sideways. Don't Don't hit that pretty blue bike down there. That thing's expensive. Yeah. call this meeting to order at 501. All right. And
say a little prayer first. So Lord God, please help us guide this city, make some great decisions on some good projects and please watch over United States to go through this trying time. And uh we pray for the memory of Charlie
Kirk and his family. And thank you for all your many blessings in Jesus Christ. Amen. To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God,
indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. All right, we have the approval of the minutes, any uh comments or
changes? Not motion to approve. Motion to approve. Second. Have a second. All in favor say I. I I all oppose say nay. Motion carries. Okay.
Next the financial report. Good evening commissioners, chair, members of the public. Uh nothing really notable here other than you will see a transfer from the batted parcel acquisition account to the professional services account in the amount of $39,763.
This was the deficit uh that we had identified at our last meeting with the issuance of the task order for for the railroad crossing um task order. So that's really the only thing that's changed since our last meeting. So I guess we need to make Thank you. Motion to accept financial
report. Second. All in favor say I. I. All oppose say nay. Motion carries. Thank you for that. Next item I have here is uh the growth and development assistance grant tracking sheet. Uh since our last meeting, I've had the pleasure of uh making two new grant
awards and I've closed out six. This brings our total for this fiscal year to 43, which is a sum of about $161,000 year to date. That's about a 71% increase year-over-year. So great, lot of interest in it. Um a lot of
success there for sure. A lot of people helped. Yeah, most definitely. Definitely. Yeah. I also included in this tracking sheet a chart just kind of itemizing or grouping rather the grants their values and and their quantities for your um
research and efforts are review. [Music] Okay. Great. All right. Moving on to the new business. All right. So, the first item I have is a request to approve incomebased roofing improvement grant for 221 Loftton
Street. The applicant is here in the audience tonight. I did receive an application from her. She does appear to meet the income qualifications uh for this program. She does have a a roof, a shingled roof that has evidently reached its end of life. I think it's a a
rebroof on top of a an existing shingle roof. So, I did receive two quotes, the lowest of which is $11,100. that includes a thousand dollar allowance for unforeseen wood rot. So I'm requesting approval for this grant program.
So with the allowance that's uh it is not to exceed that amount. That's correct. It gives us some some um buffer uh in in the the grant award. So in the event that they start pulling off those layers of shingles and they find wood rot, we don't have to go back and amend the grant. We simply have an
allowance. If it exceeds that $1,000, then we'll have to come back and and address that. But so far, $1,000 seems to be more than enough to handle most of the wood rod that they bought. Okay. All right. Does someone want to make a motion?
Motion to approve. Second. All right. Any discussion? Okay. All in favor say I. I. All oppose say nay. Motion carries. All right. Um I believe in in respect for the fire chief we have a request to
move uh item I believe it's F as uh fox tried on the agenda up to the next item. So that is um an update on the uh the task order plus direction on that if that's acceptable. Is that acceptable? Yeah. Okay.
All right. So I did receive a proposal from three notch group on the engineering and design work for the renovations identified by the fire chief and the city. Uh in the conversations that I had with the engineering consultant, uh they reached out to to
several um structural engineers, the closest one which is out of Pensacola, didn't really want to provide a proposal. He had some reservations about being able to harden that building with the current ling codes considering its its age and what it was designed to.
They did end up finding a structural engineer out of Mon, Georgia uh who agreed to provide a proposal. They had similar reservations but thought that you know something that they could they could work out. Um so in some that total cost for the design and engineering is
$77,50. Um and if the board would like to move forward with that, we can issue that task order and they can get started. Okay. So, you need a um you need a motion, you need approval on this, right? Does
anyone want to make a motion? And this is the only one that we got. Correct. So, the city has two engineering consultants through their continuing services agreement that allows us to reach out to them to receive these proposals without going out for bid um in an effort to kind of
equalize or or make it fair across the two. Um I reached out to three notch group uh to allow them an opportunity because we're going to have another task order that I've um I've gotten from Anchor Engineering, which is the other consultant. So this is the only quote that we got,
but we got it through the continuing services agreement that the city has. So go ahead. So if we wanted to get another proposal, then we would have to go out for like a request for proposal type or RFQ or RFP or something.
Yeah, if if we didn't use Anchor Engineering, uh I could certainly reach out and see if they wanted to provide a proposal and and what that fee would be. Um, but if if we weren't able to to use either of those engineering consultants, then yes, we'd have to to issue an RFP or an RFQ uh to hire a consultant um
based on, you know, the qualifications, not necessarily the price in that case. Did you talk to Ankor and did they say they had a structural? No, I I went straight to three group um just basically due to the the value in the task orders we already have with
Anchor. I tried to make it fair with Three Dons group. Um, but I'd be glad to to reach out to them and see if they want to provide a a proposal um, similar to what three group did. So, I think that might be a good idea at this point, but I also think
potentially we might need to talk to uh, city council again with the information we have now about the the structural issues and just make sure that they're going to want to move forward. Um, but
also potentially look at the idea of if we don't fix the win rating, do they want us to go ahead and fix other things if that's going to be the the part that's kind of stopping us from doing the project about, you know, as far as cost? Sure. So, I I say maybe get another proposal
from Anchor and then go back to city council and kind of give them an update of what we know so far and just make sure they want us to keep moving forward. Okay. Is there any work that we can start doing immediately that doesn't require any of this?
Uh, unfortunately, I don't think so. Um, other than having these conversations, you know, physically, I don't I don't think there's really a whole lot we can do there. Um, you know, a lot of the building code um requirements have changed substantially since when that
building was uh constructed. uh those all need to be identified in my opinion you know by an engineering consultant you know to what degree they need to be brought up to the structural piece is is obviously the most difficult that being a red iron building um you know there are a lot of components there that
weren't designed for a particular wing coat in fact it's probably likely that they weren't designed for any you know link code um at all and so in that case it's taking a a building that wasn't designed you know, for wind code rating and
trying to make it into a building. Um, that is can be extremely difficult and pricey is what I was told. Um, a lot of it has to do the foundation work. Um, you know, hardening some of the components of the red iron, you know, things of that nature. In a home, it's a
lot easier, you know, where you can go and and place clips and connectors and all those kind of things. Um but in the commercial building as I've understood from the conversations it's it's a little bit more involved and a little bit more difficult. So
and then do you think just from experience that anchor is going to be significantly different from that number? I really don't know. Um you know I don't think there are a lot of structural engineers. Um that's a lot of the problem. You know there are a lot of civil engineers but not a lot that that
specialize in structural engineering. um you know a large component of this cost I mean if not 90% of it is the structural engineering so you know I think there are some local firms uh that you know do have the expertise
I I really don't know um I think that when you get into structural work it gets very expensive um because of that specialty uh but it's it's possible it could be less it's possible it could be more I really don't know to be honest with Well, by having the other then as far as
public's concerned, at least we have something, you know, a choice. Yeah, sure. Like I said, I'd like to no matter what we do, if we're going to move forward with it, we have to have engineering done. Sure. Period. So, we're going have to spend some money on that. But I'd want to I'd still want to talk to city council and
see, you know, if it does come back where, hey, that part of the building is going to be to the point where we can't afford to do it. Do we still move forward with the other parts that we just scrap the whole project? Because that's going to help me make my decision if we're going to spend 77,000 on
engineering for a building that they have no interest in fixing. If they if they don't, you know what I mean? Are you thinking of uh instead of just a new building? Is that what you're thinking? Well, no, we can't. Well, we can't do any building. So, what I'm saying is I want to make sure that if we get this
this back, this proposal back and everything else that needs to be done is I'm throwing out random numbers, so don't hold anything to this, is a million dollars, but the structural part of it $10 million. Are they okay with us doing everything except for that?
Or do they want it completely done or nothing at all? That's what I want. That's what I want to know. Have they given you any indication of that? No. I think the engineer that they reached out to, the structural engineer in Pensacola,
their opinion was that it would probably be more cost effective to build new than it would be to retro a building that is as old as this one. Um, as far as pricing is concerned, I did speak with the engineering consultant to see if they had any, you know, professional
opinion on what the cost would be. And it's it's really hard to come up with one because they don't know exactly what components need to be hardened, placed, upgraded, so forth and so on. So, I no, I don't I don't really have a price. So, I would ask uh Clay, can if we wanted to
just help the city by building a new building, is that something with going to the tax authorities we could do or not? Or is it gets too gray? Here's the problem. Where are we building a new building? Just say uh the the old armory property
that's vacant over by the girls, the old So, you could ask. I just think that the problem is you're going to be talking about a five-year project by the time you get it designed, you get everything handled. We deal with our financing. I I think the bigger concern
there is be the financing of the debt service because they're not going to want to issue public financing in bonds for a construction project that has not even been designed. You know, the construction of a new fire
station. We're going to give you $10 million line of credit. you're going to do these five projects, you can spend 10 million on one building. It gets going to be a very hard time getting the lender to sign off on that. That's why when I proposed this first came up, the discussion of a new fire department south of town as a secondary borrowing
position makes a lot more sense than trying to do that first. So, the ability to upgrade and try to refurbish and bring the per current fire department to a workable condition made a lot more sense with our current money and our debt service we're looking at than trying to do one that we don't
know where the land is and we need to know where to go. U Chief, I'll let you weigh in. I mean, I know you're you're shaking your head. No, you're not want to weigh in. I won't let him weigh. Well, he's welcome to weigh in, but he's not going. I just I would say I think
there's going to always be a benefit if we can do one here and do one in the future is a much better use of our efforts than trying just to commit to doing one right now because you're not making any repairs right now with the current bill. Yeah. Chief, you have any problem with that at
all? That's a head nod. No. So, well, and yeah, and and Josh's point there as well, too. The other fire department has been on the CIP. So, we got a three-ear window that when I say it's a fiveyear window, that's what I'm referring to. Just so we're clear. I
probably should have, but when I say five years, I don't honestly think it's going to take five years to build, but you got three years. Then, even if we have designs ready to go, how quick can you finance, pull it, and do it? That's the issue. Got it. Well, can the CRA legally build a new fire department? We probably could with
the consent of the fire district if the fire department was engaged as part of our initiatives and our plan, but it has to be off the CIP for at least three years. Okay. The CIP. Yeah. Construction construction of fire and police buildings is specifically allowable with the consent of the tax in
parts. So technically that's more in line with what the statute contemplates than just doing an upgrade to existing bill. We're going to have to do that anyway. That's why I was asking this question, but I wasn't thinking about CIP. Yeah, that's much more in line with what we can do even to what and what we're doing is not out of bounds. I don't want to
make it sound that way, but the concept there was to build new buildings to allow community policing initiatives to allow there's some interactive things they do with fire departments now and for assistance with the community that fundamentally you don't see. And so
that'd be something we be looking at in the future. So, I mean, if it's if it ends up being cost prohibitive to fix this one, couldn't we in five years whenever that comes off the CF, couldn't we tear that one down and build one right where it's at? Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I'll let the chief talk if he Not today. Not today, but
I'll let the chief at some point when that time comes, talk about the logistics of where that fire department is located relative to the train tracks, relative to 90 response times and other issues. That's always been something and
I, you know, it's we've had various fire chiefs have various opinions. I'll say that. I know from my conversations, he's welcome to come up here and correct me, but he that spot's kind of a a sweet spot. It is. That's why I was saying if we can tear that one down and build a new one, why are we wasting money fixing an old building?
If it's going to cost three times as much to bring it up to code than it would be to tear it down and build something better. Well, the problem is that we got a three-year delay on a fire station and I need to go back and look at how it's entered into the CIP, but I believe it just is new fire station south of
I don't know that it's specifically design. It's been talked about, but I think it just says new fire station is what I recall it being. So, we can get away with the enhancements. We just can't get away with the new building. Okay. The new building itself contemplated keeping an old building and building a new building.
So, you want to go back to the city council? I want to I want to get anchor to give us another proposal and go back to city council and just kind of get a feel for what direction they'd like to see us go because I just don't want to turn this into another we do all this
work all this money for engineering and they say nah just kidding. Yeah, I get it then. So I'd like to I'd like to go I'd like to kind of keep them in the loop. Chunk of money there. You know I'd like to kind of keep them in the loop as we go to you know. Do you think we could get a proposal before the next city council meeting because that's two weeks away.
I can try or we can I certainly do my best. You know, they're going to have to very similar. I'm considered to three knots group. We have to reach out to structural engineers get prices. So, I'll do my best. Well, even if we get direction from them
and we have we have it at our next meeting, we should have a good idea of where to go with it. But are there any immediate needs that we can go ahead and address without engineering? I mean, is it can we do the interior work or whatever?
I mean, you know, I I think it would be best, you know, for that to be designed um and engineered at the same time so that way, you know, when when we let this out, turn it out to redo it. Yeah. Yeah. We don't want to go double job. No
doubt. So, all right. Does that need to be a motion or is that just direction? I think it's just direction. I think we need and make sure I'm I'm fully on board with the desire of the board going to go back to the council and have similar
conversation with them. They'll know where we are progress report uh and if the portion is vital to the outcome. I think first you need to go to anchor and ask him for Okay. So, would you prefer me to wait to
go to the council until I come back to you with the proposal from Anchor? I'd say go ahead and get Anchor to give you a proposal and in the meantime, maybe have a conversation at the next city council meeting to see to make sure we're all on the same page because I think there's a desire to do it, but
like Rob's saying, we don't want to spend this money just for them to say, "Sorry, we don't want to do that. We want to build itself." I don't think they will, but they may. So, we may as well make sure just because there's a lot of money in soft costs that we're paying to get these, you know.
So, I'd say start getting the proposal, go ahead and go to city council, get the proposal back at our next meeting if we can. Yeah, ideally I would I would say for certain next meeting while I go down. Perfect. So, in the meantime, you're just going to go to the city council.
Sounds good. I'll be there. All right. All right. So moving on, we have request to approve invoice 2564825. This is for the ongoing work on the amphitheater concept design. Um that is um the second invoice that we have
received. This is totaling $5,620 that I'm requesting approval to pay on. Motion to approve. All right, we got a motion to second. Any discussion? All in favor say I. I. I. All oppose say nay. All right, motion
carries. As an update of that, we did have a public visioning session on Monday night. Had about a dozen in attendance. Got some good input and feedback from the public. We also have an online survey that's been circulating out on the uh the internet. The last time I looked, we had uh I think 63
responses so far. Um so, you know, it's good to see that kind of uh input and and excitement about the project. So, we'll uh let the consultant continue to massage this data and hopefully get to a point here pretty soon where they have three three different concepts that we
can kind of look at and and workshop some more. So, all right. So, next item I have is request direction on the Bowwin Avenue restriping project. So, I did take this uh recommendation the board made to the city council after a lot of debate at
the council. They decided they wanted to move a different direction and had recommended uh that we remove the heading parking on the north portion and change it to angled parking but keep the additional accessible
parking spaces there in the middle. Um I did reach back out to our consultant. They came back with what we're calling concept D. We ended up losing two parking spaces on that north portion. Uh and then obviously had the conversion of
two regular parking spaces into accessible spaces. The net difference between uh that change in the north and the addition in the south is six parking spaces. And how many more is that than what was what's there currently?
So uh six six that's it. So concept C, as you may recall, it was head and parking on both north south with the accessible spaces in between on the north side. That was 11 net spaces. So we went from 11 on
concept uh C to six on concept B. And then just fun math, that ends up being if we do if we just add the six spaces and we're looking at that as our our guide, we're spending $11,667 per spot to add six spots
with the milling and and resurfacing. Yes. That makes absolutely zero sense. That's milling and resurfacing everything too, right? The middle portion too. Yeah. you know, with the the larger quantity of spaces, you're able to divide that cost out amongst those. When
you reduce that down to six, you know, the cost per space is significantly higher, obviously. So, I've had some conversations since that meeting because I was at that city council meeting. Um, I cannot justify in my head spending
taxpayer dollars of almost $12,000 per spot when we had engineers and parking studies and multiple meetings and came back with the best possible solution. Uh, multiple
solutions as far as how many spaces and where to add them, what to take out, what to leave in there. Um, and it really came down to some of them were concerned about the head-in parking being unsafe, which again is kind of is kind of ridiculous
because there's head-end parking right outside this building um at every almost every shopping center you go to here. I think it would after having these conversations with people um I think we really need to kind
of go back to them and and kind of say like listen like we've had the engineering done this this is safe maybe present some information that shows them that it is safe I'll come up with some stats before their meeting if I need to um and say you know this is really the
best concept for the space and the best return on investment I don't think it's a good return on investment and spend that much money to gain that little parking spaces. And you know, not to call anybody out here, but there is someone here that is an
engineer who is very smart sitting out here right now that could probably come up here and talk about how it's not unsafe to have head-end parking on that street. But again, realistically, it's not unsafe. It's the best use of the space. And if we're if we're if they're
absolutely stuck on leaving that diagonal, then the two handicap spots in the middle are absolutely useless and don't need to be there. The only business that was asking for those is physical. And guess what? They're moving out. That's right. And I've talked to a couple of the
business owners that are right there and none of them need the handicap spots in the middle because you have them on either end. So again, I would I would say I would recommend having you go back kind of presenting the original concept again,
adding I know Mr. Harrison wanted to make sure we had space for a bike rack on that on that edge over there uh near the railroad track. Um so you know, maybe just point out that yes, there is space for a bike rack if you want to put it there in the future, but this is the best return on investment you can get,
bang for your buck. you know, we we've spent a lot of time on this. We've made our recommendation and um I'm sorry, but if if this is going to sound really mean, but if you don't like it, spend your county tax your city county tax dollars on it. I don't think the CRA needs to waste
money to put in six spots when we can put in how many was the other one? 11. 11. Yeah, we can double the spaces or we can use that money to do some of the rightways, everything else. We got a lot of other options that we can that would be a better return on investment. So, I think if they want if
they would like the CRA to do it, then I would ask them to reconsider the idea. We'll leave space for the bike rack. Um, everything else will pretty much be the same, but we need to go with the head in parking because otherwise we're just wasting money.
Great. I don't think we even need to vote on that, do we? No. This direction to go take it back to the council. Everybody agree? Yes. Okay. Okay. All right. Any uh All right. Anything else? Uh
All right. Let's go to uh Tony, do you think had an parking site? Let him come up here. Can you wait for public? How'd you know that's what I was talking about? I am not an engineer. Yeah, I was going to say, well, thank you.
But I did sleep at at my house last night and that's like being an engineer, I guess. So, um, headed parking is safe given that you have enough area to back up. What I would note is that Baldwin Avenue in that center section, Valley, will you please state your name? Trying to get your Sure. Anthony Valley. So, I would say
that that section uh of Baldwin is actually very wide and so you can actually move the center lane closer to the actual center and you will have a lot of space to back up, which is why it's so easy to get out of the of the southern spots is because it's just I mean you can back up a a full length
pickup truck, not even be in the lane and make a U-turn and be f behind. Uh but you could shift the lane slightly, give yourself a lot more space than you typically would have and make it very safe. Additionally, I would say that the only business that I knew was asking for the handicap spots in the
middle block uh was physical, which isn't going to be there much longer. And I would say that if you only gain six and you're adding two handicap, you're not gaining six, you're gaining four because mo those other two are going to be handicapped and they're not going to be utilized at the same rate as everything else. We do have two at each
corner and you're never more than, you know, about, you know, 300 feet from from where you're going. There's some on the There's some on the side street. Yes, they're on each corner on each street at each corner. So, it's two per corner, but it's one, you know, two on each uh two on each block. So, we do
have a good proportion of handicap spots. Uh but having the two center ones also, I mean, if you're only adding four, I mean, it really doesn't make sense. So, what was the reason? Physical wanted it for their for their clients that come in. No, I'm talking
about why they thought that that was not safe. Um, I mean, one, you've gotten very used to it being the way it is. So, that is something that's comfortable and familiar. Uh, two, the feeling is that you start to block the other lanes
because you block both lanes when you're backing up instead of just the one. So, it feels like you can get out and only have to pay attention to one side. Um, but the truth is we've got so much depth there that there's really no need to infringe on the other. going to say, "I wish I had that much space when I go to Lowe's." Oh, it's a big space. Yeah. Oh, it's
big. Goes way, way bigger than you have in those parking aisles. Uh, I will say that since we've been busier, since we've seen the downtown revitalized, there's more traffic. The traffic slows down the traffic. Without traffic, people drive through fast. With the traffic, people drive through slow. Uh,
and people are getting used to that now. So, not using it like a cut off like they were for a while. And the extra stop signs that got put in help. That helped. But honestly, now we have enough traffic that it's it's cured the problem, the main problem. I think that stop sign does help a lot, though. It
I'm glad it's there. But the real solution was getting people back and and we've we've got that. Y Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Any other comments? Oh,
please state your name. Todd. I'm here as a private citizen, but as a downtown uh building owner, um I wanted to request that you remove the handicap parking spaces from the middle, eliminate the curb cut, and go back to
the city council and ask them for straight up parking. I completely agree with Mr. Hamilton's statements that if you're going to spend $12,000 a parking space, your money is better spent elsewhere. But I would love to see our downtown revitalized because we we are
seeing a lot of increase especially on that block. Just like you said, we paid good money for a parking study. Let's utilize that. Let's let's add the parking spaces. We need them on that block. Um and just go straight in. Please don't do the the handicap spots.
There's plenty of handicap spots on the corners. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Any other comments? All right. Okay. Great. So, just to clarify because the direction I was given was to go with what's there, make a head in. So, we
want to remove the accessible parking spaces in the middle. The ones the new ones in the middle. Y. So, I will talk to the consultant. We paid them for three concepts. This will be the fifth. Um, so, you know, I will encourage them to do it for us. Um, but
I wouldn't be surprised if they said, "Hey, we're going to need some additional money." So if that's the case, I'll bring it back to you. If not, I'll remade the Would we would we need that visual concept? Absolutely. To address the council and say this is what we're doing. Yes, definitely.
So it's to take out the two in the middle, right? To change back to head in parking on the north side and to remove the accessible parking spaces. The problem with that is now we have to redraw the lines because we have a 5
foot wide stripe door in between the two accessible parking spaces. So now everything is imbalanced again. So there's a lot they have to redesign it basic redraw it. So there there's some work there um that they have to do in order to get back to normal parking
spaces. So I mean just and Todd just because of you said the physical therapy were they the ones who were asking for the two in the middle? Well, in fairness to the conversation, so the reason that this got brought up is in the survey that we
did, uh, there was a large interest in adding accessible parking in the middle. Um, and this in the conversations that that were had, it would be ideal to have more in the middle. Um, where the restaurant and all that was located. Um,
I would agree that there are plenty of accessible parking spaces around the ends, but that that's kind of how we got to this additional accessible space in the middle. I mean, I don't even mind if it's all straight in, I don't mind the two in the middle, but if we're going diagonal, then we're wasting we're completely
wasting space. Yeah. So if if we keep things the way it is with the two additional accessible parking spaces, but it's head in, we end up with a net gain of three on the north and a net gain of eight on the south for
a total of 11. And what was the what was the the cost on that one? The the cost per spot. No, you have the cost per spot. Uh $2,30. And with billing it's 6121. Yeah. So, so half the price. That's
right. And we get more spots. I cannot wait till that meeting. Is the top right where the Christmas tree goes? It is. Is that cutting into the base like where where it was?
No, that is just a remnant uh there that you know is kind of oddly shaped. So All right. So, is is the direction to to remove the accessible spaces or leave them? Todd, what was the reason that you
wanted them removed? We we already have plenty of access. I'd say let's remove them. We got the ones on the ends. I think we're good. I think we're going to end up with less usable spaces. kind of like Tony was saying that we don't because you're you're basically going to
give up a space to that center aisle and have spots are wider than your standard spot. Y you're going to give up probably two spaces in reality. I think we get rid of in the middle. Yep. And then you're not doing that on any other block,
right? Yeah. Okay. Okay. All right. The next item I have is request direction on debt issuance RFP. So I did receive uh a number of documents from PFM uh which is the
actual RFP that they would issue for us. The goal is to advertise this for 30 days. Uh allow ample time for the banks to respond. Once the uh bids are in, similar to how we receive bids, the financial consultant will review those
uh and make uh a recommendation back to this board. We have a later agenda item to change the date of the October CRA meeting to accommodate for that. Uh and so on that October at that October meeting, you'll have the bids. You'll
have the recommendation uh with a decision to move forward or not move forward with that top rank bid. Uh this is non-binding at this point. It's just simply an exercise of of seeing what's out there and what interest there is. As you'll see there in RFP, it is a $5
million debt issuance. There are a lot of um components to the bid award. You know, obviously interest rate is is an important one, but but having some call option um you know, opportunities is another factor that may
increase the rate, but may give us more flexibility in the event interest rates come down for us to refinance that debt. So, there's going to be a lot to that recommendation more so than just a straight line interest rate. Um so that consultant would again review that uh
review the bids and bring that back for the board to consider at our October meeting. Okay. So if the board so desires to let PFM issue this RFP, I I will need Okay, move. Second. You got a motion in a second. Any
discussion? All in favor say I. I all oppose say nay. Motion carries. Thank you for that. Next item I have is request direction on dog park task order 25-05-C. This is for the uh dog park engineer
design. They reached out to Anchor. They gave me a proposal in the amount of $39,519.50. In addition to that, they added uh some CI construction administration at a cost not to exceed $6,170 monthly uh to get us through that
construction. It's currently structured right now uh as a 180day uh design and then they're estimating about a 60-day construction duration. So, okay.
Um anyone want to make a motion on this? Just need a motion to approve the task. We need a motion. Motion to approve. Second. Got a motion, a second. Any discussion? Uh, all in favor say I. I. All oppose
say no. All right. Motion carries. All right. So, the next item I have here is request to approve invoice 5-269029 for the historic district design standards contract. I did receive another invoice from JMT in the amount of $4,784.13
for their ongoing work on this effort. This total build is 70.4%. The consultant scheduled to be back in town for the second round of edits on October the 27th at the council meeting,
October 28th in the form of a public workshop, and then to us on October the 29th. So I need approval for payment on motion. Second. All right. Motion second. Um any
discussion? All in favor say I. I. All oppose say no. Motion carries. Okay. Thank you for that. Um as we just discussed any direction on the October, November, and December CRA board meetings. We are currently scheduled to meet I believe it's October the 22nd to
give ample opportunity for the bid to be advertised for 30 days as it relates to the debt issuance. I'm recommending that we move that meeting in October to October the 29th and then uh have the CRA meeting in November be moved to
November the 19th and then typically do not have a meeting in December so we can formally or officially cancel that meeting if so desired by the board. Uh do we need the meeting in December? I mean is there any necessary thing on the schedule or anything?
Not on the radar. All right. How do y'all feel about that? Um, is it 29th for October, 19th for November? 29th for October. Yep. That's fine. I travel in December anyway. Yeah, I'd rather just just delete the
December meeting unless y'all have No, I'm good with December because it's a crazy month anyway. Yeah, definitely. Okay, perfect. So, we need to make a motion motion to change to October 29th, November 19th, and cancel December. Second. We have a motion and a second.
Any discussion? All in favor say I. I. All oppose say no. Motion carries. All righty. So, the last item I have here on the agenda is an update on the circle circle drive lighting improvements. At our last meeting, uh we
did bring up the dark sky compliant requirement. I did reach out to Florida Power and Light to see if that Granville fixture was dark sky compliant. I did receive u response back from them uh that none of the lighting that we have
chosen is dark sky compliant. She did uh indicate that there are three lights in their catalog that are dark sky compliant. One being a roadway, one being the autobond and then the other being an area light. Those are typically for roadway purposes. And then they do
have a pendant fixture with the skirt that is also dark sky compliant. So uh in your packet there should be that catalog for you to look at those. Again it's roadway autobond and area light and
then the pendant fixture with the skirt. And what was the what was the reason for the dark sky compliant? He were part of the joint land use study and we implemented in our comp plan. So he signed on to the improvements part of
the meipo one, two, and three initiatives that come out over the years and a variety of other things they've regulated that they do not like upward lighting. We do the same thing and it's not part of their comp. [Music]
lights that are around downtown and lake yard dark sky compliant right now? I don't believe so. They also predated that which was adopted circa 067. So these have to be dark sky compliant. Unless you want to draw a foul from Magglin. Yeah. Even though they we have others that are
non-compliant, we could Can we rotate? If we ever have to replace them, we got to make them compliant. Okay. Yeah, please. That's my question. As long as the light bulbs keep getting replaced, you're fine, but when the fixture dies, we got a problem. Kim Winterberg. Uh, I'm I'm asking
is the what what is the purpose of the lighting? I know that may sound like a silly question, but the the reason that we got to this proposal was I had received a request from a business owner downtown that was asking her employees to park along
Circle Drive to free up parking along Sixth Street. And as they parked there, they didn't feel safe because of the light. Um, it's it's dark when you go when you walk on that side of the Would it be a consideration to do up
lighting instead of down lighting? You mean up lighting on like the trees? On the ground. Yes. On the ground in the trees. Light the trees up um which will actually create more light um than what it would with one street light. It's not
a bad idea. I mean, I mean, I think the goal is to get more lighting. It's not necessarily to for an ornamental street light, right? Is is that the it it was to provide more lighting across the roadway. Um, one of the challenges, as I've learned, is the rightway there where the
trees are located, railroad rightway. Um, Florida Power Light would be responsible for obtaining that easement for them to install those lights. Um, so you know, not to say that we as the CRA and the city couldn't work out a similar easement agreement, but that is a
challenge that we'd have to overcome. Okay. Just just a thought. I know it's something that our board is the the beautifification tree board is putting together something for a a five-year Chipley Park master plan that we're going to be presenting to the council.
And it's one of the things that we're looking at is being able to to create better light, help you feel a little bit more safe. Um, and and the tree lights, those up lights actually create way more light than what one
street light is going to put and it's going to go straight. Is that going to light up the road where they're trying to cross? Is that something you guys could um could give us a recommendation on? and we we've actually talked with two different companies um who have given us some bids
on that. So, I'd be glad to pass on their information. We I mean, we're not really ready for bids. I understand this was just exploratory just to kind of see what it would look like. Yeah. Um but I have the contact for the for the two that we've spoken with. I think it'd be great if uh you know, we
you want it to be utilized, everybody like it, you know, for the majority. I mean, so everybody's not going to always like it. you want to make sure, but it, you know, again, it would also if if the council does choose to, you know, take what our proposal is over the
next few years, it would blend in with what is going to go on around. I think it'd be great to to have it fit, you know. So, yeah, I I'd love I would personally love to I don't know about the rest of you, but I'd love to see what y'all's recommendations are and let's see if that would, you know, make
sense. Now, what Josh is saying about the, you know, the easements and all that kind of stuff, we definitely, you know, want to try to figure out the most advantageous way to do it, but I would say, yeah, the goal would be to make it where, you know, blends in correctly. Is that what everybody else?
Well, and I I think it would benefit both sides, right? It's going to benefit the Baldwin and the Circle Drive side where if you've just got the post lamps, that's really just benefiting Circle Drive. Yep. Can Can you get us some information? Okay,
happy to. Sounds good. Okay, everybody in favor of that? Yeah, hang on. He's got Thank you. Come on. Good afternoon, Anthony Valley. Um, couple of things. Um, there is an effort of at the city
level to make all the lighting and all the all these things consistent so that we don't end up with a hodgepodge of things. I love the fact that you're going to talk to tree and parks and beautifification committee in terms of trying to get collaboration there and coordination there. Uh but don't forget
main street plan also might include some things on that. Um and also you know the city manager has some lighting that he's implementing in other areas. So it's just good to keep it consistent with the dark skies. Um uplighting if if we're really and again it's going to depend on
how it's being uh implemented. If it's only on highway lighting that's one thing. If it's uh if it's other pedestrian lighting and private property, does it apply to that as well or supposed to regulate for dark skies? Yeah. So with that, you can't do uplighting.
Well, you can do uplighting depending on the quality, the nature, the quantity, and what is being uplift if it is a direct beam into the sky, not onto a structure. And I believe, don't hold me to this because one, I am not I don't even know what this be a light engineer. I don't
even know what you refer to that as we we would do that with lighting consultants or landscape architects. Yeah, I'll say this. Latilda and Freeport could quote this page and verse. I'm confident. But the recollection I have is that uplighting onto structures
cannot exceed either 80 or 85% of the highest point of the structure, meaning the light has to terminate before it gets over the roof. So, can you uplight your house? You can. But if your uplight goes above the top of the roof or goes to the top of the house, that's a no.
And I don't pretend to know why it's that important to Eglund. I can just tell you that we've had two developers in Freeport in the last six years fail to do it. And we had members of the
military show up at the city and there and say, "We will physically remove this." We're like, "What? Okay. Hey, how'd you figure it out? You figured it out. Well, obviously a pilot flew overhead. There was too much light. Somebody called in some problem
with the mission. And Dr. Horton's one of those. And all I can tell you is they pushed back. We very politely talked to Dr. Horton's attorney. He um very politely made a call to Egllet and next thing we knew, there
were whole new poles of lights coming out there within eight hours. So that was a very quick turnaround is all I could say. Yeah. So it it it does have rules that go along with it. What you're trying to do is avoid light pollution which is getting past any kind of horizontal
vertical surfaces that are present and getting to the sky. Uh because then you get the light pollution and actually start to create more contrast with it and actually you start to see less because you get too much contrast with what's got lit and you lose everything in the background. So it really gets hard to see it at certain intersections
when you get too much light or too much glare. So but there are other ways to do it. Horizontal lighting closer to the ground very easily accomplished using low posts. Uh those can be shielded and not only could meet dark skies but even be turtle compliant. So which is another
standard even beyond dark skies. So you can light the path, you can light the area around it and keep the light low, but as you get higher you're going to spread that beam farther. And then yes, with these other ones really you're gonna be tied into ones that have a a
shield at the top to cover the top, but seeing how extensive it can be. Um, if Cars is already looking at it, um, you know, try to coordinate and and obviously you all can figure out if it's dark skies compliant or not. Kim, just make sure that it's dark compliant.
Yes. And I didn't know about that, but I did just want to show you that the guy came out and gave us a demonstration. This is a really large tall pine tree. He had four lights on it. Um and maybe a fifth one at the base. It was It was impressive and it and it lit
the whole area without making you feel like you were under a spotlight. Awesome. Anyway, I just thought you might want to see. Thank you. Yeah. Great. Okay. All right. Next. All right. That's all I have on the agenda. I do have a statement uh that I prepared like to read to the board.
Okay. Dear members of the board, please accept this letter as my formal resignation from my position at the Funiac Springs Community Redevelopment Agency. It has been a true honor to serve this agency in our community. I want to express my
deepest appreciation to the CRA Board of Commissioners for your consistent support, encouragement, and trust throughout my tenure. Your leadership and dedication to the mission of the community revitalization have been instrumental to our collective success.
Together, we have made significant progress in strengthening the organization and laying a solid foundation for the future. Some of the accomplishments I am most proud of include expanding the CRA success and community impact, leading and supporting key redevelopment projects that are
already making a visible difference in the district, securing in increased funding and building strategic partnerships that will sustain and grow the CRA's work for years to come. Building a strong capable team and streamlining internal operations to ensure long-term efficiency and
effectiveness. Establishing a strategic vision and framework aligned with community needs and priorities. Enhancing public trust and engagement through transparent, inclusive, and community centered approaches. These achievements were only possible through the shared commitment of the board,
staff, and our partners. I leave knowing this organization is in a strong position to continue its mission and reach even greater heights. As I move on to new opportunities, I do so with deep gratitude for the chance to serve and grow with this agency. I'm committed to supporting a smooth and effective
transition in any way I can. Thank you once again for your support, confidence, and opportunity to contribute to this important work. Josh, thank you. We I I hate hate to have you go. You've done a lot of great great things and really put this
organization on sound footing. And I just want to express my gratitude to you. Um because I know there's there's been a lot of times that have been um challenging challenging. I don't know nice word for
it, but um you know appreciate the work you've done and u and really hope we can get some of these things uh in the in really in the in the critical path work uh you know going before you leave in in
a couple I guess end of the year because u we we we appre I know I appreciate it or anybody else could say what they want to but I appreciate I appreciate that. I'll say um before I sat in the seat, I didn't really know what the CRA actually did. I kind of believed all the
hype. Hype. Yeah, we'll say hype. Um and then, you know, I got to talk the first time I talked to you and actually sat down and learned some things. I was like, "Wow, wait a minute. Let me look more into this." And that was, you know, right after Amy had asked me to come sit here.
And I know I've learned a lot and I've I've gotten to help other people kind of understand what the CRA does and I know a lot of what gets done is because you're sitting where you're at. So I I really do appreciate everything you've done. Thank you. And I appreciate the fact that you're
always ready to take phone calls from anybody that I've asked me questions and you were ready to answer theirs, meet with anybody, walk to their go to their house. Done a really good job. Thank you. We we certainly, you know, have made
great progress. Um I could not have done it alone. Certainly could not have done it without support of of this board and and the community. Obviously, um not an easy decision. Uh but it's one that I believe is is best for my family. And I'm looking forward to to to moving
moving on to a different role, you know, within the county. Um I am planning to uh stay around I think December the 5th being my last day of employment. Um yeah, December the 5th. So hopefully
that'll get us through some of these things that we talked about tonight. Um and get you all on a good little platform to launch from. So would you like to serve on the C board? Yeah. Pass.
Wow. Hey, I will say you're one of the main reasons I agreed to be on this board. Um, and I'm glad you glad you're here and trained me at least. So, I appreciate it. Means a lot. One resignation a night.
[Laughter] Only one. All right. Well, uh, any, uh, any public comments? Oh, okay. Miss Henderson, you would state. Melinda Henderson, resident of the city.
Last evening, we had the second in the series of workshops on historic preservation standards 101. Uh we had 21 people in attendance and um oh wait a minute, 20 28 people in
attendance. The third workshop is October the 16th. last night was on uh researching the history of your property. On the 16th is the history of our town. Um we hope to have a
presentation about the history, a bunch of slides of early Defuniac, and we may have a surprise visit from someone from our distant past who will be answering questions in costume and in character.
So, I'd like to thank um the CRA uh for Defunia um Defunia Landmarks and the University of West Florida Historic Trust. We're partners in this grant and uh I
appreciate it and I appreciate um Josh's help in all of this. The second thing I want to say is and I may be incorrect. It's a sense that I have over several months that although the
council expresses and voted to support the CRA, they seem to be blocking proposals that they asked for and I don't understand it. So, uh, and it's not just Josh that has to face
this. I think y'all need to work better with the council because other people are sensing this too. Thank you. Can I respond to that real quick? Sure. So, I'll say speaking for myself, I've
met with multiple city council members multiple times and I'm I'll continue to do that because I feel like if we can talk a little bit more, we can kind of make more progress. But it it's going to take that's a lot because and I'll say it here publicly
and I'll probably get yelled at for saying it, but I know there's a couple council members that no matter what it is, if it comes from the CRA, they're going to say no because they they didn't get their way with the vote. And that's wrong. And I'm going to go ahead and say that's wrong. And I've I've reached out to all the council members before uh multiple times
and I've only ever heard back or from three of them. So yeah, bet it's the same three back from Sure it is. But Josh is having to take the brunt of that. I mean, they he goes out to do what they want and they won't even let him present the reports.
I feel so often we're flipping back and forth between these meetings trying to get to a finish line when it I'm not speaking for Josh, but that might be why he's resigning. I said I'm not going to speak for Josh, but that might be one of the reasons he's moving on. So, one of our councilmen uh wants to
speak, so no, he's he is a citizen. Oh, he's a citizen. I'm only here as a citizen. Um Todd Beerbomb, for the record, um I was downtown um enjoying one of the restaurants downtown a couple weeks ago
and a citizen pointed out to me that the zigzag lights were not operational. Um, I engaged with Kobe on that and have kind of heard from him that from a city perspective, they've done everything that they can do and they're still
having problems with the the lights downtown and being able to basically keep them up and running. They've replaced several of the modules and as soon as they replace them, they they blow. Um Josh did a fantastic job of doing what he was asked to do under a
completely different uh board and under a completely different set of budgets and time period. U but I believe personally that maybe I would ask the CRA to maybe reconsider. I believe back then you got a quote from
Jubilee to to install as like option one and then there was option two was what they ended up going with which was you kind of did the self-install route. So, I would ask that maybe the CRA consider engaging with one of those commercial
providers because I actually bumped into them and when I told them I was from the Phoenix Springs, they had actually said, "Oh, we we did a quote for some beastro lighting down there on Baldwin." And then they actually in the showroom in Atlanta showed me the lighting system
that they were going to install. So maybe you the CRA could consider engaging with them because then at that point it takes it out of the city's hands as far as maintenance authority goes. So I I think that's a great idea and I would say Josh if you could reach out to him
and also I'd say there's a street called Clatus Street down in West Palm Beach and when we started this in the beginning these lights are like I mean it's like the coolest thing you've ever seen. I mean, the lights we got are good, but these are like awesome lights.
Yeah. And it'd be nice if we're going to do an upgrade to think about upgrading it in a way that's going to really showcase, you know, the street. So, and and again, I want to commend Josh because, you know, he he did everything he could under the circumstances that he
was under to to produce something there. But I I think that I would really ask now that the CRA is in a different position with a different board to uh to maybe consider that we hire a company because we uh from a from the city perspective um they're they're having
severe trouble kind of maintaining that that current system and it's basically just staying broken. if we can get on a contract, it's gonna make way more sense because I mean the problem is you're like you say, it's always this constant, you know, battle with who's, you know, doing it and cities over
and I can p personally attest to the city sending the crews out there multiple days to try to figure it out and replace it and they were down there with the bucket truck and they were down there had several of the things opened up. So, uh, I think it's just time to bring one in. I know I'm under citizen
comment, so you really probably can't take action, but maybe at your next meeting you could have something there. Write it down and to bring something back. I guess give me direction. Bring something back, please. We want to make sure they're not able to comply.
Thank you. Great point. Yeah, thank you. Those who know they don't. Any other comments? Okay. Not. I'll accept the motion to adjurnn. Second. All right. to journ at 6:02.
All right.