW YOU ARE WAY OVER WHAT YOU CAN SPEND.
NOW LET ME GET INTO A LITTLE MORE DETAIL ON THE CITY REVENUE.
SO WHAT WE ARE SEEING WITH THE CITY REVENUE IS THAT IT COULD BE APPLIED TOWARDS THE GENERAL FUND.
AND AGAIN THE CRITERIA IS VERY BROAD.
WHICH WE ARE NOT YOU SO OBVIOUSLY WE FOLLOW FEMA REQUIREMENTS, AND IT IS NEVER BROAD.
SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IT SAYS WE CAN DO IS WE CAN USE THE FUNDING FOR POLICE AND FIRE. WELL AS YOU KNOW JUST IN ONE YEAR, POLICE AND FIRE IS $1 MILLION.
SO WHAT WE COULD DO IS TAKE EVERYTHING WE CAN AND REVENUE AND OFFSET IT THROUGH THE GENERAL FUND, FOR REGULAR OPERATING AND THEN WE WOULD HELP AVAILABLE DOLLARS TO POTENTIALLY MOVE AT OUR OWN PACE AND DECIDE WHAT PROJECT TO DO MOVING FORWARD. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?
>> I THINK THAT'S SORT OF THE COMMISSIONERS POINT.
THE REVENUE IS JUST THE WAY TO RECAPTURE MONEY ALREADY LAWS, IS NOT JUST YOUR MONEY BEING SPENT. SO WE ADD UP THE THREE PROJECTS, WE GET TO ROUGHLY $21.3 MILLION? AND SO, THAT WOULD BE THE IMPLICATION OF THE $17 MILLION. IT WAS TO BE A SHORTFALL OF $4.1 MILLION OFF $.3 MILLION. BUT AT LEAST THE SHORTFALL IS
LESS. >> RIGHT, IF WE DO THAT STRATEGY. SO THAT WOULD BE WHAT YOU ALL ARE GOING TO DECIDE TODAY. AND YOU KNOW,.
>> WELL I THINK IT IS TWO SEPARATE ISSUES RIGHT? ONE IS HOW ARE WE GOING TO SEEK REIMBURSEMENT OF THE ART OUT FUNDS AND THE SECOND IS ARE WE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THESE PROJECTS IF WE GET CONFIRMATION WILL WE GET THE ENTIRETY OF THE
OPERA FUN. >> I GUESS WHAT IS IT REAL CLEAR IS THE MONEY THAT IS GOING INTO THE GENERAL FUND REVENUE, CAN BE USED FOR ANYTHING. SO, TO SAY THAT THERE ARE THESE PROJECTS, THAT IS UP FOR YOU TO DECIDE.
>> THE REVENUE LOSS, IS REVENUE LOSS FROM ALL OF THE RESIDENTS IN THE DEPARTMENT. SO THAT MONEY CAN GO INTO THE GENERAL FUND, BECAUSE IT IS REVENUE THAT WE LAWS.
IT CAN BE USED AS NANCY SAID HOWEVER WE LIKE? SO WE COULD POTENTIALLY TRY TO GARNER AS MUCH REVENUE LOSS AS WE CAN, IF IT IS 8.8 MILLION OR WHATEVER, THAT STILL LEAVES 9 MILLION IN PROJECTS THAT WE NEED TO TRY TO GET COMPLETED BEFORE 2026. THAT ADDITIONAL REVENUE, IS MONEY THAT WE CAN BRING BACK TO STRATEGIC PLANNING THAT IS APRIL AND DISCUSS HOW WE WOULD LIKE TO SPEND THAT MONEY.
BECAUSE THAT MONEY CAN BE SPENT HOWEVER AT THAT POINT, BECAUSE IT IS REVENUE THAT THE RESIDENTS LOST.
>> RIGHT AT THAT POINT WE'VE ALREADY MET OUR REQUIREMENTS FOR OPERA BECAUSE RESPECTED THROUGH THE GENERAL FRONT.
>> CORRECTED, AND THEN WE DON'T NEED TO MAKE ALL OF THOSE DECISIONS NOW, WE MAKE THOSE STRATEGIC PLANNING, WHEN IN REALITY MY OPINION THE RESIDENCE AS A WHOLE IS ENTITLED TO SOME OF THE REVENUE LOSS, AS EVERYONE ELSE.
SO WE SHOULD DECIDE TO STRATEGICALLY HOW IT IS BEST
SPENT THROUGHOUT THE CITY. >> AND WE WILL NOT BE BEHOLDEN
TO ANY SORT OF TIMETABLE RIGHT? >> ONE 100% YUP.
>> THAT'S RIGHT. >> SO IF WE DID THE RANCH DRAINAGE, THE PINEY TREE DRAINAGE, THAT IS 7.2 MILLION.
7.7, AND THEN WHATEVER THE REVENUE IS, THAT STILL LEAVES US ADDITIONAL FUNDS THAT WE NEED TO FIND SOMETHING ELSE TO DO.
>> LET'S MAKE SOME ASSUMPTIONS HERE, IF WE ASSUME THAT WE ARE
[00:55:04]
GOING TO DO REVENUE AT 4.8, AND FUTURE REVENUE AT FOUR, SO RIGHT THERE IS 8.8 SITTING REVENUE. SO YOU HAVE YOUR 17 MILLION PLUS THE 8.8 LEAVES A REMAINING BALANCE OF 8.2.NOW THE TWO PROJECTS THAT YOU JUST MENTIONED MAYOR, IS THE 5.84 RANCHES DRAINAGE AND 1.9 FOR PINETREE, WHICH IS 7.7.
SO THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THOSE TWO IS SOMETHING THAT WE COULD EASILY PROBABLY OFFSET IN ADDITIONAL REVENUE BECAUSE I THINK OUR REVENUE FOR THE PROJECTION IS VERY LOW.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? I THINK FOR NOW THAT MAKES THE MOST SENSE WE ARE NOT SET TO A SPECIFIC TIMELINE WE SEE WITH THE RANCHES WATER RANCHES DRAINAGE PINETREE DRAINAGE THERE IS NOT ENOUGH FUNDS FOR THAT TO DO.
SO WE NEED TO SIT BACK AND TAKE A LOOK AT THE PLANT IN GENERAL AS A WHOLE AND SEE WHERE WE CAN DIVVY UP THE BALANCE OF THAT MONEY. TO COMPLETE WHATEVER PROJECT.
THAT WE NEED TO COMPLETE. >> TO ME I THINK IT WOULD BEHOOVE US TO CAPTURE ALL OF THE FUNDS IN OUR ACCOUNT WHETHER IT'S A REVENUE LOSS COMBINATION OF REVENUE LOSS IN THE FIRE AND POLICE AND WHATEVER CAN BE DONE. AND WE HAVE THE TOTAL PEOPLE AND MONEY IN THE ACCOUNT. WITH NO TIMELINES AND THEN IT COULD EVEN FREE UP THE ABILITY TO TALK ABOUT NOT ONLY THESE PROJECTS BUT OTHER PROJECTS IN THE MOST INTENSE VERSION OF
THESE. >> I'M NOT TRYING TO RECAPTURE
>> NO NOT REVENUE WE HAVE TO COMPLETE A COUPLE PROJECTS, BECAUSE THE REVENUE LET'S CALL IT 10 MILLION AT THE MOST.
WE ARE STILL GOING TO NEED TO COMPLETE SOME PROJECTS.
>> MY UNDERSTANDING WHAT NANCY EXPLAINED AS PART OF THE OPERA FUND ALLOCATION IS POLICE AND FIRE.
TEN SHE CAN USE IT FOR THAT. >> THE CATEGORY OF REVENUE LAWS YOU ARE LIMITED TO THAT DOLLAR AMOUNT OF TROOP REVENUE LAWS.
>> RIGHT MY POINT IS WE THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE REVENUE LOSS BETWEEN EIGHT AND 10 MILLION LAISSEZ CONSERVATIVELY $8 MILLION. WE HAVE EASILY $20 MILLION OR WHATEVER IT IS OF FIRE AND POLICE, SO WE HAVE ALREADY
$11 MILLION OVER THE MAP? >> NO, I THINK WHAT NANCY IS TRYING TO SAY IS LET'S SAY WE GET TO MILLION'S AND CITY REVENUE BACK. OF THAT 10 MILLION YOU CAN CONTRIBUTE TOWARDS A 20 MILLION A PIECE OF FIRE BUT SHE WAS STILL HAVE TO FIND A USE OR PROJECT FOR THE OTHER REMAINING SEVEN SINCE YOU MAX OUT IN THE CITY REVENUE.
>> THAT'S NOT HOW I UNDERSTAND IT, NANCY CAN WE USE THE COSTS THAT WE ATTRIBUTE TO POLICE AND FIRE AS JUSTIFICATION FOR
OFFSETTING SOME OF THESE THINGS? >> NO, YOU CAN BUT YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE JUSTIFICATION OF THE OPERA FUND AND THE QUALIFICATION IN THE CATEGORY WHICH WE ARE SAYING AS OF TODAY IS
8.8 MILLION. >> WE ARE MIXING TWO THINGS, ONE IS THE LOST REVENUE, THE OTHER IS THE POLICE AND THE FIRE.
>> POLICE AND FIRE IS NOT ONE OF THE JUSTIFIABLE POLICE AND FIRE WAS JUST PART UP AS A PART OF THE WAY TO USE AND RECAPTURE
THAT. >> HE HAS TO OFFSET IT TO EXPEND
AGAINST. >> IS REALLY ONLY ABOUT.
>> AND SHE COULD AFFECT ANYTHING FOR THE REVENUE SHE COULD'VE SAID WASTE MANAGEMENT, SHE JUST SAID POLICE AND FIRE, THAT WAS JUST, SHE WAS JUST USING THAT AS THAT IS A BIG TICKET ITEM IN OUR EXPENSES THAT SHE CAN'T IMMEDIATELY USE WHATEVER 4 MILLION SHE CAN CUT THEM A CHECK FOR 4 MILLION TODAY BECAUSE WE OWE THEM THAT MUCH. THIS YEAR, WHERE YOU KNOW SO SHE WAS JUST USING POLICE AND FIRE AS A MEANS TO PAY DOWN OUR
BILLS. >> LET ME ASK ANOTHER QUESTION BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I AM CLEAR ON THIS STUFF.
WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS THE DECISION A PROCEDURAL DECISION ON HOW TO MAKE THIS MONEY -- TAKE THIS MONEY AND ONE OF THE DECISIONS INVOLVES NOT ALLOCATING FUNDS TO ONE OF THE PROJECTS. THAT IS WHAT I AM UNDERSTANDING.
YOU ARE CUTTING OUT THE $13.6 MILLION, AND IT ENCOMPASSES THE RANCHES WATER PROJECT WHICH WOULD INCLUDE DOING THE ROWS IN THE RANCHES. AND YOU ARE TRADING THAT FOR THE
>> SO YOU CAN PUT THOSE MONIES INTO YOUR COFFERS AND USE IT FOR WHATEVER PURPOSE, THAT MEANS THAT THE OPPORTUNITY TO ACTUALLY GET RANCHES WATER THAT THEY NEED AND THERE AROSE FACTS, GOES BY
THE WAYSIDE. >> IT'S YOUR DECISION TO MAKE.
[01:00:06]
>> IT DOESN'T GO BY THE WAYSIDE, WAS IT DOES IS GUARANTEE THAT WE ARE ABLE TO USE ALL OF THE REVENUE WITHOUT A TIMELINE.
WHAT WE END UP USING THAT MONEY FOR IT IS UP TO US.
BECAUSE IF WE DO WITH THE RANCHES, WATER, AND ROADS, AND WE WANT TO DO THAT NOW. THEN IF WE DO THE RANCHES DRAINAGE, AND THE PINETREE DRAINAGE, WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY. AND WE HAVEN'T COLLECTED ANY OF THE REVENUE. SO RIGHT NOW THOSE THREE PROJECTS ARE MORE THAN WHAT WE ARE GETTING.
>> SO MY UNDERSTANDING COMMISSIONER COLOR IS THAT WE ARE JUST LOOKING FOR A WAY TO JUSTIFY TAKING IN THE $17 MILLION, ONCE WE JUSTIFY IT, HOWEVER WE CAN DO IT WHETHER HIS PARTIAL LOSS REVENUE OR COMBINATION.
THEN WE CAN DECIDE WITHOUT ANY TIMELINES WITHOUT ANY CONTINGENCIES WITHOUT ANY AUDIT OR OVERSIGHT TO SPEND THAT MONEY ON WHAT EVER WE DEEM APPROPRIATE INCLUDING IF IT IS INAPPROPRIATE THE RANCHES WATER PROJECT. IT IS JUST A WAY TO GET OUT ELF, AS I UNDERSTAND IT THE AUDIT AND TIMELINE PROCESS AND HAVE THOSE
FUNDS IN THE DOOR CLEAN. >> YUP, THAT'S FOR US.
>> YEP BUT IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THE WAY IS PRESENTED, AND A MINIMUM THE ALLOCATION OF THE 5.8 IN THE 1.9 PROJECTS THAT NEED TO BE PUT IN WITH THE DIN TIMEFRAME.
AND THEN WHATEVER THE REMAINING MONIES ARE STILL GOING TO PRESENT SECURING THE RANCH WATER STREET PROJECT.
SO YOU ARE EITHER GOING TO COME OUT OF POCKET FROM THE CITY COPPER FROM SHORT OF HIS ASSESSMENT TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THE RANCH TO ACCOMPLISH THAT PROJECT.
AND YOU LOSE THE IMPETUS OF TRYING TO GET THIS PROJECT DONE IN A FASHION THAT IMPLIES WITH THAT TIME FRAMES ARE FOR SECURING THESE FUNDS. THE THING THAT I LIKE ABOUT THE PROJECT, OR THE POTENTIAL FOR THIS PROJECT IS THAT IT PUTS ON US THE OWNERS TO GET SOMETHING DONE THAT HAS NEEDED TO VENT DOWN FOR MANY, MANY YEARS NOW. YOU KNOW THIS CONCEPT OF GETTING WATER TO THE RANCHES, AND GETTING THESE ROADS FACE IS SOMETHING I HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR FIVE YEARS NOW.
AND I UNDERSTAND THE ASPECTS OF PROCEDURALLY GETTING TO MONEY INTO THE COFFERS BUT LET'S NOT LOSE SIGHT OF THE FACT THAT WE HAVE CERTAIN THINGS THAT WE NEED TO GET ACCOMPLISHED HERE IN THE
CITY. >> KNOW I WAS GOING TO SAY I DON'T DISAGREE THAT IT ALL, IT IS IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT THAT REGARDLESS OF HOW WE DIVVY THIS OUT THERE IS GOING TO BE A SHORTFALL. EVEN SAYING THAT WE WANT TO DO ALL THREE IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE COMING OUT OF THE COFFERS ANYWAY. SO IT'S NOT LIKE WE GET TO PICK AND CHOOSE RIGHT NOW AND MAXIMIZE THE FINES AND NOT USE ANY ADDITIONAL MONEY. MY POINT WOULD BE THE DRAINAGE SEEMS MUCH MORE LIKE A SIMPLE PROJECT THAT WE KNOW CAN BE DONE BY THE DEADLINE. AND THE OTHER THING I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION IS NOT TO SAY THAT WE WANT TO DELAY THE RANCHES WATER AND ROADS FOR UNDO PERIODS OF TIME.
BUT WE HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND WE ARE BETWEEN HERE AND POTENTIALLY WHAT GOES DOWN AT THE END OF LOXAHATCHEE FROM NOW.
AND POTENTIALLY AN PINETREE ROW IF THERE IS GOING TO BE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF PROJECTS OVER THE NEXT FIVE TO SIX YEARS.
SO THE THING IS GOING TO HAPPEN IS WE DON'T WANT ALL THIS TO BE DONE AT THE SAME TIME I THINK WE HAVE TO BE SMART ABOUT HOW WE PICK IT UP SO FROM NOT ONLY FOR FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE BUT JUST CITY MANAGEMENT. TO MAKE SURE IT IS NOT CHAOS.
>> YEAH AND ONE THING IT GIVES US TIME TO DECIDE BROUGHT UP MAKE SENSE TO CHAIR OF THE ROAD INTO THE WATER AND SEWER.
MAYBE THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO DO.
ALSO HAVE TO CONSIDER SOME SORT OF DO WE NEED TO ASSESS THE RESIDENTS OF THE RANCHES? WE ARE GOING TO GIVE THEM ROADS AND WATER, WITH NO ASSESSMENT WHEN THAT REVENUE LOSS IS LEGITIMATE LIVE REVENUE LOSS FROM ALL OF THE RESIDENTS OF PARKLAND. SO RIGHT NOW WE HAD A LAWSUIT WITH PINETREE, WE ARE HAVING ISSUES WITH FIXING THEIR ROADS, SO LET'S SPEND THE 17 MILLION ON THE RANCHES WITHOUT ASSESSING THEM SO WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT I THINK THAT IS BY US TAKING AS MUCH REVENUE AS POSSIBLE AS THIS TIME TO SAY OKAY WE KNOW WHAT STRATEGIC PLANNING IS COMING IN APRIL, THESE ARE PROJECTS WE WANT TO DO THESE DEPOSITS THAT NEED TO HAPPEN HOW DO WE GO AND MAKE THEM HAPPEN FOR ALL THE RESIDENTS OF PARKLAND.
I THINK THAT'S THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS PLAN AND WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. LET'S TAKE ALL THE MONEY AS FAST AS WE CAN AND LEAVE IT HERE AND NOW LET'S DISCUSS HOW ARE WE GOING TO DO ONE OF THESE PROJECTS.
PLUS THE OTHER PROJECTS WE HAVE HIGH WE DO IT'S ALWAYS FAIR AND EQUITABLE FOR ALL THE RESIDENTS OF PARKLAND.
[01:05:02]
>> MY UNDERSTANDING IS WHETHER IT'S A QUESTION OF WHETHER THE MONEY IS CONTINGENT ON FREE AND CLEAR.
IF IT IS CONTINGENT, WE GOTTA START GETTING THESE OUT THE DOOR RIGHT AWAY. TO MAKE IT JUSTIFIABLE AS OPPOSED TO BECAUSE IF WE DID THESE THREE PROJECTS ALONE.
WE BE AT A $4.3 MILLION SHORTAGE SO WHERE IS THAT $4.3 MILLION IF WE COMMITTING TO THESE PROJECTS TODAY WHERE IS THAT $4.3 MILLION COMING FROM MY UNDERSTANDING FROM NANCY IN THE BUDGET PERSPECTIVE IS WE ARE ALREADY GOING TO BE AT THE DEFICIT IN A YEAR OR SO, SO WE HAVE GOT TO FIGURE THAT OUT.
SO THIS GIVES US IF THEY ARE NOT CONDITIONAL FUNDS, AND THERE IS NO TIMELINE, THIS GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE DO THESE PROJECTS ANALYZIG THE SEWER ISSUE AND WHERE THE FUNDS ARE GOING TO COME FROM ON THE SHORTFALL.
>> I THINK THE OTHER THING TO LOOK AT IS OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE OUTLINED STAFF AS OUTLINED THESE TWO PROJECTS.
I DON'T KNOW IF THERE ARE OTHERS 0 WHAT THE MAGNITUDE OF THE OTHERS ARE. BUT I'M SURE THAT SOMEWHERE ALONG THE WAY YOU CAN HAVE 20 PROJECT.
THE THING I LIKE ABOUT USING THESE THREE IS FOR THE MOST PART THEY ARE SHOVEL READY. EXCEPT MAYBE FOR THE RANCHES MOST OF THEM UP TO MY SHOVEL READY.
SO AGAIN THERE MAY BE OTHER PROJECTS THAT WE DECIDE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH. THERE MAY BE COMPLICATIONS OF MATERIALS AND PLANNING AND DESIGN AND OTHER CHALLENGES.
THE OTHER THING IS AND KUDOS TO SHERRY SINCE SHE HAS BEEN HERE.
SHE IS BEEN ABLE TO GET US MONEY FROM DIFFERENT PLACES THIS KEEP HER FINGERS CROSSED. WHICH COULD HELP MITIGATE SOME OF THE COST AS WELL. WE GET 3 MILLION THAT 1.9 GOES AWAY THAT COULD BE ADDED TO THE RANCHES WATER.
THAT IS ANOTHER THING THE REVENUE LOSS.
IT IS PROJECTED TO BE AT 4.0 IN THE FUTURE MAYBE IS 5.0 MAYBE 6.0 WE DON'T KNOW. SO THAT IS ANOTHER REVENUE STREAM THAT COULD BE ADDED. SO IT IS KIND OF MOVING WITH INSIDE THAT VACUUM OF PARAMETERS OF WHAT IS WHAT AND BACK TIMING TO SAY WE ARE LOOKING AT RANCHES WATER PROJECT IN JULY 2025.
LET'S SAY THERE IS A TIMELINE AND IS NOT UNTIL 2027.
WHAT REVENUE ARE WE OUT IF WE PROJECTED TO GO FORWARD? SO I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT COMMISSION OR COLOR, AND I CERTAINLY AGREE WITH YOU THAT THERE ARE PROJECTS THAT WE DEFINITELY NEED TO DO. AND I DON'T THINK ANY OF US ARE SAYING THAT WE DON'T WANT TO DO IT.
WE ARE JUST TRYING TO LOOK AT STRATEGICALLY HOW TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT, SO THAT WE COVER ALL OF THE COSTS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED. AND I THINK AS I SAID, SITTING HERE WITH THESE THREE PROJECTS, THEY ARE ALL WORTHWHILE AND I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO DO THEM ALL.
BUT AGAIN, THE FINANCIAL IMPACT IS FIGURING THAT OUT.
>> SO LET ME ASK ONE ADDITIONAL QUESTION MAY BE BUILT IN RESPONSE TO THIS. OF THESE PROJECTS THAT YOU'VE HIGHLIGHTED THAT YOU THINK ARE THE BEST FOR POTENTIAL FOR THE UTILIZATION OF THESE FUNDS, WHICH OF THEM IN YOUR OPINION IN YOUR EXPERT OPINION IS THE ONE THAT IS IN THE MOST NEED AND HAS THE MOST POTENTIAL FOR PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH HEALTH AND SAFETY AND WELL CLEAR OF OUR COMMUNITY.
SO THAT I CAN AT LEAST IN MY MIND UNDERSTAND FROM A PRIORITY ORGANIZATION STANDPOINT WHAT WE NEED TO BE FOCUSING ON TO GET
SOMETHING DONE? >> IT IS A TOUGH QUESTION BUT I WILL GIVE YOU MY HONEST OPINION. THE TWO PROJECTS THAT FROM THE PUBLIC WORKS PERSPECTIVE THAT I FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO DO AND ONE BEING AS WE SAT IN OUR PLANNING MEETING AND PUT THIS PRESENTATION TOGETHER WOULD BE RANCHES DRAINAGE PROJECT SECOND WOULD BE CONTRARY DRAINAGE PROJECT THE REASON I SAY THIS IS BECAUSE THERE IS SOME SAFETY RISK ASSOCIATED WITH NOT TAKING CARE OF THE BRANCH DRAINAGE SOONER THAN LATER.
THE WATER PROJECT AND THE ROPE LEAVING CAN HAPPEN AFTERWARDS.
BUT I GET TO GET THE STITCHES FIXED.
I'M GONNA RUN A BUNCH A HEAVY EQUIPMENT DOWN THERE.
THAT IS THE FIRST ORDER OF PRIORITY BEFORE YOU CAN EVER DO THE WATER AND YOU CAN DO THE ROADS OUT THAT YOU WOULD NOT WANT TO DO ANY OF THAT UNTIL I GET THE DITCHES THAT YOU CAN
[01:10:03]
ALWAYS GO BACK INTO THE SEWER IN THE WATER IN THE SEPARATE THINGS. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT FLOODING AND WE ARE COMPROMISING AND WE ARE RISKING PEOPLE'S HOMES AND THEIR STRUCTURES. THAT CURRENTLY BEING SERVED WITH WATER IT WEATHERS WELL OR SEPTIC.AND I DON'T WANT TO DENIGRATE OR BELITTLE ANYBODY SYSTEM BUT THEY DO HAVE IT. IF YOU DON'T HAVE YOUR HOME AND YOU GET FLOODED OUT, YOU CANNOT COME DOWN THE ROPE, YOU CAN GET EMERGENCY SERVICES DOWN THE DEBT IS A BIG PROBLEM SO THE DRAINAGE IN PINETREE AND RANCH IN MY PERSONAL OPINION THOSE YOU TWO
HIGHEST PRIORITIES. >> OKAY ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THIS ONE? SO DO YOU THINK YOU HAVE ENOUGH DIRECTION NANCY?
>> LET ME DO A RECAP JUST SO I FEEL COMFORTABLE.
OKAY SO WE HAVE THE TWO PROJECTS, THAT WE WILL GO AHEAD AND START ON IT RIGHT AWAY, WHICH IS SHORT DRAINAGE PROJECT, YOU HAVE DRAINAGE FOR THE RANCH AND YOU HAD DRAINAGE FROM PINETREE. THOSE TWO PROJECTS TOTAL 7.7 MILLION. SO, WE WILL MOVE FORWARD
TOMORROW ON THESE PROJECTS. >> OKAY.
>> OKAY, SO WE HAVE THE 17 MILLION AND WE ALREADY DEDUCED OF THAT 17 MILLION, 8.8 CAN GO INTO THE GENERAL FUND.
SO I INITIALLY IT SOUNDS LIKE WE ARE TAKING IT AWAY FROM THE RANCHES ROAD, I MEAN, FROM THE RANCHES WATER PROJECT.
WE ARE REALLY NOT BECAUSE IT JUST GOES BACK TO THE GENERAL FUND AND WE CAN'T USE IT WITH OUT A TIMELINE.
THAT IS CRITICAL FOR US TO NOT HAVE A TIMELINE ON INSTALLATION OF WATER LINES IN ROAD ASPHALT AS WE ALL KNOW THESE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS ARE GOING TO BE GIGANTIC IN THE WHOLE COUNTRY THIS IS NOT JUST HAPPENING TO US, THESE DOLLARS FROM THE TREASURY AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ARE ALL OVER THE UNITED STATES. SO PULLING ON THE RESOURCES AND ASSETS IS GOING TO BE DIFFICULT, SO TIMING WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE FLEXIBILITY. AND NOT SAYING WE AREN'T DOING ANYTHING, WE COULD STILL MOVE FORWARD WITH THE RIDGES, BUT WE WOULD HAVE TO DECIDE HOW MUCH DO YOU WANT TO PUT TOWARDS THE RANCHES PROJECT AND HOW MUCH YOU WANT TO ASSESS BACK TO RESIDENTS AND NO DIFFERENT WITH WHAT YOU ARE DISCUSSING WITH YOUR PINETREE, HOW MUCH DO YOU WANT TO ASSESS PINETREE? SO I THINK ONCE YOU HAVE ALL OF YOUR DUCKS IN A ROW, YOU WILL KNOW WHAT YOU ARE ABLE TO SPEND, WHAT YOU HAVE TO PULL FROM, AND WHAT YOU HAVE TO ASSESS. BUT BY STICKING IT AND THROWING IT THROUGH THE GENERAL FUND, YOU ARE ELIMINATING THAT TIMING.
AND I WOULD, I HOPE THAT'S WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.
>> YES, I THINK WE ARE, COULD BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE KNOW WE HAVE A SHORTFALL. RIGHT NOW I DON'T THINK WE ARE IN A POSITION TO SAY YOU KNOW, LET'S SPECIALIZE THIS WE ARE NOT IN A POSITION TO DO THAT. SO I THINK TAKING AS MUCH BACK TO THE GENERAL FUND AS POSSIBLE, KNOWING THAT THESE PROJECTS ARE A HIGH PRIORITY FOR COMMISSIONER CUTLER, WE KNOW THAT, WE UNDERSTAND THAT, AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT AS STRATEGIC PLANNING. AND THEN WE WILL BE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT HOW WE CAN FIND IT AND HOW MUCH WE CAN ALL THOSE THINGS WE CAN TALK ABOUT AS STRATEGIC PLANNING.
WE DON'T HAVE TO BE RUSHED WITH AN APRIL 30 DATE.
>> JUST ONE FOLLOW-UP ON THE RICHEST WATER IF WE CAN ALSO BEGIN TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH THAT TO SEE AGAIN ANOTHER SOURCE OF REVENUE OR COLLABORATION TO SEE WHAT THEY ARE WILLING TO DO.
>> CHORE. >> EVENTUALLY YOU PUT IN THE WALL THAT THEY ARE THE ONES ARE GOING TO REAP THE BENEFITS.
>> MAYBE WE'LL GET LUCKY AND WE'LL FIND OUT ABOUT THE GRANT SOONER THAN LATER AND WE CAN TAKE THAT 1.9 OFF, AND YOU KNOW
THAT SOMEWHERE ELSE. >> THE OTHER PART THAT I WOULD ALSO I DON'T THINK IT IS TOO LATE TO CREATE A STATE APPROPRIATIONS BUT THERE IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO TO KIND OF HELP PERPETUATE THOSE WHERE THERE IS A WATER PROJECT IN THE RANCHES, OR DRAINAGE PROJECT WE CAN KINDA SEE IF WE CAN GET SOME
STATE HELP ON THAT. >> AND NANCY, I WOULD JUST READ REWARD YOUR SUMMATION. I THINK THE FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS IS TO SEE HOW WE CAN MAXIMIZE UNRESTRICTED FUNDS JUSTIFIED FROM THIS MONEY. SO IF SHERRY IS ABLE TO FIND OUT BETWEEN NOW AND APRIL THAT WE CAN GIVE PROJECTIONS BASED ON THE SAME PERCENTAGES AND THEREFORE WE CAN JUSTIFY INSTEAD OF 8.8 TO 10 MILLION OR $11 MILLION.
[01:15:04]
TO GET THOSE FUNDS UNRESTRICTED WOULD BE THE PRIORITY.BECAUSE THAT IN COMBINATION IF WE GET THE 3 MILLION-DOLLAR GRANT, IT MAY PUSH US WHERE WE CAN DO THESE TWO DRAINAGE PROJECTS WITHOUT HAVING BOTH OF THEM TIED TO SOME DEADLINE OR SOME PRESSURE THAT WE HAVE GOT TO COMPLETE THEM OR WE WOULD LOSE THAT FUNDING. SO I THINK WE WANT TO SECURE AS MUCH FUNDING AS WE CAN WITHOUT ANY CONDITIONS AND THEN FIGURE OUT HOW WE BACKFILL THE REMAINING FUNDS AVAILABLE.
>> I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR ANTHONY SOMEONE BROUGHT UP A POINT TO ME THAT I JUST GOT KNOWLEDGE ON THERE IS SOME FLORIDA LEGISLATION OR LAW THAT IS DESIGNED TO TRY TO REMOVE IN THESE AREAS SEPTIC TANKS AND SUPPOSEDLY IF THERE IS AN ACTUAL NOW YOU CAN REQUEST A REQUEST TO GRANT IS ANYWAY WE CAN LOOK INTO THAT? I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF OBVIOUSLY IF THAT'S THE CASE THAT MIGHT BE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY FOR MONEY SHOULD WE GET TO THAT.DOWN THE ROAD.
CERTAINLY WE CAN LOOK AT IT. >> 500 AT STATE LEVEL.
>> THERE HAS BEEN A PUSH BY THE GOVERNOR TO HAVE SEPTIC TO SEWER CONVERSIONS. THERE'S BEEN SOME CONCERN IN THE RANCHES TO BROWARD COUNTY, WE MAINTAIN THE EXEMPTION, SO THAT EVEN IF YOU KNOW A SEPTIC LINE IS PUT UP AND DOWN THE STREET YOU WOULD HAVE FIVE YEARS TO HOOK IT UP.
>> CORRECT BUT I BELIEVE. THAT AREA HAS BEEN EXEMPTED.
>> YES WE BEEN EXAM FOR THAT AREA.
>> I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE EXEMPTION I'M TALKING TO THE EXTENT THAT HIS ACTUAL FUNDS ALLOCATED.
>> I MEAN, THEY'VE BEEN ALLOCATING THAT FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS WE ARE PROJECTS THAT HAVE SPENT MIAMI-DADE ABOUT
FIE OR $6 MILLION. >> I THINK YOU TOLD ME EARLIER.
>> WE'VE APPLIED IN THE PAST THEY WANT YOU TO INVEST SOME MONEY IN THIS SO THEY WANT YOU TO INVEST IN A DESIGN, AND AMORT SHOVEL READY FOR ME A PROJECT THAT HAS A CHANCE.
THEY WANT TO PUT SOMETHING ON THE RECORD, STRATEGIC PLANNING WE DID TALK ABOUT A SHORT ELEMENT FOR THIS AREA AND I JUST WANT TO PUT ON THE RECORD, WE HAD SOME ESTIMATES NOT FROM A DESIGN PLAN, BUT OUR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ARE JUST BASED UPON ENGINEERING, KINDA DID LIKE A ROUGH TAKE OFF TO GIVE US SOMETHING TO PLAY AROUND WITH AS FAR AS DOLLARS AND THE $2,018 ON THIS IS ALREADY A $24 MILLION. FOR THE SEWER AND ANY ROW WORK ASSOCIATED WITH SEWAGE. THE SEWERS ARE DIFFERENT FROM WATER. WHEN YOU PUT A WATER LINE IN AS SOON AS YOU AROUND 3 FEET DEEP. WITH THE SEWER LINE YOU CAN DIG WAY DEEPER. SO IF YOU PUT SEWER AND YOU ARE COMPROMISING THE ENTIRE INDUSTRY.
>> YOU SAID THAT WAS 2018? >> I DID NOT APPLY THAT WITH THE MULTIPLIER THAT WE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE.
JUST CRAZY NUMBERS AND WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT GETTING LAND FOR THOSE LISTINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT.
IF WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT MOST LIKE YOU'RE JUST PAYING VALUE FOR THAT LAND FOR THE STATION THAT YOU ALSO SOLVING.
SO WE ARE TALKING SERIOUS DOLLARS.
YOU WOULD PROBABLY NEED SAY FUNDING.
>> THAT'S WHY ALSO IT'S WORTH LOOKING INTO THE STENT WE HAVE TO SPEND SOME MONEY TO GET SOME MONEY I UNDERSTAND THAT.
BUT I WOULD STILL LIKE TO KNOW THE PARAMETERS.
THIS MEANT TO DOLLARS CAN WE GET 20 I DON'T KNOW.
>> POSSIBLY IT IS BEEN A CRAPSHOOT AND ROBBIE HAS ON THIS FOR YEARS, BUT THE DESIGN ON THAT YOU'LL PROBABLY SPEND IN EXCESS OF $1 MILLION TRY TO DO THAT.
>> MOST OF THE GRANTS THAT ARE SEEN ARE USUALLY 5050 SPLIT.
THE CITY MUNICIPALITY PLAYS 50% REPAIR THE OTHERS WHEN ONE
MATCH. >> I JUST WANT TO GET SOME
INFORMATION ON THANK YOU. >> I JUST OUGHT TO WANT TO ADVERSARY, AND I KNOW YOU HAVE BEEN DOING THIS FOR SOME.
BUT I GOT A CALL FROM ONE OF OUR REPRESENTATIVES IN THE STATE.
THEY ARE HAPPY TO PROVIDE ANY SORT OF SUPPORT LETTERS, GUIDANCE OR WHATEVER ON THESE GRANTS.
AND I KNOW YOU HAVE BEEN DOING THAT ON THE FEDERAL LEVEL AS WELL. SO LET'S JUST KEEP THAT IN MIND AS WELL WE GOT YOU KNOW ET CETERA ET CETERA SO WE CAN
UTILIZE SUPPORT ON THAT. >> YES THEY'LL SEND LETTERS IN
THE LAST GRANT THAT WE GOT. >> OKAY ANYBODY ELSE WERE GOOD?
>>
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.